claim,sci_digest,justification,issues,label,evidence
Did Tampered-With Conditioner Cause a Wisconsin Woman to Lose Her Hair?,['A mother and daughter sounded the alarm over a Pantene product sold at a Walmart store. We checked out their claims. '],"In late summer 2019, multiple news accounts reported that a Wisconsin woman had endured a frightening encounter with a supermarket product tamperer who, according to the articles, had added hair remover to a bottle of conditioner, causing the woman's hair to fall out. On Aug. 1, the website Distractify published an article under the headline ""Woman Loses Hair After Buying Tampered-With Conditioner That Was Mixed With Nair,"" reporting that Taffy Jo Trimm and her daughter Ashley Rose had recently bought a bottle of Pantene from a Walmart in New Richmond, Wisconsin. In a now-viral Facebook post, Taffy explained that the bottle must have been tampered with. Someone must have mixed in Nair or some other hair removal product with the conditioner because, when Taffy's daughter Ashley used it, her hair started falling out—in clumps. How horrifying is that? ""Attention New Richmond Walmart shoppers,"" Taffy's Facebook post reads, ""be aware of the shampoo and conditioner you buy there as my daughter Ashley Rose bought some two days ago and someone mixed Nair in her conditioner bottle!!!! As I speak, she is losing hair and crying!! The conditioner below this conditioner is supposed to be white. It is an ugly pink color."" Other reports went beyond the parameters of that single purported incident, claiming without evidence that it was part of a broader trend. The websites Popbuzz and Rare.us both published articles with headlines stating, ""People are Putting Hair Removal Cream in Shampoo,"" while one Twitter user posted a viral tweet claiming ""people"" were mixing Nair into shampoo and conditioner bottles. On July 30, 2019, a Twitter user wrote, ""Please check your hair products before you buy them, people are mixing Nair into shampoo & conditioner in the store smh."" 

We have been unable to verify the claim that the woman in question lost her hair involuntarily as a result of exposure to a substance deliberately added to a bottle of hair conditioner before she purchased it from Walmart. The narrative began on July 28, when Taffy Jo Timm wrote on Facebook that her daughter, 21-year-old Ashley Robinson, was ""losing her hair and crying"" after using conditioner she had purchased two days earlier from the Walmart in New Richmond. Timm's post was accompanied by a photograph of a bottle of Pantene conditioner and a photograph showing what appeared to be black hair deposited in a shower. Later that night, Robinson herself posted the same photograph of black hair, along with a brief account of what had happened earlier that evening: ""... Got in the shower, shampooed and conditioned my hair, got out, something was different and didn't smell the greatest. I carried on, sat down for a bit, and then decided to go blow dry my hair. I took my hair out of the towel and it smelled terrible. I got back in the shower, used my other shampoo, and rubbed that in. As I took my hands out of my hair, it was covered in hair and just kept on falling out."" Robinson said she visited the emergency room due to a burning sensation and was later discharged. The following evening, she wrote on Facebook that she had undergone a ""consultation"" but had resigned herself to having to shave her head. On July 30, Robinson posted a photograph of herself bald, and on Aug. 1, Minneapolis television station WCCO interviewed her. 

On Aug. 1, the New Richmond Police Department announced they had opened an investigation into potential product tampering after receiving a formal complaint about Robinson's experience. Their news release stated, ""Due to the significance of this offense, New Richmond officers and detectives have been working with Walmart staff to identify potential suspects and review video surveillance. The New Richmond Police Department will continue to follow the facts of this case. While this appears to be an isolated case at this time, the New Richmond Police Department is asking anyone in this area who has been a recent victim of this type of activity to please report it immediately to your local police/sheriff's department. The New Richmond Police Department is also reminding people to be diligent in checking products for safety seals and prior to any use to ensure it is consistent with the product you are expecting."" 

We have so far been unable to independently verify that Ashley Robinson's hair loss was involuntary and resulted from her using conditioner tainted with Nair (or some other hair-removal product, or any other substance) following an act of product tampering at the Walmart in New Richmond. If or when we receive evidence that would verify that sequence of events, we will update this article accordingly. We do know that Robinson experienced hair loss and that she did indeed visit the emergency room at Westfields Hospital and Clinic in New Richmond on July 28, 2019. Her mother provided Snopes with a photograph of part of Robinson's after-visit summary. We have redacted certain personal details, but the doctor's summary clearly establishes that Robinson had experienced hair loss and suffered chemical burns on her scalp: ""If [she] develops further burning sensation please ... re-rinse her hair. You can follow up in your clinic regarding hair regrowth. Based on the appearance of her scalp, that will likely grow back normally. However, follow-up may be necessary if your hair is not coming in as expected."" The doctor listed the diagnosis as: ""Chemical burn of scalp, unspecified corrosion degree, initial encounter."" 

However, beyond this documentation, we have found no evidence that corroborates the claim that Robinson's conditioner was deliberately contaminated with hair-removal cream by a third party. Furthermore, we have discovered certain details that detract from, rather than support, that theory. 

First, significant confusion exists over when Robinson actually purchased the conditioner that she believes caused her hair loss. In her original Facebook post, Timm said her daughter had bought it from Walmart around two days earlier, which would be July 26. However, Timm later told Snopes that Robinson bought it on July 23. In its Aug. 1 news report, WCCO stated that Robinson bought it on the same day her hair began to fall out, July 28. When we asked Timm to clarify those discrepancies, she insisted that her daughter had indeed purchased the conditioner on July 23 and said she had asked WCCO to correct its reporting. However, a spokesperson for Walmart told us that a team of employees had extensively reviewed video surveillance footage from the company's New Richmond location and found evidence that a customer who appeared to be Robinson had, in fact, purchased what appeared to be similar conditioner two weeks before the onset of her hair loss, not five days before it. Walmart found no evidence of Robinson's purchasing conditioner there at any other time in the ensuing two weeks. Walmart also reviewed footage of the same aisle from before Robinson's visit and saw no evidence of an individual's tampering with shampoo or conditioner bottles. We again put this discrepancy to Timm, who told us she could not explain it and said she had been told by her daughter that July 23 was the date on which her daughter bought the conditioner in question. We also asked Robinson about this discrepancy, checking whether it was possible she had misremembered either the date of the purchase or the location of the Walmart. She told us she was certain she made the purchase at the New Richmond Walmart and was ""almost positive"" she did so on July 23. Robinson also told us that July 28 was the first time she had used the conditioner, meaning it would have been sitting unused in her home for either five days (by her account) or around two weeks (based on Walmart's surveillance footage). We asked Robinson whether any possibility existed that a visitor to her home during that time might have contaminated the conditioner before she first used it, and she told us she had not had any visitors during that time. 

Furthermore, Walmart's review of the surveillance footage found evidence that the customer who resembled Robinson had unscrewed the pump-top cap from several bottles of conditioner, smelling each item before settling on one for purchase. This is potentially a significant finding. Robinson, in her July 28 Facebook post, asserted that she quickly realized something had gone awry in washing her hair because she could detect the odor of another substance in her conditioner (""something was different and didn't smell the greatest,"" ""I took my hair out of the towel and it smelled terrible""). If the conditioner did contain a contaminant (whether hair removal cream or some other substance) that smelled strongly enough at the time to strike Robinson as ""terrible,"" it stands to reason that she would have detected it in the first place if she were ""sniff-testing"" conditioners in Walmart before she chose the one she purchased. We put this question to Robinson, who claimed that she had opened bottles of shampoo when she visited the store, but not bottles of conditioner. In a statement, Walmart told us they had ""inspected all products in our store, reviewed surveillance footage, and found no evidence of tampering."" The company removed no products from its shelves, despite Robinson and Timm's claims of product tampering, and according to their statement, Walmart employees have ""attempted to reach out to the customer to discuss this further and have received no response."" Robinson told us she had not yet contacted Walmart because she was waiting to meet with her attorney. 

Significant differences appear to exist between the look of the hair shown deposited in the shower in Robinson's original July 28 photographs and that of the hair shown in photographs posted later. The hair in the photograph appears to be black in color, and some strands look to be relatively long. By contrast, Robinson later posted three photographs of herself on Facebook, which appeared to show her with brown or even blonde hair, apparently shorter than the black hair shown deposited in the shower. Timm told us that these photographs had been taken in the hospital on July 28. This means that, according to Timm and Robinson's version of events, her hair appeared black when she washed it on the evening of July 28, but had significantly lightened in color within a matter of hours. Timm also sent us a fourth photograph, which she said was taken on the day after the event. It even more clearly illustrated the change in apparent hair color that, according to the two women's account, took place. 

We put those discrepancies to Timm, who told us that her daughter had dyed her hair and speculated that whatever substance was purportedly added to the conditioner removed the dye from her hair, as well as removing portions of the hair itself: ""I feel whatever was put into [the] conditioner stripped the hair color and removed big clumps of hair."" Robinson told us she had dyed her hair dark brown two months earlier, but her roots sometimes appeared ""medium brown"" and ""even a little blonder-looking."" The hair shown in the shower appeared darker than it really was, she told us, because it was wet. And the hair shown in the subsequent Facebook photographs appeared lighter than it really was due to the effect of the camera's light. Robinson later posted to Facebook a photograph of herself with dyed hair, which she said was taken the day before her hair loss began, and various photographs on her Facebook account demonstrated that she did indeed periodically dye her hair. 

We haven't been able to verify that any substance was added to Robinson's conditioner in the first place or that the conditioner was the cause of her hair loss, placing doubt on Timm's hypothesis that a contaminant added to the conditioner removed the dye from her daughter's hair and led to a significant difference in hair color across the photographs. Furthermore, the difference between the apparent color of the hair in the first photograph and its appearance in the other four remains significant enough that, while we are by no means dismissing it, Robinson's explanation remains open to reasonable doubt. 

Finally, other elements are absent that would add credibility to the ""Walmart tampering"" account of Robinson's hair loss. For example, New Richmond police Chief Craig Yehlik told us that his department had received no other recent reports of product tampering of any kind in the New Richmond area. This absence of reports of similar incidents does not destroy the credibility of Timm and Robinson's version of events, but neither does it enhance it. Although not definitive, Walmart's internal investigation into many hours of surveillance footage yielded no evidence of product tampering at its New Richmond store, but it did reveal evidence that cast doubt on Timm and Robinson's version of events. It is noteworthy that the company has decided not to withdraw any items from sale at that store, despite widely publicized allegations that product tampering took place there.",['loss'],NEI,"On Aug. 1, the website Distractify published an article under the headline ""Woman Loses Hair After Buying Tampered-With Conditioner That Was Mixed With Nair,"" reporting that:Other reports went beyond the parameters of that single purported incident, claiming without evidence that it was part of a broader trend. The websites Popbuzz and Rare.us both published articles using headlines that stated ""People are Putting Hair Removal Cream in Shampoo,"" while one Twitter user posted a viral tweet that claimed ""people"" were mixing Nair into shampoo and conditioner bottles:Please check your hair products before you buy them, people are mixing Nair into shampoo & conditioner in the store smh pic.twitter.com/iCuDpZLpmL ???? ??????? (@shandiditbetter) July 30, 2019Later that night, Robinson herself posted the same photograph of black hair, along with a brief account of what had happened earlier that evening:Robinson said she visited the emergency room due to a burning sensation and was later discharged. The following evening, she wrote on Facebook that she had undergone a ""consultation"" but had resigned herself to having to shave her head. On July 30, Robinson posted a photograph of herself bald, and on Aug. 1, Minneapolis television station WCCO interviewed her:On Aug. 1, the New Richmond Police Department announced they had opened an investigation into potential product tampering after having received a formal complaint about Robinson's experience. Their news release on the subject stated that:This is potentially a significant finding. Robinson, in her July 28 Facebook post, asserted that she quickly realized something had gone awry in washing her hair because she could detect the odor of another substance in her conditioner (""something was different and didnt smell the greatest,"" ""I took my hair out of the towel and it smelt terrible""). Courtesy of Taffy Jo Timm.Robinson later posted to Facebook a photograph of herself with dyed hair, which she said was taken the day before her hair loss began, and various photographs on her Facebook account demonstrated that she did indeed periodically dye her hair."
Was a Texting Driver Found Still Clutching a Phone After a Fatal Car Crash?,"['A photograph of a car crash scene is real, but the accompanying story was evidently manufactured to dissuade people from texting while driving.']","An alarming photograph of a car after it was impaled by a guard rail is frequently presented as if it shows an accident that was the result of distracted driving. The most popular iterations of this rumor, such as this May 2018 Facebook post, also include a gory story about how the driver's torso was found in the car's trunk with a phone still in her hand: Facebook   This is a genuine photograph of a crash scene. However, the accompanying backstory is unsubstantiated. It appears that this photograph was first posted to Flickr by EMS Flight Crew, an international community of air medical professionals, in October 2010. That posting did not include any information about where or when this accident occurred, nor any information about what caused the crash (such as texting and driving.) We assume that the driver was alive when emergency crews first arrived on the scene, as the photograph was accompanied by a number of tags such as ""air evac,"" ""air rescue,"" and ""life flight."" Flickr Although it was originally posted and shared simply because it is an image of a shocking car accident, by 2012 it was being used to dissuade drivers from texting and driving. In fact, EMS Flight Crew may have been the first to share this photograph attached to a warning about distracted driving:   However, it doesn't appear that EMS Flight Crew is describing the cause of this specific crash. Rather, this appears to be a general warning against distracted driving. A few months prior, the same Facebook page asked users to suggest a headline for the photograph. ""Don't text and drive"" was one of the suggestions: prior   As there is no credible source confirming that the driver of this vehicle was texting at the time of the crash, we are highly suspect of the gory story claiming that the bisected driver was still clutching her phone when her body was recovered from the trunk of the car.  The photograph itself seems to disprove this story, as the driver's side chair is still intact.  Texting while driving is certainly a dangerous (and illegal) activity that could result in a similar car crash to the one depicted above. However, there's no evidence that this specific car accident was actually caused by a distracted driver. The story about the bisected driver clutching her phone was likely manufactured in an attempt to scare drivers from using their phones while driving. Although this story may have created with good intentions  after all, more than a quarter of car accidents in 2014 involved some form of cellphone use  this rumor is little more than unsubstantiated scarebait. 2014 We've reached out to EMS Flight Crew for more information about this crash, and will update this article if more information becomes available.",['share'],False,"An alarming photograph of a car after it was impaled by a guard rail is frequently presented as if it shows an accident that was the result of distracted driving. The most popular iterations of this rumor, such as this May 2018 Facebook post, also include a gory story about how the driver's torso was found in the car's trunk with a phone still in her hand:This is a genuine photograph of a crash scene. However, the accompanying backstory is unsubstantiated. It appears that this photograph was first posted to Flickr by EMS Flight Crew, an international community of air medical professionals, in October 2010. That posting did not include any information about where or when this accident occurred, nor any information about what caused the crash (such as texting and driving.) We assume that the driver was alive when emergency crews first arrived on the scene, as the photograph was accompanied by a number of tags such as ""air evac,"" ""air rescue,"" and ""life flight.""However, it doesn't appear that EMS Flight Crew is describing the cause of this specific crash. Rather, this appears to be a general warning against distracted driving. A few months prior, the same Facebook page asked users to suggest a headline for the photograph. ""Don't text and drive"" was one of the suggestions:Texting while driving is certainly a dangerous (and illegal) activity that could result in a similar car crash to the one depicted above. However, there's no evidence that this specific car accident was actually caused by a distracted driver. The story about the bisected driver clutching her phone was likely manufactured in an attempt to scare drivers from using their phones while driving. Although this story may have created with good intentions  after all, more than a quarter of car accidents in 2014 involved some form of cellphone use  this rumor is little more than unsubstantiated scarebait."
"After shedding jobs for more than 10 years, our manufacturers have added about 500,000 jobs over the past three.",[],"At several points in his State of the Union Address, President Barack Obama noted the importance of manufacturing to the nations economy.Our first priority is making America a magnet for new jobs and manufacturing, Obama said. After shedding jobs for more than 10 years, our manufacturers have added about 500,000 jobs over the past three. Caterpillar is bringing jobs back from Japan. Ford is bringing jobs back from Mexico. After locating plants in other countries like China, Intel is opening its most advanced plant right here at home. And this year, Apple will start making Macs in America again.The claim about job numbers is an update of a line Obama included in his acceptance speech at the 2012 Democratic convention in Charlotte, N.C. We checked that one and rated itTrue.The main difference between Obamas two versions was that the timeline in the most recent claim has been extended by six months.Because of the wording of his claim, we are examining whether the numbers are right, not whether Obama's policies were instrumental. To check the numbers, we turned to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the federal governments official source for employment numbers. We used seasonally adjusted statistics for manufacturing jobs.Shedding jobs for more than 10 yearsIts not news that manufacturing jobs have been in decline in the United States in recent years, though sometimes with ups and downs. Generally, the decline has been due to broad economic shifts both inside and outside the United States, as well as changes in technology. Manufacturings share of U.S. employment was 29 percent in 1960, but it fell to just 9 percent by 2011. Even the raw numbers of manufacturing jobs fell over that period -- from 15.7 million to 11.7 million -- despite a large expansion of the overall U.S. workforce.Between March and April 1998 and December 2009 -- the decade-plus that Obama appears to be referring to -- manufacturing employment fell from 17.6 million to 11.5 million, a decline of just over one-third. So Obamas correct that manufacturing jobs had been shedding jobs for more than 10 years by the time he took office.Added about 500,000 jobs over the past three yearsDuring the period Obama chose -- from January 2010 to January 2013 -- manufacturing jobs began to rise again, by 490,000. We think that qualifies as about 500,000, as Obama put it.Its worth noting that while the reversal has been striking, this rise has still replaced only a fraction of the manufacturing jobs lost during the decade of decline. The manufacturing jobs gained during the turnaround replaced less than 10 percent of the jobs lost during the decade of decline.Our rulingThe rise in manufacturing jobs that Obama is referring to is modest compared to the prior decades decline, but he has described the numbers carefully. We rate his statement True.","['National', 'Economy', 'Jobs']",True,"At several points in his State of the Union Address, President Barack Obama noted the importance of manufacturing to the nations economy.Our first priority is making America a magnet for new jobs and manufacturing, Obama said. After shedding jobs for more than 10 years, our manufacturers have added about 500,000 jobs over the past three. Caterpillar is bringing jobs back from Japan. Ford is bringing jobs back from Mexico. After locating plants in other countries like China, Intel is opening its most advanced plant right here at home. And this year, Apple will start making Macs in America again.The claim about job numbers is an update of a line Obama included in his acceptance speech at the 2012 Democratic convention in Charlotte, N.C. We checked that one and rated itTrue.The main difference between Obamas two versions was that the timeline in the most recent claim has been extended by six months.Because of the wording of his claim, we are examining whether the numbers are right, not whether Obama's policies were instrumental. To check the numbers, we turned to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the federal governments official source for employment numbers. We used seasonally adjusted statistics for manufacturing jobs.Shedding jobs for more than 10 yearsIts not news that manufacturing jobs have been in decline in the United States in recent years, though sometimes with ups and downs. Generally, the decline has been due to broad economic shifts both inside and outside the United States, as well as changes in technology. Manufacturings share of U.S. employment was 29 percent in 1960, but it fell to just 9 percent by 2011. Even the raw numbers of manufacturing jobs fell over that period -- from 15.7 million to 11.7 million -- despite a large expansion of the overall U.S. workforce.Between March and April 1998 and December 2009 -- the decade-plus that Obama appears to be referring to -- manufacturing employment fell from 17.6 million to 11.5 million, a decline of just over one-third. So Obamas correct that manufacturing jobs had been shedding jobs for more than 10 years by the time he took office.Added about 500,000 jobs over the past three yearsDuring the period Obama chose -- from January 2010 to January 2013 -- manufacturing jobs began to rise again, by 490,000. We think that qualifies as about 500,000, as Obama put it.Its worth noting that while the reversal has been striking, this rise has still replaced only a fraction of the manufacturing jobs lost during the decade of decline. The manufacturing jobs gained during the turnaround replaced less than 10 percent of the jobs lost during the decade of decline.Our rulingThe rise in manufacturing jobs that Obama is referring to is modest compared to the prior decades decline, but he has described the numbers carefully. We rate his statement True."
State Dept. Employee Candace Claiborne Arrested on Treason Charges?,['Department of State employee Candace Claiborne was arrested and charged in connection with her improperly receiving gifts from Chinese agents.'],"In mid-April 2017, multiple online sources reported that former U.S. State Department employee Candace Claiborne was arrested on charges related to treason. The indictment in question was real, although many online reports covering it were inaccurate. Claiborne was arrested on specific charges related to improperly receiving gifts in exchange for providing information to Chinese agents, obstructing an official proceeding, and making false statements to the FBI, not ""treason,"" as noted in a Justice Department press release about the case. A federal complaint was unsealed charging Candace Marie Claiborne, 60, of Washington, D.C., and an employee of the U.S. Department of State, with obstructing an official proceeding and making false statements to the FBI, both felony offenses, for allegedly concealing numerous contacts that she had over a period of years with foreign intelligence agents. The charges were announced by Acting Assistant Attorney General Mary B. McCord for National Security, U.S. Attorney Channing D. Phillips of the District of Columbia, and Assistant Director in Charge Andrew W. Vale of the FBI's Washington Field Office. Candace Marie Claiborne is a U.S. State Department employee who possesses a Top Secret security clearance and allegedly failed to report her contacts with Chinese foreign intelligence agents who provided her with thousands of dollars in gifts and benefits, said Acting Assistant Attorney General McCord. Claiborne used her position and her access to sensitive diplomatic data for personal profit. Pursuing those who imperil our national security for personal gain will remain a key priority of the National Security Division. Candace Claiborne is charged with obstructing an official proceeding and making false statements in connection with her alleged concealment and failure to report her improper connections to foreign contacts, along with the tens of thousands of dollars in gifts and benefits they provided, said U.S. Attorney Phillips. As a State Department employee with a Top Secret clearance, she received training and briefings about the need for caution and transparency. This case demonstrates that U.S. government employees will be held accountable for failing to honor the trust placed in them when they take on such sensitive assignments. Claiborne is accused of violating her oath of office as a State Department employee, who was entrusted with Top Secret information when she purposefully misled federal investigators about her significant and repeated interactions with foreign contacts, said Assistant Director in Charge Vale. The FBI will continue to investigate individuals who, though required by law, fail to report foreign contacts, which is a key indicator of potential insider threats posed by those in positions of public trust. Claiborne is required to report any contacts with persons suspected of affiliation with a foreign intelligence agency. Despite such a requirement, the affidavit alleges, Claiborne failed to report repeated contacts with two intelligence agents of the People's Republic of China (PRC), even though these agents provided tens of thousands of dollars in gifts and benefits to Claiborne and her family over five years. According to the affidavit, the gifts and benefits included cash wired to Claiborne's USAA account, an Apple iPhone and laptop computer, Chinese New Year's gifts, meals, international travel and vacations, tuition at a Chinese fashion school, a fully furnished apartment, and a monthly stipend. Some of these gifts and benefits were provided directly to Claiborne, the affidavit alleges, while others were provided through a co-conspirator. Claiborne wasn't an ""employee"" of Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton, other than in the sense that she held a mid-level job at the State Department, which was headed by Clinton from 2009-2013 and is part of the executive branch, which was headed by Barack Obama from 2009-2017. By that standard, Claiborne would also have been an ""employee"" of Donald Trump and Rex Tillerson, as the affidavit that accompanied the criminal complaint against her noted she was still working for the State Department at the time of her arrest. Candace Claiborne is a 60-year-old Office Management Specialist with the Department of State. She is a United States citizen who resides and works in Washington, D.C. Claiborne has a bachelor's degree in criminal justice and law enforcement from the University of the District of Columbia. She joined the State Department in 1999 and has served in a variety of places, including Washington, D.C., Baghdad, Iraq, Beijing and Shanghai, China, and Khartoum, Sudan. According to State Department records, Claiborne has language proficiency in Arabic, Mandarin Chinese, and Spanish. She currently works at the Department of State headquarters in Washington, D.C., in the Office of Caucasus Affairs and Regional Conflicts. Claiborne has held a TOP SECRET security clearance since 1999. Candace Claiborne pled ""not guilty"" at her 29 March 2017 court appearance, and a preliminary hearing for her case was scheduled for 18 April 2017.",['profit'],NEI,"In mid-April 2017, multiple online sources reported that former U.S. State Department employee Candace Claiborne (purportedly an employee of Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton) was arrested on charges of treason:The indictment in question was real, although many online reports covering it were inaccurate. Claiborne was arrested on specific charges related to improperly receiving gifts in exchange for her providing information to Chinese agents  obstructing an official proceeding and making false statements to the F.B.I.   not ""treason,"" as noted in a Justice Department press release about the case:Claiborne wasn't an ""employee"" of Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton, other than in the sense that she held a mid-level (not a ""deep state operative"") job at the State Department, which was headed by Clinton from 2009-2013 (in her position as Secretary of State) and is a part of the executive branch, which was headed by Barack Obama from 2009-2017 (in his position as President of the United States).  By that standard, Claiborne would also have been an ""employee"" of Donald Trump and Rex Tillerson, as the affidavit that accompanied the criminal complaint against her noted she was still working for the State Department at the time of her arrest:"
"Does US Rank No. 1 in Incarceration, Gas Consumption, Military Spending?","['""We\'re number one"" isn\'t always a point of pride.']","In April 2021, users of the online forum Reddit discussed, shared, and analyzed a striking meme that purported to contrast the perception Americans hold about their country's superlative status among the nations of the world with the supposedly much more sobering reality. The meme was posted to the ""/facepalm"" subreddit, a discussion board dedicated to displays of stupidity, on April 12. It read as follows: ""What the USA thinks it's #1 in: - Healthcare 30th - Happiness 19th - Education 26th - Life Expectancy 46th - Free Press 42nd - Freedom Index 17th - Climate Change Performance 59/60 What it IS #1 in: - Incarceration - Gas consumption - Oil consumption - Military spending."" The meme originated in a widely shared tweet posted back in October 2020 and was also reposted on Facebook at that time. This fact check will focus specifically on the second half of the meme, ""What the U.S. is #1 in""—the potentially surprising and arguably dubious superlatives attached to the United States. 

On the whole, the meme contained a mixture of accuracy and inaccuracy, much of which depended on the way in which certain rankings were viewed. For example, the U.S. spends by far the most of any country on its military in absolute terms, but not when overall government spending or the size of the American economy is taken into account. The United States has the highest incarceration rate of any country in the world, according to two reliable sources. In 2018, the Prison Policy Initiative, a Massachusetts-based nonprofit organization that gathers data on imprisonment and advocates against mass incarceration, reported that the U.S. has an incarceration rate of 698 per 100,000 people. This was significantly higher than that of the second-ranked nation, El Salvador, which had an incarceration rate of 614, or Turkmenistan, where the rate was 583 per 100,000 people. Similarly, the Institute for Crime and Justice Policy Research at Birkbeck, University of London, also ranked the U.S. first in 2018, with an incarceration rate of 639 per 100,000 people, with El Salvador and Turkmenistan again ranked second and third, respectively. The U.S. also had the highest outright number of incarcerated persons in the world, regardless of overall population, at just over two million people. 

The underlying data is now three years old, so this assessment comes with a health warning. However, given the gap between the United States and other nations in 2018, the ranking is unlikely to have changed significantly since then. It's not made clear in the meme, but it is reasonable to assume this claim refers to vehicle gas—that is, automobile gasoline—consumption. On that premise, the claim is true. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, a federal agency, the U.S. consumed 9.3 million barrels of automobile gasoline per day in 2018, the greatest amount of any country. That's the equivalent of 1.2 gallons per person per day, which is also the world's second-highest rate of consumption, even after population is taken into account. Canada, with 1 gallon per person per day, and the United Arab Emirates, with 0.9 gallons per person per day, were the third- and fourth-ranked nations, respectively. The place with the highest per capita consumption of automobile gasoline in 2018 was Gibraltar, a British territory located on the southern tip of Spain, with nearly 1.3 gallons per person per day. Since Gibraltar has such a small population (only 33,718 people lived there in 2018), it's quite possible that the per capita consumption figures are skewed. Gibraltar is also not a sovereign nation, so a further argument exists for placing the U.S. at the top of the per capita consumption rankings. Again, the underlying data is a few years old and comes with a health warning, but the gap between the U.S. and other nations is unlikely to have been bridged since 2018. 

This claim is supported by the same disclaimer that the most recent reliable figures available date from 2018. The best source available here is, again, the U.S. Energy Information Administration, which reported that, in 2018, the U.S. consumed 20.5 million barrels (861.5 million gallons) of oil per day. That's 20% of the entire world's consumption and comfortably the highest volume of any nation. However, when population is taken into account, the U.S. is not the world's most voracious consumer of oil, which is defined by the Energy Information Administration as including crude oil, all other petroleum liquids, and biofuels. Those 20.5 million barrels equate to 2.6 gallons of oil per person per day. Several other countries had higher rates of consumption than that, including Singapore (11 gallons per person per day), Kuwait (4.3 gallons per person per day), Saudi Arabia (3.8 gallons per person per day), and Canada (2.9 gallons per person per day). A handful of very small countries rounded out the top 10, suggesting that statistical outliers in small populations might again be playing a role. 

According to figures collected by the Stockholm International Peace Institute, a leading think tank based in Sweden, the U.S. had by far the world's highest military expenditure in 2019, the most recent year for which figures are available, spending close to $732 billion. China was ranked a distant second, with $261 billion, while India and Russia spent $71 billion and $65 billion, respectively. However, the U.S. ranked second to Israel when population is taken into account, spending $2,224 per person on its military, in comparison with Israel's $2,402 per person. The U.S. also ranked outside the top 20 for military spending as a percentage of total government spending (at 9.4%) and outside the top 10 for military spending as a percentage of gross domestic product (GDP), a measure of the overall size of the economy, with 3.4%.",['economy'],NEI,"The meme was posted to the ""/facepalm"" sub-reddit  a discussion board dedicated to displays of stupidity  on April 12. It read as follows:The meme originated in a widely-shared tweet posted back in October 2020, and was also reposted on Facebook at that time. This fact check will focus specifically on the second half of the meme, ""What the U.S. is #1 in""  the potentially surprising and arguably dubious superlatives attached to the United States.In 2018, the Prison Policy Initiative, a Massachusetts-based nonprofit organization which gathers data on imprisonment but also advocates against mass incarceration, reported that the U.S. has an incarceration rate of 698 per 100,000 people. That was a significantly higher rate than that of the second-ranked nation, El Salvador, which had an incarceration rate of 614, or Turkmenistan, where the rate was 583 per 100,000 people.Similarly, the Institute for Crime and Justice Policy Research at Birkbeck, University of London, also ranked the U.S. first in 2018, with an incarceration rate of 639 per 100,000 people, with El Salvador and Turkmenistan again ranked second and third, respectively. The U.S. also had the highest outright number of incarcerate persons in the world, regardless of overall population, at just over two million people.It's not made clear in the meme, but it is reasonable to assume this claim refers to vehicle gas  that is, automobile gasoline  consumption. On that premise, the claim is true. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, a federal agency, the U.S. consumed 9.3 million barrels of automobile gasoline per day, in 2018  the greatest amount of any country.This claim is a , with the same disclaimer that the most recent reliable figures available date from 2018. The best source available here is, again, the U.S. Energy Information Administration, which reported that, in 2018, the U.S. consumed 20.5 million barrels (861.5 million gallons) of oil per day. That's 20% of the entire world's consumption, and comfortably the highest volume of any nation. Those 20.5 million barrels equate to 2.6 gallons of oil per person per day. Several other countries had higher rates of consumption than that, including Singapore (11 gallons per person per day), Kuwait (4.3 gallons per person per day), Saudi Arabia (3.8 gallons per person per day), and Canada (2.9 gallons per person per day). A handful of very small countries rounded out the top 10, suggesting that statistical outliers in small populations might again be playing a role. . According to figures collected by the Stockholm International Peace Institute, a leading think tank based in Sweden, the U.S. had by far the world's highest military expenditure in 2019, the most recent year for which figures are available, spending close to $732 billion. China was ranked a distant second, with $261 billion, while India and Russia spent $71 billion and $65 billion, respectively. "
"The average student loan debt in Texas is over $22,000...the cost of an average size pickup truck. But unlike car owners, students are not allowed to refinance their loans at lower rates.",[],"U.S. Rep. Pete Gallego invoked pickup trucks to frame his case for making it easier for college students and young graduates to refinance student loans. The average student loan debt in Texas is over $22,000, the Texas Democrat wrote in a May 14, 2014, email blast. That also happens to be the cost of an average-sized pickup truck! But here's what’s truly alarming: students are not allowed to refinance their loans at lower rates—the same way car owners can, Gallego wrote. Democratic-sponsored legislation would provide federal aid so students and graduates stuck with high-interest rates could repay their loans at the lower rates Congress approved for new student loans in 2013. However, a May 16, 2014, National Journal news story called the proposal a long shot in the Senate, where Republicans were described as likely to resist higher taxes on the wealthy to pay for the refinancing measure. Gallego's statement piqued our curiosity. By email, Gallego's campaign manager, Anthony Gutierrez, told us the congressman's average student loan debt figure came from a news story posted online May 8, 2014, on the GovBeat blog of The Washington Post. That story stated that more than a million Americans would graduate this year with substantial student loan debt, a conclusion it attributed to the National Conference of State Legislatures. The graduates will have an average of $26,500 in student loans, the Post story said, joining the tens of millions of other adults who collectively hold more than $1 trillion in student loan debt. That burden is largest, on average, in many Northeastern and Mid-Atlantic states, a few Southeastern states, and California. An accompanying U.S. map shows more than 20 states, including Texas, where the average student loan debt is between $22,000 and $25,000. The Post credited these conclusions to the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, using data from the third quarter of 2012. We ventured to a webpage for the reserve bank, where its entry on student loan debt led us to a research paper published in 2012 and revised in April 2013 by the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City. According to the revised paper, student loan debt increased dramatically over the last several years, from about $346 billion in the fourth quarter of 2004 to $996 billion in the fourth quarter of 2012, a surge of nearly 14 percent a year. By comparison, the report said, total credit card debt was $679 billion and auto debt was $783 billion. The report states that increasing levels of debt were driven largely by growth in the number of borrowers rather than growth in average debt levels of borrowers. The report indicated that in the fourth quarter of 2012—a few months after the period analyzed in the Post's chart—the median borrower holding student loan debt owed $13,924. The average amount of student loan debt across all consumers with student loan debt was $24,699. That’s the latest available calculation, Bill Medley, spokesman for the Kansas City Fed, told us by email. Next, did Gallego accurately capture the price of an average-sized pickup? Gutierrez informed us that the campaign researched average used truck prices on the Cars Direct website. He pointed us to an April 5, 2012, article on the site showing suggested retail prices for five 2010 and 2007 models. These prices are for a base model pickup truck with standard options and no additional accessories, the article stated. According to the story, the average manufacturer's suggested retail price for a 2010 two-door Ford F-150 was $22,355, and the average for a 2010 Dodge Ram 1500 was $21,510—prices close to the $22,000-plus cited by Gallego. However, the Cars Direct article listed estimated prices for two 2010 models at less than $22,000. It also listed the price for another 2010 truck as nearly $6,000 higher. But Gallego priced used pickups; we looked on Edmunds.com, which compiles car and truck prices, for manufacturer's suggested retail prices for model-year 2013 and 2014 pickups. According to the site, the price for a basic Ford F-150 regular cab starts at $24,070 (2013 model) and $24,735 (2014). A Toyota Tacoma regular cab starts at $17,625 (2013) and $18,125 (2014), the site says. Finally, are students really not allowed to refinance college loans? Gutierrez pointed out news articles, including a Feb. 20, 2013, Time magazine piece stating that, unlike other consumers who have taken advantage of reduced interest rates to refinance purchases, student borrowers have been restricted because Congress—not the free market—sets the interest rate on the vast majority of student debt. Additionally, because these loans are not secured by collateral, private lenders are loath to undercut the federal government's terms. The Time story noted that student loan debt was at $1 trillion, and of that, the federal government backed $864 billion. Also, most of the debt was being carried at an interest rate higher than 6 percent, a figure Time attributed to a Feb. 13, 2013, report from the left-leaning Center for American Progress. That’s almost twice the rate of an average 30-year mortgage, Time said. By telephone, Heather Jarvis, a North Carolina attorney specializing in student loan law, stated that some graduates may be able to refinance student loans at lower rates through private lenders, though she noted this would only happen in cases of substantial income. (Car owners, in contrast, have four-wheeled collateral.) By email, Jarvis said refinancing federal loans with a private loan is risky. The borrower gives up important protections that accompany federal loans (like flexible repayment and discharge provisions). Students repaying federally backed loans, Jarvis said, are effectively barred from refinancing opportunities because federal law makes no provision for the government to make such offers. Also by phone, Brian Stewart of the Center for American Progress—which has urged the Democratic-backed action—said it’s possible but difficult to refinance student loans with private lenders while there’s no way for students to get the federal government to refinance a government-backed loan. Stewart, a spokesman for Generation Progress, a center project focused on young adults, said the center has been researching student loan issues for about two years.","['Education', 'Federal Budget', 'Financial Regulation', 'Texas']",True,"Democratic-sponsored legislationwould provide federal aid so students and graduates stuck with high interest rates could repay the loans at the lower rates Congress approved for new student loans in 2013, though a May 16, 2014 National Journalnews storycalled the proposal a long shot in the Senate, where Republicans were described as likely to resist higher taxes on the wealthy to pay for the refinancing wrinkle.By email, Gallegos campaign manager, Anthony Gutierrez told us the congressmans average student-loan debt figure came from anews storyposted online May 8, 2014, on the GovBeat blog ofThe Washington Post. That story said more than a million Americans would graduate this year with substantial student loan debt, a conclusion it attributed to the National Conference of State Legislatures.ThePostcredited these conclusions to the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, using data from the third quarter of 2012. We ventured to a web page for the reserve bank where its entry on student loan debt led us to aresearch paper, published in 2012 and revised in April 2013, by the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City.Gutierrez told us the campaign researched average used truck prices on the Cars Direct website. He pointed us to an April 5, 2012,articleon the site showing suggested retail prices for five 2010 and 2007 models. These prices are for a base model pickup truck with standard options and no additional accessories, the article said.But Gallego priced used pickups; we looked on Edmunds.com, which compiles car and truck prices, for manufacturers suggested retail prices for model-year 2013 and 2014 pickups.According to the site, the price for a basic Ford F-150 regular cab starts at $24,070 (2013 model) and $24,735 (2014). A Toyota Tacoma regular cab starts at $17,625 (2013) and $18,125 (2014),the sitesays.Gutierrez pointed out news articles including a Feb. 20, 2013,Time magazine piecestating that unlike other consumers who have taken advantage of reduced interest rates to refinance purchases, student borrowers have been restricted because Congressnot the free marketsets the interest rate on the vast majority of student debt, and because these loans are not secured by collateral private lenders are loath to undercut the federal governments terms.The Time story noted that student loan debt was at $1 trillionand of that, the federal government backed $864 billion. Also, most of the debt was being carried at an interest rate higher than 6 percent, a figure Time attributed to a Feb. 13, 2013,reportfrom the left-leaning Center for American Progress. Thats almost twice the rate of an average 30-year mortgage, Time said.By telephone,Heather Jarvis, a North Carolina attorney specializing in student loan law, said that some graduates may be able to refinance student loans at lower rates through private lenders, though she said this would only happen in cases of substantial income. (Car owners, in contrast, have four-wheeled collateral.)Also by phone,Brian Stewartof the Center for American Progress -- which has urged the Democratic-backed action -- said its possible but difficult to refinance student loans with private lenders while there's no way for students to get the federal government to refinance a government-backed loan. Stewart, a spokesman for Generation Progress, a center project focused on young adults, said the center has been researching student-loan issues for about two years.Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check."
Is the Kroll Settlement Administration LLC Text Message a Scam or Legit?,"['The genuine text message mentioned a T-Mobile data breach from 2021 and said recipients were ""eligible for benefits from a class action settlement.""']","In late October 2022, we received inquiries from readers who asked if a text message from Kroll Settlement Administration LLC about a 2021 T-Mobile data breach was a scam or legit. We can confirm that a message directing recipients to the URL t-mobilesettlement.com was a legitimate notification. t-mobilesettlement.com The message appeared like this:  This text was sent out beginning around Oct. 20 and read as follows: From Kroll Settlement Administration LLC. If your information was compromised in the 2021 T-MOBILE DATA BREACH, you are eligible for benefits from a Class Action Settlement, Case No. 4:21-md-03019 (BCW). A federal court has authorized this Notice. This is not a solicitation from a lawyer. Visit https://t-mobilesettlement.com to file a claim using your Unique Class Member ID: (ID here). A Twitter user asked the official and verified T-Mobile account @TMobileHelp about the text message: asked  In response, T-Mobile answered, ""Yes, this is the proposed, agreed upon settlement for the consumer class action filing related to the criminal attack of our systems we experienced in August 2021."" answered  Readers may be wondering what this ""criminal attack"" was all about. According to The New York Times, it was announced on July 22 that T-Mobile had reached a $500 million settlement for a data breach that hit the company in August 2021: The New York Times In a court filing late Friday, the mobile phone giant said it would pay $350 million to settle the customers claims and spend $150 million over the next few years bolstering its cybersecurity protection and technologies. The breach affected 76.6 million people in the United States, according to the company. It exposed highly sensitive data, including customers first and last names, Social Security numbers and drivers license information. It was not clear how much individual T-Mobile customers would receive from the settlement, though the proposed agreement, filed in U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri, stipulates that individual payments cannot exceed $2,500. As the Times said, the amount of money individuals would receive in the settlement was unclear. This appeared to depend upon the number of people who would file to receive a check. Just as an example, if 50 percent of the 76.6 million people who were affected received a payment from the $350 million fund, that would mean each person would only receive around $9. The Times published that lawyers for the wireless carrier said the settlement ""did not mean the company was acknowledging any wrongdoing,"" but rather that these sorts of data breaches had frequently occurred for a number of companies ""in the tech, banking and retail industries in recent years."" Note: T-Mobile also released a statement following the July court filing, explaining that the company had, in its words, ""doubled down"" on its cybersecurity following the data breach. T-Mobile statement Corkery, Michael. T-Mobile Reaches $500 Million Settlement in Huge 2021 Data Breach. The New York Times, 23 July 2022, https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/22/business/t-mobile-hacking-settlement.html. Statement on Proposed Settlement. T-Mobile Newsroom, 22 July 2022, https://www.t-mobile.com/news/business/statement-on-proposed-settlement/. @TMobileHelp. Twitter, https://twitter.com/tmobilehelp/.",['banking'],True,"In late October 2022, we received inquiries from readers who asked if a text message from Kroll Settlement Administration LLC about a 2021 T-Mobile data breach was a scam or legit. We can confirm that a message directing recipients to the URL t-mobilesettlement.com was a legitimate notification.A Twitter user asked the official and verified T-Mobile account @TMobileHelp about the text message:In response, T-Mobile answered, ""Yes, this is the proposed, agreed upon settlement for the consumer class action filing related to the criminal attack of our systems we experienced in August 2021.""According to The New York Times, it was announced on July 22 that T-Mobile had reached a $500 million settlement for a data breach that hit the company in August 2021:Note: T-Mobile also released a statement following the July court filing, explaining that the company had, in its words, ""doubled down"" on its cybersecurity following the data breach."
Faces in the Cloud,['Do photos of the World Trade Center fire reveal the face of Satan?'],"The images above come from, respectively, CNN's television coverage and a photo snapped by freelance photographer Mark D. Phillips (who subsequently sold his picture to Associated Press) as New York's World Trade Center towers burned after the terrorist attack on 11 September 2001. Neither image was manipulated. Mark D. Phillips Finding demonic images in photographs and other visual representations  especially those depicting scenes of death and disaster  is an age-old human behavior employed to ascribe catastrophes to evil forces beyond our control, or (as in the following example) to fix blame on a target of choice (rather than the real perpetrators): [Collected on the Internet, 2001] Don't these photos of Satan at the world Trade Center catastrophe tell us that the current seat of Satan's power is the World Trade Center? Don't these photos depict Satan being awakened from his hiding place in the World Trade Center? For it is the international bankers who operate from Fed, the CFR and the World Trade Center who create first, second and third world debt. Usury according to the Bible is Satan's method for enslaving the world under his priesthood, the accountants and bankers of the world (IMF, World Bank Group, WTO). All of this will usher in 666 which is an economic mark of commerce according to the Book of Revelation (Ch 13,17). This mark will also be a religious affiliation of worship which will damn the soul eternally of all who partake we are told. And then there are those who take the additional step of deliberately creating such images:   Pareidol is the technical term for our penchant for finding specific images amidst randomness. Just as people see all sorts of images in clouds, so viewers can find anything from an ordinary ball of smoke to the face of Satan himself in these kinds of pictures. But do we really need to find the visage of the devil here to know that evil was behind the events pictured? Pareidol ADDITIONAL INFORMATION  A Face in the Smoke?  (KUSA-TV Denver) A Face in the Smoke?  (KUSA-TV Denver) ",['debt'],True,"The images above come from, respectively, CNN's television coverage and a photo snapped by freelance photographer Mark D. Phillips (who subsequently sold his picture to Associated Press) as New York's World Trade Center towers burned after the terrorist attack on 11 September 2001. Neither image was manipulated.Pareidol is the technical term for our penchant for finding specific images amidst randomness. Just as people see all sorts of images in clouds, so viewers can find anything from an ordinary ball of smoke to the face of Satan himself in these kinds of pictures. But do we really need to find the visage of the devil here to know that evil was behind the events pictured?A Face in the Smoke?  (KUSA-TV Denver)"
"Has there been a suggestion that H.R. 2847 contains a provision indicating the downfall of the U.S. dollar on July 1, 2014?",['Rumor: The U.S. dollar will officially collapse after 1 July 2014 due to the implementation of H.R. 2847.'],"The U.S. dollar will officially collapse after July 1, 2014, due to the implementation of H.R. 2847. On this date, U.S. House of Representatives Bill ""H.R. 2847"" goes into effect. It will usher in the true collapse of the U.S. dollar and make millions of Americans poorer overnight. You now have just several months to prepare. This claim about the passage of H.R. 2847 causing the U.S. dollar to collapse as of July 1, 2014, is another example of financial scare lore put out in conjunction with an investment come-on, in this case, an ominous sales pitch from Stansberry & Associates Investment Research LLC. This latest panic piece is featured in a Stansberry & Associates presentation that includes a number of alarming statements about how we in the U.S. are soon to experience a ""near-complete shutdown of the American economy,"" will see ""the savings of millions wiped out,"" will be living under the imposition of martial law by the federal government, and will be struggling in the aftermath of various apocalyptic financial scenarios. According to Stansberry & Associates, this remarkable, radical collapse of the United States monetary system and ""our normal way of life"" is set to occur in just a matter of months, similar to a recent conspiracy scare about the federal government's plan to eliminate 16 states from the U.S. in the near future. 

But wait... all one needs to avoid suffering from this devastating national calamity, which will collapse our entire monetary system and spell doom for the American way of life, is a little information. Information that can be yours if you just shell out $149 for a one-year subscription to Stansberry's Investment Advisory newsletter. As one wry commentator put it: in other words, if a financial company spews a bunch of alarming information and then promotes its product as something that will help protect people against this frightening scenario, it might lure gullible individuals into believing that a ""fairly easy and inexpensive way to protect themselves"" against losing their money is to send their money to that company instead. Unfortunately, such schemes work often enough to keep these types of schemers in business. 

So what is this all really about? H.R. 2847, also known as the Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment Act (or HIRE), was a Congressional bill passed into law in March 2010 that sought to provide payroll tax breaks and incentives for businesses to hire unemployed workers. A section of that bill, the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (known as FATCA), aimed to eliminate the non-compliance of U.S. taxpayers who hold foreign accounts by requiring those taxpayers (including those living outside the U.S.) to report certain foreign accounts and offshore assets to the government, and by requiring foreign financial institutions to report information about the ownership of overseas assets held by U.S. taxpayers to the government. 

The problem originates from U.S. government efforts to prevent future offshore-banking tax scams like the UBS one in 2009. To keep better track of the flow of assets owned by U.S. citizens, FATCA requires bankers in other countries to send the IRS information about transactions by any of their customers who are Americans. Similarly, U.S. banks must report to the IRS information on their non-U.S.-citizen customers, so the IRS can send it on to their home countries. 

You can understand the motivation behind the rule. It's a big, interconnected world economy; huge sums can be transferred anywhere in an instant. Just as INTERPOL or the World Health Organization have a legitimate interest in sharing data, so too might taxing authorities. In principle, everyone should pay his or her fair share somewhere. As noted on the American Citizens Abroad website, starting July 1, 2014, FATCA will require foreign financial institutions (FFIs) to provide annual reports to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) on the name and address of each U.S. client, as well as the largest account balance in the year and total debits and credits of any account owned by a U.S. person. 

If an institution does not comply, the U.S. will impose a 30% withholding tax on all its transactions concerning U.S. securities, including the proceeds from the sale of securities. Additionally, FATCA requires any foreign company not listed on a stock exchange or any foreign partnership with 10% U.S. ownership to report to the IRS the names and tax identification numbers (TIN) of any U.S. owner. FATCA also requires U.S. citizens and green card holders who have foreign financial assets in excess of $50,000 (higher for those who are bona fide residents abroad) to complete a new Form 8938 to be filed with the 1040 tax return, starting with the fiscal year 2011. 

FATCA has faced criticism on several fronts, which the Treasury Department has attempted to counter in its own ""Myth vs. FACTA"" write-up. Critics argue that the costs of implementing it may outstrip the additional revenues it will generate, that it may prompt ""capital flight"" in the form of foreign financial institutions divesting themselves of U.S. assets, that foreign relations may be strained by the U.S. requiring foreign governments to gather and report (at their own expense) information on U.S. citizens, and that the law may make it difficult or impossible for U.S. citizens living and/or working abroad to open accounts in foreign banks. 

However, casting such a wide net is producing unintended consequences for some Americans who faithfully pay their taxes from afar. Banks around the world are suddenly rejecting Americans as clients or customers because they don't want the reporting and bureaucratic hassles, plus the potential exposure to severe penalties. Non-Americans are pulling their assets out of U.S. banks. I receive emails every day from American expats who say they are facing various problems bringing their long-standing foreign-based banking lives into compliance with this new law. Some of them say they're considering renouncing their citizenship. Over the years, I've had accounts with banks in England, Japan, Malaysia, China, and now Australia while living or working in those places, and I'm wondering what I need to worry about to ensure the remaining ones ""comply."" 

""I have always filed my U.S. taxes just as I am supposed to,"" says Brian Dublin, 47, an American businessman now based in Zug, Switzerland, who has lived overseas for many years, including stints in Russia. ""However, as a result of FATCA, in the past year I have been kicked out of a Swiss bank that said, 'Hey, we love you, but we won't work with Americans.' I have also been kicked out of a Swiss pension fund. They told me they don't want any Americans in the fund. They don't want to work on behalf of the IRS,"" he says. 

""And on top of that, I spend many hours and many dollars each year filing U.S. taxes when I sometimes turn out to have zero liability for that year because I have paid a lot of tax somewhere else,"" Dublin adds. Dublin, a New York City native, says he will be eligible for Swiss nationality in the next few years and that if the situation has not dramatically changed, he will seriously consider renouncing his U.S. citizenship. Writing in the New American, Alex Newman argued the more dire side of FATCA, speculating that it could potentially result in a large-scale movement by foreign investors to pull out of U.S. assets and markets. 

Estimates suggest there is currently more than $21 trillion of foreign capital invested in American assets and markets, with about $10 trillion of that in the stock market. However, that could change as FATCA enforcement begins, possibly quickly. The Japanese Bankers Association, the European Banking Federation, the Institute of International Bankers, and others have all openly warned in recent years that some of their members could decide to divest from U.S. assets and markets in response to FATCA. 

Luxembourg Bankers' Association CEO Jean-Jacques Rommes, speaking to Democrats Abroad, warned that the best way for banks to lower compliance risks was simply to reduce the amount of American assets they hold. ""In other words, divest from the U.S. market in general,"" he explained, as summarized by the Luxembourg Bankers' Association. 

Multiple reports have suggested that small and medium-sized firms, unable to bear the compliance costs or the crippling withholding taxes, would be especially likely to divest from American markets. ""On the institutional side, the cost of becoming FATCA compliant may be prohibitive for some foreign institutions, and therefore they will divest from their American holdings,"" explained Douglas Goldstein, author of The Expatriate's Guide to Handling Money and Taxes and director of Profile Investment Services Ltd. Indeed, compliance costs borne by the private sector are expected to dwarf the amount of additional U.S. tax revenue—perhaps by hundreds of times. 

Goldstein explained: ""Faced with the choice between paying to implement the new rules or divesting from U.S.-based assets, smaller foreign banks that can't afford to shoulder these costs may choose the latter. After all, there are plenty of promising new markets in which to invest."" 

Needless to say, if foreign institutions started fleeing U.S. markets, the economic damage would be massive—potentially apocalyptic—especially considering U.S. trade deficits and America's outsized reliance on foreign investment and outside credit just to function. The full implementation of FATCA may, as some critics have maintained, ultimately prove more harmful to U.S. business interests and U.S. citizens living and working abroad than its benefits will merit. However, no credible source that isn't an investment firm trying to scare potential customers into forking over money for a newsletter subscription is seriously maintaining that a law passed five years ago will collapse the entire U.S. economic system, destroy the American way of life, and lead to the imposition of martial law.",['asset'],False,"Origins:  This item about the passage of H.R. 2847 causing the U.S. dollar to collapse as of 1 July 2014 is another example financial scarelore put out in conjunction with an investment come-on, in this case an ominous sales pitch put out by the folks at Stansberry & Associates Investment Research LLC.is offered in a Stansberry & Associates presentation featuring a number of scary-sounding statements about how we in the U.S. are soon to experience a ""near-complete shutdown of the American economy,"" will see ""the savings of millions wiped out,"" will be living under the imposition of martial law by the federal government, and will be struggling in the aftermath of a number of other apocalyptic financial scenarios.And according to Stansberry & Associates, this remarkable, radical collapse of the United States monetary system and ""our normal way of life"" is going into effect in a mere matter of months (just like a similar recent conspiracy scare about the federal government's plan to eliminate 16 states from the U.S. in the very near future).But wait ... all one needs in order to avoid suffering from this devastating national calamity, one that will collapse our entire monetary system and spell doom for the American way of life, is a little information. Information that can be yours if you'll just shell out $149 for a one-year subscription to Stansberry's Investment Advisory newsletter. Or, as one wry commentator put it:H.R. 2847, also known as the Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment Act (or HIRE), was a Congressional bill passed into law in March 2010 that sought to provide payroll tax breaks and incentives for businesses to hire unemployed workers. A section of that bill, the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (known as FATCA), sought to eliminate the non-compliance of U.S. taxpayers who hold foreign accounts by requiring those taxpayers (including those living outside the U.S.) to report certain foreign accounts and offshore assets to the government, and by requiring foreign financial institutions to report information about the ownership of overseas assets held by U.S. taxpayers to the government:As noted on the American Citizens Abroad web site:FATCA has been the subject of criticisms on a number of fronts (which the Treasury Department has attempted to counter in its own ""Myth vs. FACTA"" write-up), among them that the costs of implementing it may outstrip the additional revenues it will bring in, that it may prompt ""capital flight"" in the form of foreign financial institutions divesting themselves of U.S. assets, that foreign relations may be strained by the U.S. requiring foreign governments to gather and report (at their own expense) information on U.S. citizens, and that the law may make it difficult or impossible for U.S. citizens living and/or working abroad to open accounts in foreign banks:"
Does This Picture Show a Drone Photo 'We're Not Supposed to See'?,['Online advertisements promised answers for what appeared to be a large nest or other object hanging on top of a telephone pole or power lines.'],"Since at least July 2021, online advertisements have displayed the words: ""[Pics] Drone Captures Photos We're Not Supposed to See."" It showed a purported drone photograph of a massive nest or other object hanging off a telephone pole or power lines. The ads appeared to promise answers. For example, this ad appeared next to an article on the 10news.com website. 10news.com  The ad showed a strange object blanketing power lines or a telephone pole.  A variation of the ad said: ""Drone Snaps Photos No One Should Ever See."" A third version read: ""Photos That Can Give You A New Perspective."" They were sponsored by the Definition.org website, which has quite the track record for misleading clickbait. The ad was hosted by the Outbrain advertising network. quite the track record misleading clickbait Clicking on the ads led to a 39-page slideshow article and a headline that read: ""Drone Photos Taken In Mid Air Will Have You Feeling Uneasy."" article The article contained several photographs that appeared to be shot from the air, whether by a drone, helicopter, or airplane. One claimed it showed the aftermath of a residential explosion. Another described a shot that was purportedly captured over Barcelona, Spain. We also found a picture that was said to show volcanic activity in Iceland. a residential explosion Another Barcelona, Spain picture Iceland We clicked through all 39 pages. The article never mentioned the photograph from the ad. It was clickbait. We clicked ""next page"" nearly 40 times so you dont have to. The picture in the ad was not captured high in the sky using a drone. It appeared to be shot on the ground by artist and photographer Dillon Marsh of Dillon Marsh Photography. We found no credit to Marsh on the Definition.org website. Dillon Marsh Dillon Marsh Photography The picture showed a large birds' nest for the sociable weaver, built on a telephone pole. The bird species lives in the Kalahari region of southern Africa. sociable weaver  Sociable weavers in Lijjersdraai Picnic Site at Kgalagadi Transfrontier Park in Northern Cape, South Africa. (Courtesy: Bernard Dupont/Flickr)  The only place they can be found in the United States is with the San Diego Zoo. The zoo described the nests built by sociable weavers as providing enough living space for an ""entire colony as well as for future residents."" The nests can hold up to 400 birds and can potentially last an entire century. described  Weaver birds' nests on the top of telegraph and telephone poles in the Namib desert region of southwest Africa. (Courtesy: Matt Mawson/Getty Images)  Nests built by the species are made from large twigs, dry grasses, straw, soft plants, cotton, fur, and fluff. The zoo also published that a ""proper nesting tree has a long, smooth trunk and high branches to discourage slithering predators."" This is perhaps what makes a telephone pole the perfect trunk for sociable weavers. The nests keep the sociable weavers cool in the summer and warm on cold nights. They welcome other birds inside, such as the South African pygmy falcon, pied barbet, familiar chat, red-headed finch, ashy tit, and rosy-faced lovebird. Vultures, eagles, and owls can also sometimes be seen on top of the nests. The added company is said to make for a more secure home from predators.  A view from underneath a sociable weaver nest. (Courtesy: Rui Ornelas/Flickr)  As for food, the zoo's page about the sociable weaver said that they ""need less water than any other bird"" and that ""most never take a drink."" They get their moisture from bugs. For more on the species, visit the San Diego Zoo website. San Diego Zoo website Several other photographs of the nests can be viewed on the Getty Images website. Several other photographs nests viewed In sum, ads promised to reveal something about a strange drone photograph that ""we're not supposed to see."" The long articles that resulted from the ads never mentioned the picture. In reality, it was shot from ground level and showed a massive nest built on a telephone pole by sociable weavers. Note: Photographs from Flickr are credited to Bernard Dupont and Rui Ornelas. Matt Mawson shot the Getty Images picture. The photograph in the ad, which went uncredited by the advertiser, appeared to originally be captured by Dillon Marsh. Bernard Dupont Rui Ornelas Matt Mawson Dillon Marsh Snopes debunks a wide range of content, and online advertisements are no exception. Misleading ads often lead to obscure websites that host lengthy slideshow articles with lots of pages. It's called advertising ""arbitrage."" The advertiser's goal is to make more money on ads displayed on the slideshow's pages than it cost to show the initial ad that lured them to it. Feel free to submit ads to us, and be sure to include a screenshot of the ad and the link to where the ad leads. submit ads to us",['credit'],False,"Since at least July 2021, online advertisements have displayed the words: ""[Pics] Drone Captures Photos We're Not Supposed to See."" It showed a purported drone photograph of a massive nest or other object hanging off a telephone pole or power lines. The ads appeared to promise answers. For example, this ad appeared next to an article on the 10news.com website. The ad showed a strange object blanketing power lines or a telephone pole.A variation of the ad said: ""Drone Snaps Photos No One Should Ever See."" A third version read: ""Photos That Can Give You A New Perspective."" They were sponsored by the Definition.org website, which has quite the track record for misleading clickbait. The ad was hosted by the Outbrain advertising network.Clicking on the ads led to a 39-page slideshow article and a headline that read: ""Drone Photos Taken In Mid Air Will Have You Feeling Uneasy.""The article contained several photographs that appeared to be shot from the air, whether by a drone, helicopter, or airplane. One claimed it showed the aftermath of a residential explosion. Another described a shot that was purportedly captured over Barcelona, Spain. We also found a picture that was said to show volcanic activity in Iceland.The picture in the ad was not captured high in the sky using a drone. It appeared to be shot on the ground by artist and photographer Dillon Marsh of Dillon Marsh Photography. We found no credit to Marsh on the Definition.org website.The picture showed a large birds' nest for the sociable weaver, built on a telephone pole. The bird species lives in the Kalahari region of southern Africa. Sociable weavers in Lijjersdraai Picnic Site at Kgalagadi Transfrontier Park in Northern Cape, South Africa. (Courtesy: Bernard Dupont/Flickr)The only place they can be found in the United States is with the San Diego Zoo. The zoo described the nests built by sociable weavers as providing enough living space for an ""entire colony as well as for future residents."" The nests can hold up to 400 birds and can potentially last an entire century. Weaver birds' nests on the top of telegraph and telephone poles in the Namib desert region of southwest Africa. (Courtesy: Matt Mawson/Getty Images) A view from underneath a sociable weaver nest. (Courtesy: Rui Ornelas/Flickr)As for food, the zoo's page about the sociable weaver said that they ""need less water than any other bird"" and that ""most never take a drink."" They get their moisture from bugs. For more on the species, visit the San Diego Zoo website.Several other photographs of the nests can be viewed on the Getty Images website.Note: Photographs from Flickr are credited to Bernard Dupont and Rui Ornelas. Matt Mawson shot the Getty Images picture. The photograph in the ad, which went uncredited by the advertiser, appeared to originally be captured by Dillon Marsh.Snopes debunks a wide range of content, and online advertisements are no exception. Misleading ads often lead to obscure websites that host lengthy slideshow articles with lots of pages. It's called advertising ""arbitrage."" The advertiser's goal is to make more money on ads displayed on the slideshow's pages than it cost to show the initial ad that lured them to it. Feel free to submit ads to us, and be sure to include a screenshot of the ad and the link to where the ad leads."
Sonic Drive-In Red Tray Keychain Promotion,['Sonic Drive-In promotions involving red tray keychains have been widely shared nationwide despite being local offers only.'],"On 19 May 2016 a Facebook user published a photograph and status update reporting that outlets of the Sonic Drive-In fast food chain were selling red tray keychains for $2 that entitled bearers to 99 Route 44 beverages for life: photograph  As is often the case with such high-value discount offers, the photograph rapidly spread outside the user's area and soon flooded Facebook nationally  with some viewers expressing skepticism about the information:  Posters to Sonic's Facebook wall regularly asked whether the claim promotion was real and why they had been unable to obtain the red tray keychain at their local Sonic outlets. Sonic corporate didn't respond to those questions, but an individual Sonic franchise operator replied to a customer's query to say: wall  According to that Sonic operator, the promotion was offered only by a small group of Sonic franchises in Texas. A manager at one of those ""red tray"" locations told us that the red tray keychains were only available at Texas Sonic locations in Tyler and Longview.  Similarly, 2017 saw the red tray promotion pop up at scattered Sonic Drive-In locations such as Princeton, West Virginia:  The Sonic promotion rumor and social media interest in it has spread confusion similar to that prompted by Wendy's Frosty key chains promotion, which costs $1 and enables purchasers to obtain one free Junior Frosty per Wendy's visit (but are good only for one year from date of purchase). Frosty key chains",['interest'],NEI,"On 19 May 2016 a Facebook user published a photograph and status update reporting that outlets of the Sonic Drive-In fast food chain were selling red tray keychains for $2 that entitled bearers to 99 Route 44 beverages for life:Posters to Sonic's Facebook wall regularly asked whether the claim promotion was real and why they had been unable to obtain the red tray keychain at their local Sonic outlets. Sonic corporate didn't respond to those questions, but an individual Sonic franchise operator replied to a customer's query to say:The Sonic promotion rumor and social media interest in it has spread confusion similar to that prompted by Wendy's Frosty key chains promotion, which costs $1 and enables purchasers to obtain one free Junior Frosty per Wendy's visit (but are good only for one year from date of purchase)."
Was a Woman Charged While Off-Duty Cop Who Killed Her Child Was Not?,"['A meme provided some factual information, but also excluded many complexities in telling the story of a crash that left a 1-year-old dead.']","On October 12, 2017, in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, a Nissan SUV carrying four adults and four children was making a left turn onto Florline Boulevard at a green light when a Corvette driven by a speeding off-duty police officer, traveling at an estimated 94 MPH in a 50 MPH zone, smashed into its passenger side, killing a 1-year-old girl who was ejected from the SUV. As noted in a meme circulated on social media in the aftermath of the accident, the officer behind the wheel of the Corvette, Christopher Manuel, was not penalized (even though he was driving nearly double the speed limit), while the dead girl's mother, 21-year-old Brittany Stephens, who was a passenger and not the driver of the SUV, was charged with negligent homicide for not properly securing the child in a car seat. As is often the case, while the meme provided factual information, it also ignored the many complexities of this case and instead focused on a single, outrage-inducing aspect of it. The primary context omitted here is that both Manuel and Stephens were initially arrested on suspicion of negligent homicide, but prosecutors—who deliberated for two years—ultimately felt they could not determine who was more at fault for the child's death, nor could they meet the burden of proof needed to successfully bring criminal charges against Manuel. In the end, they took no action against either party. The crash occurred when the driver of the SUV turned left onto Florline Boulevard while Manuel was traveling northbound on Airline Highway. According to Manuel's arrest report, investigators estimated his vehicle's speed at the time of the accident at 94 MPH based on calculations from data recorded by his car's airbag control module. Both cars had green lights, so the primary issue was determining whether the SUV's driver failed to yield or whether the Corvette's excessive speed would have made it extremely difficult or impossible for the driver to safely judge the turn. Investigators came down on the side of the latter, and Manuel filed a civil suit alleging that the driver of the SUV was at fault for turning ""suddenly and without warning"" into his lane. Additional complicating factors were that the driver of the SUV was unlicensed, the vehicle was carrying too many occupants, and no one in the SUV was wearing a seatbelt. Police also stated that Stephens did not properly secure her daughter's car seat, instead placing it on the SUV's center console between the two front seats, which is considered an act of ""gross negligence"" that was a ""contributing factor in the death"" of the child. As the Baton Rouge Advocate reported, the district attorney felt his office could not fairly determine whom, if anyone, to prosecute. East Baton Rouge District Attorney Hillar Moore III said his office decided not to bring charges against either Manuel or Stephens, reasoning that both had contributed to the tragic outcome even though ""one suffered a bigger loss."" ""It becomes a conundrum of 'Who's at fault?'"" Moore said. ""Do you really want to charge the mom with her child's death? Of course not. Which act truly caused the death, speeding or lack of proper restraint? Is one more culpable than the other? We couldn't really determine that based on the facts of the case and what the law requires."" This is a trying decision, Moore said. It weighed on me as a parent with children. One aspect of the controversy surrounding the crash was Manuel's status as a member of the Baton Rouge Police Department, which some critics maintained may have influenced the DA's decision not to prosecute a criminal case against him. Another was that no one involved in the accident was even cited. Marcus Allen, an attorney, volunteered to represent Stephens for free after news of her case went viral within some circles online. He said Moore's ""unilateral decision"" not to prosecute ""has the look of impropriety"" because the case involves a law enforcement officer and argued prosecutors could have avoided that by going forward with the case and allowing the criminal justice system to decide the officer's fate. Police recommended citations for several other people in the SUV with Stephens after finding various safety issues, including that there were too many occupants, none were wearing seatbelts, and the driver was unlicensed. Prosecutors had two years to issue those citations but instead let the tickets expire without doing so. They did the same for a misdemeanor speeding count against Manuel, which also expired. Moore said prosecuting Manuel for speeding would have meant essentially forfeiting the option to charge him with negligent homicide because of double jeopardy laws at the time. But once prosecutors ruled out the more serious charge, they could have chosen to issue the speeding ticket then with no major impacts on the case. Allen said that's the least Moore's office could have done. ""How can you overlook the glaring fact that he was going almost 100 mph?"" Allen said. ""You just cannot operate a vehicle that fast. For him to walk away from this with no criminal charges ... it almost appears he's above the law."" Although prosecutors decided to take no action in the case, some online reports nonetheless mistakenly reported that Brittany Stephens had been convicted and sentenced to prison.",['loss'],NEI,"Additional complicating factors were that the driver of the SUV was unlicensed, the vehicle was carrying too many occupants, and no one in the SUV was wearing a seatbelt. Police also stated that Stephens did not properly secure her daughter's car seat, instead placing it on the SUV's center console between the two front seats, which is considered an act of ""gross negligence"" that was a ""contributing factor in the death"" of the child.As the Baton Rouge Advocate reported, the district attorney felt his office could not fairly determine whom, if anyone, to prosecute:Although prosecutors decided to take no action in the case, some online reports nonetheless mistakenly reported that Brittany Stephens had been convicted and sentenced to prison."
California's Central Valley and Inland Empire are undergoing significant growth in employment opportunities.,[],"Gov. Jerry Brown frequently touts California's overall job growth when telling what he has called the state's comeback story. He claimed recently on NBC's Meet the Press that California has added 2.1 million jobs in the last six or seven years. We checked the numbers and rated that claim True. Later in the same interview, the show's host, Chuck Todd, asked Brown about inland California's struggles, leading to another claim that caught our attention: Chuck Todd: ""But there are parts of your state that are struggling. You have rural counties, ones that don't touch the ocean, struggling. Housing prices are up there, while jobs don't go there."" Gov. Brown: ""The Inland Empire, the Central Valley, they have a harder time. But they, too, are experiencing tremendous job growth."" Brown makes his jobs claim at about the 2:05 minute mark in the video above. California's job growth is normally associated with coastal hubs like Silicon Valley and San Francisco. So, we wondered whether Brown had his facts right when he said these inland regions had really experienced tremendous job growth, too. We set out on a fact-check. 

Inland Empire: Home to about 4.5 million people, Riverside and San Bernardino counties make up what's known as the Inland Empire, a sprawling set of communities east of Los Angeles. The economists we spoke with say Brown's case for tremendous job growth here is a strong one. The region's 3.2 percent job growth rate was the fastest among the state's large metro areas from February 2016 through February 2017, said John Husing, chief economist for the Inland Empire Economic Partnership. During that year, it added 47,500 jobs, which was more than the 35,700 created in the Santa Clara metro area, considered the heart of Silicon Valley, Husing said. ""This area is a real growth engine,"" he added, listing construction, logistics, and transportation among the growing sectors. Over the past five years, as the region has recovered from the Great Recession, it added jobs at a rate of 22.3 percent. That trailed only the San Francisco-Redwood City-South San Francisco metro area's 22.7 percent rate among large metros. A spokesman for the Brown Administration cited the same statistics backing up the governor's claim. Colin Strange of the San Bernardino Area Chamber of Commerce said San Bernardino is seeing job growth, but mainly in blue-collar jobs that pay about $15 per hour, including forklift operators and truck drivers. Husing, who has studied the region's wages, said the Inland Empire has a lower share of high-paying administrative jobs compared with the state as a whole. He said, however, that the region is outperforming the state in its share of middle-class jobs that pay between $45,000 and $60,000. 

Central Valley: The Central Valley stretches about 450 miles from Bakersfield north to Redding. It includes urban cities like Sacramento, Stockton, Modesto, and Fresno, vast farmland, and a diverse economy, making job growth trends for the overall region more complex. A report by Stanislaus State University in the Central Valley city of Turlock offers some help. That report shows the 8-county San Joaquin Valley, which makes up the central and southern portions of the Central Valley, experienced a 1.56 percent job growth rate in 2016; a 1.86 percent rate in 2015; and 1.80 percent in 2014. Those averages trailed the state's overall job growth average, which measured 3 percent in 2015 and about 2 percent last year. But it beat the 8-county region's 1.23 percent historical average job growth rate. 

Within its own limits, the Valley has consistently grown. But it hasn't been a home run, Gokce Soydemir, an economics professor at Stanislaus State, said of job growth in that portion of the Central Valley. Jeffrey Michael, director of the University of Pacific's Center for Business and Policy Research in Stockton, added by email: ""Central Valley areas have also done very well in recent years with the exception of Bakersfield, where recent economic fluctuations are tightly connected to the oil industry."" Bakersfield's job growth rate was flat, at 0.1 percent, over the past year. Meanwhile, Sacramento, the biggest metro area in the northern portion of the Central Valley, saw 1.8 percent growth over the past year, close to the statewide average. 

Our ruling: Gov. Jerry Brown recently claimed California's Central Valley and Inland Empire are experiencing tremendous job growth. Economists say Brown is right about the Inland Empire. That region experienced the fastest job growth rate among the state's large metro areas over the past year and added more jobs than the Santa Clara metro area, the heart of Silicon Valley, during that period. Job growth in the Central Valley, while it has outperformed its historical benchmark in much of the diverse region, hasn't kept up with the overall state average. The governor's argument here needs this key clarification. In the end, we rate his overall claim Mostly True. 

MOSTLY TRUE: The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information.","['Economy', 'Jobs', 'California']",True,"He claimed recently on NBCsMeet the Pressthat California has added 2.1 million jobs in the last six or seven years.We checked the numbers and rated that claimTrue.The regions 3.2 percent job growth rate was the fastest among the states large metro areas from February 2016 through February 2017, saidJohnHusing, chief economist for the InlandEmpire EconomicPartnership.Areport by Stanislaus State Universityin the Central Valley city of Turlock offers some help.SOURCE: Stanislaus State University, College of Business Administration,2016 Business Forecast Report,Volume VI, Issue 1Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check."
Did most of the new jobs in February 2021 consist of waiters and bartenders?,['Some online observers critical of U.S. President Joe Biden sought to undercut a broadly positive employment update in March 2021.'],"In March 2021, new employment figures showed that the U.S. economy added 379,000 jobs in February, the first full month of Joe Biden's presidency. The news was greeted with cautious optimism, with the Wall Street Journal reporting that the gains had ""set up a stronger recovery"" for the spring of 2021, and The Washington Post reporting that the figures had ""surpassed analysts' estimates."" Politico wrote that: Wall Street Journal Washington Post Politico U.S. employers added a robust 379,000 jobs last month, the most since October and a sign that the economy is strengthening as confirmed viral cases drop, consumers spend more and states and cities ease business restrictions.The February gain marked a sharp pickup from the 166,000 jobs that were added in January and a loss of 306,000 in December. Yet it represents just a fraction of the roughly 10 million jobs that were lost to the pandemic. On social media, other observers  in particular those more broadly opposed to Biden  sought to undercut the significance of the jobs figures, claiming that a large majority of the increased employment came in one sector, namely food and beverage services. On Twitter, the libertarian economics blog Zerohedge wrote: wrote Of the 379K jobs added, 286K were waiters and bartenders.   The stockbroker and financial commentator Peter Schiff tweeted: tweeted 75% of the 379k jobs ""created"" in Feb. were waiters and bartenders returning to work. Since many restaurants and bars that closed will never reopen there's a limit to how long this can last... The right-wing British blog Guido Fawkes tweeted: tweeted ""US economic recovery sees 379,000 jobs added this week, 286,000 were waiters and bartenders. God bless America and cheers!"" Those figures were accurately stated, although ""waiters and bartenders"" was a reductive description of the occupations in question. As a result, we're issuing a rating of ""true."" The standard measure of job growth is ""total nonfarm payroll employment, seasonally adjusted,"" a metric that is collated and published by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), each month. On March 5, the BLS published figures for the preceding month, February 2021, writing that: ""Total nonfarm payroll employment rose by 379,000 in February..."" In effect, this means that there were 379,000 more jobs in the United States in February than there were in January. published The BLS provides in-depth breakdowns of job gains or losses, and unemployment, including details on the demographic and sectoral contours of each month's data. According to the same set of figures, the ""leisure and hospitality"" sector gained 355,000 of the 379,000 total new jobs in February (Summary Table B).  Summary Table B Of those, 285,900 jobs were specifically in ""food services and drinking places"" (Table B-1). That's the source of the ""286K"" figure presented by Zerohedge. Those 285,900 jobs made up 75.4% of the total number of new jobs added in February, the percentage figure provided by Schiff in his tweet. Table B-1 However, the ""food services and drinking places"" subsector is made up of more than just ""waiters and bartenders."" The following is how that subsector is defined in the official North American Industry Classification System: defined Industries in the Food Services and Drinking Places subsector prepare meals, snacks, and beverages to customer order for immediate on-premises and off-premises consumption. There is a wide range of establishments in these industries. Some provide food and drink only; while others provide various combinations of seating space, waiter/waitress services and incidental amenities, such as limited entertainment. The industries in the subsector are grouped based on the type and level of services provided. The industry groups are full-service restaurants; limited-service eating places; special food services, such as food service contractors, caterers, and mobile food services; and drinking places. The BLS figures for February 2021 don't specify the proportion of those 285,900 jobs composed of specific occupations, but it's highly unlikely they were all ""waiters and bartenders."" In 2019, the most recent year for which figures are available, the following was the breakdown of occupations within the ""food services and drinking places subsector"": breakdown As can be seen from those figures, ""waiters and waitresses"" made up less than one-third of workers within that subsector. If the distribution of occupations was even broadly similar among the 285,900 new ""food services and drinking places"" jobs added in February, then it would appear highly unlikely that even a majority of those 285,900 new jobs were made up of ""waiters and bartenders"" alone. ",['loss'],True,"In March 2021, new employment figures showed that the U.S. economy added 379,000 jobs in February, the first full month of Joe Biden's presidency. The news was greeted with cautious optimism, with the Wall Street Journal reporting that the gains had ""set up a stronger recovery"" for the spring of 2021, and The Washington Post reporting that the figures had ""surpassed analysts' estimates."" Politico wrote that:On Twitter, the libertarian economics blog Zerohedge wrote:The stockbroker and financial commentator Peter Schiff tweeted:The right-wing British blog Guido Fawkes tweeted:The standard measure of job growth is ""total nonfarm payroll employment, seasonally adjusted,"" a metric that is collated and published by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), each month. On March 5, the BLS published figures for the preceding month, February 2021, writing that: ""Total nonfarm payroll employment rose by 379,000 in February..."" In effect, this means that there were 379,000 more jobs in the United States in February than there were in January.The BLS provides in-depth breakdowns of job gains or losses, and unemployment, including details on the demographic and sectoral contours of each month's data. According to the same set of figures, the ""leisure and hospitality"" sector gained 355,000 of the 379,000 total new jobs in February (Summary Table B). Of those, 285,900 jobs were specifically in ""food services and drinking places"" (Table B-1). That's the source of the ""286K"" figure presented by Zerohedge. Those 285,900 jobs made up 75.4% of the total number of new jobs added in February, the percentage figure provided by Schiff in his tweet.However, the ""food services and drinking places"" subsector is made up of more than just ""waiters and bartenders."" The following is how that subsector is defined in the official North American Industry Classification System:The BLS figures for February 2021 don't specify the proportion of those 285,900 jobs composed of specific occupations, but it's highly unlikely they were all ""waiters and bartenders."" In 2019, the most recent year for which figures are available, the following was the breakdown of occupations within the ""food services and drinking places subsector"":"
"Yes, IRS Asked Taxpayers To Claim Stolen Items and Illegal Income","[""But there's a loophole to get out of declaring on stolen goods. ""]","Criminals, beware. Just because you got away with an illegal activity doesn't mean the IRS isn't going to come after your earnings. That's because just ahead of the 2021 tax season, the IRS released guidelines that required taxpayers to claim items they have stolen, as well as earnings from illegal activities. The claim made headlines in publications that joked potential criminals were running out of time to return stolen goods to avoid paying taxes on them. It went viral when the financial Twitter account @litquidity took to social media to remind taxpayers that tax season is around the corner. And it's true. Publication 17, which contains the IRS's general rules for filing federal income tax returns, lists illegal activities under other income categorized as self-employment activity required to be reported to the federal tax agency. ""Income from illegal activities, such as money from dealing illegal drugs, must be included in your income on Schedule 1 (Form 1040), line 8z, or on Schedule C (Form 1040) if from your self-employment activity,"" read the 2021 IRS guidelines. The guidelines also require that those who steal property must report the fair market value as income in the year that the item was stolen. Of course, one can avoid paying taxes on such items as long as the person returns them to the individual they were stolen from in the first place. The handy regulations also list how to report embezzled funds, note that bribes are considered nondeductible expenses, and state that kickbacks, side commissions, and push money must also be included in Schedule 1 (Form 1040), line 8z, or on Schedule C (Form 1040) if from self-employment activity. It's not just items or earnings obtained through illegal activities. That watch you found in the gym locker room? Yep, it's taxable. If you find and keep property that doesn't belong to you that has been lost or abandoned (treasure trove), it's taxable to you at its fair market value in the first year it's your undisputed possession, noted the IRS. Snopes spoke with an accountant who said that while the reporting requirements themselves aren't new, there was previously a separate form specifically for reporting illegal activity income. It's unclear to what extent people actually used the form in the past. It's not exactly clear whether law enforcement will be given information about individuals who report income from illegal activities. What is clear is that anyone under the age of 65 who made more than $12,550 in 2021 is required to file by April 18, 2022. Sources: Dolan, Debra. ""Time Is Running Out to Return Stolen Goods to Avoid Paying Taxes on Them."" https://www.wdbj7.com, https://www.wdbj7.com/2021/12/29/time-is-running-out-return-stolen-goods-avoid-paying-taxes-them/. Accessed 30 Dec. 2021. ""IRS Asks That Criminals Provide Its Cut of Stolen Property, Illegal Income."" KXXV, 29 Dec. 2021, https://www.kxxv.com/news/local-news/irs-asks-that-criminals-provide-its-cut-of-stolen-property-illegal-income. ""Publication 17 (2021), Your Federal Income Tax | Internal Revenue Service."" https://www.irs.gov/publications/p17. Accessed 30 Dec. 2021. ""Stole Something? IRS Says Stolen Property and Bribes Must Be Reported as Income."" USA Today, https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2021/12/28/irs-says-stolen-property-must-reported-and-twitter-goes-wild/9035694002/. Accessed 30 Dec. 2021.",['funds'],True,"The claim made headlines in publications that joked potential criminals were running out of time to return stolen goods to avoid paying taxes on them. And went viral when the financial Twitter account @litquidity took to social media to remind taxpayers that tax szn is around the corner. And its true. Publication 17, which contains the IRS general rules for filing federal income tax returns, lists illegal activities under other income  categorized as self-employment activity  required to be reported to the federal tax agency.  Screengrab/IRS Publication 17 Screengrab/IRS Publication 17"
Did Kamala Harris Prosecute Journalists Who Exposed Planned Parenthood?,['Two people associated with the Center for Medical Progress entered several meetings with Planned Parenthood and the National Abortion Federation under the false company name Biomax.'],"In 2014 and 2015, two individuals associated with an anti-abortion organization called the Center for Medical Progress (CMP), David Daleiden and Sandra Merritt, posed as fetal researchers for a fake company named Biomax to gain entry to National Abortion Federation conventions. The pair's goal was to gather evidence that Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers were selling tissue from aborted fetuses for medical research. Although it is unlawful to knowingly acquire, receive, or otherwise transfer any human fetal tissue for valuable consideration, it is legal for patients to donate extracted material for medical research and for providers to receive reasonable payments associated with the transportation, implantation, processing, preservation, quality control, or storage of human fetal tissue as part of the donation process. The CMP subsequently posted videos online, which they claimed documented Planned Parenthood officials offering to illegally sell fetal tissue for profit, while Planned Parenthood maintained that the videos were deceptively edited and captured only discussions related to legal reimbursements for tissue donation procedures. A text meme circulated during the 2020 presidential campaign claimed that California Attorney General Kamala Harris (who by 2020 was a U.S. senator and a Democratic vice presidential candidate) had unfairly prosecuted the CMP ""journalists"" while taking no action against Planned Parenthood for ""selling aborted baby parts."" That meme was both inaccurate and misleading. It is true that no charges were brought against Planned Parenthood in California for the sound reason that Planned Parenthood was investigated by multiple states, but none of them found sufficient evidence to support a prosecution over claims that the organization had unlawfully sold (or offered to sell) human fetal tissue. As NPR reported, by the end of 2015, 12 different states had opened investigations into allegations that Planned Parenthood was ""selling body parts,"" and none of them turned up evidence of wrongdoing by that organization. Another eight states, including California, decided not to pursue similar investigations. On the other hand, after Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick asked the district attorney in Harris County to open a criminal investigation into Planned Parenthood in 2015, a grand jury there took no action against Planned Parenthood but did find sufficient evidence to indict Daleiden and Merritt on felony charges (which were later dropped) of tampering with government records over their use of fake identification. In late 2019, a federal jury in San Francisco ruled in favor of Planned Parenthood in a civil lawsuit filed by that organization, rejecting arguments that Daleiden and Merritt were simply acting as investigative journalists, and ordering Daleiden, the Center for Medical Progress, and others to pay Planned Parenthood $2.3 million in damages for violating federal and state laws by trespassing on private property and secretly recording video of others without their consent. In March 2017, Daleiden and Merritt were charged in California with 15 counts of violating state invasion of privacy laws that prohibit the recording of conversations without consent. A Superior Court judge dismissed some of those criminal charges, but another count was subsequently added in July, and several criminal counts remain current as of September 2020. Although then-Attorney General Harris was involved with the initial investigation of Daleiden and Merritt, she had left that office to take her seat in the U.S. Senate two months before charges were first brought against the pair by her successor, Xavier Becerra.",['profit'],False,"The CMP subsequently posted videos online which they claimed documented Planned Parenthood officials offering to illegally sell fetal tissue for profit, while Planned Parenthood maintained the videos were deceptively edited and captured only discussion related to legal reimbursements for tissue donation procedures.It is true that no charges were brought against Planned Parenthood in California  for the sound reason that Planned Parenthood was investigated by multiple states  but none of them found sufficient evidence to support a prosecution over claims that the organization had unlawfully sold (or offered to sell) human fetal tissue. As NPR reported, by the end of 2015, 12 different states had opened investigations into allegations that Planned Parenthood was ""selling body parts,"" and none of them turned up evidence of wrongdoing by that organization. (Another eight states, including California, decided not to pursue similar investigations.)On the other hand, after Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick asked the district attorney in Harris County to open a criminal investigation into Planned Parenthood in 2015, a grand jury there took no action against Planned Parenthood, but did find sufficient evidence to indict Daleiden and Merritt on felony charges (which were later dropped) of tampering with government records over their use of fake identification.In late 2019, a federal jury in San Francisco ruled in favor of Planned Parenthood in a civil lawsuit filed by that organization, rejecting arguments that Daleiden and Merritt were simply acting as investigative journalists, and ordering Daleiden, the Center for Medical Progress, and others, to pay Planned Parenthood $2.3 million in damages for violating federal and state laws by trespassing on private property and secretly recording video of others without their consent.In March 2017, Daleiden and Merritt were charged in California with 15 counts of violating state invasion of privacy laws that prohibit the recording of conversations without consent. A Superior Court judge dismissed some of those criminal charges, but another count was subsequently added in July, and several criminal counts remain current as of September 2020."
Did a Gymnast Celebrate by Showing Off Vaccination Card?,"[""Move over touchdown dance, it's time for the vaccination card wave. ""]","Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And, please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease.  fighting Find out Read Submit Become a Founding Member CDC WHO In April 2021, a video went viral of a gymnast celebrating after a successful vault landing. While gymnastic celebrations don't often make viral content, this video proved share-worthy as this athlete, Evan Manivong from the University of Illinois, removed a card from beneath his uniform and started waving it around to the crowd:  He later revealed he was showing off his vaccination card and encouraged everyone to ""go get vaccinated"": encouraged go get vaccinated   Vaccination distribution plans vary by state in the U.S. NBC News reports that more than 80 counties in Illinois have ""expanded COVID vaccine eligibility to all state residents 16 years and older."" Residents of Illinois can check the Illinois Department of Public Health website for more information on how to get their COVID-19 vaccines. For residents outside of Illinois, the CDC recommends using VaccineFinder.org to find a nearby location that is administering vaccines.  NBC News Illinois Department of Public Health CDC VaccineFinder.org Manivong, who earned the B1G Sportsmanship award, helped the Fighting Illini take fourth place at the 2021 Big Ten Men's Gymnastic Championship with a score of 14.45 in the vault. His teammate Michael Fletcher was crowned the B1G Vault champion with a score of 14.6.  Head Coach Justin Spring said: said ""We really struggled on parallel bars, but we never gave up and finished strong. We finished the last two rotations hitting 10/10 routines, and had our best pommel horse of the season, so I'm really proud of how we finished despite having multiple gymnasts out.""",['share'],True,"Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And, please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease. He later revealed he was showing off his vaccination card and encouraged everyone to ""go get vaccinated"":Vaccination distribution plans vary by state in the U.S. NBC News reports that more than 80 counties in Illinois have ""expanded COVID vaccine eligibility to all state residents 16 years and older."" Residents of Illinois can check the Illinois Department of Public Health website for more information on how to get their COVID-19 vaccines. For residents outside of Illinois, the CDC recommends using VaccineFinder.org to find a nearby location that is administering vaccines. Head Coach Justin Spring said:"
"When these [undocumented] students graduate from college, they're still illegal aliens. They cannot get a job.",[],"As a result of a decision last year by the Rhode Island Board of Governors for Higher Education, students who are in the state illegally who graduate from Rhode Island high schools are eligible for the in-state tuition rate if they decide to go to a state college or university. The ruling sparked a furor among advocates of strict enforcement of immigration laws.Two bills --one that would reverse the boards decisionandone that would make the policy state law-- were the subject of an April 24, 2012, hearing before the House Committee on Finance.William T. Terry Gorman, executive director ofRhode Islanders for Immigration Law Enforcement, argued for reversing the regents policy, saying the state would be subsidizing a college education for people who aren't employable because they are in the country illegally.Please keep in mind that these students, when they're attending high school, they're illegal aliens. When they graduate, they're illegal aliens. When they enter college, they're illegal aliens. Because of that status, they're not allowed to get a job to help pay their way through college. They're not allowed to get a driver's license to drive back and forth to college. And when we've provided them that four years of in-state tuition, they're not allowed to get a job, Gorman said. They can't get a job at Textron, they can't get a job at CVS, they can't get a job at Gilbane, they can't get a job at Dunkin Donuts, and they can't get a job at Burger King because of their status. And we provided them with four years of a college education.He again emphasized that point later in the hearing: When these students graduate from college, they're still illegal aliens. They cannot get a job. How does that help the economy?One could argue that it's good to have the state's smartest students -- whether legal or illegal -- move into the Rhode Island work force.But will those undocumented college grads really end up unemployed anyway?We were particularly curious because three of the 12 states that have passed laws to provide in-state tuition for undocumented high school graduates -- California, New Mexico and Texas -- are places where the illegal immigration issue is particularly prominent, thanks to their borders with Mexico.Are those states doing something different, allowing companies to tap the best-educated, motivated undocumented residents?The answer is no, saidLaura Vazquez, a legislative analyst for theNational Council of La Raza, a Washington, D.C.-based Latino civil rights and advocacy organization. She said the situation is the same throughout the United States. When they graduate, we don't get the benefit of having this educated group of people who are eager and ready to contribute fully.They do find work. Some of them are working under the table under poor conditions. Some work for family. A number of students go to law school or enroll in Ph.D. programs, she said. But companies can't hire them because the government requires that all workers be checked for employment eligibility.Graduates could seek employment overseas, but a lot of these kids feel American through and through and want to practice their skills here, Vazquez said. And if they were to leave the country to take an overseas job they won't be allowed back in for a long time. Immigration law says, in general, if you've been in the United States illegally for more than one year after reaching age 18, once you leave the country you are banned from reentering for 10 years.In a few cases, undocumented people who have been scheduled for deportation have gotten a waiver from the Department of Homeland Security, which allows them to seek a work permit. But the DHS is very stingy with it, she said.Other immigration experts told us the same thing: Gorman is essentially correct.It is true that undocumented college graduates are legally barred from working. The only exception is in rare cases they have been able to obtain contract work provided there is no employer/employee relationship, said Kent Wong, director of the Center for Labor Research and Education at the University of California, Los Angeles.Gorman sent us a link toa Huffington Post storyabout Iliana Guadalupe Perez, a mathematician and undocumented immigrant, who has writtena free online guidedetailing how undocumented college graduates can find work. Her advice was also to seek work as an independent contractor where proof of citizenship isn't required.When we asked Gorman what was going on in the border states, he suggested that graduates may be able to get jobs because enforcement was lax. He said a source in San Diego reported that immigration officials are not checking on hardly anything regarding illegal aliens here right now, least of all the status of recent college grads applying for jobs. She said the governor just authorized state scholarships for the illegal alien students.I also spoke with Jim Gilchrist from theMinuteman Projectand he echoed basically the same sentiments. He did say there has been more employer audits by ICE [U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement] but not of the type that would be looking for illegal alien college grads, Gorman said in an e-mail. (The Minuteman Project pushes for stronger enforcement of immigration laws. )I also spoke with the Policy Director of The Center for Immigration Studies and she said she has never heard of any enforcement efforts in Texas or California regarding illegal alien college grads, said Gorman. The center is a research group that opposes illegal immigration and wants less legal immigration into the United States.However, given the strictness of the law, a special effort to focus on college graduates may not be necessary.Michael Olivas, director of the Institute of Higher Education Law & Governance at the University of Houston, said the why-give-them-a-tuition-break-when-they-can't-get-a-job argument is a diversion from the real problem: children brought to the United States, sometimes at a very young age, are left in this netherworld where they can neither work nor be licensed once they become adults.And when their inability to find work is used to try to prevent them from being eligible for the same in-state educational opportunities as their peers, its the worst kind of misdirection. It's hiding the larger issue, said Olivas, a proponent of the federal DREAM Act, which would give such students a path to citizenship.Our rulingTerry Gorman, during testimony on the question of whether to let Rhode Island's undocumented high school graduates take advantage of in-state tuition rates, said, When these students graduate from college, they're still illegal aliens. They cannot get a job.The experts we spoke with said he's generally correct, although they can, in a few cases, be hired as independent contractors.Over all, we rate the claim asTrue. (Get updates fromPolitiFactRI on Twitter. To comment or offer your ruling, visit us on ourPolitiFact Rhode Island Facebookpage.)","['Immigration', 'Rhode Island', 'Children', 'Civil Rights', 'Education', 'Human Rights', 'Legal Issues', 'Poverty', 'State Budget', 'Welfare', 'Workers']",True,"As a result of a decision last year by the Rhode Island Board of Governors for Higher Education, students who are in the state illegally who graduate from Rhode Island high schools are eligible for the in-state tuition rate if they decide to go to a state college or university. The ruling sparked a furor among advocates of strict enforcement of immigration laws.Two bills --one that would reverse the boards decisionandone that would make the policy state law-- were the subject of an April 24, 2012, hearing before the House Committee on Finance.William T. Terry Gorman, executive director ofRhode Islanders for Immigration Law Enforcement, argued for reversing the regents policy, saying the state would be subsidizing a college education for people who aren't employable because they are in the country illegally.Please keep in mind that these students, when they're attending high school, they're illegal aliens. When they graduate, they're illegal aliens. When they enter college, they're illegal aliens. Because of that status, they're not allowed to get a job to help pay their way through college. They're not allowed to get a driver's license to drive back and forth to college. And when we've provided them that four years of in-state tuition, they're not allowed to get a job, Gorman said. They can't get a job at Textron, they can't get a job at CVS, they can't get a job at Gilbane, they can't get a job at Dunkin Donuts, and they can't get a job at Burger King because of their status. And we provided them with four years of a college education.He again emphasized that point later in the hearing: When these students graduate from college, they're still illegal aliens. They cannot get a job. How does that help the economy?One could argue that it's good to have the state's smartest students -- whether legal or illegal -- move into the Rhode Island work force.But will those undocumented college grads really end up unemployed anyway?We were particularly curious because three of the 12 states that have passed laws to provide in-state tuition for undocumented high school graduates -- California, New Mexico and Texas -- are places where the illegal immigration issue is particularly prominent, thanks to their borders with Mexico.Are those states doing something different, allowing companies to tap the best-educated, motivated undocumented residents?The answer is no, saidLaura Vazquez, a legislative analyst for theNational Council of La Raza, a Washington, D.C.-based Latino civil rights and advocacy organization. She said the situation is the same throughout the United States. When they graduate, we don't get the benefit of having this educated group of people who are eager and ready to contribute fully.They do find work. Some of them are working under the table under poor conditions. Some work for family. A number of students go to law school or enroll in Ph.D. programs, she said. But companies can't hire them because the government requires that all workers be checked for employment eligibility.Graduates could seek employment overseas, but a lot of these kids feel American through and through and want to practice their skills here, Vazquez said. And if they were to leave the country to take an overseas job they won't be allowed back in for a long time. Immigration law says, in general, if you've been in the United States illegally for more than one year after reaching age 18, once you leave the country you are banned from reentering for 10 years.In a few cases, undocumented people who have been scheduled for deportation have gotten a waiver from the Department of Homeland Security, which allows them to seek a work permit. But the DHS is very stingy with it, she said.Other immigration experts told us the same thing: Gorman is essentially correct.It is true that undocumented college graduates are legally barred from working. The only exception is in rare cases they have been able to obtain contract work provided there is no employer/employee relationship, said Kent Wong, director of the Center for Labor Research and Education at the University of California, Los Angeles.Gorman sent us a link toa Huffington Post storyabout Iliana Guadalupe Perez, a mathematician and undocumented immigrant, who has writtena free online guidedetailing how undocumented college graduates can find work. Her advice was also to seek work as an independent contractor where proof of citizenship isn't required.When we asked Gorman what was going on in the border states, he suggested that graduates may be able to get jobs because enforcement was lax. He said a source in San Diego reported that immigration officials are not checking on hardly anything regarding illegal aliens here right now, least of all the status of recent college grads applying for jobs. She said the governor just authorized state scholarships for the illegal alien students.I also spoke with Jim Gilchrist from theMinuteman Projectand he echoed basically the same sentiments. He did say there has been more employer audits by ICE [U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement] but not of the type that would be looking for illegal alien college grads, Gorman said in an e-mail. (The Minuteman Project pushes for stronger enforcement of immigration laws.)I also spoke with the Policy Director of The Center for Immigration Studies and she said she has never heard of any enforcement efforts in Texas or California regarding illegal alien college grads, said Gorman. The center is a research group that opposes illegal immigration and wants less legal immigration into the United States.However, given the strictness of the law, a special effort to focus on college graduates may not be necessary.Michael Olivas, director of the Institute of Higher Education Law & Governance at the University of Houston, said the why-give-them-a-tuition-break-when-they-can't-get-a-job argument is a diversion from the real problem: children brought to the United States, sometimes at a very young age, are left in this netherworld where they can neither work nor be licensed once they become adults.And when their inability to find work is used to try to prevent them from being eligible for the same in-state educational opportunities as their peers, its the worst kind of misdirection. It's hiding the larger issue, said Olivas, a proponent of the federal DREAM Act, which would give such students a path to citizenship.Our rulingTerry Gorman, during testimony on the question of whether to let Rhode Island's undocumented high school graduates take advantage of in-state tuition rates, said, When these students graduate from college, they're still illegal aliens. They cannot get a job.The experts we spoke with said he's generally correct, although they can, in a few cases, be hired as independent contractors.Over all, we rate the claim asTrue.(Get updates fromPolitiFactRI on Twitter. To comment or offer your ruling, visit us on ourPolitiFact Rhode Island Facebookpage.)"
Was the Ohio man who labeled COVID-19 as a 'Political Ploy' the one who perished from the illness?,['John W. McDaniel of Ohio passed away at the age of 60 in April 2020.'],"Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease. 

In April 2020, a set of screenshots supposedly showing comments from a ""John McDaniels,"" in which he called COVID-19 a ""political ploy"" and social-distancing measures ""bullshit,"" started to circulate on social media. Along with the posts were articles claiming he died from complications of the coronavirus disease. 

McDaniel truly died from complications related to COVID-19 in April 2020 after he downplayed the seriousness of the disease on social media. The New York Daily News wrote: An Ohio man has tragically died from COVID-19 after criticizing his state's coronavirus lockdown. John W. McDaniel, 60, died Wednesday in Columbus, exactly one month after reportedly calling Gov. Mike DeWine's stay-at-home order madness. ""If what I'm hearing is true, that DeWine has ordered all bars and restaurants to be closed, I say bullshit! He doesn't have the authority,"" McDaniel reportedly wrote in a since-deleted social media post that circulated widely. As screenshots of McDaniel's posts went viral, many social media users took the opportunity to criticize him, saying he had received his comeuppance for calling the virus a political ploy. 

McDaniel's wife, Lisa, acknowledged that her husband had made some ""early assumptions"" about the virus on social media but added that social media users were also making unfair assumptions about him. In a statement posted to the Snyder Funeral Homes Facebook page, which announced that services for McDaniel would not be live-streamed due to concerns about unwanted, negative social media reactions, she explained that McDaniel, like many others, was initially not fully aware of the severity of the pandemic. However, she wrote that he ordered the employees at his company, O&M, to work from home on March 16 (the day after the above-displayed Facebook post). Furthermore, according to her Facebook message, he self-isolated as soon as he was made aware that he had been in contact with someone who tested positive for COVID-19. 

Lastly, she wrote that if he were still alive, he would have abided by the state's stay-at-home order and would have encouraged others to do the same. Here's her statement from April 22, 2020 (emphasis ours): ""Words do not describe all of the emotions we, John W. McDaniel's family, are experiencing right now. We are overwhelmed with grief for the loss of our beloved husband, father, soon-to-be father-in-law, son, brother, uncle, and dear friend to many. Similar to thousands of people, we are suffering from an unexpected and untimely loss due to the effects of COVID-19, the likes of which we never could have imagined. During this time of mourning, John's story, along with early assumptions that he stated on Twitter and Facebook, have turned into national news. The news has opened the floodgates for people to share their own misguided anger and unfounded assumptions about a man they don't know. Wanting to protect my family and John's legacy, we have decided not to live stream his funeral services via Facebook today. We will be privately recording his services today, and we will be sharing it directly with his family and friends. We have not come to this decision lightly, and we hope everyone will honor and respect this decision. 

As each day passes, we all are learning more about this ""invisible enemy."" We have all learned that the early actions taken by our national and state government were indeed the right actions to take. Quarantine and social distancing have been effective in flattening the curve. John, President of O&M, ordered the company to work from home on March 16. In addition, it is important to note that John immediately self-isolated as soon as he learned he had been in contact with someone who had tested positive. Many, like John, made statements early on not fully aware of the severity of COVID-19; many have retracted their statements knowing now the effects of this pandemic. We know if John were still here with us, he would acknowledge the national crisis we're in, abide by the stay-at-home order, and encourage family and friends to do the same. But sadly, he is not with us, and we will forever have to live and cope with how his life ended far too soon. Further, we will never be able to erase from our hearts and minds the negative posts that have been made and shared about John this past week. To all of our family and friends, my sons and I will never be able to appropriately say ""thank you"" for all the love and support you have given us throughout this entire process. From the bottom of our hearts, we will forever be grateful for you and the special relationship we share. 

While some may cast aspersions on McDaniel for not treating COVID-19 with the seriousness it deserved in March 2020, it should be noted that misinformation has been rampant during this pandemic. We've debunked scores of rumors over several months that have touted bad medical advice and promoted conspiracy theories. U.S. President Donald Trump, too, has been criticized for downplaying the seriousness of COVID-19 and has repeatedly called the news outlets covering this pandemic ""fake news."" On Feb. 28, just two weeks before McDaniel posted on social media that COVID-19 was a ""political ploy,"" Trump said during a rally that ""Democrats are politicizing the coronavirus"" as their ""new hoax.""",['share'],True,"Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And, please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease. McDaniel truly died from complications related to COVID-19 in April 2020 after he downplayed the seriousness of the disease on social media. The New York Daily News wrote: In a statement posted to the Snyder Funeral Homes Facebook page that announced services for McDaniel would not be live-streamed due to concerns about unwanted, negative social media reactions, she explained that McDaniel, like many others, was initially not fully aware of the severity of the pandemic. However, she wrote that he ordered the employees at his company O&M to work from home on March 16 (the day after the above-displayed Facebook post). Furthermore, according to her Facebook message, he self-isolated as soon as he was made aware that he had been in contact with someone who tested positive for COVID-19.While some may cast aspersions on McDaniel for not treating COVID-19 with the seriousness it deserved in March 2020, it should be noted that misinformation has been rampant during this pandemic.We've debunked scores of rumors over several months that have touted bad medical advice and promoted conspiracy theories. U.S. President Donald Trump, too, has been criticized for downplaying the seriousness of COVID-19 and has repeatedly called the news outlets outlets covering this pandemic ""fake news."" On Feb. 28, just two weeks before McDaniel posted on social media that COVID-19 was a ""political ploy,"" Trump said during a rally that ""Democrats are politicizing the coronavirus"" as their ""new hoax."" "
Texas Maternal Mortality Rate Doubles After Reproductive Health Restrictions?,"[""A September 2016 study demonstrated a higher than expected maternal mortality rate in Texas, but researchers couldn't determine whether reproductive health funding cuts were responsible for that uptick.""]","On 20 August 2016, the UK newspaper The Guardian (among others) published an article about a September 2016 study suggesting that the maternal mortality rate in Texas had doubled in recent years (outstripping that of countries with overall poorer health outcomes): article The rate of Texas women who died from complications related to pregnancy doubled from 2010 to 2014, a new study has found, for an estimated maternal mortality rate that is unmatched in any other state and the rest of the developed world. The finding comes from a report, appearing in the September issue of the journal Obstetrics and Gynecology, that the maternal mortality rate in the United States increased between 2000 and 2014, even while the rest of the world succeeded in reducing its rate. Excluding California, where maternal mortality declined, and Texas, where it surged, the estimated number of maternal deaths per 100,000 births rose to 23.8 in 2014 from 18.8 in 2000  or about 27%. But the report singled out Texas for special concern, saying the doubling of mortality rates in a two-year period was hard to explain in the absence of war, natural disaster, or severe economic upheaval. From 2000 to the end of 2010, Texass estimated maternal mortality rate hovered between 17.7 and 18.6 per 100,000 births. But after 2010, that rate had leaped to 33 deaths per 100,000, and in 2014 it was 35.8. Between 2010 and 2014, more than 600 women died for reasons related to their pregnancies. No other state saw a comparable increase. The article noted that reproductive health advocates placed the blame squarely on Texas' unique targeting of reproductive health centers and practices, citing budget cuts, atypically strict reproductive health laws and efforts to defund Planned Parenthood, along with the vast size of the state (which made it difficult for many women to cross state lines to obtain gynecological care unavailable in Texas): strict defund In the wake of the report, reproductive health advocates are blaming the increase on Republican-led budget cuts that decimated the ranks of Texass reproductive healthcare clinics. In 2011, just as the spike began, the Texas state legislature cut $73.6m from the states family planning budget of $111.5m. The two-thirds cut forced more than 80 family planning clinics to shut down across the state. The remaining clinics managed to provide services  such as low-cost or free birth control, cancer screenings and well-woman exams  to only half as many women as before. Not everyone was convinced the ostensible cause and effect was so clear cut, as noted in a Townhall piece holding that conclusions about Texas' legislative efforts were politically motivated and contradicted by data: piece Apparently, the researchers did some adjusting of their own. According to the Texas Department of State Health Services (DSHS), maternal mortality rates have been alarmingly increasing for years. That modest increase, lead researcher Marian MacDorman imagines, was a huge increase. In 2000, the MMR was 10.5 maternal deaths per 100,000 live births (equating to 30 tragic deaths). By 2009, this rate had nearly tripled to 28.9 maternal deaths per 100,000 live births (resulting in 116 deaths). Thats a modest increase? In 2010, the MMR actually decreased to 24.6. Then, MacDorman et al claimed: Texas had a sudden increase in 2011-2012. If by sudden they mean over ten years of significant increases ... sure. They completely ignored the fact that from 2010 to 2011, the MMR rose from 24.6 to 30.7 (an increase of about 25 percent). From 2011 to 2012, the increase was only 3%, rising to a rate of 31.6 ... not doubling! That didn't stop Slate.com and a host of media outlets from declaring: After Texas Slashed Its Family Planning Budget, Maternal Deaths Almost Doubled. In 2013 it rose another 25 percent to 39.5 (claiming the lives of 153 women). Heres the clincher, though. Texas MMR dropped in 2014 in rate and total maternal deaths. Neither the peer-reviewed study nor any of the leftists in the news media mention this. Both items cited the study, titled ""Recent Increases in the U.S. Maternal Mortality Rate""  published [PDF] in the September issue of the journal Obstetrics and Gynecology. Both the study's title and its objective described a nationwide focus on maternal mortality: PDF To develop methods for trend analysis of vital statistics maternal mortality data, taking into account changes in pregnancy question formats over time and between states, and to provide an overview of U.S. maternal mortality trends from 2000 to 2014. Similarly, its conclusion singled out no state by name and made no specific reference to Texas: Despite the United Nations Millennium Development Goal for a 75% reduction in maternal mortality by 2015, the estimated maternal mortality rate for 48 states and Washington, DC, increased from 2000 to 2014; the international trend was in the opposite direction. There is a need to redouble efforts to prevent maternal deaths and improve maternity care for the 4 million U.S. women giving birth each year. Texas' second namecheck in the study was benign, noting that the overall rate of maternal mortality was so low that only California and Texas served as sources of by-state data  due not to their specific outcomes, but to the size of their populations: It would be preferable to analyze data individually for each state; however, maternal death is a rare event, and the number of cases (396 U.S. deaths in 2000 and 856 in 2014) was not sufficient to support individual state analysis for all but the most populous states (California and Texas). But the ""Results"" portion of the introductory page noted that California's and Texas' statistics trended differently and provided a primary finding that colored media coverage of the findings: The estimated maternal mortality rate (per 100,000 live births) for 48 states and Washington, DC (excluding California and Texas, analyzed separately) increased by 26.6%, from 18.8 in 2000 to 23.8 in 2014. California showed a declining trend, whereas Texas had a sudden increase in 20112012. Analysis of the measurement change suggests that U.S. rates in the early 2000s were higher than previously reported. Much of the research hinged on pinpointing and adjusting for what was described as ""the pregnancy question"" (which was ""added to the 2003 revision of the U.S. standard death certificate""), defined by the World Health Organization as death certificate language recording ""The death of a woman while pregnant or within 42 days of termination of pregnancy, irrespective of the duration and the site of the pregnancy, from any cause related to or aggravated by the pregnancy or its management, but not from accidental or incidental causes."" The WHO also provided for late maternal deaths via a separate but similar checkbox: ""The death of a woman from direct or indirect obstetric causes more than 42 days but less than 1 year after termination of pregnancy."" Although the phrasing ""termination of pregnancy"" typically is understood to mean ""an abortion"" in layman's speech, the researchers and WHO used it to mean the end of a pregnancy via live birth, stillbirth, miscarriage, or abortion. Researchers noted that state-by-state adoption of the pregnancy question vis a vis death records led to findings that required some adjustment to reach conclusions. While some states immediately adopted the guideline in 2003, others waited years. By January 2014, 44 states and the District of Columbia included the question on their death certificates; that incongruous state-by-state data pool led to efforts on the researchers' parts to calibrate the data and parse it. The study noted that Texas (which adopted the question in 2006) demonstrated results that led to ""uncertainty"" in the final report: California is the only state that revised their death certificate with a pregnancy question inconsistent with the U.S. standard. The California question only asks about pregnancies within the past year. In addition, there were changes over time in specific data provided by California to the National Center for Health Statistics for deaths at less than 42 days, making use of this measure impracticable. Thus, maternal and late maternal deaths were combined for the California trend analysis. Finally, we estimated maternal mortality rates for 48 states and the District of Columbia from 2000 to 2014. California and Texas were excluded from this estimation: California because it does not provide comparable data and Texas as a result of uncertainty regarding recent trends (see Results). In that section, researchers described Texas' atypical spike in maternal mortality and noted that the laws in question were not likely sufficient to account for the spike (referencing a ""future study"" to obtain more information on Texas): Texas had an unrevised question about pregnancies in the past 12 months and revised to the U.S. standard question in 2006. Adjusted maternal mortality rates for Texas show only a modest increase from 2000 to 2010, from a rate of 17.7 in 2000 to 18.6 in 2010. The slope of this regression line was 0.12 (95% CI 20.22 to 0.46) (564 maternal deaths and 4,246,835 live F4 births) (Fig. 4). However, after 2010, the reported maternal mortality rate for Texas doubled within a 2-year period to levels not seen in other U.S. states. Joinpoint trend analysis was done separately for the 20002010 and the 20112014 periods because the trends for these two periods differed widely.  The Texas data are puzzling in that they show a modest increase in maternal mortality from 2000 to 2010 (slope 0.12) followed by a doubling within a 2- year period in the reported maternal mortality rate. In 2006, Texas revised its death certificate, including the addition of the U.S. standard pregnancy question, and also implemented an electronic death certificate. However, the 2006 changes did not appreciably affect the maternal mortality trend after adjustment, and the doubling in the rate occurred in 20112012. Texas cause-of-death data, like with data for most states, are coded at the National Center for Health Statistics, and this doubling in the rate was not found for other states. Communications with vital statistics personnel in Texas and at the National Center for Health Statistics did not identify any data processing or coding changes that would account for this rapid increase. There were some changes in the provision of womens health services in Texas from 2011 to 2015, including the closing of several womens health clinics. Still, in the absence of war, natural disaster, or severe economic upheaval, the doubling of a mortality rate within a 2-year period in a state with almost 400,000 annual births seems unlikely. A future study will examine Texas data by raceethnicity and detailed causes of death to better understand this unusual finding. The study's introduction cited ""[e]arlier studies [which] identified significant underreporting of maternal deaths in the National Vital Statistics System,"" reiterating in its ""Discussion"" section that variations by state impeded the research: For example, had the National Center for Health Statistics and the Texas vital statistics office both been publishing annual maternal mortality rates, the unusual findings from Texas for 20112014 would certainly have been investigated much sooner and in greater detail. The study noted that Texas demonstrated what appeared to be a spike in maternal mortality between 2011 and 2014, but researchers weren't yet confident that slashed funding for women's healthcare was primarily responsible for the change. Moreover, researchers mentioned widespread underreporting of maternal mortality across all states, positing it was ""an international embarrassment that the United States, since 2007, has not been able to provide a national maternal mortality rate to international data repositories such as those run by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development."" Study author Christine Morton told a reporter that the Texas-specific findings remained an unsolved puzzle: told I think everybody is at a loss to understand why Texas saw such an increase in maternal mortality rate. We posited that the documented changes in provisions in women's health services happened in this same time period, but it's hard to knowin the absence of in-depth case review of maternal mortality data in Texashow that lined up with those changes. As the Townhall columnist pointed out, Texas did demonstrate upticks in maternal mortality antedating 2011 clinic funding provisions. State data from 1970 to 2014 evidenced the 2011 to 2014 spike in maternal mortality but exhibited a maternal death rate (a number unaffected by the raw number of deaths or births in any given year) that didn't appear to correlate directly with changes in state laws. In 1970, the maternal death rate hovered at 0.3 per 1,000 live births, dropping to 0.1 in 1977 and remaining virtually static until it rose to 0.2 in 2003. That figure remained fairly constant until 2009, when it reached 0.3 at 116 deaths; 2011 saw identical numbers. In 2012, 2013, and 2014 respectively that rate was 0.3 (121 deaths), 0.4 (153 deaths), and 0.3 (139 deaths): data  So the September 2016 study on the United States' maternal mortality rate published in the journal Obstetrics and Gynecology identified a steady increase in maternal deaths in Texas and cited state laws and funding as a potential (not proven) factor in that post-2011 uptick. But study authors bemoaned a lack of comprehensive record-keeping nationwide that impeded research, and the first year maternal deaths began increasing in Texas was 2003 (before clinics were affected by legislative efforts to reduce abortion).   Bomberger, Ryan.  ""The Truth About Texas Maternal Mortality Rates and the Epic Defunding of Planned Parenthood.""
  Townhall.  26 August 2016. Goodwyn, Wade.  ""Texans Try to Repair Damage Wreaked Upon Family Planning Clinics.""
  NPR.  28 January 2016. MacDorman, Marian F. et.al.  ""Recent Increases in the U.S. Maternal Mortality Rate.""
  Obstetrics and Gynecology.  September 2016. Peters, Adele.  ""Texas Has the Worst Maternal Mortality Rate in the Developed World.""
  Fast Company.  26 August 2016. Redden, Molly.  ""Texas Has Highest Maternal Mortality Rate in Developed World, Study Finds.""
  The Guardian.  20 August 2016.",['budget'],NEI,"On 20 August 2016, the UK newspaper The Guardian (among others) published an article about a September 2016 study suggesting that the maternal mortality rate in Texas had doubled in recent years (outstripping that of countries with overall poorer health outcomes):The article noted that reproductive health advocates placed the blame squarely on Texas' unique targeting of reproductive health centers and practices, citing budget cuts, atypically strict reproductive health laws and efforts to defund Planned Parenthood, along with the vast size of the state (which made it difficult for many women to cross state lines to obtain gynecological care unavailable in Texas):Not everyone was convinced the ostensible cause and effect was so clear cut, as noted in a Townhall piece holding that conclusions about Texas' legislative efforts were politically motivated and contradicted by data:Both items cited the study, titled ""Recent Increases in the U.S. Maternal Mortality Rate""  published [PDF] in the September issue of the journal Obstetrics and Gynecology. Both the study's title and its objective described a nationwide focus on maternal mortality:The study noted that Texas demonstrated what appeared to be a spike in maternal mortality between 2011 and 2014, but researchers weren't yet confident that slashed funding for women's healthcare was primarily responsible for the change. Moreover, researchers mentioned widespread underreporting of maternal mortality across all states, positing it was ""an international embarrassment that the United States, since 2007, has not been able to provide a national maternal mortality rate to international data repositories such as those run by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development."" Study author Christine Morton told a reporter that the Texas-specific findings remained an unsolved puzzle:As the Townhall columnist pointed out, Texas did demonstrate upticks in maternal mortality antedating 2011 clinic funding provisions. State data from 1970 to 2014 evidenced the 2011 to 2014 spike in maternal mortality but exhibited a maternal death rate (a number unaffected by the raw number of deaths or births in any given year) that didn't appear to correlate directly with changes in state laws. In 1970, the maternal death rate hovered at 0.3 per 1,000 live births, dropping to 0.1 in 1977 and remaining virtually static until it rose to 0.2 in 2003. That figure remained fairly constant until 2009, when it reached 0.3 at 116 deaths; 2011 saw identical numbers. In 2012, 2013, and 2014 respectively that rate was 0.3 (121 deaths), 0.4 (153 deaths), and 0.3 (139 deaths):"
The unemployment rate among blacks in Texas is 9.5% -- far more than double white unemployment -- and wages have fallen for black workers in Texas since 2000.,[],"Urging the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas to choose a president who prioritizes jobs and rising wages for all communities, a Texas group stated that African Americans in the state have fared poorly on both fronts. The Texas Organizing Project, which claims to promote social and economic equality for low- to moderate-income residents, joined labor unions in calling on the Fed, which has kept interest rates near zero since 2008 to spur business lending, not to raise interest rates and instead focus on full employment and higher wages, according to a March 4, 2015, news story in the Dallas Morning News. The project caught our attention in a March 2015 press release with this: Although the economy is adding jobs, the unemployment rate among blacks in Texas is 9.5%—far more than double the white unemployment rate—and wages have fallen for black workers in Texas since 2000. We sought elaboration. 

To our inquiry, a project spokesman, Daniel Barrera, pointed us by email to a March 2015 report by the Brooklyn-based Center for Popular Democracy, which claims to promote equity, opportunity, and a dynamic democracy. The report, Wall Street, Main Street, and Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard: Why African Americans Must Not Be Left Out of the Federal Reserve's Full-Employment Mandate, presents charts with the cited figures, which the Washington, D.C.-based Economic Policy Institute compiled based on federal wage and employment data. One chart indicates that the 2014 Texas black unemployment rate of 9.5 percent was more than twice the state's white unemployment rate of 3.7 percent; the 2014 Hispanic jobless rate was 5.3 percent. Conditions may have been better in Texas than elsewhere over those years. Nationally, according to the report, black-white unemployment disparities were greatest in Wisconsin (where the black jobless rate was 4.6 times the white rate) and Minnesota (where the black rate was 3.7 times the white rate). 

Another chart in the report indicates that median hourly wages for Texas whites and Hispanics increased by 8 and 2.9 percent, respectively, from 2000 to 2014, while median hourly wages for black Texans decreased by 0.8 percent. We wondered if blacks experienced falling wages by this measure throughout those years. They did not: In response to our inquiry, the Economic Policy Institute provided year-by-year data showing that the hourly median for black Texans decreased in six years while increasing in eight years. Throughout the period, the real median wage for Texas African Americans bottomed out at $13.61 in 2008 and peaked at $15.18 in 2012. Nationally, at the end of the 15-year period, median real wages for African-American workers were down even more than in Texas alone, according to the report. Specifically, the national median real hourly wage for African Americans in 2014 was $13.97, about 3 percent less than the comparable median of $14.41 in 2000. Additionally, according to the report, other states had larger differences between the first and last years studied. 

And why? Missing from the report is an explanation for the differences between black workers and others. When we called to ask about that, Ady Barkan, a center official, suggested multiple longstanding factors, including racism and differences in education levels and rates of incarceration between blacks and whites. By email, Barkan also pointed out a July 2011 issue paper from the liberal Center for American Progress noting, among other reasons, that in each of the latest U.S. recessions, blacks were most often the first employees fired and the last ones hired (once each recession was ending). We asked the Economic Policy Institute why black unemployment in Texas appeared to be higher than white and Hispanic unemployment. Josh Bivens, director of research and policy, said by email that this may be due to discrimination in the labor market and pre-labor market factors. 

And what is the pre-labor market? Bivens explained that residential segregation can lead to blacks attending lower-quality primary and secondary schools, potentially resulting in lower levels of educational achievement and less lucrative jobs. We also sought an explanation of the cited differences from Chris King, director of the Ray Marshall Center for the Study of Human Resources at the University of Texas. By email, King stated that labor economists would explain higher unemployment among blacks/African Americans nationally by pointing out that African Americans tend to have lower levels of education and are employed in lower-paying occupations and industries than whites. King elaborated by highlighting Bureau of Labor Statistics data from 2011 showing that black men were more likely to work in service, production, transportation, and material moving jobs. Conversely, he noted that black men were less likely to work in professional and managerial jobs than whites; the picture was similar for black women. 

Another view came from analyst Chuck DeVore of the conservative Texas Public Policy Foundation, who suggested that the real median hourly wage estimates used by the institute may provide an incomplete picture of economic well-being. People do not live on wages alone, DeVore said, adding that a more accurate indicator of wealth would be household income, which includes Social Security, inheritances, and any other financial assistance. 

Our ruling: The Texas Organizing Project stated that the unemployment rate among blacks in Texas is 9.5%—far more than double the white unemployment rate—and that wages have fallen for black workers in Texas since 2000. Texas African Americans may not have been as badly off as residents of other states, and this claim does not acknowledge wage fluctuations over the years. Regardless, evidence shows that Texas blacks have a higher unemployment rate than their fellow Texans and are the only group with lower wages in 2014 than in 2000. We rate the statement True. The statement is accurate, and there is nothing significant missing.","['Economy', 'Education', 'Jobs', 'Texas']",True,"The Texas Organizing Project,which saysit promotes social and economic equality for low- to moderate-income residents, joined labor unions in calling on the Fed, which has kept interest rates near zero since 2008 to spur business lending, not to raise interest rates and focus instead on full employment and higher wages, according to a March 4, 2015,news storyin theDallas Morning News.The project got our attention in a March 2015press releasewith this: Although the economy is adding jobs, the unemployment rate among blacks in Texas is 9.5% -- far more than double white unemployment -- and wages have fallen for black workers in Texas since 2000.To our inquiry, a project spokesman, Daniel Barrera, pointed us by email to a March 2015 report by the Brooklyn-based Center for Popular Democracy, which says it promotes equity, opportunity and a dynamic democracy. The report,Wall Street, Main Street, and Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard: Why African Americans Must Not Be Left Out of the Federal Reserves Full-Employment Mandate,presents charts with the cited figures, which the Washington, D.C.-based Economic Policy Institute based on federal wage and employment data.Source:Report, Wall Street, Main Street, and Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard: Why African Americans Must Not Be Left Out of the Federal Reserves Full-Employment Mandate,  Center for Popular Democracy, April 6, 2015Source:Report, Wall Street, Main Street, and Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard: Why African Americans Must Not Be Left Out of the Federal Reserves Full-Employment Mandate,  Center for Popular Democracy, April 6, 2015When we called to ask about that, Ady Barkan, a center official, suggested multiple longstanding factors including racism and differences between blacks and whites in education levels and rates of incarceration. By email, Barkan also pointed out aJuly 2011 issue paperfrom the liberal Center for American Progress noting, among reasons, that in each of the latest U.S. recessions, blacks were most often the first employees fired and the last ones hired (once each recession was ending).We also sought an explanation of the cited differences from Chris King, director of the Ray Marshall Center for the Study of Human Resources at the University of Texas. By email, King said labor economists would  explain higher unemployment among blacks/African Americans nationally by pointing out that African Americans tend to have lower levels of education and be employed in lower-paying occupations and industries than whites. King elaborated by pointing out Bureau of Labor Statistics data covering 2011 showing black men more likely to work in service, production, transportation and material moving jobs. Conversely, he wrote, black men were less likely to work in professional and managerial jobs than whites; the picture was similar, he said, for black women. (See his full reply here.)Separately to our inquiry, analyst Chuck DeVore of the conservativeTexas Public Policy Foundation suggested real median hourly wage estimates used by the institute may deliver an incomplete picture of economic well being. People dont live on wages alone, DeVore said, adding that a more accurate indicator of wealth would be household income, folding in Social Security, inheritances and any other financial assistance.See more on this aspect here.Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check."
Bill Cosby on Blaming White People,"[""Did comedian Bill Cosby's remarks form the basis of a 'We Can't Blame White People' essay?""]","Comedian Bill Cosby's remarks form the basis of a 'We Can't Blame White People' essay. Example: [Collected via e-mail, October 2005] They're standing on the corner and they can't speak English. I can't even talk the way these people talk: ""Why you ain't? Where you is? What he drive? Where he stay? Where he work? Who you be?"" And I blamed the kid until I heard the mother talk. Then I heard the father talk. Everybody knows it's important to speak English except these knuckleheads. You can't be a doctor with that kind of language coming out of your mouth. In fact, you will never get any kind of job that pays a decent living. People marched and were hit in the face with rocks to get an education, and now we've got these knuckleheads walking around. The lower economic people are not holding up their end of this deal. These people are not parenting; they are buying things for kids—$500 sneakers for what? And they won't spend $200 on Hooked on Phonics. I am talking about these people who cry when their son is standing there in an orange suit. Where were you when he was 2? Where were you when he was 12? Where were you when he was 18, and how come you didn't know that he had a pistol? And where is the father? Or who is his father? People putting their clothes on backward: Isn't that a sign of something gone wrong? People with their hats on backward, pants down around the crack— isn't that a sign of something? Or are you waiting for Jesus to pull his pants up? Isn't it a sign of something when she has her dress all the way up and has all types of piercings going through her body? What part of Africa did this come from? We are not Africans. Those people are not Africans; they don't know a thing about Africa. With names like Shaniqua, Taliqua, and Mohammed, and all of that nonsense, and all of them are in jail. Brown or black versus the Board of Education is no longer the white person's problem. We have got to take the neighborhood back. People used to be ashamed. Today, a woman has eight children with eight different 'husbands' or men or whatever you call them now. We have millionaire football players who cannot read. We have million-dollar basketball players who can't write two paragraphs. We as black folks have to do a better job. Someone working at Wal-Mart with seven kids, you are hurting us. We have to start holding each other to a higher standard. We cannot blame white people any longer. Origins: On 17 May 2004, at an NAACP event commemorating the 50th anniversary of Brown vs. Board of Education, the landmark Supreme Court decision that struck down school segregation, entertainer Bill Cosby gave a speech on the theme of blacks in America taking responsibility for their own lives. In his exposition to that assembly, the man known to television audiences as the lovable, kindly, yet permanently bemused patriarch Dr. Huxtable spoke harshly about his perception of the ills affecting black American society. He cited elevated school dropout rates for inner-city black students and criticized low-income blacks for not using the opportunities the civil rights movement has won for them. Blacks, by their unplanned pregnancies, poor parenting, lack of education, non-standard English, counter-culture dress, and involvement in crime, fail the black community as well as themselves, he said. That May 2004 speech has been both praised and condemned, and excerpts from it have been cobbled together (often in forms that rearrange and present them out of context) and circulated on the Internet under titles such as ""We Can't Blame White People"" and ""Bill Has Done It Again."" Bill Cosby has not repudiated his controversial pronouncements or attempted to distance himself from them. Instead, he has chosen to expand upon his theme on subsequent occasions and to make himself a spokesperson for black self-empowerment through education and better parenting. In the service of this cause, he has drawn upon his celebrity to make his voice heard; but, unlike many entertainers who take to the soapbox to decry their bêtes noires, he brings far more to the podium than merely a recognizable face and a fan base. This man, who is best known to the world as a comedian, holds a doctorate in education. He is also highly regarded in the African-American community, where he and his wife, Camille, are prized for their philanthropy. (The Cosbys were present at the NAACP event that sparked the e-mail quoted above in order to be honored for their open-handed generosity in donating money to black colleges.) Dr. Cosby defended his comments almost as soon as he made them. The day after, he said in an interview: ""It makes no sense to claim that these are things that belong quietly in the black community. We have to figure out how to get parenting back into the home. This is a problem of epic proportions."" Then, in a statement released shortly after the NAACP gala, he made clear his purpose: ""I think that it is time for concerned African-Americans to march, galvanize, and raise awareness about this epidemic, to transform our helplessness, frustration, and righteous indignation into a sense of shared responsibility and action."" In another interview, he said: ""I feel that I can no longer remain silent. If I have to make a choice between keeping quiet so that conservative media does not speak negatively or ringing the bell to galvanize those who want change in the lower economic community, then I choose to be a bell ringer."" In July 2004, he again took to the public soapbox to expound upon his thesis. In a speech given at Rev. Jesse Jackson's Rainbow Coalition/PUSH Coalition conference in Chicago, he said: ""You've got to stop beating up your women because you can't find a job, because you didn't want to get an education and now you're earning minimum wage. You should have thought more of yourself when you were in high school, when you had an opportunity."" In December 2004, he addressed a panel at Medgar Evers College in Brooklyn, telling them: ""Stop waiting for a leader. Get up! Tell your friends. And if they can't get up, we must see about them because they are true victims ... It's time to study four hours a day with your children. Teach them how much they'll be worth when they have A's instead of F's."" Barbara ""sag your pants, sag your chances,"" says Cos Mikkelson. Variations: An August 2009 variant prefaced Dr. Cosby's remarks with the following claim regarding their origins: Bill Cosby's response on the Bailout in America. This is actually word for word what he said to a gathering of students who asked about the bailout in America. Great response. This man deserves a Nobel Prize. As noted above, this item dates from a talk Dr. Cosby gave in 2004, so his words had nothing to do with any economic bailouts provided to businesses in 2009. Last updated: 19 May 2014. Harris, Paul. ""The Paradox That Divides Black America."" The Observer. 9 October 2005. Mitchell, Mary. ""Cosby Gave It to Us Straight and It's a Valuable Lesson."" Chicago Sun-Times. 3 June 2004 (p. 14). O'Connor, Austin. ""A Beloved Comic, Now Crusader."" Lowell Sun. 18 November 2004. Suggs, Ernie. ""Cosby, Unbowed, Defends Remarks."" Cox News Service. 2 July 2004. Associated Press. ""Cosby Continues to Challenge African-Americans."" 15 December 2004.",['income'],NEI,"Origins:  On 17 May 2004, at an NAACP event commemorating the 50th anniversary of Brown vs. Board of Education, the landmark Supreme Court decision that struck down school segregation, entertainer Bill Cosby gave a speech on the theme of blacks in America taking responsibility for their own lives. In his exposition to that assembly, the man known to television viewing audiences as lovable, kindly, yet permanently bemused patriarch Dr. Huxtable spoke harshly about his "
FedEx Scam Claims 'Your Package Is Held in Our Warehouse' in Fake 'Delivery Notification' Email,"['If you receive an email or text message about an unexpected package delivery, read it carefully -- it might be a scam.']","In December 2022, a FedEx email scam circulated, claiming to be a ""package delivery notification"" from the company, stating, ""Your package is held in our warehouse."" The scam was sent out at the same time that people around the world were ordering and receiving packages for gift-giving holidays. We previously examined similar scams involving UPS, the U.S. Postal Service (USPS), and other package delivery companies. In fact, one of our earlier stories about a FedEx package delivery email scam was published a decade ago. Scammers have been engaging in this activity for a long time. According to a copy of the FedEx email scam that we reviewed, the message originated from admin@america-groups.xyz, which is not an official FedEx email address. The message read as follows: ""Your package delivery Notification ID#0164278468-735 'Fedex' admin@america-groups.xyz via walisdom.biz Important Message for (name) Your package delivery Notification FedEx Order 29194773US Your package is held in our warehouse. You have (1) package waiting for you in our warehouse, ready for delivery. Use your order number to track and receive your package! TRACK YOUR PACKAGE Order number Order 29194773US Delivery Expected delivery: 1 - 2 days."" The tracking number was real, but the package associated with it had already been delivered in April 2022. The scammers sent the email in the hope that people would click the link without verifying the tracking number. We investigated the link in the email and found that it was a phishing scam, meaning the scammers aimed to obtain personal information and financial data. The link in the scam email led to the URL storage.googleapis.com/pemotion/tixrin.html, followed by a long string of additional code likely intended for the scammers' own tracking purposes. Upon clicking the URL, we were directed to mooltay.com, which then redirected to ponnel.com, a website that displayed an ""Express"" logo without the word ""Federal"" in front of it. On the ponnel.com scam website, we were guided through a series of questions about the supposed package delivery issue. One step falsely claimed that there would be a $1.95 charge to release the nonexistent package from a customs distribution hub. At the end of the steps, the ponnel.com website redirected to webwinnalists.com, a page that requested personal information and a credit card number. We strongly advise against providing any of these websites with your data. On FedEx.com, the company warns its customers to be on the lookout for scams involving ""unexpected requests for money in return for delivery of a package, often with a sense of urgency."" That's precisely what this FedEx email scam for a ""package delivery notification"" entailed. By email, FedEx shared the following statement with us: ""FedEx does not send unsolicited text messages or emails to customers requesting money or package or personal information. Unfortunately, scammers often invoke the names of trusted brands when attempting to take advantage of the public, and FedEx is one of many companies whose brand has been abused in this way. Any suspicious text messages or emails should be deleted without being opened and reported to abuse@fedex.com."" For more tips on detecting online scams, visit the FedEx Customer Protection Center at https://www.fedex.com/us/security/prevent-fraud. This story will be updated if further details come to light. Source: ""Recognize & Report Fraud."" FedEx.com, https://www.fedex.com/en-us/trust-center/report-fraud.html. Dec. 14, 2022: This story was updated to add a statement from FedEx.",['credit'],False,"We previously looked at similar scams for UPS, the U.S. Postal Service (USPS), and other package delivery companies. In fact, one of our previous stories about a FedEx package delivery email scam was published a decade ago. Needless to say, scammers have been doing this for a long time.On FedEx.com, one of the scams the company advises that its customers be on the lookout for was, ""Unexpected requests for money in return for delivery of a package, often with a sense of urgency."" That's exactly what this FedEx email scam for a ""package delivery notification"" was all about.FedEx does not send unsolicited text messages or emails to customers requesting money or package or personal information. Unfortunately, scammers often invoke the names of trusted brands when attempting to take advantage of the public and FedEx is one of many companies whose brand has been abused in this way. Any suspicious text messages or emails should be deleted without being opened and reported toabuse@fedex.com. For more tips on detecting online scams, visit the FedEx Customer Protection Center athttps://www.fedex.com/us/security/prevent-fraud."
Was there a fine imposed on Donald Trump for allegedly misappropriating funds designated for veterans?,['Social media posts and memes badly misrepresented the facts surrounding the November 2019 resolution of a high-profile lawsuit against the president.'],"In November 2019, we received multiple inquiries about the accuracy of claims that U.S. President Donald Trump had been fined $2 million by a New York court because he was found to have ""stolen"" charitable donations intended for military veterans. For example, former Democratic Virginia State Senate candidate Qasim Rashid tweeted on several occasions in November 2019 that Trump had ""stolen"" $2.8 million in charitable donations from veterans and that he had admitted as much in court: ""The President stole $2.8M in charity from Veterans & spent it on himself & admits to his crime in court documents. As you speak of honor & service, where is your accountability of a President who trampled on both? Why are you silent, Rep @RobWittman? #VeteransDay"" One of Rashid's tweets was later reposted in the form of a meme by the Facebook page Act.tv. Another widely shared meme claimed, ""It is a fact that draft dodger Trump stole charitable cash donations that were meant for our veterans."" These social media posts and memes grossly misrepresented the facts surrounding a November 2019 settlement agreement between the New York Attorney General and the Donald J. Trump Foundation, Trump himself, and his children Ivanka and Eric. Trump did not ""steal"" charitable donations intended for veterans, nor did he admit as much in court. All the donations intended for veterans' charities ended up going to those charities. However, Trump's 2016 presidential campaign did direct and benefit from the manner in which many of those donations were distributed to the charities. The claims were related to a lawsuit brought by the New York Attorney General's office in June 2018 against the Trump Foundation, the president, and Ivanka and Eric Trump, in their capacity as board directors of the charity. In her June 2018 petition to the state's Supreme Court, then-New York Attorney General Barbara Underwood wrote: ""For more than a decade, the Donald J. Trump Foundation has operated in persistent violation of state and federal law governing New York State charities. This pattern of illegal conduct by the Foundation and its board members includes improper and extensive political activity, repeated and willful self-dealing transactions, and failure to follow basic fiduciary obligations or to implement even elementary corporate formalities required by law."" One of the examples of ""improper political activity"" cited in the lawsuit related to a January 2016 fundraiser that the Trump Foundation and Trump's presidential election campaign jointly operated. In January 2016, days before the Iowa caucuses, Trump complained of unfair treatment by Fox News anchor Megyn Kelly and announced he would be boycotting the next Republican primary debate and instead host a fundraiser for veterans' charities in Iowa. The event raised around $5.6 million, with roughly half going to the Trump Foundation and half going directly to specific veterans' charities. The Trump campaign directed the distribution of funds to recipient charities, and Trump himself repeatedly presented checks at campaign rallies and more broadly used the distribution of funds to boost his presidential campaign. On the basis of those allegations, Underwood requested several outcomes, including asking the court to ""dissolve the Foundation for its persistently illegal conduct, enjoin its board members from future service as a director of any not-for-profit authorized by New York law, obtain restitution and penalties, and direct the Foundation to cooperate with the Attorney General in the lawful distribution of its remaining assets to qualified charitable entities."" The parties to the lawsuit spent around a year negotiating a settlement. In December 2018, for example, all sides agreed that the Foundation would be dissolved and its assets distributed to a list of mutually agreed charities. In November 2019, the New York Supreme Court published the final settlement. As part of that settlement, Trump, his children, and the Foundation stipulated to a set of facts, among them the following section related to the Iowa veterans fundraiser: The website for the Iowa Fundraiser, DonaldTrumpForVets.com, was developed by campaign personnel and, with the agreement of the Foundation, featured the name of the Foundation at the top of the home page and informed visitors that ""the Donald J. Trump Foundation is a 501 (c)(3) nonprofit organization""; The campaign planned, organized, and paid for the Iowa Fundraiser, with administrative assistance from the Foundation; and the campaign directed the timing, amounts, and recipients of the Foundation's grants to charitable organizations supporting military veterans. The Iowa Fundraiser raised approximately $5.6 million in donations for veterans' groups, of which $2.823 million was contributed to the Foundation; the balance was contributed by donors directly to various veterans' groups. At campaign events in Iowa on January 30, January 31, and February 1, 2016, Mr. Trump personally displayed presentation copies of Foundation checks to Iowa veterans' groups. On May 31, 2016, at a campaign press conference, Mr. Trump announced the grants the Foundation made to veterans' groups with the proceeds of the Iowa Fundraiser and, on or about the same day, the campaign posted on its website a chart identifying the grant recipients. The New York Attorney General's office objected to the way in which the Trump Foundation had been used to advance the interests of the Trump campaign, and especially the way in which the campaign dictated how more than half of the funds were to be distributed, with Trump at times personally handing out checks at campaign rallies. The Attorney General's Office did not object on the grounds that Trump, his children, or his foundation had stolen or kept the money. Indeed, in an order accompanying the November 2019 settlement, New York Supreme Court Justice Saliann Scarpulla wrote that: ""The Attorney General has argued that I should award damages for waste of the entire $2,823,000 that was donated directly to the Foundation at the Fundraiser. In opposition, Mr. Trump notes that the Foundation ultimately disbursed all of the funds to charitable organizations and that he has sought to resolve consensually this proceeding. As stated above, I find that the $2,823,000 raised at the Fundraiser was used for Mr. Trump's political campaign and disbursed by Mr. Trump's campaign staff, rather than by the Foundation, in violation of [New York law]. However, taking into consideration that the funds did ultimately reach their intended destinations, i.e., charitable organizations supporting veterans, I award damages on the breach of fiduciary duty/waste claim against Mr. Trump in the amount of $2,000,000, without interest, rather than the entire $2,823,000 sought by the Attorney General."" Trump was ordered to pay $2 million to a list of agreed-upon charities as damages for the waste incurred by the fact that his political campaign orchestrated and benefited from distributing around $2.8 million in donations to veterans' groups. (That $2 million in damages was separate from the roughly $1.7 million the Trump Foundation had already agreed to distribute to various charities as part of the resolution dissolving the Foundation.) Neither Trump, nor his children, nor his charity were found to have ""stolen"" or kept the funds, and so none ""admitted"" to such actions. The New York Supreme Court explicitly acknowledged that all the funds raised from the January 2016 Iowa event did ultimately end up with veterans' groups. The irony in those claims was that it was, in fact, the manner in which the Trump Foundation and Trump campaign colluded in distributing the donations to veterans' charities that landed the president in hot water, not his having ""stolen"" the donations.",['funds'],NEI,"For example, former Democratic Virginia State Senate candidate Qasim Rashid tweeted on several occasions in November 2019 that Trump had ""stolen"" $2.8 million in charitable donations from veterans, and that he had admitted as much in court:Why are you silent Rep @RobWittman?#VeteransDay https://t.co/rGi9fT0AsP Qasim Rashid, Esq. (@QasimRashid) November 11, 2019One of Rashid's tweets was later reposted in the form of a meme by the Facebook page Act.tv. (The meme was later deleted):The claims were related to a lawsuit brought by the New York Attorney General's office in June 2018 against the Trump Foundation, the president, and Ivanka and Eric Trump, in their capacity as board directors of the charity. We've written about the case in detail in a previous fact check.In her June 2018 petition to the state's Supreme Court, then-New York Attorney General Barbara Underwood wrote:In January 2016, days before the Iowa caucuses, Trump complained of unfair treatment by Fox News anchor Megyn Kelly and announced he would be boycotting the next Republican primary debate and instead host a fundraiser for veterans' charities in Iowa. The parties to the lawsuit spent around a year negotiating a settlement. In December 2018, for example, all sides agreed that the Foundation would be dissolved and its assets distributed to a list of mutually agreed charities. In November 2019, the New York Supreme Court published the final settlement. As part of that settlement between the parties, Trump, his children and the Foundation stipulated to (agreed upon) a set of facts, among them the following section related to the Iowa veterans fundraiser:Indeed, in an order accompanying the November 2019 settlement, New York Supreme Court Justice Saliann Scarpulla wrote that:"
Northridge Quake Underreported,['Was the Northridge quake underreported as a 6.7 to get FEMA off the hook?'],"Claim:  The magnitude of the 17 January 1994 Northridge earthquake was deliberately under-reported in order to spare the government from having to pay out emergency relief funds.   Examples:  [Harvey, 1994] Urban Myth No. 5,212: It's linked to the earthquake, of course  what isn't these days? The [Los Angeles] Times has heard from several callers who claim there's a conspiracy to hide the fact that the quake's magnitude was really 8.0. One caller quoted an unnamed structural engineer who said that only an 8.0 temblor could have inflicted the damage of the Northridge quake. And why the conspiracy? The unfounded rumor that FEMA is obligated to give outright grants, rather than loans, to damaged houses and businesses after quakes of 8.0 or more.  [Collected on the Internet, 2000] Right after the Northridge earthquake in 1994, word was going around that the State of California coerced CalTech to declare the magnitude of the earthquake under 7.0. This was due to a hidden clause in the state laws saying state income tax in California is suspended that year for affected areas when there is a major earthquake over 7.0 on the Richter Scale. Origins:  On 17 January 1994, Los Angeles area residents were shaken awake at 4:31 A.M. by the seismic event that would come to be known as the Northridge quake. In the usual way of earthquakes, those few seconds of violent shaking took a terrible toll.  The quake killed 57 people, injured another 9,000, and caused property damage in the $13-$15 billion range. It closed seven freeway sites and two hospitals, and left 150,000 people without water, 40,000 without natural gas, and 25,000 without homes.  It was devastatingly awful. Folks were shocked when the quake was reported to have registered a mere 6.7 on the Richter scale. They were thus prepared to believe almost anything that would confirm the quake's intensity to have been much higher. After the Northridge quake, a bogus fax on fake Caltech letterhead (misstated as ""Cal Tech"") was circulated throughout the Los Angeles area. It purportedly assigned an ""intensity scale"" to different Los Angeles ZIP codes, with the strength  of the quake measured in one ZIP code area listed as a whopping 9.5. The numbers quoted in the fax were, in fact, estimates of the intensity of the shaking around the Los Angeles basin based on the modified Mercalli scale, which uses the Roman numbers I through XII. (The Mercalli scale is a measurement derived from observable earthquake damage; the Richter scale is based on seismometer readings.  The Mercalli scale is thus largely a subjective measurement, while the Richter scale is generally considered to be more objective and scientifically accurate.)  Parts of Santa Monica and the San Fernando Valley experienced Mercalli IX-level intensity, which was misconstrued on the fax as a 9-level Richter scale measurement (instead of  the officially reported 6.7).  Caltech (actually the U.S. Geological Survey at Caltech) had not under-reported the figure  the Northridge quake was a 6.7 no matter who measured it. Earthquake data is almost instantaneously shared among a number of organizations worldwide, and one group's under-reporting the magnitude would have been quickly picked up by the others. Even if Caltech had wanted to suppress the real numbers, it would have been unable to do so without the cooperation of a number of other scientific organizations. The scary fax played into what people wanted to believe.  Those who'd lived through the quake swore it had to have been much stronger than the 6.7 that was being reported. From this belief was the legend born: if Caltech was fudging the magnitude of the event, there had to be a reason. Inventive sorts that humans are, it wasn't long before someone advanced the plausible-sounding explanation that the amount and type of aid provided to disaster victims by the government was predicated upon the severity of the event; by convincing Caltech to under-report, the Federal Emergency Management Association (FEMA) slipped off the hook. According to this rumor, since the quake's intensity was under 7.0, FEMA only had to provide loans to earthquake victims rather than outright grants, which saved the agency billions of dollars. The rumor, of course, was false. FEMA never gives loans to those disadvantaged by disaster; its assistance comes in the form of grants to those affected. That agency works with the Small Business Administration (SBA), which provides low-interest loans.    Also, FEMA bases its aid on need, not upon a standardized chart that determines how much can be allocated according to what scientists measure.  Likewise, insurance companies base their earthquake policy liability on damage estimates, not on magnitude scales. This makes sense  under a system like the one hinted at in the legend, survivors of a large earthquake in a relatively unpopulated zone would be eligible for free aid while those trying cope with the aftermath of a lesser disaster in a far more densely populated area would be saddled with repaying government loan debts (or would receive no financial assistance at all). An extreme hypothetical example could see millions of free dollars directed towards the rebuilding of one house in Alaska while 200,000 uninsured and homeless Californians had do without, all because Alaska was hit by an 8.2 while California had to cope with only a 6.7.  The legend took off the way it did for reasons other than just the usual mistrust of government and science that marks such whispers. Getting up close and personal with the unthinkable heightens the experience, which explains in part why this legend was so widely believed by Los Angeleans: they'd been shaken out of bed and back to reality by this earthquake, whereas they had experienced other large quakes that had taken place in other lands merely as words on a page or images on a television screen. In a world where the ruin of the 6.9 Kobe quake (17 January 1995) was dispassionately presented by the nightly news and barely given a second thought here in California, what the authorities were telling skeptical Los Angeleans was a 6.7 felt like it was more because it had been experienced with all our senses, not just the television-dulled ones.  There was yet another reason for this legend's running rampant: its location. The quake's epicenter was in the heart of the San Fernando Valley, a heavily-populated area, and so felt stronger to many people because those who experienced the sensation were right on top of the worst of it.  Additionally, we humans have a desire to star ourselves in the drama of the moment. A 6.7 didn't sound worthy of the harrowing experience endured by those resident on 17 January 1994, and those who'd been through the shake and looked to regale others with their horrific accounts were especially receptive to any suggestion that the figure was far too low. On a final note, one further rumor attached to FEMA in California: that illegal immigrants who surfaced to apply for disaster relief would be rounded up, handed over to INS, and deported. That rumor did not begin with the Northridge quake, however; it was recorded in the aftermath of the 17 October 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake in the San Francisco area. While FEMA's aid is now available only to U.S. citizens, legal residents of the U.S., and the resident parents of U.S. citizens (that is, children born in the USA), at the time of the Loma Prieta quake, the assistance it directed was available to citizens and non-citizens alike. As for alerting the INS to potential illegals, FEMA pointed out at that time that it didn't ask about the citizenship status of aid applicants, with  questions about citizenship status not even being presented on any of its forms. (That has since changed  FEMA Form 90-69 is specifically for that purpose.) Barbara ""not a milked shake"" Mikkelson Additional information:        Federal Emergency Management Agency   (FEMA)        Earthquake Myths   (U.S. Geological Survey)   Last updated:  18 July 2007    Sources:   Harvey, Steve.  ""Only in L.A.""    Los Angeles Times.  2 March 1994  (p. B2).    Jackson, Robert and Miles Corwin.  ""Aid Centers Open But No Money Yet.""    Los Angeles Times.  23 October 1989  (p. A1).    Mitchell, Sean.  ""Warning: The Following L.A. Stories Are Not True.""    Los Angeles Times.  24 November 1996  (Magazine, p. 32).",['income'],False,      Federal Emergency Management Agency   (FEMA)      Earthquake Myths   (U.S. Geological Survey)
June 11 2004 Terrorist Rumor,['Are terrorists planning to strike the U.S. on 11 June 2004?'],"Claim:  Terrorists are planning to strike the U.S. on 11 June 2004.  Example:  [Collected on the Internet, 2004] PLEASE STOP WHAT YOU ARE DOING AND READ THIS. WHO KNOWS WHETHER OR NOT IT IS TRUE, BUT IT IS NOT WORTH TESTING OUT. PLEASE FORWARD THIS TO EVERYONE YOU KNOW. IT WILL TAKE FIVE MINUTES OF YOUR TIME AND HAS THE POTENTIAL TO IMPACT PEOPLE'S LIVES FOREVER! THANKS!! Please read the below that was forwarded...it is pretty scary. gloria sent this to me...this was sent to her from a coworker at CNN...i'm not sending this to freak everybody out...but just try to be careful... Hi all I hope everyone is doing well. The reason I am sending out this mass email to everyone is because of something that was brought to my attention the other day that I feel I need to tell as many people aspossible in case it turns out to be true.. One of my colleagues has a good family friend who works in city hall. This friend called my coworker on Friday to tell him about some intelligence the city has gotten regarding a possible terror attack in the city (most likely the subways) planned for this Friday and urged him to avoid the subways if possible. He also told him something about the city placing an order for 2 to 3 thousand extra body bags. Now you have to take these things with a grain of salt because I am sure they get tons of this intelligence that turns out to be nothing. However there are some things that coinside with this Friday that seem to give it a higher probability than usual. The terrorists attacked the WTC on 9/11. They attacked Spain's subways on 3/11. This Friday just happens to be 6/11 (thank GOD I'll be on a plane that day!). Whether that means anything or not who knows. The thing that really has me concerned however is that all of a sudden a lot of things are now closed on Friday due to Reagan's death. The stock market, banks, Mail and all federal buildings are closed. Obviously Reagan's death wasn't planned but the fact they chose Friday as the day to do this big honoring of him strikes me as a little to coincidental (less people going to work = less people on the subway). The question that I get most when I tell people about this is why wouldn't they go on TV and warn people. Well I think the answer to that is simple....they can't.  They would cause mass hysteria and the city would be out of control. Take this information and do with it what you want. I just felt the need to tell as many people as I could. God forbid something does happen this Friday and some people get hurt or die that I know and could have warned about it and didn't, well that would be a tough pill for me to swallow. I hope all this is bull and nothing happens this Friday or anyday for that matter. One thing is for certain though if I have to work on Friday I am taking a cab. Origins:  There's an old joke I've heard used by many a person called upon to deliver yet another generic opening speech at yet another public function, and it goes like this: ""I feel like Zsa Zsa Gabor's seventh husband on his wedding night  I know what I'm supposed to do; I just don't know how to make it interesting.""  This is an occasion when I can understand the sentiment  how can I write about the umpteenth variation of the same rumor and have anything interesting or informative to say, something that isn't a rehash of stuff I've written several times before?  I'm not sure, so in this case I'm not going to try.  I'll just reiterate the same points we've made elsewhere many times over the last three years:  The ""extra body bags have been ordered"" claim is a detail that shows up in rumor after rumor about upcoming disasters (usually ones about which the government is supposedly keeping quiet because they ""don't want to cause a panic""), as it's a simple yet effective way of creating a striking visual image of death in the minds of readers.  (References to images such hospitals, ambulances, stretchers, and medics are similarly chilling, but they all allow for the possibility of survival, while a body bag signifies nothing other than the finality of death.) If a city government were really ramping up for a terrorist attack, there would be plenty of signs an insider might notice other than an order for ""extra body bags"": emergency personnel (police, firefighters, EMTs) being put on alert and scheduled for additional shifts, the implementation of extra security equipment and procedures, preparations to limit or close traffic to certain locations, stocking of emergency supplies (food, water, medical kits), maybe even requests to mobilize National Guard or federal troops.  Why is it that the one and only tangible piece of information these anonymous informants ever seem to have is that someone is stocking up on body bags?  Since the September 11 terrorist attacks, the government has warned us on several occasions about the heightened possibility of additional attacks, even when they had no specific information about when or where those attacks might occur.  That they would say nothing to the public when they did have specific information about the date and location of a possible attack makes no sense, but (as always) anonymous rumormongers conveniently explain away that incongruity by maintaining the government is keeping mum because to do otherwise might cause ""mass hysteria."" Is there a better recipe for ""mass hysteria"" than allowing a foreseeable attack to proceed against a completely unprepared and unwarned populace?  It serves no real purpose for terrorists to plan their attacks to fit into recognizable patterns. They might choose a date with symbolic importance (e.g., attacking the U.S. on the 4th of July would send a powerful symbolic message), but planning to strike on particular days simply because the dates make tidy numerical patterns is contrary to their purposes. They want to maximize their chances of success by attacking at times when their plans are least likely to be anticipated, and coordinating their strikes to fit easily recognized patterns is a pointless and poor way of accomplishing their goals.  As noted, President Reagan's death on 5 June 2004 was obviously not a scheduled event, and declaring the day of his funeral (11 June) to be a federal holiday wouldn't stop people from being killed in the event of a terrorist attack.  (The most common version of this message doesn't even identify a city by name  some readers assume it refers to New York, others to Washington, D.C.) Sure, fewer people might be out and about on a federal holiday, but there are plenty of people who aren't employed by the federal government (or financial institutions) and would still have to go to work that day, not to mention all the people in the city who use public transportation even on their days off.  Risking the deaths of, say, 20,000 people in order to avoid alarming 200,000 doesn't sound like much of a worthwhile trade-off. The New York Police Department has denied this rumor while (questionably) identifying it as a ""part of a computer virus"": denied THE NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT HAS RECEIVED NO CREDIBLE THREAT INFORMATION CONCERNING A WIDELY-CIRCULATED EMAIL MESSAGE THAT DISCUSSES A PURPORTED SUBWAY ATTACK ALLEGEDLY PLANNED FOR FRIDAY, JUNE 11TH. IN ADDITION, THE EMAIL IS PART OF A COMPUTER VIRUS WHICH ATTACKS THE ADDRESS BOOKS OF ITS RECIPIENTS AND SPREADS BY USING THOSE ADDRESSES. COMPUTER USERS ARE REMINDED NOT TO OPEN MESSAGES OF FROM SUSPECT OR UNFAMILIAR SENDERS. (It's possible this message has been re-sent by some recipients whose PCs were already infected by viruses, but we haven't seen any evidence that the message itself was deliberately circulated as a way of spreading malevolent code.) June 11 came and went without incident; no terrorist attacks took place, and there was no news of any having been thwarted. The essence of this message was the same as countless other similar rumors we've traced since September 11: the world is a scary place, especially when you're dealing with hidden foes who might strike anywhere, at any time.  Asserting that the enemy will follow a predictable pattern allows us to regain a sense of direction, to feel that we have control of our futures, to believe that we can take active steps to avoid becoming victims rather than passively awaiting our fates.  What we fear most is the unknown, and these types of rumors provide us with the comfort of knowing something, even if that something proves to be bogus.  Whether this sort of comfort is worth the price of the false fears that usually accompany it is up to the individual to decide. Last updated:  14 March 2008    Sources:  Reuters.  ""New York Police Say E-Mail on Subway Attack Is Hoax.""  9 June 2004.",['stock market'],False,"The New York Police Department has denied this rumor while (questionably) identifying it as a ""part of a computer virus"":"
Osama bin Laden and Gum Arabic,['Does terrorist Osame bin Laden own extensive gum arabic holdings?'],"Claim: Osama bin Laden owns extensive gum arabic holdings. Status: Not anymore. Example: [Collected on the Internet, 2001] Early this morning, I was listening to the news. One of the commentators said that Osama bin Laden owns a huge amount of stock in the company that makes gum arabic. Gum arabic is known to be in some soft drinks and many other food items. Check your cupboards and refrigerators; if you have products that use gum arabic, get rid of them and do not buy products with the gum arabic additive. If we continue to use these products that contain gum arabic, we are, in essence, supporting this man's terrorist attacks against our fellow Americans! One thing that the U.S. helps Osama bin Laden with is that he owns the company that makes gum arabic, which is mostly used in pop—Mountain Dew is one of them—and other products. Gum arabic keeps things from settling in bottles and cans. Stop buying anything with gum arabic in its contents. The money goes to bin Laden's company. Please send this to everyone. This was on the news today. Origins: The September 11, 2001, attack on America has given rise to numerous rumors, some of which center on how terrorist Osama bin Laden gains his financing. In the wake of the attacks, rumors and several erroneous media reports have linked him and his financial interests to a number of organizations and industries around the world. The exact extent of bin Laden's fortune can only be guessed at. The most commonly mentioned figures indicate he is worth approximately $300 million USD. Drug running in Afghanistan is now thought to be a principal source of his income, as well as donations from wealthy Arabs who support his cause. Gum arabic is a resin that is used as an emulsifier in soft drinks, a thickener in candies and jellies, a binder in special-purpose inks and drugs, and even a foam stabilizer in beer. Its name derives from the fact that the gum was shipped to Europe from Arabic ports. According to The National Soft Drink Association: ""The U.S. State Department was very specific in saying it has no evidence that bin Laden has any interest in the Sudanese gum arabic industry."" (The National Soft Drink Association is the premier trade association representing the broad spectrum of companies that manufacture and distribute alcohol-free beverages in the United States.) American industries that utilize gum arabic from Sudan—confectionery, cosmetics, pharmaceuticals, dietary fiber, printing, and some citrus-based soft drinks—obtain the final form of the product from domestic importers under the licensed approval of the U.S. State Department. In a September 15, 1998, Baltimore Sun article, a U.S. State Department official said bin Laden divested himself of all (Sudanese) holdings when he was expelled from Sudan in 1996. In that same report, the Sun, quoting another State Department official, said, ""Bin Laden and his cronies tried to take over all the gum arabic crop in the early 1990s, but failed in their attempt."" Additionally, the Gum Arabic Company of Sudan, Ltd., which controls all gum arabic exports from Sudan, has repeatedly denied any bin Laden involvement in the gum arabic market in Sudan, dating back to 1969. Barbara ""ungummed"" Mikkelson Additional Information: Gum Arabic (The National Soft Drink Association) Last updated: 7 March 2008 Sources: Bentham, Martin. ""Terror Chief Has Global Cash Machine."" Daily Telegraph. 16 September 2001 (p. 11). Bowman, Tom and Ann LoLordo. ""Sanctions on Sudan Bend for Gum Supply."" The Baltimore Sun. 15 September 1998 (p. A1). PR Newswire. ""The National Soft Drink Association Statement Regarding Gum Arabic."" 17 September 2001.",['income'],False,Additional Information:     Gum Arabic  (The National Soft Drink Association)
Did Trump Watch 'The Gorilla Channel' in the White House?,"['An excerpt purportedly from the book ""Fire and Fury"" convinced more than a few readers that the president spends much of his days watching a channel created to placate him.']","Michael Wolff's bombshell bookFire and Fury: Inside the Trump White Houseis full of salacious stories from President Donald Trump's first year in office. As media outlets published excerpts from the book in early January 2018, Twitter user PixelatedBoat took advantage of the frenzy to share a fake passage in which White House aides purportedly confessed that they had created a ""Gorilla Channel"" in order to placate a furious Trump: book share  (@pixelatedboat/Twitter) This fake excerpt ended up getting mixed in with real excerpts from the book, effectively fooling some readers into believing (in not such an unlikely turn of events, given how improbable much of 2016 and 2017 were) that the White House had actually created a ""Gorilla Channel"" to entertain the President of the United States. Twitter user @PixelatedBoat is best known for creating the internet phrase""Milkshake Duck,"" which refers to a beloved entity that the Internet quickly turns on and devours after damaging information about it is revealed; they frequently post humorous and obviously satirically content on their feed. After the Gorilla Channel joke was mistaken for a genuine excerpt, they changed their handle to ""the gorilla channel thing is a joke"" and posted a message expressing remorse: @PixelatedBoat phrase Milkshake Duck tfw you parody a guy making up shit about Trump but people believe it so you become part of the problem PixelatedBoat's ""Gorilla Channel"" joke is reminiscent of the fake transcripts between President Bill Clinton and Prime Minister Tony Blair that were created by comedian Michael Spicer. In case you were curious, Bill Clinton never said that he punchesslabs of ham to work through his frustrations. punches",['share'],False,"Michael Wolff's bombshell bookFire and Fury: Inside the Trump White Houseis full of salacious stories from President Donald Trump's first year in office. As media outlets published excerpts from the book in early January 2018, Twitter user PixelatedBoat took advantage of the frenzy to share a fake passage in which White House aides purportedly confessed that they had created a ""Gorilla Channel"" in order to placate a furious Trump:Twitter user @PixelatedBoat is best known for creating the internet phrase""Milkshake Duck,"" which refers to a beloved entity that the Internet quickly turns on and devours after damaging information about it is revealed; they frequently post humorous and obviously satirically content on their feed. After the Gorilla Channel joke was mistaken for a genuine excerpt, they changed their handle to ""the gorilla channel thing is a joke"" and posted a message expressing remorse:PixelatedBoat's ""Gorilla Channel"" joke is reminiscent of the fake transcripts between President Bill Clinton and Prime Minister Tony Blair that were created by comedian Michael Spicer. In case you were curious, Bill Clinton never said that he punchesslabs of ham to work through his frustrations."
Papa John's John Schnatter vs. Little Caesar's Mike Ilitch,"[""A meme comparing the founders of Papa John's (John Schnatter) and Little Caesar's (Mike Ilitch) pizza chains contains a mixture of facts and factoids.""]","On 2 November 2017, the Facebook page ""The Other 98%"" shared a meme comparing purported facts about the founder of the Papa John's (John Schnatter) and Little Caesar's (the late Mike Ilitch) pizza chains: purported facts Papa John's John Schnatter   Purported facts about Schnatter were accompanied by a red ""X"" (indicating dispproval) and those about Ilitch with a green check mark (indicating approval). The meme comprised seven claims in total, four about Schnatter and three about Ilitch, which we'll cover one by one: [Papa John's] John Schnatter, Founder [Little Caesar's] Mike Illitch [sic], Founder According to Federal Election Committee (FEC) filings, Schnatter made a total of $85,500 in political contributions in 2016, just over two percent of which went to the Trump campaign. Schnatter donated $1,000 each to two Trump campaign political action committees (PACs), he donated $33,400 to the Republican National Committee (RNC) and the Kentucky Republican Leadership Fund in 2016, and $6,200 to Rand Paul's PACs. As such, the claim was true but somewhat misleading: Schnatter (a resident of Louisville) did donate to the Trump campaign, but the bulk of his financial support went elsewhere, most of it to political activity on the state level. FEC In early November 2012, it was widely reported that Schnatter planned to cut worker hours in response to provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA, or ""Obamacare""): reported The CEO of popular pizza chain Papa John's says his employees may face reduced hours and he expects his business costs to rise because President Obama's re-election most likely insures the president's health care reform law will be implemented in full. NaplesNews.com reports John Schnatter made the remarks to a small group at Edison State College's Collier County campus the day after the election. Schnatter, who supported Mitt Romney in the election, said all Americans having health insurance under ObamaCare is a good, but estimates the change will cost Papa John's $5 million to $8 million annually. However, Schnatter asserted that his comments had been misinterpreted in an op-ed piece, explaining that his earlier remarks were speculative and pertained to franchisees of Papa John's (not the corporation itself): misinterpreted Many in the media reported that I said Papa Johns is going to close stores and cut jobs because of Obamacare. I never said that. The fact is we are going to open over hundreds of stores this year and next and increase employment by over 5,000 jobs worldwide. And, we have no plans to cut team hours as a result of the Affordable Care Act. Clearly there was some misunderstanding somewhere. The remarks that generated the headlines were made during an entrepreneur class I was asked to speak to at a Florida college. I was asked to share my experience as an entrepreneur and to provide the students with real-life small business situations. Unbeknownst to me, until she identified herself, a reporter was there. Here is the part of the interchange that was the genesis of the news: Reporter: Do you think your  you know  franchise owners... are going to cut people hours back to make them part time instead of full time? Me: Well, in Hawaii there is a form of the same kind of health insurance and thats what you do, you find loopholes to get around it. Thats what theyre going to do. Reporter: My understanding is that if youre a full time employee, which is 35 hours or over, youd be covered. Or if youre part time then you wouldnt be. So wouldnt some business owners just cut people down like 34 hours a week so they wouldnt have to pay for health insurance? The reporter asked what I believed Papa Johns franchisees would do in response to Obamacare, not what Papa Johns would do ... Papa Johns, like most businesses, is still researching what the Affordable Care Act means to our operations. Regardless of the conclusion of our analysis, we will honor this law, as we do all laws, and continue to offer 100% of Papa Johns corporate employees and workers in company-owned stores health insurance as we have since the company was founded in 1984. In 2015, a Papa John's franchisee (not the chain, nor Schnatter) was found guilty of wage theft and noncompliance with New York State laws pertaining to overtime: guilty Abdul Jamil Khokhar, who owns nine Papa Johns locations in New York City with BMY Foods, pled guilty to failing to pay workers in compliance with the New York Labor Law, which is a misdemeanor, and to filing false business records, a felony. He will serve 60 days in jail for failing to pay his workers the minimum wage and overtime and has agreed to pay $230,000 in restitution to the workers ... Instead of paying his employees the proper minimum overtime wages according to New York State law, Khokhar paid them the same minimum wage they would make during regular hours. To hide this illegal practice, he created fake names for employees in the computer system and used the fake names to avoid paying the time-and-a-half rate required for overtime. So an employee who worked for more than 40 hours would be paid for regular work hours under his or her own name, and any overtime hours would be paid as straight hours to a fictitious employee. Khokar was an independent franchise owner, and his 2015 conviction was falsely attributed to Schnatter in the meme. Separate instances also involved the actions of independent franchisees, not Papa John's itself. instances In August 2012, news outlets reported that Schnatter was planning to pass increased health insurance costs onto customers in order to protect ""shareholders' best interests"": reported And if the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act rolls out as planned in 2014, Schnatters strategy is of course ... to pass that cost on the consumer in order to protect our shareholders best interest, he said in a recent conference call. Schnatter estimates that the legislation will cost Papa Johns about 11 cents to 14 cents per pizza, which equates to 15 cents to 20 cents per order. An average delivery charge runs $1.75 to $2.50. Schnatter's claims about an 11- to 14-cent per pizza increase in prices occurred in tandem with his earlier referenced ACA-related remarks. As with those previous comments, Schnatter later maintained his remarks had been misinterpreted: Most visibly, Papa John's CEO John Schnatter repeatedly claimed that Obamacare would increase the price of a pizza by eleven to fourteen cents (even if you accept his numbers, hardly a dramatic setback). CNN did some fact checking, and found that the exact costs of Obamacare for the chain were incalculable thanks to the pizza franchise's refusal to provide pertinent data (such as the number of pizzas they sell, how many full-time employees they have, what their current health care plan is, etc.). However, they rated Schnatter's claims as ""false"" because Obamacare does not require companies to provide health care plans to part-time employees, as well as exempts many small businesses (such as the local franchises which compose Papa Johns retail locations) from the health care requirements. After being debunked, Papa John's is backing off from its claims that Obamacare would raise prices and potentially cost jobs, now saying Schnatter was quoted incorrectly. Due to the business strength, the company now says, Papa John's could absorb the added costs easily. Schnatter stated that his earlier remarks were misconstrued, and denied pizza prices would go up by the minor amount mentioned. Although it was true Schnatter speculated higher Obamacare-related costs would be ""pass[ed] on"" to customers, he soon revised his position and no surcharge was added. The meme then turned to Ilitch, who died in February 2017. Back in February 2014, SportsBusiness Daily reported that Ilitch had arranged to pay for housing for civil rights icon Rosa Parks after she was robbed and assaulted in her Detroit home: reported On Aug. 31, 1994, Parks, then 81, was robbed and assaulted in her home in central Detroit. [Judge Damon] Keith called real estate developer Alfred Taubman, the owner of Riverfront Apartments, about finding a safer home for Parks. Taubman pledged to find the best home available. When Ilitch read about Keiths plan and Taubmans promise in the newspaper, he called the judge and said he would pay for Parks housing for as long as necessary. (Parks passed away in 2005 at the age of 92). Keith served as the executor of the trust established for Parks housing. The episode is just one of many throughout Ilitchs life when he stepped forward to help (see box), usually outside of the spotlight. Keith produced a canceled November 1994 check and affirmed that Ilitch had paid Parks' rent from 1994 until her death in 2005, adding that it was ""important"" people learn of that circumstance. This claim appears to reference Little Caesar's Love Kitchen, described on the company's web site as follows: described THE LITTLE CAESARS LOVE KITCHEN travels across the United States to help those in need. We have two trucks in operation so we can be of service 365 days a year. These restaurants on wheels have served more than three million people. The Love Kitchen has been recognized for its charitable efforts as well, receiving The President's Volunteer Action Award Citation from former Presidents George H. W. Bush and Bill Clinton. The Reagan administration also awarded the Love Kitchen a Presidential Citation for Private Sector Initiatives. Additionally, the Love Kitchen has received a certificate of appreciation from the State of Michigan and was recognized by the Detroit City Council for its efforts in the Gulf Coast region. The Love Kitchens 30th anniversary was recognized when it was listed in the Congressional Record by U.S. Congresswoman Candice Miller, on April 30, 2015. The Love Kitchen charity was founded by Ilitch in 1985. founded Ilitch In September 2007, news outlets reported that Ilitch had ""received the U.S. Veterans Affairs Department's top civilian honor for giving war veterans franchise opportunities,"" with one press release stating: reported stating In recognition of his service to Veterans, Honorable R. James Nicholson, Secretary of Veterans Affairs, will present Little Caesar Enterprises, Inc. founder Michael Ilitch with the Secretary's Award, the highest tribute given to a private citizen by the United States Department of Veterans Affairs. The ceremony, which will take place today in the nation's capitol at the Department of Veterans Affairs at 2:30 p.m. ET, recognizes Mr. Ilitch's industry-leading support of Veterans through the Little Caesars Veterans Program. ""Michael Ilitch has demonstrated great patriotism by providing business opportunities to honorably discharged Veterans through the Little Caesars Veterans Program,"" said Nicholson. ""This award, the highest honor my office can bestow, represents the VA's appreciation of a Detroit business leader who is making a difference for U.S. military Veterans as they transition to civilian life or make a career change."" Launched on Veterans Day (November 9) 2006, the program provides honorably discharged, service-disabled Veterans who qualify as Little Caesars franchisees a benefit of up to $68,000. Honorably discharged, non service-disabled Veterans who qualify as Little Caesars franchisees are eligible for a benefit of $10,000. Ilitch, a former Marine, has made giving back part of the way Little Caesars has done business since shortly after opening the first store in 1959. ""Veterans and their families have made significant sacrifices for our country, and I feel that it's important to acknowledge that, and to thank them for their service,"" said Michael Ilitch, founder and chairman, Little Caesars. ""As I thought about the businesses I own, I thought what better way to say thank you to the men and women who have given so much for our nation than to provide them with a business opportunity: becoming a Little Caesars franchisee. I'm very honored that the program, and the people who created it, are being recognized with this prestigious award."" Aside from its literal veracity (or lack thereof), this meme also cherry-picks its ""facts"" to reflect poorly on Schnatter (whose political positions are well-known) and elides charitable contributions Papa John's has made to causes such as the Red Cross, children affected by domestic violence, and general philanthropic donations that Schnatter estimated to total around $30 million. Red Cross domestic violence Schnatter Hsu, Tiffany.  ""Papa John's to Raise Pizza Prices If 'Obamacare' Survives: CEO.""
  Los Angeles Times.  8 August 2012. McKay, Tom.  ""Papa John's Backtracks from Claim That Pizza Prices Will Increase Because of Obamacare.""
  Mic.  27 January 2013. Schnatter, John.  ""The Real Scoop on Papa Johns and Obamacare.""
  Huffington Post.  13 January 2013. Wolfson, Andrew.  ""The Real Papa John: Pizza Entrepreneur John Schnatter Makes No Apologies for Wealth, Success, Obamacare Remarks.""
  Courier-Journal.  13 January 2013. Federal Elections Commission.  ""Individual Contributions: John H. Schnatter/Papa John's International, Inc; 2016.""
  Accessed 2 November 2017. Fox News.  ""CEO of Papa John's Says Employees' Hours Will Likely Be Cut Due to Obamacare.""
  11 November 2012. Fox News.  ""Papa John's Franchisee Gets Jail Time for Illegally Taking Employee Wages.""
  17 November 2015. RT.  ""Under Fire: Chipotle, Papa John, Mcdonalds Over Pervasive Wage Theft And Discrimination.""
  27 August 2016. WXYZ-TV.  ""Mike Ilitch Paid for Rosa Parks' Housing for More Than a Decade.""
  11 February 2017. UPI.  ""Little Caesars Founder Earns Vets Award.""
  18 September 2007. Press Release.  ""Veterans Affairs Secretary Honors Little Caesars Founder Michael Ilitch.""
  17 September 2007. QSR Magazine.  ""Papa Johns Teams Up with Cowboys for Charity.""
  9 August 2016. Ilitch Companies.  ""Mike Ilitch.""
  Accessed 2 November 2016. American Red Cross.  ""Hawaii Red Cross Is the Papa Johns Charity of the Month!""
  27 February 2017.",['insurance'],NEI,"On 2 November 2017, the Facebook page ""The Other 98%"" shared a meme comparing purported facts about the founder of the Papa John's (John Schnatter) and Little Caesar's (the late Mike Ilitch) pizza chains:According to Federal Election Committee (FEC) filings, Schnatter made a total of $85,500 in political contributions in 2016, just over two percent of which went to the Trump campaign. Schnatter donated $1,000 each to two Trump campaign political action committees (PACs), he donated $33,400 to the Republican National Committee (RNC) and the Kentucky Republican Leadership Fund in 2016, and $6,200 to Rand Paul's PACs. As such, the claim was true but somewhat misleading: Schnatter (a resident of Louisville) did donate to the Trump campaign, but the bulk of his financial support went elsewhere, most of it to political activity on the state level.In early November 2012, it was widely reported that Schnatter planned to cut worker hours in response to provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA, or ""Obamacare""):However, Schnatter asserted that his comments had been misinterpreted in an op-ed piece, explaining that his earlier remarks were speculative and pertained to franchisees of Papa John's (not the corporation itself):In 2015, a Papa John's franchisee (not the chain, nor Schnatter) was found guilty of wage theft and noncompliance with New York State laws pertaining to overtime:Khokar was an independent franchise owner, and his 2015 conviction was falsely attributed to Schnatter in the meme. Separate instances also involved the actions of independent franchisees, not Papa John's itself.In August 2012, news outlets reported that Schnatter was planning to pass increased health insurance costs onto customers in order to protect ""shareholders' best interests"":Back in February 2014, SportsBusiness Daily reported that Ilitch had arranged to pay for housing for civil rights icon Rosa Parks after she was robbed and assaulted in her Detroit home:This claim appears to reference Little Caesar's Love Kitchen, described on the company's web site as follows:The Love Kitchen charity was founded by Ilitch in 1985.In September 2007, news outlets reported that Ilitch had ""received the U.S. Veterans Affairs Department's top civilian honor for giving war veterans franchise opportunities,"" with one press release stating:Aside from its literal veracity (or lack thereof), this meme also cherry-picks its ""facts"" to reflect poorly on Schnatter (whose political positions are well-known) and elides charitable contributions Papa John's has made to causes such as the Red Cross, children affected by domestic violence, and general philanthropic donations that Schnatter estimated to total around $30 million."
'I Live in Sweden': Facts About Swedish Society and Health Care,['A popular meme outlines the purported benefits of living in Sweden.'],"Sweden is often the subject of fierce political debate, with some championing it as an example of a well-run, successful social democracy, while others point to what they see as endemic problems throughout the country. It has also long been the target of misinformation and confusion regarding its integration and assimilation of immigrants, a topic we have explored in detail in the past. In the spring of 2018, a meme went viral that highlighted some of the positive aspects of Swedish society, particularly its health care system. On April 25, the ""Medicare for All"" Facebook page shared this meme: ""I live in Sweden. We have social security, affordable health care, strict gun laws, five weeks of paid annual leave, and one year of maternity leave. A stay at the hospital for one night costs about $10. Prescription drugs have an annual cap of $210. We're not a communist country, or even strictly socialist. We're socio-democratic, and our freedoms are not inhibited."" 

The meme cites the Twitter handle @SweResistance as its source. In March 2018, that Twitter user posted a series of tweets making the case for Swedish health care. For example, health care can cost a maximum of around $130 per year for visits to health care centers, while hospital nights cost $12 per night with a $175 cap per month. Prescription drugs have a yearly cap of $250. It appears that ""Medicare for All"" actually changed some of the details in its meme for reasons unknown. We have fact-checked the claims made in the meme, rather than in @SweResistance's Twitter thread. 

While there is no objective definition of ""strict,"" Sweden does stringently regulate gun ownership and usage compared to the United States. According to an analysis by GunPolicy.org, a research project hosted at the University of Sydney, Australia, employees are legally entitled to 25 days of paid leave each year, as stated in Section 4 of the Annual Leave Act. 

This is not quite right. Sweden doesn't have maternity leave in the traditional sense; instead, it offers its inhabitants exceptionally generous parental leave. Parents of a newborn or adopted child are entitled to 480 combined days of parental leave, which they can split between themselves in whatever way they choose, regardless of gender. In 2017, fathers claimed 28 percent of all parental leave days, according to government statistics. For 390 of the 480 days available, parents are paid at a rate of almost 80 percent of their normal salary, according to Swedish government figures. The parental leave doesn't need to be taken right away; parents in Sweden can continue to take days off until their child turns eight years old. 

The claim of one year of maternity leave ignores the reality of how the Swedish system works, but it is absolutely possible that a new mother, depending on the agreement she has with the child's other parent, could claim 365 days or more of paid leave. This is true. According to official government figures published on the Sweden.se website, the maximum fee for a hospital visit is 100 Kronor (SEK). Based on the exchange rate on April 26, 2018, that's $11.56, which is closer to the $12 stated by @SweResistance. 

This is also basically true, although the dollar amount again depends on the exchange rate. According to Swedish government figures, ""nobody pays more than SEK 2,200 in a given 12-month period"" for prescription medication. (That's the equivalent of $254 as of April 2018.) Again, that's very close to the $250 figure provided by @SweResistance. It's not clear where the figure of $210 originates. 

Overall, the meme accurately states some of the details of Sweden's social democratic institutions. However, like most politically charged social media content, it leaves out important context. The most obvious thing to know about Sweden's famous ""cradle to grave"" social safety net and good working conditions is that they are largely funded by Sweden's equally famous high taxes. Nonetheless, polling shows that Swedes are largely satisfied with the public services they receive in return.",['taxes'],NEI,"Sweden is often the subject of fierce political debate, with some championing it as an example of a well-run, successful social democracy, while others point to what they see as problems endemic throughout the country. It has also long been the target of misinformation and confusion relating to its integration and assimilation of immigrants, something we have written about in detail in the past. In the spring of 2018, a meme went viral which presented some of the positive aspects of Swedish society, in particular its health care system. On 25 April, the ""Medicare for All"" Facebook page shared this meme:The meme cites the Twitter handle @SweResistance as its source. In March 2018, that Twitter user posted a series of tweets making the case for Swedish health care: Prescription drugs have a yearly roof of $250. #healthcare Caroline ?????? #FBR #RESIST (@SweResistance) March 10, 2018While there is no objective definition of ""strict,"" Sweden does stringently regulate gun ownership and usage by comparison with the United States. According to an analysis by GunPolicy.org, a research project hosted at the University of Sydney, Australia:According to Section 4 of the Annual Leave Act, employees are legally entitled to 25 days' paid leave each year.This is not quite right. Sweden doesn't have maternity leave, exactly; instead, it offers its inhabitants exceptionally generous parental leave. Parents of a newly born or adopted child are entitled to 480 combined days of parental leave, which they can split between themselves in whatever way they choose regardless of gender. In 2017, fathers claimed 28 percent of all parental leave days, according to government statistics. For 390 of the 480 days available, parents are paid at a rate of almost 80 percent their normal salary, according to Swedish government figures. The parental leave doesn't need to be taken right away, either. Parents in Sweden can continue to take days off until their child turns eight years old.This is true. According to official government figures published on the Sweden.se web site, the maximum fee for a hospital visit is 100 Kroner (SEK.) Based on the exchange rate on 26 April 2018, that's $11.56, which is closer to the $12 stated by @SweResistance.This is also basically true, although the dollar amount again depends on the exchange rate. According to Swedish government figures, ""nobody pays more than SEK 2,200 in a given 12-month period"" for prescription medication. (That's the equivalent of $254 as of April 2018.) Again, that's very close to the $250 figure provided by @SweResistance. It's not clear where the figure of $210 originates. Overall, the meme accurately states some of the details of Sweden's social democratic institutions. However, like most politically-charged social media content, it leaves out important context. The most obvious thing to know about Sweden's famous ""cradle to grave"" social safety net and good working conditions is that they are largely paid for by Sweden's equally famous high taxes. Nonetheless, polling shows that Swedes are largely satisfied with the public services they receive in return."
EverPet Dog Food,['Rumor: EverPet brand dog and cat food is made in China and has killed several pets in the U.S.']," Claim:  EverPet brand dog and cat food is made in China and has caused pets to fall ill and die in the U.S. Example:  [Collected via Facebook, February 2015]   Origins:   On 2 November 2014, the above-quoted message about EverPet brand pet food was posted on Facebook and subsequently shared hundreds of thousands of times. Although that particular warning came in late 2014, rumors about adverse pet reactions to  Facebook EverPet brand cat and dog food (commonly sold at Dollar General stores) have circulated on the internet since at least as far back as 2010. It is not uncommon to find stories on social media attributing a pet's death to a particular brand of cat or dog food, as people  brand who have experienced the untimely loss of a beloved animal companion attempt to spare other families the trauma they have endured. Similar warnings have circulated about brands such as Purina, with grieving owners similarly convinced the food their pet consumed was responsible for the animal's illness or death. Purina In the absence of confirmation or denial from Dollar General, well-intentioned pet owners seized on anecdotal information about the brand on the web, but the owner of the dog referenced above later admitted that the pet's death had not been linked to EverPet:   Unlike Purina, discount brand EverPet has no dedicated website or social media presence where they address such complaints. Consequently, rumors of recalls continue to circulate even though there has never been a recall of EverPet pet food. Representatives from Dollar General have replied to some of the rumors about EverPet food and stated unequivocally that the product is manufactured in the United States (not China), and that no recalls have been ordered for EverPet products. On 20 December 2013, Dollar General's Facebook page published the following response to a user who asked about EverPet rumors: response   Last updated:  20 February 2015",['share'],NEI,"Origins:   On 2 November 2014, the above-quoted message about EverPet brand pet food was posted on Facebook and subsequently shared hundreds of thousands of times. Although that particular warning came in late 2014, rumors about adverse pet reactions to It is not uncommon to find stories on social media attributing a pet's death to a particular brand of cat or dog food, as people who have experienced the untimely loss of a beloved animal companion attempt to spare other families the trauma they have endured. Similar warnings have circulated about brands such as Purina, with grieving owners similarly convinced the food their pet consumed was responsible for the animal's illness or death.On 20 December 2013, Dollar General's Facebook page published the following response to a user who asked about EverPet rumors:"
Facebook Appeal for Baby Born with Heart Outside Body,['Rumor: Facebook is donating $1 per share to a medical fund for a baby born with his heart outside his body.'],"Claim: Facebook is donating $1 per share to a medical fund for a baby born with his heart outside his body. Example: [Collected via e-mail, April 2015] The photo looks unreal, stating that ""Fb"" will donate $1 for each share of the photo showing a baby born with his heart outside of its body. Origins: In April 2015, an image urging viewers to share a photograph of a baby born with his heart outside his body in order to raise funds for his medical care was circulated widely via Facebook. However, neither the image nor its claim was new; the tandem was simply a reiteration of a hoax that had circulated more than a year earlier involving the same photograph and plea. This ""raise money for a child's medical care by sharing this photo on Facebook"" format of hoax is common. Previous variations include a child purportedly shot by a family member, a toddler who needed a heart transplant, and a little girl from Poland in desperate need of money for burn treatment. As is often the case with these popular social media hoaxes, the image used was of a real child suffering from a real medical condition, and that image was deliberately selected with the intent of tugging at the heartstrings of Facebook users for purposes unconnected to the depicted child's recovery or well-being. The photograph used in this case is one that was widely reproduced in conjunction with 2012 news coverage about the case of Hayes Davis, who was born with omphalocele, a birth defect in which the fetus's intestines and other abdominal organs stick out from the belly button. After a pregnancy filled with seemingly endless appointments and ultrasounds, [Kelly] Davis gave birth to Hayes on March 25, 2011, via Cesarean section at Children's Memorial Hermann Hospital in Houston, TX. ""I was so excited to meet him, but the anxiety was almost overwhelming,"" the new mom said. ""I didn't know if he would breathe on his own or eat on his own or whether the omphalocele would stay intact."" In January 2012, doctors successfully corrected Davis's condition. After his mom spent months treating the condition and even documenting her world on her blog, ""O Baby,"" Hayes underwent surgery to correct the organs. ""The surgery went perfectly,"" Davis said. ""Both surgeons were incredibly pleased. We're looking forward to a simpler way of life."" Images such as the one of the ""baby born with his heart outside his body"" are carefully selected by Facebook scammers preying on the sympathies of social media users. Many people believe that sharing the image is harmless: If the claim is true, the baby is helped; and if it's false, only a small amount of their time was wasted. However, these types of hoaxes are typically lures for the distribution of malware as well as clickjacking, clickbaiting, and like-farming activities, made all the more reprehensible for their dishonest and unauthorized use of such photographs. In any case, Facebook does not directly donate money based on likes or shares generated for any purpose. Facebook's advice for charitable giving on the social network can be found here. Last updated: 21 April 2015.",['share'],False,"This ""raise money for a child's medical care by sharing this photo on Facebook"" format of hoax is common: Previous variations include a child purportedly shot  by a family member, a toddler who neededa heart transplant, and a little girl from Poland in desperate need of money for burn treatment.The photograph used in this case is one that was widely reproduced in conjunction with 2012 news coverage about the case of Hayes Davis, who was born with omphalocele, a birth defect in which the fetus' intestines and other abdominal organs stick out from the belly button:In any case, Facebook does not directly donate money based upon likes or shares generated for any purpose. Facebook's advice for charitable giving on the social network can be found here."
Federal workers are paid well above the HOUSEHOLD income in southern Missouri.,[],"The House of Representatives passed a 2.6 percent pay raise for all civilian federal employees in response to a government shutdown that left hundreds of thousands of federal workers either furloughed or working without pay. Some Republican lawmakers decried the move. U.S. Rep. Jason Smith, R-Mo., sent out a tweet saying, ""Where I come from, you don't get a pay raise just for showing up to work. Today, Dem leaders pushed a $5B pay raise for federal workers who are paid well above the household income in southern Missouri. Retweet if you think that money would be better spent to #SecureOurBorder."" On Feb. 1, Smith repeated the claim in his Weekly Capitol Report. The raise in question matches an increase in pay for military personnel that was passed in 2019. If passed by the Senate, the bill would undo a pay freeze instituted by President Donald Trump on Dec. 28. We decided to take a closer look to see if federal workers really do make that much more than southern Missourians and, if so, why. Smith's claim focuses on two different metrics: the income of an individual federal civilian employee and the income of households in southern Missouri. This distinction is important because household income can include the wages and salaries of multiple people. Data from the U.S. Census Bureau and the Bureau of Economic Analysis supports Smith's claim that individual federal employees earn more than southern Missouri households. The mean household income in Missouri is $70,144, a figure already lower than the mean income of a federal civilian worker, which is $90,811. When asked for data supporting the claim, Smith's communications director, Joey Brown, pointed to census data compiled by congressional district. To determine the average household income in southern Missouri, we looked at the two congressional districts that cover the state's southernmost counties: districts 7 and 8. Smith's district, Congressional District 8, encompasses the southeast corner of the state, stretching from Ozark County to Jefferson County and extending into the Bootheel region. There, the mean household income is $54,393. In neighboring Congressional District 7, which covers the southwest corner of the state, the mean household income is $62,145. There are many explanations for why federal employees are paid more than the average southern Missourian household. Experts told us that any comparison should also take into account education, training, skills, and experience that increase worker productivity and typically result in higher incomes. The federal government's 2.2 million civilian workers tend to be older, more educated, and more concentrated in professional occupations than private-sector workers, according to the Congressional Budget Office, the nonpartisan research arm of Congress. About 51 percent of federal workers have attained at least a bachelor's degree. In Smith's district, about 16 percent of constituents aged 25 and older have a bachelor's degree, according to data from the U.S. Census Bureau and the Office of Personnel Management. A report by the Congressional Budget Office that accounted for these differences found that there is a disparity between how federal and private workers are paid. But this disparity depends on levels of education. ""There's very little question that the top people in government are being paid quite a bit less than the top people with those kinds of skills in the private sector,"" said University of Missouri economics professor Peter Mueser. Federal workers with a professional or doctorate degree earned roughly 24 percent less than their privately employed counterparts. However, federal workers with no more than a high school education earned 34 percent more than similar workers employed outside the federal government. Federal employees whose highest level of education was a bachelor's degree earned 5 percent more. Another factor worth considering is benefits, said Iowa State University economics professor John Winters via email. In addition to salaries and wages, workers are compensated with benefits such as health insurance, retirement plans, and job security. However, benefits are more difficult to quantify because they are partly based on future predictions, and less detailed data is available on benefits than on wages. The CBO study found that for federal employees whose highest level of education was a bachelor's degree, benefits were 52 percent higher. Average benefits were 93 percent higher for federal employees with no more than a high school education. For employees with a doctorate or professional degree, average benefits were about the same in the two sectors. The bare bones of Smith's claim hold up to scrutiny. Federal workers do take home more in income than the average household in southern Missouri. But Smith's statement doesn't take into account differences between southern Missourians and the average federal employee that help explain income disparity, such as education. We rate this statement Mostly True.","['Federal Budget', 'Income', 'Workers', 'Missouri']",True,"Some Republican lawmakers decried the move. U.S. Rep. Jason Smith, R-Mo., sent out atweetsaying, Where I come from you dont get a pay raise just for showing up to work.Where I come from you don't get a pay raise just for showing up to work. Today Dem leaders pushed a $5B pay raise for federal workers who are paid well above the HOUSEHOLD income in southern Missouri. Retweet if you think that money would be better spent to#SecureOurBorderOn Feb. 1, Smith repeated the claim in hisWeekly Capitol Report."
Was Pfizer COVID-19 Vaccine Development Funded by Trump Administration?,['Agreeing to a buy a vaccine once approved is not the same as funding its research and development.'],"Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And, please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease.  fighting Find out Read Submit Become a Founding Member CDC WHO In the final months of 2020, scientists around the world raced to develop a vaccine for the novel coronavirus, which at that point had reached more than 50 million cases and resulted in the deaths of at least 1.2 million people. reached On Nov. 9, the biopharmaceutical company Pfizer announced in a news release  not a peer-reviewed journal that interim results testing the efficacy of vaccine candidate BNT162b2 showed a 90% success rate in protecting against COVID-19 infection, making it one of the first and most promising immunization potentials to date. news release And politicians were quick to weigh in. U.S. Vice President Mike Pence said in a tweet that the public-private partnership between U.S. President Donald Trump's administration and Pfizer led to the success of the vaccine:  While former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley, whose policies closely align with Trump, furthered the notion that the vaccine was a part of the presidents Operation Warp Speed (OWS), an effort led by the Trump Administration to accelerate the testing of COVID-19 vaccines and therapeutics:  These claims are half-truths and misrepresent the role that OWS played in developing this particular vaccine candidate. Although the very preliminary findings of the vaccine look promising, a detailed look at the reported findings revealed that there is cause to be cautious about its availability and timeliness. A deal between OWS and Pfizer was announced in a July news release that outlined a bid by the U.S. government to receive 100 million doses (with the option to acquire up to 500 million more doses) of a vaccine  pending approval by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)  for $1.95 billion. news release Today is a great day for science and humanity. The first set of results from our Phase 3 COVID-19 vaccine trial provides the initial evidence of our vaccines ability to prevent COVID-19, said Dr. Albert Bourla, Pfizer Chairman and CEO. We are reaching this critical milestone in our vaccine development program at a time when the world needs it most with infection rates setting new records, hospitals nearing over-capacity and economies struggling to reopen. With todays news, we are a significant step closer to providing people around the world with a much-needed breakthrough to help bring an end to this global health crisis."" OWS is a joint effort by the Trump administration and the U.S. departments of Defense (DOD) and Health and Human Services (HHS) in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, launched on May 15 to accelerate the testing, supply, development, and distribution of safe and effective vaccines, therapeutics, and diagnostics by January 2021. Part of its mission is to also accelerate the vaccine approval process from the typical 73 months to just 13 months. Generally, receiving approval for a new drug or therapy is a long and tenuous process that can sometimes last years.  Department of Defense  Department of Defense   OWS offered $456 million to vaccine research and development projects by Johnson & Johnson for its Phase 1 clinical trials, as well as a total of $955 million to Moderna for late-stage clinical testing. However, the $1.95 billion allocated to Pfizer was for large-scale manufacturing and nationwide distribution. In short, the government intended to buy doses of a vaccine from Pfizer once an effective vaccine was made available, but it did not fund the research and development of Pfizer's vaccine. offered Johnson & Johnson Moderna Pfizer is proud to be one of various vaccine manufacturers participating in Operation Warp Speed as a supplier of a potential COVID-19 vaccine, Sharon Castillo, a Pfizer spokesperson, told Snopes in an email. While Pfizer did reach an advanced purchase agreement with the U.S. government, the company did not accept the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) funding for the research and development process. All the investment for R&D and manufacturing has been made by Pfizer at risk. Technically, the work conducted by Pfizer and its partner, German drugmaker BioNTech, is an expansion of OWS and was operating under an agreement to meet the goal of OWS to deliver 300 million doses of a vaccine in 2021. As part of the agreement, the U.S. government would receive 100 million doses after the successful manufacturing of the vaccine and its approval by the FDA. However, that is not to say that the government had any hand in the research or development of the vaccine. Rather, it just agreed to buy the vaccines from the companies once they had gone through final approval. We made the early decision to begin clinical work and large-scale manufacturing at our own risk to ensure that product would be available immediately if our clinical trials prove successful and an Emergency Use Authorization is granted. We are honored to be a part of this effort to provide Americans access to protection from this deadly virus, said Dr. Albert Bourla, Pfizer chairman and CEO, at the time. Pfizer and BioNTech have similar agreements with the European Union. European Union The specific details about the Pfizer vaccine are not readily available. What we do know is that BNT162b2 is an mRNA-based vaccine that contained SARS-CoV-2 spike protein  the same protein that nearly all vaccination studies are targeting  that allows the virus to enter human cells and elicits an immune response from its host. The first doses administered to U.S. study participants, half of whom received the vaccine and the other half a placebo, were done so in May via intramuscular injection, which is similar to the flu shot. As part of a randomized placebo trial, two doses were each given three weeks apart with the vaccine not taking full effect until at least a week after the final dose. That means that a person couldnt expect protection until about a month after they were immunized. SARS-CoV-2 spike protein administered  A three-dimensional simulation of the coronavirus spike protein just before binding to the human cell receptor. University of Arkansas  University of Arkansas   An analysis of the interim results suggested that the vaccine is 90% effective in preventing the disease in study volunteers who did not have evidence of a prior COVID-19 infection  a rate that is similar to the measles vaccine administered in early childhood. No safety concerns were observed, but as the trial continues those findings could change. measles vaccine Thats because the results are based on limited data from an early clinical trial, and its unclear whether the vaccine prevents infection or just reduces symptoms. This is a very timely and encouraging development in the race to get an effective vaccine. It is difficult to fully evaluate the interim data without more information but it appears that the vaccine is able to protect against COVID-19 disease, said Lawrence Young, a professor of molecular oncology at Warwick Medical School. The big question is whether the vaccine can block virus infection and subsequent transmission. This additional data will be generated as further confirmed cases are identified and analyzed. said The promising results were met with both encouragement and skepticism by the broader scientific community, which by and large said that it remains cautiously optimistic. First and foremost, the results are interim and still await full trial results, meaning that these are non-peer-reviewed findings that were published midway through the clinical trial. Releasing the findings in the middle of a trial may further influence the integrity of the study, potentially biasing how future study participants respond or how their observations are reported. That could in turn make long-term follow-up with adequate randomization more challenging. There are other important limitations to the research that must be considered. Snopes read through the a 123-page study protocol document and found that while researchers describe the more than 43,000 participants as ethnically diverse,"" they do not specify other characteristics that may make an individuals infection more extreme, such as age or co-morbidities. And while it is written that study participants were between the ages of 18 and 85, their exact demographics were not known. Furthermore, individuals with a high risk of severe infection were excluded from the first phase of testing and the preliminary findings did not determine how long the vaccination lasts. protocol document  NurPhoto / Contributor  NurPhoto / Contributor Even after addressing the limitations, the results of an effective vaccine will not be felt immediately. With the best will in the world, this vaccine  or any other vaccine currently in trials  isnt going to change things for the majority of us this winter, said Elenor Riley, a professor of immunology and infectious disease at the University of Edinburgh. said So, we all need to accept that the current public health measures are going to remain in place at least until the end of the winter, possibly longer. But if this vaccine lives up to this early promise, and other vaccines work equally well, we may be able to look forward to a much better summer and autumn in 2021. If the vaccine is proven to be robustly effective at the wider community level, experts warn that there must still be public trust and buy-in  a challenge given some political leaders have been quick to dismiss the severity of the outbreak. Then there is the logistical challenge of manufacturing and distributing vaccines globally. First doses must be prioritized for health care workers and vulnerable populations. And a logistical challenge lies in manufacturing and rolling out a vaccine that needs to be stored and maintained at very low temperatures (-94 to -112 degrees Fahrenheit). As the world waits, experts warn that the promise of a vaccine cannot allow the findings to seed complacency and cause people to shy away from public health guidance. On the cusp of the vaccine candidate announcement, most nations in the world saw massive upticks in new coronavirus cases reported each day in October and November, according to data published by Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center. On Nov. 4, 5, and 6, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported over 100,000 new coronavirus cases each day data reported Pfizer applied for an emergency use authorization (EUA) of the two-dose vaccine with the FDA on Nov. 20. At this point, researchers had collected two months of safety data required to use the drug in some cases. However, that does not constitute full approval of the drug. At the time of this writing, just 94 of the nearly 44,000 trial participants had contracted COVID-19 and the study is expected to continue until at least 164 people test positive. applied EUA Though the long-term safety and efficacy data remains to be seen, it is estimated that the manufacturers could produce globally up to 50 million vaccine doses in 2020 and up to 1.3 billion doses in 2021 to be distributed on an as-needed basis if a EUA is granted. The Pfizer study is estimated to be completed by Dec. 11, 2022. estimated Update [Nov. 20, 2020]: This article was updated to reflect Pfizers official filing of a EUA on Nov. 20.",['investment'],False,"Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And, please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease. In the final months of 2020, scientists around the world raced to develop a vaccine for the novel coronavirus, which at that point had reached more than 50 million cases and resulted in the deaths of at least 1.2 million people.On Nov. 9, the biopharmaceutical company Pfizer announced in a news release  not a peer-reviewed journal that interim results testing the efficacy of vaccine candidate BNT162b2 showed a 90% success rate in protecting against COVID-19 infection, making it one of the first and most promising immunization potentials to date.A deal between OWS and Pfizer was announced in a July news release that outlined a bid by the U.S. government to receive 100 million doses (with the option to acquire up to 500 million more doses) of a vaccine  pending approval by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)  for $1.95 billion. Department of DefenseOWS offered $456 million to vaccine research and development projects by Johnson & Johnson for its Phase 1 clinical trials, as well as a total of $955 million to Moderna for late-stage clinical testing. However, the $1.95 billion allocated to Pfizer was for large-scale manufacturing and nationwide distribution. In short, the government intended to buy doses of a vaccine from Pfizer once an effective vaccine was made available, but it did not fund the research and development of Pfizer's vaccine.Pfizer and BioNTech have similar agreements with the European Union.The specific details about the Pfizer vaccine are not readily available. What we do know is that BNT162b2 is an mRNA-based vaccine that contained SARS-CoV-2 spike protein  the same protein that nearly all vaccination studies are targeting  that allows the virus to enter human cells and elicits an immune response from its host. The first doses administered to U.S. study participants, half of whom received the vaccine and the other half a placebo, were done so in May via intramuscular injection, which is similar to the flu shot. As part of a randomized placebo trial, two doses were each given three weeks apart with the vaccine not taking full effect until at least a week after the final dose. That means that a person couldnt expect protection until about a month after they were immunized. A three-dimensional simulation of the coronavirus spike protein just before binding to the human cell receptor. University of ArkansasAn analysis of the interim results suggested that the vaccine is 90% effective in preventing the disease in study volunteers who did not have evidence of a prior COVID-19 infection  a rate that is similar to the measles vaccine administered in early childhood. No safety concerns were observed, but as the trial continues those findings could change.This is a very timely and encouraging development in the race to get an effective vaccine. It is difficult to fully evaluate the interim data without more information but it appears that the vaccine is able to protect against COVID-19 disease, said Lawrence Young, a professor of molecular oncology at Warwick Medical School. The big question is whether the vaccine can block virus infection and subsequent transmission. This additional data will be generated as further confirmed cases are identified and analyzed.There are other important limitations to the research that must be considered. Snopes read through the a 123-page study protocol document and found that while researchers describe the more than 43,000 participants as ethnically diverse,"" they do not specify other characteristics that may make an individuals infection more extreme, such as age or co-morbidities. And while it is written that study participants were between the ages of 18 and 85, their exact demographics were not known. Furthermore, individuals with a high risk of severe infection were excluded from the first phase of testing and the preliminary findings did not determine how long the vaccination lasts. NurPhoto / ContributorWith the best will in the world, this vaccine  or any other vaccine currently in trials  isnt going to change things for the majority of us this winter, said Elenor Riley, a professor of immunology and infectious disease at the University of Edinburgh.As the world waits, experts warn that the promise of a vaccine cannot allow the findings to seed complacency and cause people to shy away from public health guidance. On the cusp of the vaccine candidate announcement, most nations in the world saw massive upticks in new coronavirus cases reported each day in October and November, according to data published by Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center. On Nov. 4, 5, and 6, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported over 100,000 new coronavirus cases each dayPfizer applied for an emergency use authorization (EUA) of the two-dose vaccine with the FDA on Nov. 20. At this point, researchers had collected two months of safety data required to use the drug in some cases. However, that does not constitute full approval of the drug. At the time of this writing, just 94 of the nearly 44,000 trial participants had contracted COVID-19 and the study is expected to continue until at least 164 people test positive.The Pfizer study is estimated to be completed by Dec. 11, 2022."
Is the account of Neerja Bhanot and the 1986 Pan Am hijacking based on actual events?,"['In 1986, Pan Am flight 73 was attacked in Karachi airport by hijackers linked to the Palestinian Abu Nidal Organization.  ']","Sometimes, Snopes readers stumble on old stories that require us to revisit key moments of history. One such story was of the courageous actions of Neerja Bhanot, an Indian flight attendant on Pan Am flight 73, which was hijacked in 1986 by Palestinian militants on its way to the United States while on a stopover in Karachi, Pakistan. Neerja Bhano Many of our readers shared social media posts, and queries, asking us to detail some of the main events of the hijacking, including Bhanots death from a gunshot wound. posts   One reader asked us to confirm the following: When radical Islamic terrorists hijacked her A/C in Karachi, Pakistan she informed the pilots (who used their escape hatch to runaway) and kept both the passengers/remaining crew calm. When the terrorists demanded to know who the Americans were on the flight so they could execute them she gathered all the passports and hid the ones belonging to Americans under seat cushions. The terrorists confused and unable to determine the national origins of the passengers didn't execute anyone. When Pakistani police raided the plane she was able to nearly singlehandedly evacuate all the passengers as the firefight ensued. She being one of the last people on board did a last check and found three children still hiding. As she led the children to safety the surviving terrorists spotted the children and opened fire on them. Neerja jumped in the way of the bullets and was mortally wounded. She was able to evac the children to safety before dying from her wounds. Neerja was awarded the Ashok Chakra Award by India, the highest peacetime gallantry award possible. She was the youngest and first civilian to ever be awarded this honor. Through testimonies from the flight crew and passengers during the sentencing of one of the hijackers, and interviews done by the BBC, we were able to gather key facts from that fateful day. In 2004, Zayad al Safarini, a Jordanian hijacker who was part of the attack, was sentenced by a U.S. district judge to 160 years in prison. At the hearing for his sentencing, a number of passengers, flight attendants, and Bhanots brother, came forward to recount the events of the hijacking. The full transcript of their testimonies can be read here. testimonies BBC sentenced here The Palestinian militants who hijacked the aircraft were affiliated with the Abu Nidal Organization (ANO), which was opposed to U.S. and Israeli policies in the Middle East, and was described as a secular international terrorist organization. When the hijackers boarded the plane, they began trying to identify any Americans on board. A 2016 BBC report included interviews with the surviving flight attendants, described the scene: described BBC report Sunshine, Madhvi Bahuguna and another flight attendant began collecting passports, quietly avoiding collecting any that were American. They then went through the bags of passports they had collected, secretly sifting out any remaining American ones and tucking them under their seats or concealing them in their clothing. Mike Thexton, a passenger on the plane, describes the act in his book What Happened to The Hippy Man? as ""extremely brave, selfless and clever"". ""I may be biased but I feel that day proved that the flight attendants on board were some of the best in the industry."" Descriptions from passengers and family members from the sentencing of Safarini detailed the moment that flight attendants were told to gather passports, and the ways in which they tried to protect the Americans among them. Aneesh Bhanot, Neerjas brother, who was not on the plane as these events took place, described this effort as one carried out by all the flight attendants together: Descriptions Neerja was an Indian citizen. All the other flight attendants were also Indian citizens. Mr. Safarini and his gang were targeting Americans, as was very obvious from the passenger calls which you heard later on. Neerja and all the other attendants knew this. That is why when they asked them to get the passports of all the passengers, they hid the American passports on the airplane. He also cited the testimony of another passenger that was published in the Cincinnati Enquirer in September 1986. A clipping of that paper is available below (in which Bhanot is referred to as Neerja Mishra):   Michael John Thexton, a British passenger, recounted the following: recounted Then came the call for passports, and I should have ignored it. But I felt that I had to obey orders. So I took out my passport and I handed it in, still thinking that the Americans would be in front of us, not reckoning the ingenuity and the extraordinary bravery of the stewardess who was making the collection in discarding American passports that had a white face. I suppose the British were [the] third choice for the terrorists. And after the Americans and the Israelis, mine was the only one of a small handful of British passports with a white face in that pile. I think maybe six or seven, something of that sort. So the call came over the public address for passenger Michael John to come forward, then Michael John Thexton, and I knew that they wanted to shoot me. Darrell Pieper, an American passenger, credited flight attendant Sunshine Vesuwala for protecting his identity. In his testimony, he said, Sunshine hid my passport when she realized the hijackers are looking for Americans. I'm grateful to her for her quick thinking and action, which again saved my life. credited Gregg Maisel, the attorney representing the U.S. government, said, the flight attendants, risking their own lives, deliberately refused to accept United States passports from some passengers and hid several United States passports under seat cushions. said Given that Bhanot played a big role in protecting the American passengers by hiding their passports, but was not the only flight attendant doing this, we rate this part of the claim as true. In this instance, even as Bhanot showed remarkable bravery in getting passengers to safety, she was not alone in this effort. According to Maisel, passengers escaped after Bhanot and others were able to open up some exits: escaped As the bullets and grenades flew, Neerja Bhanot, as well as other flight attendants and passengers, heroically managed to force open two exits in the economy section. The opening of the rear exit triggered inflation of the emergency slide, but the opening of the exit over the wing did not trigger the inflation of a second emergency slide. People clamored to reach both exits fearful that the hijackers would resume the assault.[...]This diagram illustrates the efforts of surviving hostages to escape the aircraft using the emergency slide and climbing onto the wing of the plane. While the slide was a safer escape route, the sheer number of people attempting to leave the plane through this exit at night resulted in additional injuries to some who were unable to exit quickly enough to avoid being crushed by others behind them.[...]At the direction of several flight attendants, other passengers reentered the plane climbing over the wounded and the dead and used the rear exit where the slide was inflated to the safer escape route. Aneesh Bhanot also recounted an article written by a Pakistani passenger: recounted There's another passenger from Pakistan, a gentleman called Hussein, who had written an article in a newspaper called the Star of Pakistan. And he wrote again that says as the lights went out at 10:00 p.m. we was herded with the passengers and the shooting started. From nowhere, his savior, Neerja, and I'm sure other flight attendants also did the same thing, had the presence and the nerve to steer through the pandemonium to lead the passengers where to go. Neerja, by sheer zest, it seems, single-handedly opened the chute. Her favorite words to him and other passengers were, get out, run. In this instance, since Bhanot appeared to have taken the lead in helping passengers escape and was also aided by other crew and passengers, we rate this part of the claim as a mixture, given that she did not do this alone. Bhanots death was described through different accounts, based on information gathered in the aftermath of the attack. Some reports said she was protecting three children, while flight attendants described her being shot during the escape. Jennifer Levy, another attorney representing the U.S. government, described Bhanots final moments: described When the lights went out just before the final assault, Ms. Bhanot ran for the emergency door and activated the inflatable chute. Instead of escaping as one of the first off the aircraft, she remained on board to help others out of the plane. She was shot in the final assault. Although she was taken off the plane alive by her fellow flight attendants, she died shortly afterwards of massive bleeding. Viraf Daroga, Pan Ams director in Pakistan, described how Bhanot was brought down from the aircraft through the emergency chute: described Those who were injured were picked up as they came down the chute, put in ambulances that came rushing to the aircraft, and were driven off to various hospitals. Neerja, the senior purser, was brought down by her colleagues and was taken to the hospital. She died in the hospital in the arms of one of my staff. Aneesh Bhanots testimony described how Bhanot was indeed protecting three children when she was shot and killed: described Neerja could have been the first one to escape from the aircraft as she opened the emergency door, yet she chose not to do that. Instead, she got the passengers out and gave her own life, as we are told, while shielding three small children from gunfire. Her actions probably saved hundreds of lives. The Pan Am Historical Foundation also described her death by saying As the hijackers opened fire on passengers and crew, Neerja Bhanot lost her life shielding three children from bullets. described Since reports differ on what happened during Bhanots final moments, and some details remain uncertain, we rate the overall truth of this claim as ""Mixture."" But there is no doubting that her actions, as well as the actions of other flight attendants and crew, saved many lives. She was posthumously awarded the Ashok Chakra award, which is India's highest civilian decoration for bravery.  Ashok Chakra award",['inflation'],NEI,"Sometimes, Snopes readers stumble on old stories that require us to revisit key moments of history. One such story was of the courageous actions of Neerja Bhanot, an Indian flight attendant on Pan Am flight 73, which was hijacked in 1986 by Palestinian militants on its way to the United States while on a stopover in Karachi, Pakistan.Many of our readers shared social media posts, and queries, asking us to detail some of the main events of the hijacking, including Bhanots death from a gunshot wound.Through testimonies from the flight crew and passengers during the sentencing of one of the hijackers, and interviews done by the BBC, we were able to gather key facts from that fateful day. In 2004, Zayad al Safarini, a Jordanian hijacker who was part of the attack, was sentenced by a U.S. district judge to 160 years in prison. At the hearing for his sentencing, a number of passengers, flight attendants, and Bhanots brother, came forward to recount the events of the hijacking. The full transcript of their testimonies can be read here.The Palestinian militants who hijacked the aircraft were affiliated with the Abu Nidal Organization (ANO), which was opposed to U.S. and Israeli policies in the Middle East, and was described as a secular international terrorist organization. When the hijackers boarded the plane, they began trying to identify any Americans on board. A 2016 BBC report included interviews with the surviving flight attendants, described the scene:Descriptions from passengers and family members from the sentencing of Safarini detailed the moment that flight attendants were told to gather passports, and the ways in which they tried to protect the Americans among them. Aneesh Bhanot, Neerjas brother, who was not on the plane as these events took place, described this effort as one carried out by all the flight attendants together:Michael John Thexton, a British passenger, recounted the following:Darrell Pieper, an American passenger, credited flight attendant Sunshine Vesuwala for protecting his identity. In his testimony, he said, Sunshine hid my passport when she realized the hijackers are looking for Americans. I'm grateful to her for her quick thinking and action, which again saved my life.Gregg Maisel, the attorney representing the U.S. government, said, the flight attendants, risking their own lives, deliberately refused to accept United States passports from some passengers and hid several United States passports under seat cushions.In this instance, even as Bhanot showed remarkable bravery in getting passengers to safety, she was not alone in this effort. According to Maisel, passengers escaped after Bhanot and others were able to open up some exits:Aneesh Bhanot also recounted an article written by a Pakistani passenger:Jennifer Levy, another attorney representing the U.S. government, described Bhanots final moments:Viraf Daroga, Pan Ams director in Pakistan, described how Bhanot was brought down from the aircraft through the emergency chute:Aneesh Bhanots testimony described how Bhanot was indeed protecting three children when she was shot and killed:The Pan Am Historical Foundation also described her death by saying As the hijackers opened fire on passengers and crew, Neerja Bhanot lost her life shielding three children from bullets.Since reports differ on what happened during Bhanots final moments, and some details remain uncertain, we rate the overall truth of this claim as ""Mixture."" But there is no doubting that her actions, as well as the actions of other flight attendants and crew, saved many lives. She was posthumously awarded the Ashok Chakra award, which is India's highest civilian decoration for bravery. "
Did David Hogg Attend a California High School?,['The Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shooting survivor turned gun-control activist has been the target of relentless online hoaxes and attempted smears.'],"In the weeks after a gunman opened fire at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida on 14 February 2018, killing seventeen people, Internet trolls and ""hoaxers"" continued to share an already completely debunked rumor that David Hogg  a teenaged survivor of the mass shooting who has since become an outspoken advocate of gun control  is actually a professional actor who went to school in southern California:   As Hogg's classmates have pointed out and as we reported previously, the above meme is a very low-quality, low-effort Internet hoax  the photograph actually confirms that Hogg is legitimately an Marjory Stone Douglas High School student because the image was taken from MSD's yearbook, a fact that could be gleaned from another student in the very same image wearing an MSD ""Eagles"" mascot shirt two rows above him: reported previously Theres a photo going around claiming David Hogg did not attend Douglas, but a school in California. Heres a video to debunk that: pic.twitter.com/hJsMNSdAsF pic.twitter.com/hJsMNSdAsF  Joey (@_Joey_Wong) February 21, 2018 February 21, 2018  Hogg had visited California in 2017 and witnessed an altercation, about which he made a video blog  a simple fact that was blown out by conspiracy theorists to mean he already lived in Los Angeles and was part of the entertainment industry. (Hogg did live in California, but relocated with his family to Florida before starting high school; he returns to visit every year, as many people do.)  video blog Nikolas Cruz, 19, a former Marjory Stone Douglas student who used an AR-15 semi-automatic firearm he had reportedly purchased from a gun store to carry out the mass shooting, has since been charged with murder; Parkland students have galvanized a national movement calling for stricter gun legislation. Hogg has been one of the most vocal leaders in what has become known as the ""March For Our Lives."" known as The students' activism has made them the target of ""hoaxers""  deranged Internet users and grifters who spread false information that mass shooting incidents are manufactured by the government to seize guns and hand power to a secret global cabal working to install an authoritarian world government. hoaxers Such hoaxers have periodically been arrested and jailed for physically stalking and harassing survivors, but despite their outlandish beliefs and apparent moral debasement, they are not exactly the ""fringe."" Far-right web sites and Internet personalities like GatewayPundit.com writer Lucian Wintrich, undeterred by ongoing lawsuits related to previous conspiracy theory-related blunders, have claimed the Parkland students were reading from scripts, while the National Rifle Association said in an official statement in response to a nationwide march on 24 March 2018 that the events were staged by ""Hollywood elites."" arrested jailed stalking ongoing lawsuits blunders claimed statement DAngelo, Bob.  ""NRA: March Fueled By 'Gun-Hating Billionaires and Hollywood Elites.'""
Dayton Daily News.  25 March 2018. Herman, John. ""The Making of a No. 1 YouTube Conspiracy Video After the Parkland Tragedy.""
The New York Times.  21 February 2018. Chavez, Nicole.  ""School Shooting Survivor Knocks Down 'Crisis Actor' Claim.""
CNN.  21 February 2018.",['returns'],False,"As Hogg's classmates have pointed out and as we reported previously, the above meme is a very low-quality, low-effort Internet hoax  the photograph actually confirms that Hogg is legitimately an Marjory Stone Douglas High School student because the image was taken from MSD's yearbook, a fact that could be gleaned from another student in the very same image wearing an MSD ""Eagles"" mascot shirt two rows above him:Theres a photo going around claiming David Hogg did not attend Douglas, but a school in California. Heres a video to debunk that: pic.twitter.com/hJsMNSdAsF Joey (@_Joey_Wong) February 21, 2018Hogg had visited California in 2017 and witnessed an altercation, about which he made a video blog  a simple fact that was blown out by conspiracy theorists to mean he already lived in Los Angeles and was part of the entertainment industry. (Hogg did live in California, but relocated with his family to Florida before starting high school; he returns to visit every year, as many people do.) Nikolas Cruz, 19, a former Marjory Stone Douglas student who used an AR-15 semi-automatic firearm he had reportedly purchased from a gun store to carry out the mass shooting, has since been charged with murder; Parkland students have galvanized a national movement calling for stricter gun legislation. Hogg has been one of the most vocal leaders in what has become known as the ""March For Our Lives.""The students' activism has made them the target of ""hoaxers""  deranged Internet users and grifters who spread false information that mass shooting incidents are manufactured by the government to seize guns and hand power to a secret global cabal working to install an authoritarian world government.Such hoaxers have periodically been arrested and jailed for physically stalking and harassing survivors, but despite their outlandish beliefs and apparent moral debasement, they are not exactly the ""fringe."" Far-right web sites and Internet personalities like GatewayPundit.com writer Lucian Wintrich, undeterred by ongoing lawsuits related to previous conspiracy theory-related blunders, have claimed the Parkland students were reading from scripts, while the National Rifle Association said in an official statement in response to a nationwide march on 24 March 2018 that the events were staged by ""Hollywood elites."""
Was there a 'Convicted Terrorist' who served on the board of a funding body for the Black Lives Matter movement?,"['The past crimes of Susan Rosenberg reemerged in the summer of 2020, amid a new wave of protests over racial injustice and police brutality.']","In the summer of 2020, amid a new wave of nationwide protests over racial injustice and police brutality, readers inquired about the accuracy of online articles and social media posts that claimed a convicted terrorist sat on the board of directors of a left-leaning organization that provides fundraising and administration services for the Black Lives Matter movement. On July 8, 2020, Twitter user @asdomke posted a widely-shared tweet that read:  ""This is convicted terrorist Susan Rosenberg, she sits on the Board of Directors for the fundraising arm of Black Lives Matter. She was convicted for the 1983 bombing of the United States Capitol Building, the U.S. Naval War College and the New York Patrolmen's Benevolent Assoc.""   In June, the website of right-leaning talk radio host Wayne Dupree posted an article with the headline ""Report: Leader of Group Handling 'BLM Fundraising' is a Convicted Terrorist Who Carried Out Bombings in NYC and DC."" Similar articles were published by the Daily Caller (an article that was republished by the Western Journal) and on the website of former Fox News pundit Bill O'Reilly.  article Daily Caller Western Journal Bill O'Reilly On July 9, 2020, Tucker Carlson ran a segment about Rosenberg's past and her connection to Thousand Currents and the Black Lives Matter movement on his Fox News show.  segment Those posts and articles were largely based on a June 24, 2020, report published by the right-leaning Capital Research Center, which carried the headline ""A Terrorist's Ties to a Leading Black Lives Matter Group."" The report went on to state that: report Some conservatives have begun speculating the unrest in American cities -- even as late as Monday night in Washington, DC as protestors unsuccessfully worked to tear down a statue of Andrew Jackson and set up an autonomous zone across the street from the White House -- may in part be an attempt to affect the upcoming presidential election, with the chaos and violence intended to make it as difficult as possible for Donald Trump to win a second term. Lending credence to this idea is the fact that at least one board member of the group fiscally sponsoring the most organized part of the Black Lives Matter movement, who have been involved in most of the activity surrounding the current unrest -- tried the same thing almost 40 years ago during Ronald Reagans reelection campaign. And it landed her in federal prison for 16 years. If there were any question whether Black Lives Matter has ideological ties to the Communist terrorists of the 1960s, the story of Susan Rosenberg should put that issue to bed... Rosenberg, who started out as a member of the 1960s revolutionary group Weather Underground, graduated into even more violent, and arguably successful, forms of terrorism in the 1970s and 1980s -- including bombings at an FBI field office in Staten Island, the Navy Yard Officers Club in Washington, DC, and even the U.S. Capitol building, where she damaged a representation of the greatest of the Democrat defenders of slavery, John C. Calhoun. She currently serves as human and prisoner rights advocate and a vice chair of the board of directors of Thousand Currents. Thousand Currents is undoubtedly very closely linked to the Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation, a Delaware-registered entity that is one of the leading formal embodiments of the broader Black Lives Matter movement. The Thousand Currents website outlines the relationship between the two entities: outlines ""In 2016, BLM Global Network approached Thousand Currents to create a fiscal sponsorship agreement. Thousand Currents, a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt nonprofit organization, provides the legal and administrative framework to enable BLM to fulfill its mission. Fiscal sponsorship is a common structure utilized by nonprofit organizations. Oftentimes, nonprofit initiatives seek fiscal sponsorship to be able to have the fiscal sponsor handle administrative operations while the organization focuses on its programs and builds up its own organizational infrastructure. In this capacity, we provide administrative and back office support, including finance, accounting, grants management, insurance, human resources, legal and compliance."" Descriptions of Thousand Currents as an organization which ""handles fundraising"" for Black Lives Matter were therefore accurate. As recently as June 24, the date on which the Capital Research Center published their report, the Thousand Currents website listed Susan Rosenberg as vice chair of the organization's board of directors, describing her as a ""human and prison rights advocate and writer."" The entire ""board of directors"" page has since been removed from the site. describing According to tax documents obtained by Snopes, Rosenberg sat on the board of directors during the 2015 and 2016 financial years, and was elevated to the position of vice chair in 2017. We asked Thousand Currents for the dates of Rosenberg's tenure on the board, and as its vice chair, and invited the organization to comment on the ongoing controversy, and will update this story if we receive a response. 2015 2016 2017 Rosenberg's prominent position within Thousand Currents is clear, as are that organization's close links to the Black Lives Matter Global Network (and thereby the broader Black Lives Matter movement). However, the question of whether she should be described as a ""terrorist"" or ""convicted terrorist"" is much more complicated. Originally from New York City, Rosenberg was an active member of several revolutionary left-wing groups and movements during the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s. In November 1984, she was arrested in Cherry Hill, New Jersey after police said she and an associate, Timothy Blunk, were found transferring 740 pounds of explosives, an Uzi submachine gun, an M-14 rifle, a rifle with a telescopic sight, a sawed-off shotgun, three 9-millimeter handguns and boxes of ammunition from a car into a storage locker. said Rosenberg was tried and convicted on the following charges: ""Conspiracy to possess unregistered firearms, receive firearms and explosives shipped in interstate commerce while a fugitive, and unlawfully use false identification documents ...; possession of unregistered destructive devices, possession of unregistered firearm (two counts) ...; carrying explosives during commission of a felony ... ; possession with intent to unlawfully use false identification documents...; false representation of Social Security number, possession of counterfeit Social Security cards."" charges In May 1985, New Jersey U.S. District Court Judge Frederick Bernard Lacey gave Rosenberg and Blunk the maximum available sentence of 58 years each in prison. On Jan. 20, 2001, his last day in office, President Bill Clinton commuted Rosenberg's sentence, and she was released from prison. sentence commuted According to several contemporaneous news reports, Rosenberg had previously been charged with multiple offenses as part of a major 1982 conspiracy case against several prominent left-wing revolutionaries. Along with the others, Rosenberg was charged with conspiracy and racketeering offenses in connection with the following incidents: incidents The most high-profile incident was the October 1981 Brink's robbery in Nyack, New York. Several members of the Weather Underground and Black Liberation Army groups were accused of having orchestrated and carried out the violent robbery of a Brink's armored vehicle at the Nanuet Mall, stealing total of $1.6 million. In the course of a police chase and shootout, two police officers and a Brink's guard were killed. The money was recovered. Specifically, Rosenberg was accused of having driven one of the getaway cars. killed accused After Rosenberg's arrest in New Jersey in 1984, and her subsequent conviction and imprisonment on the weapons and explosives possession charges, prosecutors dropped the conspiracy and racketeering charges against her, and she was never tried or convicted in relation to the 1981 Brink's robbery, the 1979 Shakur prison escape, or other armed robberies. The prosecutor who oversaw the decision not to proceed with that case, in the 1980s, was Rudolph Giuliani, then U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York. After Rosenberg's release in 2001, Giuliani, by then Mayor of New York City, told the New York Times the charges were dropped because her existing 58-year prison sentence made a further prosecution unnecessary. told In 1988, Rosenberg was charged with aiding and abetting a series of bombings which took place between 1983 and 1985, at the Capitol building, Fort McNair, the Washington Navy Yard Computer Center and the Washington Navy Yard Officers' Club, all in Washington, D.C. Bombs were also planted, but did not detonate, at several sites in New York: the FBI's office in Staten Island, the Israeli Aircraft Industries building, the South African consulate and the New York Patrolmen's Benevolent Association. However, prosecutors dropped those charges in 1990 as part of a plea deal involving other suspects in the bombings. As a result, Rosenberg was never tried or convicted on any charges relating to the 1983-1985 bombing campaign. The claim, made in @asdomke's tweet, that Rosenberg was ""convicted of"" several 1983 bombings, was therefore false. The claim in the headline of an article on Wayne Dupree's website that Rosenberg ""carried out"" the bombings stands in contrast to the fact that she was never tried or convicted in relation to those incidents. dropped During her 16-year incarceration, Rosenberg renounced the use of political violence, though her political beliefs appear not to have changed significantly. In a radio interview shortly after her release in January 2001, she said she ""rejects"" the ""potential for violence in my past actions,"" saying her view of violence as a strategic tool had undergone an ""enormous change,"" but that she retained ""a political view that is certainly progressive and radical in a certain sense."" interview In her 2011 memoir, she recounted what she said during an unsuccessful 1997 parole application: recounted ""I outlined my criminal acts and what I felt about them then and now. I talked about the political ethos of the 1960s and how it had led me and my associates into thinking our activities were acceptable. I detailed how sorry I felt now, how I accepted responsibility for my past actions, and how I would never commit any crimes again. I tried to put my life within the context of the historical period when many Americans thought they could change the world and end war and racism and poverty. I tried to distinguish between my core values and my embrace of the use of political violence. I stated that I now rejected the use of violence. I meant all that I said."" There is no single, universally-accepted definition of terrorism, so any use of that label requires a degree of explanation or justification. One basis upon which one might reasonably describe a person as a terrorist is if they have been convicted of terrorist offenses. That is not true of Rosenberg, who was convicted only of weapons and explosives possession and fraudulent document possession, after her arrest in New Jersey 1984. She pleaded not guilty to charges relating to the 1980s bombing campaign, and those charges against her were dropped, and she has denied any involvement in the 1979 Shakur prison break and 1981 Brink's robbery, with those charges also having been dropped. not guilty denied The United States Code defines ""domestic terrorism"" (as distinct from ""international terrorism"") as follows: defines ""... Activities that (A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State; (B) appear to be intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and (C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States ..."" However, that definition was only added in 1992, years after Rosenberg was convicted of weapons and explosives possession and charged for her alleged role in the 1983-1985 bombing campaign, and her alleged role in a series of armed robberies by left-wing revolutionaries. added In any event, despite the existence of a definition of domestic terrorism in federal law, a discrete criminal offense of domestic terrorism does not exist, and did not exist in the 1980s. As a result, even if Rosenberg's activities perfectly met the definition of domestic terrorism currently set out in federal law, and even if that definition existed in the 1980s, she could not have been charged with, tried for and convicted of domestic terrorism as such does not exist In the 1988 indictment relating to the 1983-1985 bombing campaign, prosecutors accused Rosenberg and others of trying ""to influence, change and protest policies and practices of the United States Government concerning various international and domestic matters through the use of violent and illegal means."" That language is remarkably similar to that found in the present U.S. Code definition of domestic terrorism as seeking to ""influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping ..."" accused Examining the 1980s bombings retrospectively, one might very well be justified as describing them as a campaign of domestic terrorism, even if prosecutors were not in a position to hang that label on them at the time. However, the charges against Rosenberg were dropped anyway, and she was never convicted in relation to the bombing campaign. In her memoir, Rosenberg wrote of her 1984 arrest in New Jersey that ""there was no immediate, specific plan to use the explosives"" with which she and Blunk were caught. However, it's clear they were transporting and transferring them for a purpose that was at the very least broadly associated with the group's wider mission of opposing various U.S. government policies and carrying out a socialist uprising. ""We were stockpiling arms for the distant revolution that we all had convinced ourselves would come soon,"" she added. wrote Earlier in her book, Rosenberg indicated that she was comfortable, at least at one point in time, with bombing government buildings: ""We thought that by taking armed actions against government property (including bombing unoccupied government buildings), we would show that despite the power of the state, it was possible to oppose it."" indicated One could reasonably argue that Rosenberg's actions in the explosives possession case served her and her comrades' overarching mission of militant opposition to U.S. government policy and broader power structures and were in keeping with the group's (if not Rosenberg's) proven record of using bomb attacks to influence the wider American public and advance their cause. As such, a supportable (though not definitive) case exists for claiming that the crimes of which Rosenberg was convicted in 1985 were indeed acts of domestic terrorism. Crane, Missy. ""Report: Leader of Group Handling 'BLM Fundraising' is a Convicted Terrorist Who Carried Out Bombings in NYC and DC.""
 WayneDupree.com. 28 June 2020. Kerr, Andrew. ""A Convicted Terrorist Sits on Board of Charity Handling Black Lives Matter Fundraising.""
 The Daily Caller. 27 June 2020. O'Reilly, Bill. ""Does Karl Marx Matter?""
 BillOReilly.com. 5 July 2020. Walter, Scott. ""A Terrorist's Ties to a Leading Black Lives Matter Group.""
 Capital Research Center. 24 June 2020. Raab, Selwyn. ""Radical Fugitive in Brink's Robbery Arrested.""
 The New York Times. 1 December 1984. The Associated Press/The Philadelphia Daily News. ""2 Revolutionaries Get 58 Years Each in N.J.""
 20 May 1985. Barbanel, Josh. ""4 Indicted by U.S. in Escape of Joanne Chesimard in '79.""
 The New York Times. 19 November 1982. Barbanel, Josh. ""3 Killed in Armored Car Holdup.""
 The New York Times. 21 October 1981. Gross, Jane. ""Brink's Suspect Held Without Bail After She Refuses to Enter a Plea.""
 The New York Times. 14 May 1985. Lipton, Eric. ""Officials Criticize Clinton's Pardon of an Ex-Terrorist.""
 The New York Times. 22 January 2001. The Associated Press/The New York Times. ""3 Radicals Agree to Please Guilty in Bombing Case.""
 6 September 1990. Rosenberg, Susan. ""An American Radical...""
 Citadel Press. 2011. Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School. ""United States Code, Title 18, Part I, Chapter 113B, Section 2331 -- Definitions.""
 Accessed 14 July 2020. McCord, Mary B. ""It's Time for Congress to Make Domestic Terrorism a Federal Crime.""
 Lawfare. 5 December 2018. Shenon, Philip. ""U.S. Charges 7 in the Bombing at U.S. Capitol.""
 The New York Times. 12 May 1988.",['insurance'],NEI,"In June, the website of right-leaning talk radio host Wayne Dupree posted an article with the headline ""Report: Leader of Group Handling 'BLM Fundraising' is a Convicted Terrorist Who Carried Out Bombings in NYC and DC."" Similar articles were published by the Daily Caller (an article that was republished by the Western Journal) and on the website of former Fox News pundit Bill O'Reilly. On July 9, 2020, Tucker Carlson ran a segment about Rosenberg's past and her connection to Thousand Currents and the Black Lives Matter movement on his Fox News show. Those posts and articles were largely based on a June 24, 2020, report published by the right-leaning Capital Research Center, which carried the headline ""A Terrorist's Ties to a Leading Black Lives Matter Group."" The report went on to state that:Thousand Currents is undoubtedly very closely linked to the Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation, a Delaware-registered entity that is one of the leading formal embodiments of the broader Black Lives Matter movement. The Thousand Currents website outlines the relationship between the two entities:As recently as June 24, the date on which the Capital Research Center published their report, the Thousand Currents website listed Susan Rosenberg as vice chair of the organization's board of directors, describing her as a ""human and prison rights advocate and writer."" The entire ""board of directors"" page has since been removed from the site.According to tax documents obtained by Snopes, Rosenberg sat on the board of directors during the 2015 and 2016 financial years, and was elevated to the position of vice chair in 2017. We asked Thousand Currents for the dates of Rosenberg's tenure on the board, and as its vice chair, and invited the organization to comment on the ongoing controversy, and will update this story if we receive a response.Originally from New York City, Rosenberg was an active member of several revolutionary left-wing groups and movements during the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s. In November 1984, she was arrested in Cherry Hill, New Jersey after police said she and an associate, Timothy Blunk, were found transferring 740 pounds of explosives, an Uzi submachine gun, an M-14 rifle, a rifle with a telescopic sight, a sawed-off shotgun, three 9-millimeter handguns and boxes of ammunition from a car into a storage locker.Rosenberg was tried and convicted on the following charges: ""Conspiracy to possess unregistered firearms, receive firearms and explosives shipped in interstate commerce while a fugitive, and unlawfully use false identification documents ...; possession of unregistered destructive devices, possession of unregistered firearm (two counts) ...; carrying explosives during commission of a felony ... ; possession with intent to unlawfully use false identification documents...; false representation of Social Security number, possession of counterfeit Social Security cards.""In May 1985, New Jersey U.S. District Court Judge Frederick Bernard Lacey gave Rosenberg and Blunk the maximum available sentence of 58 years each in prison. On Jan. 20, 2001, his last day in office, President Bill Clinton commuted Rosenberg's sentence, and she was released from prison.According to several contemporaneous news reports, Rosenberg had previously been charged with multiple offenses as part of a major 1982 conspiracy case against several prominent left-wing revolutionaries. Along with the others, Rosenberg was charged with conspiracy and racketeering offenses in connection with the following incidents:The most high-profile incident was the October 1981 Brink's robbery in Nyack, New York. Several members of the Weather Underground and Black Liberation Army groups were accused of having orchestrated and carried out the violent robbery of a Brink's armored vehicle at the Nanuet Mall, stealing total of $1.6 million. In the course of a police chase and shootout, two police officers and a Brink's guard were killed. The money was recovered. Specifically, Rosenberg was accused of having driven one of the getaway cars.The prosecutor who oversaw the decision not to proceed with that case, in the 1980s, was Rudolph Giuliani, then U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York. After Rosenberg's release in 2001, Giuliani, by then Mayor of New York City, told the New York Times the charges were dropped because her existing 58-year prison sentence made a further prosecution unnecessary.However, prosecutors dropped those charges in 1990 as part of a plea deal involving other suspects in the bombings. As a result, Rosenberg was never tried or convicted on any charges relating to the 1983-1985 bombing campaign. The claim, made in @asdomke's tweet, that Rosenberg was ""convicted of"" several 1983 bombings, was therefore false. The claim in the headline of an article on Wayne Dupree's website that Rosenberg ""carried out"" the bombings stands in contrast to the fact that she was never tried or convicted in relation to those incidents.During her 16-year incarceration, Rosenberg renounced the use of political violence, though her political beliefs appear not to have changed significantly. In a radio interview shortly after her release in January 2001, she said she ""rejects"" the ""potential for violence in my past actions,"" saying her view of violence as a strategic tool had undergone an ""enormous change,"" but that she retained ""a political view that is certainly progressive and radical in a certain sense.""In her 2011 memoir, she recounted what she said during an unsuccessful 1997 parole application:There is no single, universally-accepted definition of terrorism, so any use of that label requires a degree of explanation or justification. One basis upon which one might reasonably describe a person as a terrorist is if they have been convicted of terrorist offenses. That is not true of Rosenberg, who was convicted only of weapons and explosives possession and fraudulent document possession, after her arrest in New Jersey 1984. She pleaded not guilty to charges relating to the 1980s bombing campaign, and those charges against her were dropped, and she has denied any involvement in the 1979 Shakur prison break and 1981 Brink's robbery, with those charges also having been dropped.The United States Code defines ""domestic terrorism"" (as distinct from ""international terrorism"") as follows:However, that definition was only added in 1992, years after Rosenberg was convicted of weapons and explosives possession and charged for her alleged role in the 1983-1985 bombing campaign, and her alleged role in a series of armed robberies by left-wing revolutionaries.In any event, despite the existence of a definition of domestic terrorism in federal law, a discrete criminal offense of domestic terrorism does not exist, and did not exist in the 1980s. As a result, even if Rosenberg's activities perfectly met the definition of domestic terrorism currently set out in federal law, and even if that definition existed in the 1980s, she could not have been charged with, tried for and convicted of domestic terrorism as suchIn the 1988 indictment relating to the 1983-1985 bombing campaign, prosecutors accused Rosenberg and others of trying ""to influence, change and protest policies and practices of the United States Government concerning various international and domestic matters through the use of violent and illegal means."" That language is remarkably similar to that found in the present U.S. Code definition of domestic terrorism as seeking to ""influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping ...""In her memoir, Rosenberg wrote of her 1984 arrest in New Jersey that ""there was no immediate, specific plan to use the explosives"" with which she and Blunk were caught. However, it's clear they were transporting and transferring them for a purpose that was at the very least broadly associated with the group's wider mission of opposing various U.S. government policies and carrying out a socialist uprising. ""We were stockpiling arms for the distant revolution that we all had convinced ourselves would come soon,"" she added.Earlier in her book, Rosenberg indicated that she was comfortable, at least at one point in time, with bombing government buildings: ""We thought that by taking armed actions against government property (including bombing unoccupied government buildings), we would show that despite the power of the state, it was possible to oppose it."""
Was the Oval Office Trashed During the Capitol Riot?,['Damage done to areas of the Capitol during a pro-Trump siege was quite real. '],"On Jan. 7, 2021, a day after a pro-Trump mob stormed the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., a picture began circulating on social media that supposedly showed damage done to the Oval Office. This is not a genuine photograph of a desecrated Oval Office, and the picture predates the riot. It should also be noted that the Oval Office is located in the White House, not the Capitol. While the Capitol was vandalized during the riot, no damage was done to the White House. The image in question has been circulating online since at least November 2020, when it was shared on social media along with messages mocking U.S. President Donald Trump in the wake of his election loss to President-elect Joe Biden. This image was created by Nick den Boer, an animator, director, and digital artist who posts on social media under the handle @smearballz. This image, along with three others depicting a tarnished Oval Office, was originally posted on Twitter on Nov. 8, 2020, the day after Biden was declared the winner of the presidential election, along with the caption: ""Aftermath."" Another set of similar images depicting a trashed Oval Office was posted to @Smearballs' Instagram page in November 2019. Den Boer explained that the images are all 3D models of the Oval Office. While this is a digital creation that does not depict any actual damage done to the Oval Office, the Capitol was truly vandalized during a mob riot that resulted in the deaths of five people. NBC News reported that hundreds of President Donald Trump's supporters swarmed the U.S. Capitol on Wednesday, leaving the halls of Congress with broken windows, vandalized walls, and ransacked offices. Among the wreckage were pieces of broken furniture, battered doors, and heaps of trash littering the hallway floors. A thick film of dust and tear gas residue remained throughout the building that contains the Senate and the House of Representatives. Stolen and damaged items were reported in elected officials' offices, including the wood and gold placard above House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's office. Updated [8 January 2021]: Article updated to credit the original artist.",['loss'],False,"This image was created by Nick den Boer, an animator, director, and digital artist who posts on social media under the handle @smearballz. This image, along with three others depicting a tarnished Oval Office, was originally posted on Twitter on Nov. 8, 2020, (the day after Biden was declared the winner of the presidential election) along with the caption: ""Aftermath.""Another set of similar images depicting a trashed Oval Office was posted to @Smearballs Instagram page in November 2019. Den Boer explained to us that the above-displayed images are all 3D models of the Oval Office. While this is a digital creation that does not depict any actual damage done to the Oval Office, the Capitol was truly vandalized during a mob riot that included the deaths of five people.NBC News reported:"
Is this Weightlifter with a Prolapsed Rectum Real?,['This fact check is not safe for anywhere.'],"This email from the dawn of the millennium made its way to our inbox in 2003: This rather shocking photo was snapped in November 16th by a spectator at the collegiate power lifting championships at Pennsylvania State. The unfortunate competitor, who expressed a plea to remain anonymous, remembered to surgeons that he was ""stuck"" at the bottom of a personal best attempt in the squat lift when he ""sort of pulled his stomach in and pushed extra hard, at the same time as trying to complete the lift."" He remembers a loud popping, splattering noise then a fierce stabbing pain and then not being able to move from the squat position. He remained in this position for about half an hour, since trying to stand caused him overwhelming agonizing pain.  Paramedics arrived and applied anaesthesia on the spot and carried him to an ambulance. He was rushed to surgery, where surgeons described the trauma as an ""explosive and aggravated prolapse of the bowel"". Meanwhile it was revealed that the weight was removed from his shoulders at the time of the incident by two ""spotters"" on either side of the lifter. The third spotter who was standing behind the lifter was unfortunately sprayed with fecal matter at the time of the incident. This spotter promptly fainted when he realized the extent of the injury to the lifter, who was a personal friend. This compounded the task of first aid officers who were at a loss as to how to treat the injury to the lifter in any case, who remained in the squatting position moaning in pain much to the consternation of the helpless audience. The hapless lifter had successful surgery to relieve the prolapse, but remained immobilized with his feet elevated in stirrups for 2 weeks to ensure ""internal compliance with the surgery and that the organs retracted successfully"". To add insult to injury, the ex-lifter required rectal stitching to partially occlude the anal orifice and stitch the rectal passage (which had significantly expanded and torn during the prolapse) and also was put on a low fibre low residue diet to combat flatulence to avoid any possibility of a recurrence. CBS news spoke to his wife and asked if she thought he would resume his power lifting career. ""Not if I have anything to say about it, would you like to risk something like that again?"" We agreed!!  CBS news        This item is ""false"" in the sense that the accompanying text does not correspond to the image:  The message reproduced above was not written or published by CBS news or any other news agency. (The poor writing, non-news format, and focus on ""gross out"" details mark it as a fabrication.)  The annual USAPL Pennsylvania State Powerlifting Championship contests are held early in the year (February or March), not in November. contests  No such injury as the one described occurred to any weightlifter at the Pennsylvania State Powerlifting Championships in the last several years.  The ""weightlifter"" in the photograph is posed squatting immediately in front of a doorway or wall, which would not be the case if had suffered an injury in the midst of a powerlifting match and then found himself ""not able to move from the squat position.""  (He'd be in the middle of an arena or gymnasium floor with plenty of room on all sides.) Although a prolapsed rectum or bowel is a real medical condition, the text cited here is an obvious attempt at a ""gross out"" piece involving all the familiar aspects of potty humor (e.g., rectums, sprayed fecal matter, farts).  How and why the image accompanying the text was produced (and by whom) is still unknown to us. prolapsed rectum Canadian Press.  ""Is It a Cactus or a Rude Gesture?""",['loss'],False," The annual USAPL Pennsylvania State Powerlifting Championship contests are held early in the year (February or March), not in November.Although a prolapsed rectum or bowel is a real medical condition, the text cited here is an obvious attempt at a ""gross out"" piece involving all the familiar aspects of potty humor (e.g., rectums, sprayed fecal matter, farts).  How and why the image accompanying the text was produced (and by whom) is still unknown to us."
A recent economic uptick appears to coincide with the expectation of a new Republican Congress.,[],"In remarks from the Senate floor, newly elevated Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., suggested that his partys takeover of Senate control appears to coincide with recent good economic news. After so many years of sluggish growth, were finally starting to see some economic data that can provide a glimmer of hope, McConnell said. The uptick appears to coincide with the biggest political change of the Obama administrations long tenure in Washington: the expectation of a new Republican Congress. McConnell stopped short of saying the Republican Senate takeover actuallycausedan economic improvement, though manymediaobserversassumedthat was what he was trying to imply. In the liberalNew Republic, Brian Beutlerjoked,It absolutelydoescoincide with the expectation of a new Republican Congress. Relatedly, things that coincide are called coincidences. But is McConnell even right that the economic data and the political expectations coincided? We focused on two questions. First, when did the expectation of a new Republican Congress actually solidify? And second, was there an uptick in economic data that actually coincided with that time frame? Well also briefly address the question of causation, even though McConnell didnt explicitly claim that. The data we found suggest McConnell is engaging in some wishful thinking. When did the expectation of a new Republican Congress actually emerge? To answer this question, we checked with political analysts who handicapped the 2014 battle for the Senate and also looked at poll-based forecasting models. McConnell said expectation, a stronger word than possibility and one that requires a reasonable degree of consensus. Going into the 2014 Senate elections, most observers expected the GOP to gain seats, due primarily to a favorable map for the GOP (far more Democrats were up for re-election, especially in conservative states) combined with the longstanding history of six-year-itch midterm elections bedeviling second-term presidents, in this case Democrat Barack Obama. But whether the GOP would actually manage to win enough seats to seize control of the chamber -- six -- was less certain. Going into the election, the Democrats held a 55-45 edge (counting two Democratic-caucusing Independents as Democrats). With many individual races rated as highly competitive right through Election Day, winning a net six seats was no slam dunk. Jennifer Duffy, who handicaps Senate races for the Cook Political Report, said different political experts settled on a Republican takeover at different times but added that she felt pretty comfortable with a gain of six seats around Labor Day, which was on Sept. 1 last year. Kyle Kondik, managing editor of Sabato's Crystal Ball, agreed that Labor Day was a turning point, though he added that there were slivers of doubt right up until the end. We formally called the Senate for the Republicans the week before the election, but we also suggested that a GOP Senate was likely in the months prior to the election. The forecasters atfivethirtyeight.comsuggested the toss-up lasted past Labor Day. They calculated the likelihood of a GOP takeover at just over 50 percent as late as mid September, before rising again, ultimately to 76 percent on the eve of the election. TheNew York Times in-house forecast saw much the same pattern, narrowing to essentially a coin flip in mid September before climbing to a 75 percent chance of a GOP takeover by Election Day. All told, this suggests that an expectation of a GOP takeover didnt emerge until the beginning of September at the earliest, and possibly as late as the second half of September. This leads to our next question. Has there been an economic uptick that appears to coincide with this timeline? McConnells office pointed us to the announcement that the economy grew at an annualized 5 percent rate in the third quarter of 2014, the biggestexpansionin more than a decade. So well start there. Thefigurewas indeed impressive. But there are two problems with citing this as evidence for McConnells point. First, the third quarter covers July, August and September. So the bulk of this growth occurred before the expectation of a GOP Senate began to jell. Second, GDP growth for thesecondquarter -- covering April, May and June of 2014 -- was almost as impressive, 4.6 percent. And that was well before the expectation of a GOP takeover seemed to take hold. (In fact, for much of that quarter, theNew York Timesmodel showed the Democrats likelier to win control than the Republicans.) Indeed, the longer-term trend for GDP growth shows that three of the past five quarters -- that is, since mid 2013 -- have exceeded 4 percent growth, and another quarter came close to that. Only one quarter, the first quarter of 2014, was a dud. So its not as if the impressive third-quarter growth of 2014 came totally out of the blue. Source: Bureau of Economic Analysis We also looked at another major yardstick for the economy -- the monthly change in employment. During 2014,total monthly employment gainsaveraged 241,000. In October -- the month after the expectation of a GOP takeover would have taken hold -- the gain was almost exactly that, 243,000. The November total was 321,000 -- the highest of the year, but not far out of line when compared with the general trend for job creation since early 2011 (see chart below). Its too soon to tell whether Novembers figure kicks off a new, higher threshold or whether the number settles back again into the 240,000 range. Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics The strongest evidence for McConnells point is consumer confidence. TheUniversity of Michigan Index of Consumer Sentimentdid experience an uptick between November and December, but even with this measurement, confidence had been rising consistently since July. And other evidence actually points in the opposite direction. Data fornew orders of capital goods-- a good statistic for gauging how much confidence there is in future economic conditions -- actually fell every month between August and November. The question of causation Even if the statistical timeline fit perfectly, its worth remembering that correlation does not equal causation. I don't think that either party has that much power to affect short-run economic movements, except by royally screwing up, and I haven't seen any evidence that theexpectationof a regime change of this sort would affect economic outcomes, said Tara Sinclair, a George Washington University economist. Its even possible to draw up a theory that runs the opposite direction as McConnells linkage. Gary Burtless, a senior fellow with the Brookings Institution, said one reason GDP and employment have increased a bit faster in recent months is that government investment, government consumption, and public employee payrolls have recently been rising instead of falling. Given this, McConnells comments linking the GOP and accelerated economic growth are ironic, Burtless said, since Republicans have been at the forefront of cutting government spending and payrolls. Our ruling McConnell said a recent economic uptick appears to coincide with the expectation of a new Republican Congress. Even leaving aside the question of causation, key statistics show that the economic recovery was under way well before September, which is our best estimate for when the expectation of a GOP Senate solidified. We rate the statement False. Help fund PolitiFact's Kickstarter to live fact-check the 2015 State of the Union and GOP response.","['National', 'Economy', 'Jobs']",False,"McConnell stopped short of saying the Republican Senate takeover actuallycausedan economic improvement, though manymediaobserversassumedthat was what he was trying to imply. In the liberalNew Republic, Brian Beutlerjoked,It absolutelydoescoincide with the expectation of a new Republican Congress. Relatedly, things that coincide are called coincidences. The forecasters atfivethirtyeight.comsuggested the toss-up lasted past Labor Day. They calculated the likelihood of a GOP takeover at just over 50 percent as late as mid September, before rising again, ultimately to 76 percent on the eve of the election. TheNew York Times in-house forecast saw much the same pattern, narrowing to essentially a coin flip in mid September before climbing to a 75 percent chance of a GOP takeover by Election Day.McConnells office pointed us to the announcement that the economy grew at an annualized 5 percent rate in the third quarter of 2014, the biggestexpansionin more than a decade. So well start there.Thefigurewas indeed impressive. But there are two problems with citing this as evidence for McConnells point.During 2014,total monthly employment gainsaveraged 241,000. In October -- the month after the expectation of a GOP takeover would have taken hold -- the gain was almost exactly that, 243,000. The November total was 321,000 -- the highest of the year, but not far out of line when compared with the general trend for job creation since early 2011 (see chart below). Its too soon to tell whether Novembers figure kicks off a new, higher threshold or whether the number settles back again into the 240,000 range.The strongest evidence for McConnells point is consumer confidence. TheUniversity of Michigan Index of Consumer Sentimentdid experience an uptick between November and December, but even with this measurement, confidence had been rising consistently since July.And other evidence actually points in the opposite direction. Data fornew orders of capital goods-- a good statistic for gauging how much confidence there is in future economic conditions -- actually fell every month between August and November.Help fund PolitiFact's Kickstarter to live fact-check the 2015 State of the Union and GOP response."
"Since the stimulus package was passed, Ohios lost over 100,000 more jobs.",[],"PolitiFact has rapped Rob Portman for certain claims made during his U.S. Senate campaign. Weve credited Portman, too, for truthful statements. Thats the nature of the Truth-O-Meter: We play it as it lays.Which brings us to Portmanslatest television ad.In the 30-second spot, Portman points to out-of-control federal spending, dangerous deficits and an economic stimulus plan that he says isnt working. Since the $800 billion stimulus passed, Ohios lost over 100,000 more jobs, Portman says in the commercial.The claim about the stimulus program not working has been batted about repeatedly. The White House said when the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act passed in February 2009, that unemployment would peak at 8 percent. Yet it is now 9.6 percent nationally, and 10.7 percent in Ohio.A number of economists say that even more jobs would have been lost were it not for the government spending to stimulate the economy. TheCongressional Budget Offices last quarterly evaluationsaid the stimulus increased national employment by 1.4 million to 3.3 million jobs. There have been mistakes, missteps and gaffes documented in the spending programs, however, and Portman and other Republicans say the spending was poorly focused. This central question will be for historians and economists in the future to settle.Were merely taking note of Portmans claim because of this: He uses a lower number -- 100,000 jobs lost in Ohio since the stimulus passed -- than he used previously. When he put the figure at 150,000 in June,the Truth-O-Meter ruled it Half True-- because only 127,900 jobs had actually been lost, judging by the most widely accepted measure.That was based on Bureau of Labor Statistics figures through May, the most current at the time. The numbers come from surveys of employers and are adjusted as the data becomes more complete. Using updated data, BLS now shows the post-stimulus job losses in Ohio came to 130,000 for the period Portman claimed in his earlier statement..But now its October and Portman is using a lower figure when he speaks. As he said in his newest ad, and repeated during an Oct. 8 debate at the City Club of Cleveland, since the stimulus bill passed, Ohios lost over 100,000 more jobs.Yet heres the thing: Portmans rhetoric might actually be too cautious now. As measured by the latest BLS figures, which go through August and are preliminary, Ohio has 149,200 fewer jobs now than when the stimulus passed. Thats exquisitely close to 150,000.What happened?The state steadily lost jobs through 2009 but the numbers started improving early in the year, continuing through May. The summer saw a retraction, however, reducing Ohios employment count by a total of 19,200 jobs during June, July and August.So Portman was accurate and then some with his recent, more cautious statement. The Half True ruling nevertheless stands for his June claim, because PolitiFact doesnt believe in fortune-telling and Portmans numbers were in fact off when he made that statement.But we give credit where credit is due. So the Truth-O-Meter takes a turn to the right and rules on Portmans newest claim: True. Comment on this item.","['Ohio', 'Economy', 'Message Machine 2010', 'Stimulus']",True,"PolitiFact has rapped Rob Portman for certain claims made during his U.S. Senate campaign. Weve credited Portman, too, for truthful statements. Thats the nature of the Truth-O-Meter: We play it as it lays.Which brings us to Portmanslatest television ad.In the 30-second spot, Portman points to out-of-control federal spending, dangerous deficits and an economic stimulus plan that he says isnt working. Since the $800 billion stimulus passed, Ohios lost over 100,000 more jobs, Portman says in the commercial.The claim about the stimulus program not working has been batted about repeatedly. The White House said when the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act passed in February 2009, that unemployment would peak at 8 percent. Yet it is now 9.6 percent nationally, and 10.7 percent in Ohio.A number of economists say that even more jobs would have been lost were it not for the government spending to stimulate the economy. TheCongressional Budget Offices last quarterly evaluationsaid the stimulus increased national employment by 1.4 million to 3.3 million jobs. There have been mistakes, missteps and gaffes documented in the spending programs, however, and Portman and other Republicans say the spending was poorly focused. This central question will be for historians and economists in the future to settle.Were merely taking note of Portmans claim because of this: He uses a lower number -- 100,000 jobs lost in Ohio since the stimulus passed -- than he used previously. When he put the figure at 150,000 in June,the Truth-O-Meter ruled it Half True-- because only 127,900 jobs had actually been lost, judging by the most widely accepted measure.That was based on Bureau of Labor Statistics figures through May, the most current at the time.  The numbers come from surveys of employers and are adjusted as the data becomes more complete. Using updated data, BLS now shows the post-stimulus job losses in Ohio came to 130,000 for the period Portman claimed in his earlier statement..But now its October and Portman is using a lower figure when he speaks. As he said in his newest ad, and repeated during an Oct. 8 debate at the City Club of Cleveland, since the stimulus bill passed, Ohios lost over 100,000 more jobs.Yet heres the thing: Portmans rhetoric might actually be too cautious now. As measured by the latest BLS figures, which go through August and are preliminary, Ohio has 149,200 fewer jobs now than when the stimulus passed. Thats exquisitely close to 150,000.What happened?The state steadily lost jobs through 2009 but the numbers started improving early in the year, continuing through May. The summer saw a retraction, however, reducing Ohios employment count by a total of 19,200 jobs during June, July and August.So Portman was accurate and then some with his recent, more cautious statement. The Half True ruling nevertheless stands for his June claim, because PolitiFact doesnt believe in fortune-telling and Portmans numbers were in fact off when he made that statement.But we give credit where credit is due. So the Truth-O-Meter takes a turn to the right and rules on Portmans newest claim: True.Comment on this item."
Day of Not Participating in Any Purchases,"[""Is participating in a 'Not One Damn Dime Day' an effective way to protest the war in Iraq?""]","Claim: Participating in a 'Not One Damn Dime Day' is an effective way to protest the war in Iraq. Example: [Collected on the Internet, 2004] National Anti-War Boycott It doesn't really matter that everyone will be out spending what they didn't the next day; a point or two will have been made: Since our religious leaders will not speak out against the war in Iraq, and since our political leaders lack the moral courage to oppose it, Inauguration Day, Thursday, January 20th, 2005, is ""Not One Damn Dime Day"" in America. On ""Not One Damn Dime Day,"" those who oppose what is happening in our name in Iraq can speak up with a 24-hour national boycott of all forms of consumer spending. During ""Not One Damn Dime Day,"" please don't spend money. Not one damn dime for gasoline. Not one damn dime for necessities or impulse purchases. Not one damn dime for anything for 24 hours. On ""Not One Damn Dime Day,"" please don't go to the mall or the local convenience store. Please don't buy any fast food (or any groceries at all, for that matter). For 24 hours, please do what you can to shut the retail economy down. The object is simple: remind the people in power that the war in Iraq is immoral and illegal; that they are responsible for starting it and that it is their responsibility to stop it. ""Not One Damn Dime Day"" is to remind them,",['economy'],False,"Origins:  Evaluating e-mails urging people to participate in some form of protest is always difficult, because (except in the rare cases where a hoax or a joke has been taken seriously) they can't be ""true"" or ""false.""  The protests may succeed, fail, or achieve some intermediate result, but whether to participate is a matter of individual choice.  We don't know who came up with the idea for the Not One Damn Dime! protest (it is often falsely attributed to newsman Bill Moyers) or what level of participation it might achieve; all wecan do is offer an opinion about its likelihood of success.  In this case our opinion is that someone has taken the futile concept of slacktivism to a new extreme."
President Obama Signs SNAP Fairness Act of 2014 Into Law,['Can food stamps now be used to purchase alcohol and tobacco?'],"Claim: Food stamps can now be used to purchase alcohol and tobacco products. Example: [Collected via e-mail, December 2014] Is the following true? I am pretty sure it isn't, but can't find any other information other than this website. ""President Obama signs SNAP Fairness Act of 2014 Into Law: Alcohol & Tobacco Products No Longer Prohibited from Food Stamps."" Origins: On 7 December 2014, the Salty Badger website published an article claiming President Obama had signed legislation called ""The SNAP Fairness Act of 2014"" into law, making it legal to purchase alcohol and tobacco (items that have long been excluded from the food stamps program) with Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) electronic benefit (EBT) cards. The article stated that President Obama signed the ""SNAP Fairness Act of 2014"" into law on 12/7/14, thirty-four days after both houses of Congress narrowly passed the controversial bill, overcoming strong Republican resistance in both the Senate and House. All SNAP-eligible Americans would be enjoying a late Christmas present this year courtesy of Uncle Sam. Wrapped inside with a red, white, and blue bow would be increased food stamp funds and the right to use their EBT card to buy alcohol and tobacco products. Hakeem Jeffries of New York's 8th Congressional District stated, ""For too long, American citizens have been discriminated against at the grocery store. There is no reason my constituents should be barred from purchasing a 6-pack of Coors Light with their EBT card to go along with their steak dinner, also purchased with their EBT card. To expect low-income hardworking Americans to go out of pocket for essentials such as cigarettes and beer is not only racist but cruel. I am proud to stand with my president today in this historical signing for food stamp fairness."" The article uses the names of real politicians, like President Obama and Hakeem Jeffries, but that's the only factual element of the story. The SNAP Fairness Act of 2014 does not exist, President Obama didn't sign any bills into law on 7 December 2014, and SNAP benefit cards cannot be used to purchase alcohol or tobacco products. The photo used to illustrate this fictitious article shows President Obama sitting at his desk in August 2013 signing the Bipartisan Student Loan Certainty Act, not the SNAP Fairness Act, into law. The Salty Badger may not be as well known as fake news sites such as Huzlers or World News Daily Report, but the website's mission is the same: to spread misinformation. The Salty Badger, which prides itself on being ""not always right, but always first,"" notes in its mission statement that when the Salty Badger was conceived and born from two genius minds, literally minutes prior to writing this statement, they had three major goals in mind: to bring their brand of comedy to the forefront, to have beautiful women throwing themselves at them, and to get Scrooge McDuck rich. They will settle for any one of the three. They will sneak their humor into the minds of the world one individual at a time. Last updated: 10 December 2014.",['income'],False,"Origins:  On 7 December 2014, the Salty Badger web site published an article claiming President Obama had signed legislation called ""The SNAP Fairness Act of 2014"" into law, making it legal to purchase alcohol and tobacco (items that have long been excluded from the food stamps program) with Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) electronic benefit (EBT) cards:The article uses the names of real politicians, like President Obama and Hakeem Jeffries, but that's the only factual element of the story. The SNAP Fairness Act of 2014 does not exist, President Obama didn't sign any bills into law on 7 December 2014, and SNAP benefit cards cannot be used to purchase alcohol or tobacco products. The photo used to illustrate this fictitious article shows President Obama sitting at his desk in August 2013 signing the Bipartisan Student Loan Certainty Act, not the SNAP Fairness Act, into law. The Salty Badger may not be as well known as fake news sites such as Huzlers or World News Daily Report, but the web site's mission is the same: To spread misinformation. The Salty Badger, which prides itself on being ""not always right, but always first,"" notes in their mission statement that:"
"Says that unlike Texas, Missouri has a perfect AAA credit rating.",[],"Responding to an ad blitz in which Texas Gov. Rick Perry urged Missouri businesses to move to the booming Lone Star State, Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon suggested that taxes are lower in his state and that students fare better. Nixon, a Democrat, also singled out credit worthiness in the radio spotwe noticed onlineAug. 27, 2013. Unlike Texas, Nixon said, Missouri has a perfect AAA credit rating. Three days earlier, heposted a similar claimon a Twitter list of ways he ranks the Show-Me State as #betterthantx. His credit claim snagged our attention. Achart posted onlineby the California state treasurer lists state general-obligation bond ratings by three rating agencies. We noticed that Missouri and Texas both earned the highest, AAA rating from both Fitch Ratings and Moodys Investors Service. But Standard & Poors gave Missouri a  AAA rating and Texas a rating of AA+, which is its rating immediately below AAA. Via emails from spokespersons for each of those rating services, we confirmed those ratings for both states--and we inquired into the differences. By phone, New York-based Moodys spokesman David Jacobson told us that both states have long been stable borrowers, though Missouri has had its Moodys AAA rating longer--since at least 1972, Jacobson said. In contrast, he said, Moodys lowered its rating for Texas general obligation debt from AAA to AA in 1987. That year, Texas faced a recession that drove down state revenues. In 2010, Jacobson said, Moodys recalibrated its methodology for rating state debt; Texas regained a AAA rating. A Standard & Poors spokesman, Olayinka Fadahunsi, emailed us a Nov. 20, 2012, report by the firm stating it had assigned its AA+ rating to general-obligation bonds issued by the Texas Transportation Commission. The report credited the Texas economy with being diverse and strong and likely to continue to generate additional jobs. Also, it said, state government had strong cash-management practices and low overall debt and retirement liabilities. On the other hand, it expressed concern at the states budgetary pressures, which are primarily related to the growing proportion of school revenues Texas is required to fund, as well as insufficient new sources of recurring dedicated tax revenues to support the increased funding. The report also cited increasing spending pressure from public assistance payments, including Medicaid, plus uncertainty about how the Obamacare law might affect the states health-care expenditures. Based on the analytic factors we evaluate for states, on a four-point scale in which '1' is the strongest, we have assigned Texas an overall score of '1.8, the report said. We asked Fadahunsi to discuss the distinction between the firms AA+ and AAA ratings. By email, he said that there is no one precise financial distinction. The firms general debt ratings methodology, as published Jan. 3, 2011, states that it develops a states credit rating by judging conditions across factors including the governments framework; financial management; economy; budgetary performance; and debt/liability profile. We assess each of these factors utilizing various metrics that we score on a scale from 1 (strongest) to 4 (weakest), the methodology states. For each metric there may be several indicators we evaluate to develop the metric score. We score each indicator individually on the same scale and average the indicators' scores to develop the overall score for the metric. We average the metrics for each factor to develop a composite score for each. The scores for the five factors are combined and averaged with equal weighting to arrive at an overall score which is then translated to an indicative credit level. The report says an overall score of 1 to 1.5 is needed to draw the AAA rating. Separately, R.J. DeSilva, spokesman for the Texas state comptrollers office, pointed us to a December 2012,reportby the Texas Bond Review Board which includes a chart indicating that as of August 2012, Missouri was among seven states with AAA GO debt ratings from the three major rating services. The other perfects were: Delaware, Georgia, Maryland, North Carolina, Utah and Virginia. Finally we asked Robert Coalter, executive director of theTexas Public Finance Authority, which issues bonds for the acquisition or construction of state buildings, to speak to any financial costs to Texas from not having Missouris three AAA ratings. Coalter said by phone that the effect is minimal, adding that any entity that issues bonds--including state agencies--sometimes obtain ratings from only one or two of the rating services. Also, he said, investment firms conduct their own research before committing to bonds. Coalter said the ratings of Texas debt are outstanding. Our debt is considered to be top quality. Put another way, might the Missouri governors statement be real-world meaningless? I do not believe its significant, Coalter replied. He said the claim sounded like comparing one student scoring 100 on a test with another scoring 99. Our ruling Nixon said that unlike Texas, Missouri has a perfect AAA credit rating. Thats correct, though Texas is close; two major services rate the bigger states GO debt AAA, one rates it AA+, which is its next-highest rating. We rate this claim as True. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TRUE The statement is accurate and theres nothing significant missing. Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check.","['Economy', 'State Budget', 'States', 'Texas']",True,"Nixon, a Democrat, also singled out credit worthiness in the radio spotwe noticed onlineAug. 27, 2013.Unlike Texas, Nixon said, Missouri has a perfect AAA credit rating. Three days earlier, heposted a similar claimon a Twitter list of ways he ranks the Show-Me State as #betterthantx.Achart posted onlineby the California state treasurer lists state general-obligation bond ratings by three rating agencies. We noticed that Missouri and Texas both earned the highest, AAA rating from both Fitch Ratings and Moodys Investors Service. But Standard & Poors gave Missouri a  AAA rating and Texas a rating of AA+, which is its rating immediately below AAA.Separately, R.J. DeSilva, spokesman for the Texas state comptrollers office, pointed us to a December 2012,reportby the Texas Bond Review Board which includes a chart indicating that as of August 2012, Missouri was among seven states with AAA GO debt ratings from the three major rating services. The other perfects were: Delaware, Georgia, Maryland, North Carolina, Utah and Virginia.Finally we asked Robert Coalter, executive director of theTexas Public Finance Authority, which issues bonds for the acquisition or construction of state buildings, to speak to any financial costs to Texas from not having Missouris three AAA ratings. Coalter said by phone that the effect is minimal, adding that any entity that issues bonds--including state agencies--sometimes obtain ratings from only one or two of the rating services. Also, he said, investment firms conduct their own research before committing to bonds.Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check."
Did Man Stuck 71 Hours in Elevator Kill and Eat Wife To Survive?,['Desperate situations sometimes call for horrifically desperate measures.'],"On 18 April 2017, the entertainment website World News Daily Report (WNDR) published a fake news article claiming that Bruce Franklin, a Philadelphia man, killed and ate his wife after being stuck in an elevator for 71 hours: published 44-year old Bruce Franklin was arrested this morning, after he confessed to killing his wife and eating her flesh while he was stuck with her in an elevator. According to the Philadelphia Police Department, the partially devoured corpse of his wife was lying next to him when he was rescued after being stuck for three days in an elevator. There is no truth to this story. WNDR is a well-known satirical website with a long history of peddling fictional news articles. The site carries this disclaimer: well-known history World News Daily Report assumes all responsibility for the satirical nature of its articles and for the fictional nature of their content. All characters appearing in the articles in this website  even those based on real people  are entirely fictional and any resemblance between them and any person, living, dead or undead, is purely a miracle. As with many of its fake news stories, WNDR used photographs from unrelated events in order to lend credence to its claims:       Although we have not been able to uncover the exact source for the mugshot, that image has been online since 2011 when it was included in a gallery of ""funny hair"" mugshots. online Another image in the article shows Philadelphia Police Deputy Commissioner Richard Ross, correctly identified by WNDR, but the photograph was taken during a City Council budget hearing in April 2016, not a press event concerning a man who just ate his wife. photograph The final photograph in the article, of the elevator shaft, was taken inside the National Lift Tower in Northampton, England. National Lift Tower",['budget'],False,"On 18 April 2017, the entertainment website World News Daily Report (WNDR) published a fake news article claiming that Bruce Franklin, a Philadelphia man, killed and ate his wife after being stuck in an elevator for 71 hours:There is no truth to this story. WNDR is a well-known satirical website with a long history of peddling fictional news articles. The site carries this disclaimer:Although we have not been able to uncover the exact source for the mugshot, that image has been online since 2011 when it was included in a gallery of ""funny hair"" mugshots.Another image in the article shows Philadelphia Police Deputy Commissioner Richard Ross, correctly identified by WNDR, but the photograph was taken during a City Council budget hearing in April 2016, not a press event concerning a man who just ate his wife.The final photograph in the article, of the elevator shaft, was taken inside the National Lift Tower in Northampton, England."
3-on-3 Basketball at the 2016 Olympics?,['Rumor: The IOC has announced that 3-on-3 basketball will be an official sport at the 2016 Olympics.'],"Claim: The IOC has announced that 3-on-3 basketball will be an official sport at the 2016 Olympics. Example: [Collected via Twitter, January 2015] The 2016 Olympics will feature 3-on-3 basketball. Who would you choose? pic.twitter.com/4VZhxLLy2i pic.twitter.com/4VZhxLLy2i BALL UP NBA (@BallUpNBA) January 15, 2015 January 15, 2015 Origins: On 14 January 2015, the satirical Australian website Betoota Advocate published a fake news article claiming that 3-on-3 basketball would be an officially sanctioned sport at the 2016 Summer Olympics. After decades of pressure and debate, as well as an official application submitted by the International Basketball Federation, the IOC confirmed this week that a three-on-three basketball variant will be included as part of the official event program for the 2016 Olympics in Rio de Janeiro. The final decision was made quietly during an annual committee meeting late last month. After nearly a decade of exploring different options, the International Olympic Committee's executive board confirmed that they would go ahead with the proposal despite the fact that the request would result in a higher number of athletes and an increased number of medals, thereby adding to the cost and complexity of the Games. While the Betoota Advocate's article was shared only a few hundred times on social media, the rumor about 3-on-3 basketball becoming an official Olympic sport received a viral push when Deadspin reported the hoax as real news: The IOC has officially added a new half-court 3-on-3 basketball event to the competitions to be held in the 2016 Olympics in Rio de Janeiro. This rules. Right away, you'll have to throw a big bucket of calm down on your head because, as the IOC put it in a 2012 letter discussing its interest in 3-on-3, a large part of the impetus is to focus more on the amateurism of sports and get the event away from being ""somewhat of an exhibition for the American NBA."" When reporter Kyle Wagner realized his mistake, he added an update at the top of the article stating he had been duped by a satire site: Nah, this isn't happening. I wrote a post based on a satire website, which is just about the dumbest way to mess up. Sorry. Mess me. Would have been cool though. Last updated: 16 January 2015",['interest'],False,"The 2016 Olympics will feature 3-on-3 basketball. Who would you chose? pic.twitter.com/4VZhxLLy2i BALL UP NBA (@BallUpNBA) January 15, 2015Origins:  On 14 January 2015, the satirical Australian web site Betoota Advocate published a fake news article claiming 3-on-3 basketball would be an officially sanctioned sport at the 2016 Summer Olympics:While the Betoota Advocate's article was shared only a few hundred times on social media, the rumor about 3-on-3 basketball's becoming an official Olympic sport received a viral push when Deadspin reported the hoax as real news:"
Did Immigration Enforcement Agents Arrest the Mayor of Los Angeles?,['A routine review of content labeled satire.'],"On Nov. 26, Taters Gonna Tate published an article positing that the federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency (ICE) had arrested the mayor of Los Angeles, titled ""ICE Arrests LA Mayor for Harboring Fugitives Through Sanctuary City."" We've all been wondering when this would happen and why it wasn't done from the start. But we shouldn't dwell; justice is finally being served. Josiah Barron, the celebrated mayor of Los Angeles County, was led away from his office in handcuffs today by ICE agents and charged with harboring fugitives from the law due to his decision to provide undocumented immigrants with refuge under his Sanctuary City designation. The arrest followed Barron's order to the city's police to not cooperate with ICE by reporting illegal aliens in their custody. ICE demanded that the criminals be handed over, but they were denied. This item was not a factual recounting of real-life events. The article originated from a website that describes its output as humorous or satirical in nature, stating: ""Tatersgonnatate.com is a subsidiary of the Americas Last Line of Defense network of parody, satire, and tomfoolery ... Everything on this website is fiction. It is not a lie and it is not fake news because it is not real. If you believe that it is real, you should have your head examined. Any similarities between this site's pure fantasy and actual people, places, and events are purely coincidental, and all images should be considered altered and satirical."" The fake story was widely shared in late December after America's Last Line of Defense (ALLOD) re-promoted it on Facebook on Dec. 24. Although the article bore disclaimers labeling it ""satire,"" many readers mistook it for serious news, as demonstrated by a series of earnest comments on the ALLOD Facebook page. For background, here is why we sometimes write about satire and humor.",['lien'],False,"On Nov. 26, Taters Gonna Tate published an article positing that the federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency (ICE) had arrested the mayor of Los Angeles. This item was not a factual recounting of real-life events. The article originated with a website that describes its output as being humorous or satirical in nature, as follows:For background, here is why we sometimes write about satire and humor."
Was a Marine Told He Can't Fly U.S. and Marine Corps Flags at the Same Time?,"[""A meme circulating on social media is based on a years-old dispute over a retirement community's rules about flags.""]","In April 2018, an outrage-instigating meme circulated on Facebook reporting that Jim Lowe, a retired Marine Corps captain, had been forbidden from flying both the American flag and the Marine Corps colors outside his home. The meme instructs users to ""like"" and ""share"" if they agree he should be allowed to do so:   According to local news reports, the dispute over the flags stemmed from Lowe flying both the Stars and Stripes and the Marine Corps colors from the exterior of his home despite a community rule that allowed only one flag. But Lowe had maintained that because Marines refer to their banner as ""colors,"" it shouldn't count as a flag. The homeowners association had threatened to fine Lowe or even place a lien on his house if he didn't comply. The situation escalated to the point where Lowe threatened to move out of the community, but he never made good on it. According to the local newspaper, The Citizen, Lowe passed away in his Sun City-Peachtree home on 12 September 2016  but not before the combat veteran was able to ""give 'em hell."" Local news station WTXF reported that in October 2013, Lowe won the battle to fly both the American flag and Marine Corps colors outside his home. threatened The Citizen won the battle Fox News.""Georgia Marine Vet Loses Fight to Fly American, Marine Corps Flags.""
27 August 2013. Wing, Nick.""Georgia Veteran Plans to Leave Retirement Community After Being Told He Cant Fly Two Flags.""
HuffingtonPost.com.27 August 2013. The Citizen.""James Madison Lowe II, Age 76.""
16 September 2016. Dillon, Denise.""Veteran Wins Battle to Fly U.S., USMC Flags Outside Home.""
WAGA.30 September 2013.",['lien'],NEI,"The situation escalated to the point where Lowe threatened to move out of the community, but he never made good on it. According to the local newspaper, The Citizen, Lowe passed away in his Sun City-Peachtree home on 12 September 2016  but not before the combat veteran was able to ""give 'em hell."" Local news station WTXF reported that in October 2013, Lowe won the battle to fly both the American flag and Marine Corps colors outside his home."
Twenty million Americans are out of work.,[],"For all the discussion of immigration, foreign policy and social issues in the 2016 campaign, one issue always returns to the fore eventually: jobs. Republican candidate John Kasich emphasizes his record on jobs as Ohio governor in a new ad. Theadbegins with grainy footage of what seems to be an unemployment line. The narrators first words are, Twenty million Americans are out of work, and this assertion is bolstered by being repeated in on-screen text:  This figure sounded high to us, since the official number of unemployed Americans during the most recent month, February, tops out at about 7.8 million. So we asked the Kasich campaign for their evidence, and they proceeded to cite a source that caught us off-guard: Us. Specifically, they pointed to ourfact-check from Augustin which we analyzed a statement by Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump. Trump said that we have 93 million people out of work. They look for jobs, they give up, and all of a sudden, statistically, they're considered employed. We rated this claimFalse, largely because the 93 million number included lots of people who would not be expected to want or be able to work, including full-time students, senior citizens, the disabled, and those who have chosen to take care of their children full-time. However, in the process, we conducted a mathematical experiment in which we played with possible numbers of Americans who are out of work that fit somewhere between the official unemployment rate (on the low end) and Trumps number (on the high end). HELP US RAISE $15,000 TO HIRE AN EXTRA FACT-CHECKER Heres what we wrote, using the statistics that were current at the time: The official number of unemployed Americans is 8.3 million -- less than one-tenth of what Trump says. But to give Trump the benefit of the doubt, its possible to expand this number using more credible economic thinking. Gary Burtless, an economist at the Brookings Institution, says its not unreasonable to include:  The 6.4 million people who havent looked for work recently enough to qualify as being in the labor force, but who say they currently want a job. And the 6.5 million people working part-time who would prefer to have a full-time job. This would mean that upwards of 21 million Americans could be described with some justification as out of work involuntarily, either fully or partially. But thats not even one-quarter of the number that Trump offered. Rob Nichols, a spokesman for Kasich, said the campaign simply updated our math with more recent data in preparing the television ad. The numbers for January 2016, Nichols said, were:  Unemployed: 7.8 million  People who havent looked for work recently enough to qualify as being in the labor force, but who say they currently want a job: 6.2 million  People working part-time who would prefer to have a full-time job: 6 million. That works out to 20 million on the nose. We salute the Kasich campaigns efforts to fact-check-proof their assertion. Still, we should note that we didnt intend our calculation to be the final word on how to determine the number of out of work Americans. Rather, we were trying to provide a benchmark for showing just how wrong Trumps number was. Well note that our wording was that the 21 million figure had some justification  not exactly a clarion call for the Bureau of Labor Statistics to change its longstanding protocol. In subsequent fact-checks, though not the one the Kasich campaign referred to, we have added language that is clearer about our intentions. We did that, for instance, in ourFeb. 11, 2016, fact-checkof a different statement by Trump: Don't believe those phony numbers when you hear 4.9 and 5 percent unemployment. The number's probably 28, 29, as high as 35 (percent). In fact, I even heard recently 42 percent. In that fact-check, which produced a rating ofPants on Fire, we prefaced a similar alternative calculation this way: We are deliberately stretching the numbers here as an intellectual exercise; we are not saying that 15.6 percent is a more accurate unemployment rate than the official one of 4.9 percent. But enough from us. What do the two economists we checked with for the original fact-check think about Kasichs use of the 20 million figure? Given that the image looks like a guy in an unemployment line, I'd say it's a misleading figure, said Tara Sinclair, an economist with George Washington University and the jobs website Indeed.com. Many people have good reasons for not wanting to work now, she said, and that is something distinct from actually being out of work. Burtless agreed, saying, The 5.988 million people working part-time who would prefer to have a full-time job are not out of work. They are employed, but on a work schedule that does not provide them with the weekly hours they desire. At the same time, Burtless said there is still some value in the number cited in Kasichs advertisement. Gov. Kasich has given an upper-bound estimate of the total number of Americans who are unemployed or underemployed, Burtless said. Its just not theonlyestimate. Our ruling Kasichs ad said that 20 million Americans are out of work. The Kasich campaign shrewdly cites a past PolitiFact item as evidence for this larger-than-usual estimate of Americas out of work population. But its worth noting that the calculation we did was not intended to determine the actual number of out-of-work Americans, but rather to suggest the highest figure with any sort of credibility as a way of seeing how far out of line Trumps assertion was. The statement is partially accurate but takes things out of context, so we rate it Half True.","['National', 'Economy', 'Jobs']",NEI,"Theadbegins with grainy footage of what seems to be an unemployment line. The narrators first words are, Twenty million Americans are out of work, and this assertion is bolstered by being repeated in on-screen text:Specifically, they pointed to ourfact-check from Augustin which we analyzed a statement by Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump. Trump said that we have 93 million people out of work. They look for jobs, they give up, and all of a sudden, statistically, they're considered employed.We rated this claimFalse, largely because the 93 million number included lots of people who would not be expected to want or be able to work, including full-time students, senior citizens, the disabled, and those who have chosen to take care of their children full-time.HELP US RAISE $15,000 TO HIRE AN EXTRA FACT-CHECKERIn subsequent fact-checks, though not the one the Kasich campaign referred to, we have added language that is clearer about our intentions. We did that, for instance, in ourFeb. 11, 2016, fact-checkof a different statement by Trump: Don't believe those phony numbers when you hear 4.9 and 5 percent unemployment. The number's probably 28, 29, as high as 35 (percent). In fact, I even heard recently 42 percent.In that fact-check, which produced a rating ofPants on Fire, we prefaced a similar alternative calculation this way: We are deliberately stretching the numbers here as an intellectual exercise; we are not saying that 15.6 percent is a more accurate unemployment rate than the official one of 4.9 percent."
Was Donald Trump's Grandfather successful in the prostitution industry?,['A meme claimed Frederick Trump was a pimp and drug dealer who made his fortune running a brothel and opium den.'],"In November 2015, the biography of Frederick Trump, Donald Trump's grandfather, was condensed into two paragraphs and then circulated on the internet via a meme. While some of the information included in the meme is accurate, much of it is either exaggerated or incomplete. This particular rumor centers on the idea that Frederick Trump made his fortune through brothels and opium dens. While there is anecdotal evidence that Trump dabbled in prostitution, there is no proof that this constituted the bulk of his fortune. In Gwenda Blair's 2000 book, The Trumps: Three Generations of Builders and a Presidential Candidate, she describes how Frederick Trump opened a series of restaurants and hotels during the Klondike Gold Rush in the 1890s. One of those hotels, The Arctic Restaurant and Hotel, was described as decadent and far superior to other restaurants in the area. In the larder were salmon and an extraordinary variety of meats, including duck, ptarmigan, grouse, goose, and swan, as well as caribou, moose, goat, sheep, rabbit, and squirrel. Incredibly, the New Arctic served fresh fruit: red currants, raspberries, strawberries, blueberries, blackberries, and even cranberries. A small oasis of luxury, the Arctic's menu was a vast improvement over what the two restaurateurs had been able to offer on the trail. An anonymous letter to the Yukon, however, claimed that The Arctic Restaurant and Hotel was also known for prostitution: ""I would advise respectable women traveling alone, or with an escort, to be careful in their selection of hotels at Bennett,"" he wrote. ""For single men, the Arctic has excellent accommodations as well as the best restaurant in Bennett, but I would not advise respectable women to go there to sleep as they are liable to hear that which would be repugnant to their feelings and uttered, too, by the depraved of their own sex."" While it's unclear if Frederick Trump directly profited from prostitution at his hotel (or whether it even occurred there), it should be noted that the world's oldest profession was relatively commonplace during the Gold Rush. The meme also claims that Frederick Trump decided to return to Germany when police started cracking down on ""his criminal rackets."" Again, this is based on little more than a morsel of truth and does not tell the whole story. In 1901, Trump sold his assets and returned to Germany. While one could argue that Trump made the decision because he believed that police were going to start enforcing prostitution laws, that is only one factor that led to Trump's departure for Germany; Frederick Trump saw that it was time to leave. If Major Wood actually enforced the laws regarding prostitution, gambling, and liquor, hotels and restaurants would be far less profitable. Not only that, the economic boom was bound to be short-lived. There was not nearly enough solid economic development to absorb these newcomers in any long-term way; when the placer deposits were emptied, they would go back home. Without the umbrella of gold, other local industries would not be strong enough to sustain themselves and compete with cheaper sources farther south. The boom was over, Frederick Trump realized. He left just in time, avoiding the uproar when his erstwhile partner hit the skids and the economic decline that would soon sweep over White Horse. In a situation that created many losers, he managed to emerge a winner. He had made money; perhaps even more unusually in the Yukon, he had also kept it and departed from White Horse with a substantial nest egg. He had accomplished his goal of making and saving enough money to marry, but he had no intention of doing so in America. For this important moment, he would have to return to Germany. While the meme exaggerated Trump's involvement in ""criminal rackets,"" it did correctly state that Trump returned to the United States after the German government determined that he had originally left Germany in 1885 to avoid taxes and the army. In summation, Donald Trump's grandfather Frederick Trump was a German immigrant who made his fortune by opening several restaurants and hotels in Seattle and British Columbia during the Yukon Gold Rush. While some of these hotels may have been used for prostitution, gambling, or other seedy activities common on the trail, it is incorrect to say that Trump built his fortune on illegal activities.",['taxes'],False,"In Gwenda Blair's 2000 book The Trumps: Three Generations of Builders and a Presidential Candidate, she described how Frederick Trump opened a series of restaurants and hotels during the Klondike Gold Rush in the 1890s. One of those hotels, The Arctic Restaurant and Hotel, was described as decadent and far superior to other restaurants in the area:While the meme exaggerated Trump's involvement in ""criminal rackets,"" it did correctly state that Trump returned to the United States after the German government determined that he had originally left Germany in 1885 to avoid taxes and the army."
Did Amazon Solicit Donations to Help Pay Worker Sick Leave?,"['After being called out for its approach to supporting seasonal and contract workers during times of crisis, the retail giant made some edits. ']","Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And, please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease.  fighting Find out Read Submit Become a Founding Member CDC WHO In early March 2020, amid the COVID-19 coronavirus disease outbreak that would later grow into a pandemic, the massive retail and delivery company Amazon launched the Amazon Relief Fund, which among other things, offers grants to contract and seasonal workers so they can receive sick pay if they contract the coronavirus. The $25 million fund established by Amazon sparked an online backlash after a liberal newsletter pointed out that seasonal and contract workers would have to file an application to receive the funds, and that Amazon, a behemoth corporation whose founder and CEO Jeff Bezos is the richest person in the world, solicited public donations for the program. Anger over the idea that a famously profitable corporation was soliciting donations from the public to fund sick leave for some of its workforce during a pandemic was initiated by reporting from Popular Information, described as a ""newsletter about politics and power."" The letter's founder, Judd Legum, posted this Twitter thread on March 24, 2020:We reached out to Amazon for comment and received the following statement: reporting Twitter thread  We are not and have not asked for donations and the Amazon Relief Fund has been funded by Amazon with an initial donation of $25 million. The structure to operate a fund like this, which hundreds of companies do through the same third-party, requires the program to be open to public contributions but we are not soliciting those contributions in any way. Amazon truly did launch a $25 million fund to provide sick leave for contract workers and seasonal employees through a grant program to which those workers must file applications before receiving benefits. Although the wording on the page has since been updated to indicate that donations are not expected, initially the language did indicate that Amazon was seeking  or at the very least suggesting  donations. An archived version of the page from March 19, 2020, included this statement (shown in the screen capture below): ""The Fund relies primarily on individual donations from individuals and support from Amazon.com Services LLC to fund this program.""The page has since been updated. The highlighted sentence above was removed and the page now explicitly states that donations from the public are not expected, as follows:We reached out to Legum, who told us via email that he believed Amazon changed the wording on the relief fund page ""because the optics were clearly bad and the company is trying to cover up its actions."" Legum added that in his view, ""Amazon has ample resources to simply pay their contractors while they are out sick during this pandemic."" updated archived version  updated  According to Amazon's announcement, the Amazon Relief Fund will provide their delivery partners and drivers ""the ability to apply for grants approximately equal to up to two-weeks of pay if diagnosed with COVID-19 or placed into quarantine by the government or Amazon."" announcement Additionally, the statement reads, ""this fund will support our employees and contractors around the world who face financial hardships from other qualifying events, such as a natural disaster, federally declared emergency, or unforeseen personal hardship. Applicants can apply and receive a personal grant from the fund ranging from $400 to $5,000 USD per person."" The company also announced it is offering unlimited unpaid time off for hourly staff during the month of March. announced Whether or not Amazon actively solicited donations, the original wording on its Amazon Relief Fund page did call for individuals to donate to the fund. Even though the wording has been updated to state explicitly that no donations from the public are expected, a ""Donate"" button still exists on the page, which could be interpreted as an invitation to do so. We therefore rate this claim  Legum, Judd.  ""Amazon Soliciting Public Donations to Pay Workers' Sick Leave.""
  Popular Information.24 March 2020. Galetti, Beth.  ""COVID-19 Update: More Ways Amazon Is Supporting Employees and Contractors.""
  DayOne, the Amazon blog.11 March 2020. Palmer, Annie.  ""Amazon Launches $25 Million Relief Fund for Delivery Drivers and Seasonal Employees Amid Coronavirus Outbreak.""
  CNBC.  11 March 2020. Greene, Jaye.  ""Amazon Workers Test Positive for Covid-19 at 10 U.S. Warehouses.""
  Washington Post.25 March 2020. [CORRECTION 03/25/20]: A previous version of this article erroneously stated that Amazon was offering ""unlimited paid time off"" to hourly staff during the month of March; that has been corrected to ""unlimited unpaid time off.""",['funds'],True,"Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And, please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease. Anger over the idea that a famously profitable corporation was soliciting donations from the public to fund sick leave for some of its workforce during a pandemic was initiated by reporting from Popular Information, described as a ""newsletter about politics and power."" The letter's founder, Judd Legum, posted this Twitter thread on March 24, 2020:We reached out to Amazon for comment and received the following statement:Although the wording on the page has since been updated to indicate that donations are not expected, initially the language did indicate that Amazon was seeking  or at the very least suggesting  donations. An archived version of the page from March 19, 2020, included this statement (shown in the screen capture below): ""The Fund relies primarily on individual donations from individuals and support from Amazon.com Services LLC to fund this program.""The page has since been updated. The highlighted sentence above was removed and the page now explicitly states that donations from the public are not expected, as follows:We reached out to Legum, who told us via email that he believed Amazon changed the wording on the relief fund page ""because the optics were clearly bad and the company is trying to cover up its actions."" Legum added that in his view, ""Amazon has ample resources to simply pay their contractors while they are out sick during this pandemic.""According to Amazon's announcement, the Amazon Relief Fund will provide their delivery partners and drivers ""the ability to apply for grants approximately equal to up to two-weeks of pay if diagnosed with COVID-19 or placed into quarantine by the government or Amazon.""Additionally, the statement reads, ""this fund will support our employees and contractors around the world who face financial hardships from other qualifying events, such as a natural disaster, federally declared emergency, or unforeseen personal hardship. Applicants can apply and receive a personal grant from the fund ranging from $400 to $5,000 USD per person."" The company also announced it is offering unlimited unpaid time off for hourly staff during the month of March."
"Mayor Barrett saved Milwaukee $25 million, thanks to Gov. Walkers reforms.",[],"Those billboards around Milwaukee featuring Mayor Tom Barretts mug and a claim he saved Milwaukee $25 million are clever if you slow down to read the punch line.If you can do it without driving your car into an embankment, youll see theyare sponsored by the conservative Wisconsin Club for Growth and give credit to Barretts once -- and possibly future -- gubernatorial rival, Scott Walker, for making the savings possible.Barrett, the signs smaller print says, got the savings thanks to Gov. Scott Walkers reforms.The billboards hit on a theme voters undoubtedly will hear over and over from Republicans if Barrett takes on Walker in a possible recall election in 2012.The billboards refer to Walkers controversial budget legislation that took health care and pensions out of collective bargaining for most public employees.That allowed local governments and schools to impose cost-sharing for those benefits instead of negotiating with labor leaders.Barretts campaign, reacting tothead, denounced it as completely off base,in a statement toWTMJ4that said: The only thing accurate about that billboard is the picture of Tom Barrett.Whats the truth?Club for Growth didnt respond, but the Journal Sentinel reported in August that the city of Milwaukee will indeed save $25 million in 2012 just on health care costs, in large part by asking employees to pay more.In fact, Barretts budget document said revisions to the citys health insurance -- the ones made easier by Walkers changes -- would help drive overall health care costs down for the first time in more than 20 years.We contacted the same Milwaukee budget official quoted in August 2011, and he told us the city still expects a $25 million drop in health costs.Case closed?The official, city economist Dennis Yaccarino, says the $25 million actually overstates savings related to the Walker budget alone. He said city officials didnt make that clear in early August when a Journal Sentinel reporter first got the number from the city and published the $25 million figure in the context of Walkers changes. Thatstoryran Aug. 8, 2011.The newspaper followed upAugust 21, 2011, quoting city officials saying $6 million of that savings number was from the citys own decision to switch from an insured HMO to a self-funded approach due to projected cost savings. The $6 million switch is noted that way in Barretts budget.The move, we should note, was negotiated with the citys largest union two years ago but was not put in place until now for reasons unrelated to the state budget, according to Yaccarino and Richard Abelson, executive director of the American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees, which represents general city employees.Yaccarino said the city calculated in 2011 that it was paying a profit to its carrier and could keep the money for itself by going self insured. That scenario had not existed until 2011, hence the delay, he said.So that leaves $19 million of savings for Milwaukee from Walkers original budget plan and the amended one he signed, right?Not exactly.Remember, the $25 million figure is just on the health care costs side fo the equation. What about public employees paying more in pension costs? Thats the second part of Walkers limits on collective bargaining over benefits. Milwaukee didnt put them in place due to questions about the legality of the state changes as they apply to Milwaukee. So thats a 0.Finally, city official note Walkers overall budget cut municipal aid, leaving the net savings to the city much reduced from $19 million.But the billboard refers to Walkers reforms, which is the changes tied to  the collective bargaining issue. It is making a narrower claim, on how much was saved from the reforms, not how the city fared overall.Our conclusionBillboards say Walkers reforms allowed Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett to save $25 million for the city.The city is that much ahead, but a portion was Barretts doing before Walkers budget was enacted.We rate the claim Mostly True.","['City Budget', 'State Budget', 'Unions', 'Wisconsin']",True,"Those billboards around Milwaukee featuring Mayor Tom Barretts mug and a claim he saved Milwaukee $25 million are clever if you slow down to read the punch line.If you can do it without driving your car into an embankment, youll see theyare sponsored by the conservative Wisconsin Club for Growth and give credit to Barretts once -- and possibly future -- gubernatorial rival, Scott Walker, for making the savings possible.Barrett, the signs smaller print says, got the savings thanks to Gov. Scott Walkers reforms.The billboards hit on a theme voters undoubtedly will hear over and over from Republicans if Barrett takes on Walker in a possible recall election in 2012.The billboards refer to Walkers controversial budget legislation that took health care and pensions out of collective bargaining for most public employees.That allowed local governments and schools to impose cost-sharing for those benefits instead of negotiating with labor leaders.Barretts campaign, reacting tothead, denounced it as completely off base,in a statement toWTMJ4that said: The only thing accurate about that billboard is the picture of Tom Barrett.Whats the truth?Club for Growth didnt respond, but the Journal Sentinel reported in August that the city of Milwaukee will indeed save $25 million in 2012 just on health care costs, in large part by asking employees to pay more.In fact, Barretts budget document said revisions to the citys health insurance -- the ones made easier by Walkers changes -- would help drive overall health care costs down for the first time in more than 20 years.We contacted the same Milwaukee budget official quoted in August 2011, and he told us the city still expects a $25 million drop in health costs.Case closed?The official, city economist Dennis Yaccarino, says the $25 million actually overstates savings related to the Walker budget alone. He said city officials didnt make that clear in early August when a Journal Sentinel reporter first got the number from the city and published the $25 million figure in the context of Walkers changes. Thatstoryran Aug. 8, 2011.The newspaper followed upAugust 21, 2011, quoting city officials saying $6 million of that savings number was from the citys own decision to switch from an insured HMO to a self-funded approach due to projected cost savings. The $6 million switch is noted that way in Barretts budget.The move, we should note, was negotiated with the citys largest union two years ago but was not put in place until now for reasons unrelated to the state budget, according to Yaccarino and Richard Abelson, executive director of the American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees, which represents general city employees.Yaccarino said the city calculated in 2011 that it was paying a profit to its carrier and could keep the money for itself by going self insured. That scenario had not existed until 2011, hence the delay, he said.So that leaves $19 million of savings for Milwaukee from Walkers original budget plan and the amended one he signed, right?Not exactly.Remember, the $25 million figure is just on the health care costs side fo the equation. What about public employees paying more in pension costs? Thats the second part of Walkers limits on collective bargaining over benefits. Milwaukee didnt put them in place due to questions about the legality of the state changes as they apply to Milwaukee. So thats a 0.Finally, city official note Walkers overall budget cut municipal aid, leaving the net savings to the city much reduced from $19 million.But the billboard refers to Walkers reforms, which is the changes tied to  the collective bargaining issue. It is making a narrower claim, on how much was saved from the reforms, not how the city fared overall.Our conclusionBillboards say Walkers reforms allowed Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett to save $25 million for the city.The city is that much ahead, but a portion was Barretts doing before Walkers budget was enacted.We rate the claim Mostly True."
Does Jared Kushner's brother own a business associated with COVID-19 testing?,"['Oscar, a digital health-insurance startup that recently set up a service for users to find COVID-19 testing centers, was co-founded by Joshua Kushner. ']","Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease. Compared to the output of most other developed countries, the United States' ability to test for COVID-19, the disease caused by the novel coronavirus, has been extremely limited. This reality has led to rumors that President Donald Trump's administration, or some of its members, have a financial interest in promoting specific tests over others that would be more widely available or more easily distributed. One claim that has emerged in this vein came from a report by Raw Story that asserted, ""the Kushner family is trying to cash in on the pandemic that could kill millions of us."" The basis for this claim concerns the health insurance startup Oscar, co-founded by Jared Kushner's brother, Joshua Kushner. Jared Kushner is the son-in-law of and special adviser to Trump. On March 13, 2020, Oscar announced that it would be launching a testing-center locator for COVID-19. Today, Oscar, a tech-driven health insurance company, launched the first testing center locator for COVID-19 in the U.S., featuring more than 100 centers. It is accessible to the general public, and more testing centers are being added every day. However, the details of Oscar's testing locator have been described incorrectly in several viral social media posts alleging profiteering from the Kushners during the coronavirus pandemic. A well-shared post by a user named ""Boston Judy,"" for example, asserted that ""we didn't have testing because the Trump family circle wanted to wait till they could make a profit."" Even if this assertion had merit, the actions Oscar took merely help locate unaffiliated testing centers. As an insurance company, Oscar does not manufacture, perform, analyze, or sell any actual COVID-19 tests. Further, the test-center locator that Oscar developed is open to the general public and is not limited to people who get insurance through Oscar. Once a user has taken a short survey, the locator will provide the closest locations for testing in areas in which they operate. While the service also acts as a promotion for the company, it can serve as a testing center locator for any interested party. ""Boston Judy"" later clarified that Oscar was not producing tests, but that the company would get to ""bill the feds for evaluating people for COVID and referring them to a testing center if they meet the criteria [for testing]."" While the legislation that would allow for such reimbursement likely will include a fund for covering the cost of these tests, the legislation has not yet been finalized, and it's unclear that it would really be a windfall for Oscar, either. On March 13, 2020, U.S. House Democrats and the White House reached a deal on a package of legislation that included a requirement that insurance companies cover the full cost of COVID-19 testing with no cost sharing. As described by the Brookings Institute, this legislation, if and when it is passed by the Senate and signed by the president, would offer financial support to state governments by temporarily increasing the share of Medicaid spending financed by the federal government, require almost all forms of health insurance to cover COVID-19 testing without cost-sharing, and create mechanisms to pay for COVID-19 testing for uninsured people. In other words, while the government will likely be subsidizing insurance companies like Oscar, they are doing so to cover losses incurred by the requirement for full reimbursement to members. These laws, and the federal reimbursement they would authorize, would apply to any health insurance company in America, not only Oscar. Joshua Kushner co-founded Oscar in 2012. His venture capital firm, Thrive Capital, holds a significant ownership share. According to financial-disclosure forms released by Jared Kushner and his wife, Ivanka Trump, covering the year 2018, the couple owned and received profit from shares of Thrive. This document also appears to assert that the couple divested from Thrive during the 2018 financial year. Under federal law, executive branch employees are eligible to defer paying capital gains taxes on investments sold to comply with conflict of interest requirements. To take advantage of this benefit, the employees must obtain a Certificate of Divestiture from the Office of Government Ethics prior to selling the asset. Jared Kushner received a certificate of divestiture for, among other things, four Thrive-associated funds in February 2017. In a narrow legal sense, this removed the conflict of interest associated with his financial ownership in his brother's companies, according to Virginia Canter, who serves as chief ethics counsel for the nonpartisan Center for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), which also provided us with Kushner's Certificate of Divestiture. But, she told us, his divestment does little to alter the appearance of a conflict of interest or reduce the risk of potential corruption, especially if he is using his public office to promote the private interests of his brother or giving him preferential access. The similarities between the Trump Administration's announcement of a website designed to locate COVID-19 testing centers and the website released by Oscar have been a source of speculation about undue access on Joshua Kushner's part. That being said, the assertion that the Kushners as a family are involved in the business of COVID-19 testing is not entirely accurate. The company's coronavirus response so far is limited to an online form that allows users to find a testing location if their symptoms call for it. Health insurance companies are likely to be reimbursed for covering the cost of COVID-19 testing once legislation is passed, but this would apply to all insurance providers, not just Oscar. For these reasons, we rank the truth of this claim as a ""Mixture.""",['finance'],NEI,"Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And, please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease. Compared to the output of most other developed countries, the United States' ability to test for COVID-19, the disease caused by the novel coronavirus, has been extremely limited. This reality has led to rumors that President Donald Trump's administration, or some of its members, have a financial interest in promoting specific tests as opposed to others that would be more widely available or more easily distributed.One claim that has emerged in this vein came from a report by Raw Story that asserted ""the Kushner family is trying to cash in on the pandemic that could kill millions of us."" The basis for this claim concerns the health insurance startup Oscar co-founded by Jared Kushners brother, Joshua Kushner. Jared Kushner is the son-in-law of and special adviser to Trump.On March 13, 2020, Oscar announced that it would be launching a testing-center locator for COVID-19:However, the details of Oscar's testing locator have been described incorrectly in several viral social media posts alleging profiteering from the Kushners during the coronavirus pandemic. A well-shared post by a user named ""Boston Judy,"" for example, asserted that ""we didn't have testing because the Trump family circle wanted to wait till they could make a profit.""Even if this assertion had merit, the actions Oscar took merely help locate unaffiliated testing centers. As an insurance company, Oscar does not manufacture, perform, analyze, or sell any actual COVID-19 test. Further, the test-center locator that Oscar developed is open to the general public and is not limited to people who get insurance through Oscar. Once a user has taken a short survey, the locator will provide the closest locations for testing in areas in which they operate. While the service also acts as a promotion for the company, it can serve as a testing center locator for any interested party.On March 13, 2020, U.S. House Democrats and the White House reached a deal on a package of legislation that included a requirement that insurance companies cover the full cost of COVID-19 with no cost sharing. As described by the Brookings Institute, this legislation, if and when it is passed by the Senate and signed by the president:In other words, while the government will likely be subsidizing insurance companies like Oscar, they are doing so to cover losses incurred by the requirement for full reimbursement to members. These laws, and the federal reimbursement they would authorize, would apply to any health insurance company in America, not only Oscar.Joshua Kushner co-founded Oscar in 2012. His venture capital firm, Thrive Capital, holds a significant ownership share. According to financial-disclosure forms released by Jared Kushner and his wife, Ivanka Trump, covering the year 2018, the couple owned and received profit from shares of Thrive:Under federal law, executive branch employees are eligible to defer paying capital gains taxes on investments sold to comply with conflict of interest requirements. To take advantage of this benefit, the employees must obtain a Certificate of Divestiture from the Office of Government Ethics prior to selling the asset. Jared Kushner received a certificate of divestiture for, among other things, four Thrive-associated funds in February 2017.In a narrow legal sense, this removed the conflict of interest associated with his financial ownership in his brothers companies, according to Virginia Canter, who serves as chief ethics counsel for the nonpartisan Center for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), which also provided us with Kushners Certificate of Divestiture. But, she told us, his divestment does little to alter the appearance of a conflict of interest or reduce the risk of potential corruption, especially if he is using his public office to promote the private interests of his brother or giving him preferential access. The similarities between the Trump Administrations announcement of a website designed to locate COVID-19 testing centers and the website released by Oscar have been a source of speculation about undue access on Joshua Kushners part."
Did Kamala Harris provide bail for 'violent rioters' amid the George Floyd protests?,['The claim appeared to stem from a June 2020 tweet from Harris.'],"On Aug. 11, 2020, then-U.S. presidential candidate Joe Biden selected California U.S. Sen. Kamala Harris as his Democratic running mate in the race against Republican incumbents Donald Trump and Mike Pence. Joe Biden Kamala Harris Donald Trump Mike Pence Following that announcement, Trump and his supporters attempted to call attention to what they framed as immoral judgment by Harris  the Trump campaign alleged she wrongly encouraged Americans to help people who were arrested during protests over the police in-custody death of George Floyd in Minneapolis. George Floyd For example, in an Aug. 17 speech to supporters in Mankato, Minnesota (which is about 80 miles southwest of Minneapolis), Trump said, according to a Factba.se transcription of the event: Factba.se transcription Kamala Harris encouraged Americans to donate to the so-called Minnesota Freedom Fund  do you know that is?  which bailed out the rioters, looters, assaulters, and anarchists from jail. And Biden's staff did the same thing; they donated a lot of their money to get them out of jail so that everyone was right back on the streets. Think of that: This is what is running for office.  Less than two weeks later, U.S. Sen. Tom Cotton, a Republican from Arkansas, doubled down on the president's claim, alleging in a tweet: ""Kamala Harris helped violent rioters in Minnesota get out of jail to do more damage."" Sen. Tom Cotton tweet   Around the same time, at least one conservative website purported in a headline that Harris donated to the Minnesota Freedom Fund (MFF), which indeed gives cash to people who cannot afford bail so they don't have to wait in jail until court hearings, or agree to high-interest loans. one conservative website Over the course of months, numerous Snopes readers contacted us to investigate whether Harris had actually given money to the Minnesota-based organization, and, if so, whether those contributions allowed for any of the roughly 170 people who were arrested during protests to get out of jail and commit more crimes. First, let us identify what appeared to be the basis of those assertions. Following Floyd's death, supporters of the civil rights movement nationwide (including many celebrities) donated more than $30 million to MFF, according to the nonprofit and news reports. High-profile donors used social media to promote their contributions, and Harris, on June 1, used her official accounts as a vice presidential candidate to express her support for the fundraising effort.  including many celebrities more than $30 million accounts ""If you're able to, chip in now to the @MNFreedomFund to help post bail for those protesting on the ground in Minnesota,"" she wrote on Facebook and Twitter, including links to an MFF donation page on the left-leaning fundraising site, ActBlue. @MNFreedomFund   In other words, while it was true Harris publicly expressed support for the nonprofit and encouraged others to donate to it in summer 2020, she did not say on social media  or via any other public statement  that she herself donated money to the organization. Next, we analyzed how Harris' 2020 campaign spent money and if, or to what extent, it helped the nonprofit, despite the fact she had not publicly declared the possible financial tie in a speech, interview, or on social media. Based on campaign filings compiled by the Federal Election Commission (FEC) and Center for Responsive Politics, no expenditure receipt listed ""Minnesota Freedom Fund""  debunking the possible claim that she used campaign money to help the nonprofit. Federal Election Commission Center for Responsive Politics Snopes reached out to MFF, asking if Harris at any point donated money and, if so, for the contribution's details. Greg Lewin, the organization's interim executive director, responded to us via email: ""No, we have nothing in our records indicating a donation from Vice President Harris."" We also reached out to Harris' press secretary, Symone Sanders, to comment on critics' accusations, but we have not heard back. We will update this report when or if we do. (As part of a wide-sweeping proposal to reform the country's criminal justice system, the Biden-Harris administration has pledged to eliminate the country's cash-bail system.) has pledged Now, let us move to the latter claim regarding the people who MFF helped during the protests, in light of Harris' June 1 posts praising the organization's work. Established in 2016, MFF is among the many nonprofits that attempt to counteract inequities in the country's cash-bail system by paying detainees' criminal and immigration bonds. Then, when those people attend court proceedings to determine the outcome of their case  or whether they indeed broke the law prior to their arrest  they must return the full value of the cash bail to the Minnesota-based nonprofit. The MFF website states: inequities states Weve never made decisions based simply on pretrial charge  and we wont now. [...] We have always prioritized those who are unable to pay for freedom and face the greatest level of danger and marginalization. We will continue to center and prioritize the following groups in our bail payment: BIPOC (Black, Indigenous and People of Color) Those experiencing homelessness  People arrested who live in Minnesota Those who have been detained while fighting for justice  Nearly half the people we pay bail for have had their case completely dismissed, suggesting there was never a case for the arrest or charge to begin with. Therefore, if a judge has decided that someone can be released so long as they can afford the price, we will pay that fee if we can afford it. Like in dozens of U.S. cities where people protested Floyds death, peaceful marches during the day between May 26 and early June set the stage for vandalism and destruction at night. However, the overwhelming majority of people who were arrested during the large gatherings  whether chaotic or peaceful  did not need the MFF's help. Citing accounting by the American Bail Coalition (a trade group of insurance companies who profit from underwriting bail bonds) and Hennepin County jail records, The Washington Post reported in September that all but three of the 170 people arrested during the protests were released from jail within a week. Of the 167 released, only 10 had to put up a monetary bond to be released, and, in most cases, the amounts were nominal, such as $78 or $100. In fact, 92 percent of those arrested did not have to pay bail  and 29 percent of those arrested did not face charges, the news outlet reported. American Bail Coalition The Washington Post ""We have paid all the protest bails that have come our way,"" the MFF website said. ""[Many] of the people who were arrested during the uprising werent detained and instead were given citations then released, have been released with no bail, or held with no bail."" said However, among the small group of people who did receive direct bail assistance from the nonprofit, one man was arrested on suspicion of shooting at police with an AK-47-style mini Draco pistol in the early hours of May 30, as well as a woman who allegedly stole from a cell phone store in a Minneapolis suburb and other businesses the day prior, according to The Washington Post and other news reports. As of September, the nonprofit paid $75,000 in cash to help the former suspect and $750 to assist the latter. AK-47-style mini Draco pistol woman The Washington Post news reports Additionally, a 32-year-old man whom MFF bailed out on an assault charge in July  a case that was unrelated to the protests  was charged with committing third-degree assault the following month, leaving the victim with a traumatic brain injury and a fractured skull, according to news reports. Lewin said in a statement afterward that the organization needs to ""strengthen our internal procedures"" to ensure its clients stay out of the criminal justice system after their first go-around. news reports statement In sum, while Harris indeed expressed public support for MFF following Floyd's death, it was false to claim she donated money to the organization, or that it helped protesters ""get out of jail and do more damage,"" like Cotton alleged. Rather, no evidence existed to show the handful of people who received direct bail assistance for arrests related to the demonstrations committed more crimes after their initial detainment. For those reasons, we rate this claim ""false.""",['insurance'],False,"On Aug. 11, 2020, then-U.S. presidential candidate Joe Biden selected California U.S. Sen. Kamala Harris as his Democratic running mate in the race against Republican incumbents Donald Trump and Mike Pence.Following that announcement, Trump and his supporters attempted to call attention to what they framed as immoral judgment by Harris  the Trump campaign alleged she wrongly encouraged Americans to help people who were arrested during protests over the police in-custody death of George Floyd in Minneapolis.For example, in an Aug. 17 speech to supporters in Mankato, Minnesota (which is about 80 miles southwest of Minneapolis), Trump said, according to a Factba.se transcription of the event:Less than two weeks later, U.S. Sen. Tom Cotton, a Republican from Arkansas, doubled down on the president's claim, alleging in a tweet: ""Kamala Harris helped violent rioters in Minnesota get out of jail to do more damage.""Around the same time, at least one conservative website purported in a headline that Harris donated to the Minnesota Freedom Fund (MFF), which indeed gives cash to people who cannot afford bail so they don't have to wait in jail until court hearings, or agree to high-interest loans.First, let us identify what appeared to be the basis of those assertions. Following Floyd's death, supporters of the civil rights movement nationwide (including many celebrities) donated more than $30 million to MFF, according to the nonprofit and news reports. High-profile donors used social media to promote their contributions, and Harris, on June 1, used her official accounts as a vice presidential candidate to express her support for the fundraising effort. ""If you're able to, chip in now to the @MNFreedomFund to help post bail for those protesting on the ground in Minnesota,"" she wrote on Facebook and Twitter, including links to an MFF donation page on the left-leaning fundraising site, ActBlue.Next, we analyzed how Harris' 2020 campaign spent money and if, or to what extent, it helped the nonprofit, despite the fact she had not publicly declared the possible financial tie in a speech, interview, or on social media. Based on campaign filings compiled by the Federal Election Commission (FEC) and Center for Responsive Politics, no expenditure receipt listed ""Minnesota Freedom Fund""  debunking the possible claim that she used campaign money to help the nonprofit.We also reached out to Harris' press secretary, Symone Sanders, to comment on critics' accusations, but we have not heard back. We will update this report when or if we do. (As part of a wide-sweeping proposal to reform the country's criminal justice system, the Biden-Harris administration has pledged to eliminate the country's cash-bail system.)Established in 2016, MFF is among the many nonprofits that attempt to counteract inequities in the country's cash-bail system by paying detainees' criminal and immigration bonds. Then, when those people attend court proceedings to determine the outcome of their case  or whether they indeed broke the law prior to their arrest  they must return the full value of the cash bail to the Minnesota-based nonprofit. The MFF website states:Citing accounting by the American Bail Coalition (a trade group of insurance companies who profit from underwriting bail bonds) and Hennepin County jail records, The Washington Post reported in September that all but three of the 170 people arrested during the protests were released from jail within a week. Of the 167 released, only 10 had to put up a monetary bond to be released, and, in most cases, the amounts were nominal, such as $78 or $100. In fact, 92 percent of those arrested did not have to pay bail  and 29 percent of those arrested did not face charges, the news outlet reported.""We have paid all the protest bails that have come our way,"" the MFF website said. ""[Many] of the people who were arrested during the uprising werent detained and instead were given citations then released, have been released with no bail, or held with no bail.""However, among the small group of people who did receive direct bail assistance from the nonprofit, one man was arrested on suspicion of shooting at police with an AK-47-style mini Draco pistol in the early hours of May 30, as well as a woman who allegedly stole from a cell phone store in a Minneapolis suburb and other businesses the day prior, according to The Washington Post and other news reports. As of September, the nonprofit paid $75,000 in cash to help the former suspect and $750 to assist the latter.Additionally, a 32-year-old man whom MFF bailed out on an assault charge in July  a case that was unrelated to the protests  was charged with committing third-degree assault the following month, leaving the victim with a traumatic brain injury and a fractured skull, according to news reports. Lewin said in a statement afterward that the organization needs to ""strengthen our internal procedures"" to ensure its clients stay out of the criminal justice system after their first go-around."
Does Amazon Station Paramedics at Hot Warehouses Rather Than Install Air Conditioning?,"[""News accounts detailed the retail giant's controversial lack of air conditioning at uncomfortably hot fulfillment centers.""]","On 15 August 2015, the New York Times published an in-depth, widely discussed piece about online retailing giant Amazon.com titled ""Inside Amazon: Wrestling Big Ideas in a Bruising Workplace"" (subtitled ""The company is conducting an experiment in how far it can push white-collar workers to get them to achieve its ever-expanding ambitions""). The Times' article focused renewed attention on Amazon.com for its perennially controversial labor practices. An Allentown Morning Call article titled ""Inside Amazon's Warehouse,"" written by Spencer Soper and published on 18 September 2011, had covered much of the same territory. Elmer Goris spent a year working in Amazon.com's Lehigh Valley warehouse, where books, CDs, and various other products are packed and shipped to customers who order from the world's largest online retailer. The 34-year-old Allentown resident, who has worked in warehouses for more than 10 years, said he quit in July because he was frustrated with the heat and the demands that he work mandatory overtime. Working conditions at the warehouse worsened earlier that year, especially during summer heat waves when temperatures soared above 100 degrees, he said. He felt light-headed and experienced leg cramps, symptoms he had never encountered in previous warehouse jobs. One hot day, Goris said, he saw a co-worker pass out at the water fountain. On other hot days, he witnessed paramedics bringing people out of the warehouse in wheelchairs and on stretchers. During summer heat waves, Amazon arranged to have paramedics parked in ambulances outside, ready to treat any workers who became dehydrated or suffered other forms of heat stress. Those who couldn't quickly cool off and return to work were sent home or taken out on stretchers and wheelchairs to be transported to area hospitals. New applicants were ready to begin work at any time. Clearly, interest in a 2015 exposé on Amazon's treatment of white-collar workers revived attention on a 2011 story about Amazon's blue-collar (often temporary) workers. The outcome of the overheated workers' scenario described in the above-quoted excerpt was also addressed in a Reuters op-ed published on 17 June 2015. Meanwhile, Amazon's treatment of warehouse workers has been under scrutiny since 2011, when an investigation by the Allentown Morning Call newspaper revealed what were quite literally sweatshop conditions. When summer temperatures exceeded 100 degrees inside the company's Breinigsville, Pennsylvania, warehouse, managers would not open the loading bay doors for fear of theft. Instead, they hired paramedics to wait outside in ambulances, ready to extract heat-stricken employees on stretchers and in wheelchairs, the investigation found. Workers also reported being pressured to meet ever-greater production targets, a strategy colloquially known as ""management by stress."" Amazon declined to answer the newspaper's specific questions about working conditions in the warehouse, but eight months after the story was released, company officials announced that they had spent $52 million to retrofit warehouses with air conditioning. The New York Times article also revisited that earlier controversy: In Amazon warehouses, employees are monitored by sophisticated electronic systems to ensure they are packing enough boxes every hour. The Morning Call reiterated that issue in a 17 August 2015 article: in the case of the Pennsylvania warehouse, after The Morning Call published an in-depth look at the appalling conditions, the company spent $52 million adding air conditioners there and at other facilities around the country. It had been mistreating low-wage workers who had few options, and it deserved to be shamed into changing its behavior. While Amazon was widely criticized in 2011 (and afterwards) for heat conditions in a Pennsylvania warehouse, the company has since installed air conditioning at that warehouse and several other facilities.",['interest'],NEI,"The Times' article focused renewed attention on Amazon.com for its perennially controversial labor practices. An Allentown Morning Call article titled ""Inside Amazon's Warehouse"" written by Spencer Soper and published on 18 September 2011 had covered much of the same territory:Clearly, interest in a 2015 expos on Amazon's treatment of white-collar workers revived interest in a 2011 story on Amazon  blue-collar (often temporary) workers. The outcome of the overheated workers scenario described in the above-quoted excerpt was also addressed in a Reuters op-ed published on 17 June 2015:The Morning Call reiterated that issue in a 17 August 2015 article:"
Does Jeff Sessions Have Investments in the Private Prison Industry?,['A web site claimed that Sessions stood to gain from the recent reversal of an Obama-era policy on private prisons.'],"On 12 April 2017, the partisan website Crooks and Liars reported that Attorney General Jeff Sessions owns shares in the private prison industry and stands to gain financially from some of his recent policy announcements. It reported, ""It's more than a conflict of interest. The more people Attorney General Jeff Sessions sends to private prisons, the more money he shoves in his pockets."" From announcing he wants federal law enforcement agencies to arrest people for a little bit of weed to ordering federal prosecutors to find ways to convict more immigrants, Sessions is looking for ways to provide more clients to private prisons contracted by the federal government. As Attorney General Sessions fills these private prisons, he is making money. According to his latest financial disclosures required by Congress, dated December 23, 2016, he divested from other investments that were found to be in conflict. In these disclosures, he also lists numerous Vanguard funds. Vanguard owns more private prison stock than any other investment management company. A popular meme also broadcast this claim: The article lists three funds that Sessions has shares in, all of which are managed by the investment firm Vanguard, and claims that the funds contain holdings in two leading companies in the private prison industry: CoreCivic and GEO Group. This is true of only two of those funds. The third seems to be listed as the result of a mix-up. The article rightly states that one of these funds, the Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund, contains holdings in ""GEO Holdings Corporation."" However, this is a Japanese company that has no relation to the Florida-based private prison company GEO Group, as confirmed to Snopes.com by a spokesperson for GEO Group. As for the other two investment funds, federal financial disclosure records show that the Attorney General owns between $31,003 and $115,000 worth of shares in the Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund, yielding a total of between $1,403 and $4,500 in income per year for Sessions. And this fund does indeed include CoreCivic and GEO Group. However, what the article does not mention is that CoreCivic and GEO Group constitute just two out of 3,557 companies in the Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund. The Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund is what's known as an Excepted Investment Fund (EIF)—that means the fund is independently managed (that is, not by Sessions himself) and either publicly traded or ""widely diversified"" (that is, it doesn't focus on one particular sector of the economy), according to the Office of Government Ethics. A brief look at this particular fund shows that its more than 3,500 holdings relate to companies from throughout the economy, including well-known names such as Cracker Barrel, Zillow, and Rite Aid. The same is true of the Vanguard Small-Cap Index Fund, in which Sessions has between $15,001 and $50,000 worth of shares, yielding between $201 and $1,000 in income for him per year. While it does include holdings in CoreCivic and GEO Group, these are just two of 1,422 companies listed in the fund, which come from a variety of sectors and include names like Domino's Pizza and JetBlue Airways. According to Kathleen Clark, a professor at Washington University School of Law and an expert on legal and government ethics, investments in widely diversified funds such as these are unlikely to leave a public official vulnerable to conflicts of interest. ""If it's a diversified fund as opposed to being a sector fund [focused on one sector of the economy], then it's not subject to the conflict of interest statute."" Clark told us that even if one or two companies in a widely diversified fund were to perform well and increase their value, the presence of a large number of other companies in that fund means, ""It is exceedingly unlikely that such an interest would influence the government official, or that the public would perceive that as a significant risk."" This is because income from a widely diversified fund, like the two we're examining, is based on the aggregate value of the companies within that fund. Remember that in one fund, CoreCivic and GEO Group represent two out of 3,557 companies, and in the other, they represent two out of 1,422. Now remember that the Attorney General's total annual income from the first fund is between $1,403 and $4,500, and from the second fund, it's between $201 and $1,000. So while it's true that Jeff Sessions has some shares in funds that include holdings in two private prison companies, it's misleading to say that this means he stands to gain in any meaningful way from an increase in the value of those companies. The Attorney General's annual income from these funds—which is relatively low—depends on the overall performance of those funds. A surge in the value of CoreCivic or the GEO Group would very quickly be canceled out by a dip in the value of just a handful of the thousands of other companies included in those two funds, and because these are widely diversified Excepted Investment Funds, they don't fall foul of conflict of interest regulations.",['economy'],NEI,"On 12 April 2017, the partisan web site Crooks and Liars reported that Attorney General Jeff Sessions owns shares in the private prison industry and stands to gain financially from some of his recent policy announcements:The third seems to be listed as the result of a mix-up. The article rightly states that one of these funds, the Vanguard Total International Stock Index fund, contains holdings in ""GEO Holdings Corporation"". However, this is a Japanese company that has no relation to the Florida-based private prison company GEO Group, as confirmed to Snopes.com by a spokesperson for GEO Group.As for the other two investment funds, federal financial disclosure records show that the Attorney General owns between $31,003 and $115,000 worth of shares in the Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund, yielding a total of between $1,403 and $4,500 in income per year for Sessions.Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund is what's known as an Excepted Investment Fund (EIF) - that means the fund is independently managed (that is, not by Sessions himself), and either publicly traded or ""widely-diversified"" (that is, it doesn't focus on one particular sector of the economy), according to the Office of Government Ethics. The same is true of the Vanguard Small-Cap Index fund, in which Sessions has between $15,001 and $50,000 worth of shares, yielding between $201 and $1,000 in income for him, per year."
Giant Sea Creature Washes Ashore Along Santa Monica Coastline,['Has a gigantic squid washed ashore along the California coastline?'],"On 9 January 2014, the Lightly Braised Turnip website published an article (complete with a photo) positing that a gigantic mutant squid, grown to a size of 160 feet due to radioactivity, had been discovered on the California coast near Santa Monica. For the second time in recent months, a giant sea creature has washed ashore in California. First, it was a rare oarfish that had grown to a freakish 100-foot length. This time, it was a giant squid measuring a whopping 160 feet from head to tentacle tip. These giants look different, but experts believe they share one important commonality: they both come from the waters near the Fukushima Dai-ichi Nuclear Power Plant in the Futaba District of Japan. Scientists believe that following the 2011 disaster at the Fukushima Dai-ichi Nuclear Power Plant, an unknown number of sea creatures suffered genetic mutations that triggered uncontrolled growth or ""radioactive gigantism."" Unfortunately, this cadre of mutant giants seems to be drifting towards the continental U.S. Local officials in Santa Monica, CA, where the creature drifted ashore, tried to calm residents. By later that day, links and excerpts referencing this article were being circulated via social media, with many of those who encountered the item mistaking it for a genuine news article. However, that article was just a bit of fictional humor (a follow-up to an earlier fictional item about a giant oarfish supposedly discovered off the California coast) spoofing recent alarmist reports about dangerous radioactivity reaching the U.S. from Japan's crippled Fukushima nuclear power plant. The photo was a fabrication that melded a picture depicting a dead whale found in Chile back in 2011 with a picture of a giant squid that washed up on a Spanish beach in 2013. The Santa Monica area of California is just outside our home base here at snopes.com, and a quick drive along the coastline provided no view of a gigantic squid on the beach, nor did any of the many local news outlets cover any such topic. Disappointed, we headed elsewhere for our calamari lunch. Last updated: 9 January 2014.",['share'],False,"On 9 January 2014,  the Lightly Braised Turnip web site published an article (complete with photo) positing that a gigantic mutant squid grown to the size of 160 feet due to radioactivity had been discovered on the California coast near Santa Monica:By later that day, links and excerpts referencing this article were being circulated via social media, with many of those who encountered the item mistaking it for a genuine news article.  However, that article was just a bit of fictional humor (a follow-up to an earlier fictional item about a giant oarfish supposedly discovered off the California coast) spoofing recent alarmist reports about dangerous radioactivity reaching the U.S. from Japan's crippled Fukushima nuclear power plant. The photo was a fabrication that melded a picture depicting a dead whale found in Chile back in 2011 with a picture of a giant squid that washed up on a Spanish beach in 2013:"
Groom's wedding attire,"[""Did a man lists his ex-wife's wedding dress on eBay with a hilarious offer of sale?""]","Claim:  A man listed a wedding gown on eBay via a hilarious offer of sale that included photos of him posing in the dress.  Example:  [Collected on the Internet, 2004] For Sale: One Slightly Used Size 12 Wedding Gown. Only worn twice: Once at the wedding and once for these pictures. Make: Victoria Style: 611 Size: 12 Divorce forces sale I found my ex-wife's wedding dress in the attic when I moved.  She took the $4000 engagement ring but left the dress.  I was actually going to have a dress burning party when the divorce became final, but my sister talked me out of it.  She said, ""Thats such a gorgeous dress.  Some lucky girl would be glad to have it. You should sell it on EBay. At least get something back for it.""  So, this is what Im doing.  Im selling it hoping to get enough money for maybe a couple of Mariners tickets and some beer.  This dress cost me $1200 that my drunken sot of an ex-father-in-law swore up and down he would pay for but didnt so I got stuck with the bill.  Luckily I only got stuck with his daughter for 5 years. Thank the Lord we didn't have kids. If they would have turned out like her or her family I would have slit my wrists. Anyway, its a really nice dress as you can see in the pictures.  Personally, I think it looks like a $1200 shower curtain, but what do I know about this.  We tried taking pictures of this lovely white garment but it didnt look right on the hanger as you can see, so my sister says, ""You need a model.""  Well, quite frankly my sister isnt exactly small, (like a size 12 is?) so she wouldnt pose for the picture. Seeing as I have sworn off women for the time being and I aint friends with any, it left me holding the bag.  I took the liberty of blacking out my face - not to protect the ex-wife but to protect me from my bar buddies and co-workers finding out about it.  I would never live it down.  Actually I didnt think my head would fit in the neck hole, but then I figured she got her Texas cheerleader hair through there I could get my head in it.  Though, after looking at the pictures, I thought it made me look fat.  How do you women wear this crap? I only had to walk 3 feet and I tripped twice. Dont worry ladies - I am wearing clothes on underneath it.  I gotta say it did make me feel very pretty.  So if it can make me feel pretty, it can make you feel pretty, especially on the most important day of your life, right?  Anyway, I was told to say it has a train and a veil and all kinds of shiny beady things.  I think it's funny that one picture makes it look like the chest plate off an Imperial Storm Trooper.  Did I mention that all I want is a ball game and beer?  Cheap at twice the price.  Ladies, you wont regret this.  You may regret the dude you marry but not the dress. Just a little side note - As I was putting this ad in EBay, it asked me for a color.  Is a wedding dress any other freaking color than white or ivory??!!  If it is it wouldn't be a wedding dress, now would it??  I suppose black would work...  On Apr-26-04 at 10:38:31 PDT, seller added the following information: Well, the auction is a little over half over and I am just amazed.  This thing has taken more hits than that pothead that lives in the next building.  Man, oh man, if hits were bucks Id be getting a suite at Safeco.  I also have received TONS of email.  I dont have the time to reply to all of them but I just want to let everyone know that I appreciate the well wishes.  Of the email I received:  Five or so were invitations to ball games in other states.  Two of those were for little league games.  Do they have those cushy executive boxes with the free chicken wings at those?  One email was from Scotland.  Its a good thing he wrote it because I wouldnt be able to understand a word he said.  Never did get through Braveheart.  Most were thanking me for the laugh. Youre entirely welcome.  Five years of misery was well worth the hearty guffaw that was my pleasure to give you. Oh, yeah.  I also got three marriage proposals.  Yes, you read it right - three marriage proposals.  I feel like one of those mass murderers on death row.  I never understood how the hell they got more chicks than I did.  Now I know.  They sold crap on eBay.  On Apr-26-04 at 23:45:56 PDT, seller added the following information: Holy Moly!  The hit counter is starting to look like the odometer in my truck! Not the new shiny black full-size 4-wheel-drive American pick-up that I had to part with, but the somewhat older, multicolored, lumpy, tiny, 2-wheel-drive foreign pick-up that belches smoke. A little something about that vehicle, though: its absolutely amazing! When I get inside it to go to the store, I am all depressed. But when I arrive at the store, Im so freaking loopy from inhaling the fumes, I forget why I went there in the first place. Im saving buckets of money. Of course, I will probably have to spend it all on the tuberculosis I will acquire, but hey, you cant have everything. I felt compelled to update this ad once more due to all of your emails. The first thing I have to say is thank you all for your support in my time of need. It was a truly harrowing experience. Some of you men know exactly what I mean. Seeing as this has turned into my little public forum, I just want to address a few of the emails that kind of left me scratching my head. I now have five marriage proposals. You would think my speaking of the ones I already got yesterday would have put a damper on it, but you women sure are persistent. One woman actually said she doesnt want to marry me, but wouldnt mind being my ex-wife. Hmmm. Let me think about that. Nope. No thanks, already got one. (Pssst. Didnt I mention I had one? Who wants an ex-wife that cant read? Now, I know what you guys are thinking - ""If she cant read, then the divorce would be smooth sailing."" Well, that would be all well and good but I didnt say her ATTORNEY couldnt read. You following me on this?) Other emails are serious buyers asking about the dress. ""How long is the train?"" and ""Does the gown come with the headdress and veil?"" Yes, headdress and veil are included, but the do-rag stays with me. And if the train was long enough for my exs caboose, its long enough for yours. You will have to supply your own baggage, though. I gave mine to Goodwill. There was this one woman who wrote, ""You should have covered your tattoos. People will be able to recognize you, like on Americas Most Wanted."" HELLO!!! Im a guy selling a dress. Im not wanted for war crimes. Some of your emails made me laugh. Like the bitter woman that wished she had her exs testicles to sell on eBay. Im not too sure theres a market for that, though. Then there was the guy that gave his wifes wedding dress to the Salvation Army by mistake, thinking it was a Christmas tree. Guess he didnt have any Christmas balls that year. This has also been a learning experience for me. I got a lot of messages correcting me about the color of wedding dresses. For Russian Orthodox, they are blue. For Chinese they are red. Mexico has multi-colored ones. All I know is, for my next wedding I will be wearing a hairy, flesh-toned ensemble because I will be buck naked with a toe tag lying on a slab in the morgue because I would have killed myself. A lot of folks were asking me if I wear womens dresses a lot. I can honestly say that this is the first time I have ever donned female attire. Its also the first time Ive been inside something feminine that didnt nag me to take out the garbage. It seems a few people have taken offense to my inferring a size 12 is big. One male even pointed out that Marilyn Monroe was a size 14. Now, I would agree with you that size 12/14 is small if I lived elsewhere. But I live right here in the good old 48 Contiguous, where binging and purging is a way of life. American women do not want to be double digits in size. Just ask any woman what size they want to be. Invariably they will say five or seven. Wealthy will be the person that opens a store for Lane Bryant-sized women but sews size 7 tags on all the clothes.  On the flip side of that, I have taken offense to some of the people that told me Im ugly and a loser. All I have to say is youd be ugly too if you had a huge white blotch on your face. And as far as being a loser, I think you have it all wrong. I am such the winner. It isnt every day an average guy can make 50,000 people laugh. Thanks to each and every one of you from the heart of my bottom. Origins:  The online auction powerhouse eBay has been the setting of many strange come-ons, some seriously meant and some far less so. In addition to a throng of earnest sellers and determined bargain hunters that frequent this popular online bazaar, it is also populated by its share of crazies intent upon sneaking   their hoax listings into the marketplace. Consequently, one can't always tell fish from fowl at first glance. Over the years, our readers have queried us about various eBay auctions because they harbored suspicions about particular listings, either due to the nature of the goods being tendered or because something about the pitch struck them as not quite right (e.g.; an offer of a tea kettle, which displayed additional wares of the seller). Yet few of the auctions so doubted have been asked about as often as the April 2004 proffering of a size 12 Victoria wedding gown, an item that isn't in and of itself all that unusual. But it wasn't the dress that set people to wondering; it was the seller's comments, which appeared to afford a hilarious look into one man's private hell. The seller wasn't so much advertising a dress as he was proclaiming from a public soapbox how awful his wife had been. The auction listing was just as much about getting even as it was about unloading an item he had no particular use for. tea kettle Or was it?  Had a gal with ""Texas cheerleader hair"" really so turned a man against marriage that he swore that ""for my next wedding I will be wearing a hairy, flesh-toned ensemble because I will be buck naked with a toe tag lying on a slab in the morgue because I would have killed myself""? Herein rested the listing's appeal: The story was entertaining, but was it real? The solicitation was on the up and up, at least in regard to the nature of the merchandise being vended  there was such a dress, and the offer of sale was genuine. However, some (if not all) of the gown's backstory was the stuff of fairy tales. The original eBay listing posted by 42-year-old Larry Star wasn't provoking much interest among those shopping for a wedding dress, so he rewrote it to make it amusing  resulting in the posting that has served to make him famous. The tale of marital woe posted by this Brooklyn native both contained invented details and omitted key bits of information. Though he has a sister, she didn't talk him out of the dress burning party he had his heart set upon by suggesting he list the  gown on eBay and so get something out of it. He also had an ex-wife prior to the one whose dress he supposedly was selling. (Star and his first missus were married in 1994, separated in 1996, and were divorced in 1998.) And contrary to his statement, ""Thank the Lord we didn't have kids. If they would have turned out like her or her family I would have slit my wrists,"" he and his second wife did indeed have a son together during their short-lived marriage. The unhappy couple wed in 2000, separated in 2001 after a domestic kafuffle (which reportedly resulted in Star's being charged with domestic violence assault in the fourth degree and interfering with the reporting of domestic violence), and divorced in 2003. Though ""five years of misery"" might well have been worth the hearty guffaw he says was his pleasure to give the online community, those years weren't spent ""stuck"" with the ""drunken sot's"" daughter; his time cohabitating with Wife #2 amounted to just a bit more than a year. It's not known if the gown in question even belonged to his ex-wife, as she hasn't surfaced to speak publicly about the matter. Also, according to the Houston Chronicle, when asked if the dress had really been hers, Mr. Star sidestepped the question, instead replying, ""I got the wedding dress, I wanted to get rid of it. I was going to burn it and had the idea of selling it on eBay. I needed to sell it on eBay with all the other dresses on there, and I needed to make it stand out."" And stand out it did. The auction of the fabled wedding gown ended 28 April 2004 with a buyer using the online handle of ""absolutsth"" placing the winning bid of $3,850. Yet all is not coming up roses for the intrepid seller who one would assume to be realizing a profit of $2,650 on the gown he says cost originally $1,200, as the sale has fallen through. According to Star, the buyer has backed out, claiming ""I left my computer on and somebody made the bid for me."" The folks at eBay have told Star he can either accept the second-highest bid or re-list the dress and hold the sale again. As of 7 May 2004, he had not decided whether he would accept the next highest legitimate bid (if there even was a legitimate bid). By the time the auction ended, Star's listing on eBay had been viewed more than 5.8 million times. Some of those visitors, possibly caught up in the frenzy of it all, placed bids they did not intend to honor. (Officials at eBay had to weed out many phonies  at one point the bidding reached $99 million.) How many of the remaining bids were legitimate is not known. And, even if all those bids were meant seriously at the time they were placed, some of those prospective buyers may now be having second thoughts, particularly those who offered more than $1,000 for a used, stained dress that was only worth $1,200 when it first came off the hanger.  The ultimate fate of the frock may take it in a far different direction than down the aisle on the back of a budget-conscious bride. Its listing (which has now been viewed 11 million times) has brought recognition to its owner and has possibly opened the way to a new career for this software test designer and part-time musician. Thanks to the dress, Larry Star has twice been a guest on both MSNBC's Countdown and NBC's Today Show, each time wearing the unsold gown. Also thanks to the dress, he has made his debut as a stand-up comedian at the Punchline Comedy Club in Atlanta. He has said he would like to pursue a comedy writing career, and all this attention might well work to get that going.  Though there are many stand-up comedians on the circuit, we know of none that perform their schtick outfitted in wedding regalia. Could this gown do for Star what a sledgehammer and a watermelon did for Gallagher? Barbara ""smash hit"" Mikkelson Additional Information:   Weddingdressguy.com  (Larry Star)  Last updated:  3 July 2007    Sources:   Brodeur, Nicole.  ""Fact Is, There's Some Fiction to Man's Pitch to Sell His Ex-wife's Wedding Dress on eBay.""   The Seattle Times.  29 April 2004  (p. B1).     Curry, Ann, Matt Lauer and Katie, Couric.  ""Today.""   NBC.  30 April 2004.     Eldredge, Richard.  ""Wedding Dress Guy Jilted by eBay Bidder.""   The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.  7 May 2004  (p. E2).     Kelso, John.  ""Best of eBay: A Wedding Dress Tale.""   Cox News Service.  2 May 2004.     Olbermann, Keith.  ""Countdown.""   MSNBC.  30 April 2004.     Olbermann, Keith.  ""Countdown.""   MSNBC.  28 April 2004.     Parks, Louis.  ""On eBay, Wedding Dress for Success.""   The Houston Chronicle.  30 April 2004  (Houston; p. 1).     Weiss, Tara.  ""A Star is Born, Selling Wedding Dress on eBay.""   Hartford Courant.  30 April 2004  (p. D2).     Associated Press.  ""Man Who Sold Ex's Wedding Dress on eBay Earns Instant Fame.""   30 April 2004.     The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.  ""15 Minutes Still Ticking for Wedding Dress Guy.""   4 May 2004  (p. E2).",['budget'],True,"Over the years, our readers have queried us about various eBay auctions because they harbored suspicions about particular listings, either due to the nature of the goods being tendered or because something about the pitch struck them as not quite right (e.g.; an offer of a tea kettle, which displayed additional wares of the seller). Yet few of the auctions so doubted have been asked about as often as the April 2004 proffering of a size 12 Victoria wedding gown, an item that isn't in and of itself all that unusual. But it wasn't the dress that set people to wondering; it was the seller's comments, which appeared to afford a hilarious look into one man's private hell. The seller wasn't so much advertising a dress as he was proclaiming from a public soapbox how awful his wife had been. The auction listing was just as much about getting even as it was about unloading an item he had no particular use for.Additional Information:   Weddingdressguy.com  (Larry Star)"
Is Sheryl Underwood exiting 'The Talk' following her endorsement of weight loss gummies which has angered CBS?,"['An online article purportedly published by People magazine said Underwood had ""shocked everyone when she announced her departure from the show.""']","In November 2023, multiple Facebook ads were displayed to users that led to an article that bore the People magazine logo and claimed that Sheryl Underwood, the longtime co-host of ""The Talk,"" would be leaving the TV talk show to work on expanding her own line of keto gummies for weight loss. However, this was not true. Underwood has nothing to do with any keto gummies for weight loss, nor did People magazine ever publish any such story. Underwood was simply the latest person in a long line of famous people who had had their image and likeness used without permission to sell keto gummies. Further, this false rumor that mentioned Underwood led to a dangerous scam that could potentially cost victims thousands of dollars per year. a long line of famous people One version of the Facebook ad claimed, ""Producers are furious that she came forward."" The headline in the ads read, ""Sheryl Abandons 'The Talk' After Confessing Her Trick."" Two of the false Facebook ads that promoted the scam. These ads led to a fake People magazine article on scam websites including emperorsland.pro, sizzlingpear.pro, mindfulmovement.pro and chillytreats.info. (We were unable to provide an archived link to the article since scammers design these websites so that the scam version of the page is cloaked from prying eyes  that is, unless users specifically came from a Facebook ad.) This is not a true story, nor did People.com ever publish any such article. The fake People magazine article, which was nothing more than fiction and a scam, began as follows: Sheryl Underwood Confirms She Is Leaving 'The Talk' After Her Accidental 'Live' Confession On-Air... The host said that it was 'time for a break', but she may actually have bigger things in mind. (People) - Sheryl Underwood, the 60-year-old host on CBS's show 'The Talk', shocked everyone when she announced her departure from the show after 12 record-breaking years on-air. Sheryl, who has earned the reputation of being one of the most business savvy women in the industry, made sponsors (and CBS) FURIOUS. Why? Because Sheryl failed to disclose her new weight loss line to the network. Sheryl's new company is actually a HUGE competitor to CBS's current sponsor Weight Watchers because Sheryl's product is 90% cheaper and five times more effective than Weight Watchers's competing product. According to sources, CBS made Sheryl decide on which direction she was going to focus on in the future. Being so turned off by the reaction of the network and their power move she has decided to pursue her new weight loss line and dream. The scam article went on to falsely claim that other celebrities had joined with Underwood to promote the products, whether they be Belly Blast Keto Gummies, Total Fit Keto Gummies or other products. It is a fact that no celebrities have ever endorsed keto gummies that are purportedly intended for use in weight loss. Websites that promote sales of keto gummies for weight loss usually lack information about the true creators of the products and the source of where they were packaged. In the past, some consumers who fell victim to these scams told Snopes that the post office box numbers included in return addresses for the products don't exist. The rabbit hole for keto gummies goes even deeper, however. Two odd scenarios have been laid out by numerous victims of the scams, which usually involve monthly subscription fees often reported as being around $200 or more, or around $2,400 per year. Some consumers said that they never ordered the products but kept receiving shipments that they had no way of returning, due to fake return addresses. On the flip side, other customers said that they received charges for the products on their credit card statements despite never having ordered them, and then never received any products in the mail. Further, listings for keto gummies for weight loss on Amazon.com and Walmart.com often feature the words ""Shark"" and ""Tank,"" although not consecutively as ""Shark Tank."" The two words are included in product listings on Amazon.com and Walmart.com so that any customers searching online for keto gummies with the words ""Shark Tank""  after those same customers saw false claims that said the TV show's investors endorsed the products  would then fall victim to the scam and purchase the products based on the ""Shark Tank"" lie. Again, to be clear, no investors associated with ""Shark Tank"" ever endorsed gummies. false claims If any readers have been victimized by these scams, we recommend contacting your credit card company immediately, reporting fraud to the FTC and also searching the U.S. Better Business Bureau's (BBB) website to perform a search for the product name associated with the purchase on your account or the product that arrived at your doorstep, so that you can find the company or LLC connected with the scam. reporting fraud to the FTC website Liles, Jordan. Shark Tank Keto Gummies Weight Loss Reviews Are a Scam. Snopes, 14 Mar. 2023, https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/shark-tank-keto-gummies-weight-loss-reviews/.",['loss'],False,"However, this was not true. Underwood has nothing to do with any keto gummies for weight loss, nor did People magazine ever publish any such story. Underwood was simply the latest person in a long line of famous people who had had their image and likeness used without permission to sell keto gummies. Further, this false rumor that mentioned Underwood led to a dangerous scam that could potentially cost victims thousands of dollars per year.Further, listings for keto gummies for weight loss on Amazon.com and Walmart.com often feature the words ""Shark"" and ""Tank,"" although not consecutively as ""Shark Tank."" The two words are included in product listings on Amazon.com and Walmart.com so that any customers searching online for keto gummies with the words ""Shark Tank""  after those same customers saw false claims that said the TV show's investors endorsed the products  would then fall victim to the scam and purchase the products based on the ""Shark Tank"" lie. Again, to be clear, no investors associated with ""Shark Tank"" ever endorsed gummies.If any readers have been victimized by these scams, we recommend contacting your credit card company immediately, reporting fraud to the FTC and also searching the U.S. Better Business Bureau's (BBB) website to perform a search for the product name associated with the purchase on your account or the product that arrived at your doorstep, so that you can find the company or LLC connected with the scam."
Did Monica Lewinsky 'Leave Behind' an 'Impressive' Net Worth?,['Online advertisements falsely implied that Monica Lewinsky was dead and claimed that her net worth stunned her family.'],"In late December 2020, a misleading online advertisement appeared, announcing that Monica Lewinsky was dead and that her net worth stunned her family. It read: ""Monica Lewinsky's Net Worth Stuns Her Family At Age 47. Monica Lewinsky Leaves Behind A Net Worth That Will Boggle Your Mind."" However, this was not true. She is alive, and despite what the ad claimed, there was no indication in the resulting story that her net worth shocked her family. The ad was sponsored by the Therapy Joker website and was hosted on the Yahoo! Gemini advertising service. Readers who clicked the ad were led to a 430-page story with the headline: ""The Biggest Hollywood Celebrities & Their Incredible Net Worth: Can You Guess Who Has The Biggest Bank Account?"" Lewinsky's net worth appeared on page 417, meaning that readers had to click ""Next Page"" 417 times to reach her section: ""Monica Lewinsky: Activist and TV Personality - $500,000."" Monica Samille Lewinsky is a woman of many skills. This popular American television personality is also a successful fashion designer, activist, and a former intern at the White House. The paparazzi constantly followed her, and she was a regular face in the media during her time at the White House. However, she decided to leave all that behind and pursue a different career. Additionally, she authored the book, ""Monica: Her Story,"" which added to her fame. The London School of Economics and Political Science alumna is now 47 years old and remains a popular television personality. She rents a lavish apartment and enjoys a luxurious lifestyle. Her fleet of cars includes a Mini Cooper and a Cadillac. We hope she has a professional financial advisor to assist her with her banking needs. Currently, the media personality, activist, and fashion designer has retained her fame, and we hope Lewinsky continues to manage the money she has accumulated over the years. The page mentioned nothing about Lewinsky's purported death, nor did it present any information about her family being stunned by her net worth. The misleading advertisement and exceptionally lengthy article reflect a strategy known in the advertising world as ""arbitrage."" The Therapy Joker website's goal was to make more money from ads displayed on each of the 430 pages than it cost to lure readers with the initial ""Monica Lewinsky's Net Worth Stuns Her Family"" ad. The business and technology blog Margins defined ""arbitrage"" as ""leveraging an inefficient set of systems to make a riskless profit, usually by buying and selling the same asset."" Margins also referred to it as ""the mythical free lunch that economics tells us does not exist."" Lewinsky was a White House intern in the mid-1990s who became famous after her affair with former U.S. President Bill Clinton became a public scandal. In December 1998, Clinton was impeached by the U.S. House of Representatives. However, the Senate did not vote to convict and remove him from office, and he served the remainder of his second term in the White House. We previously covered similar misleading net worth stories for Sean Connery, Jaleel White, Richard Gere, Chuck Norris, Clint Eastwood, and Alex Trebek. Snopes debunks a wide range of content, and online advertisements are no exception. Misleading ads often lead to obscure websites that host lengthy slideshow articles with many pages. It's called advertising ""arbitrage."" The advertiser's goal is to make more money on ads displayed on the slideshow's pages than it cost to show the initial ad that lured them to it. Feel free to submit ads to us, and be sure to include a screenshot of the ad and the link to where the ad leads.",['asset'],False,"In late December 2020, a misleading online advertisement appeared to announce that Monica Lewinsky was dead and that her net worth stunned her family. It read: ""Monica Lewinsky's Net Worth Stuns Her Family At Age 47. Monica Lewinsky Leaves Behind A Net Worth That Will Boggle Your Mind.""Lewinsky's net worth appeared on page 417. This meant that readers had to click ""Next Page"" 417 times to reach the page for Lewinsky:The business and technology blog Margins defined ""arbitrage"" as ""leveraging an inefficient set of systems to make a riskless profit, usually by buying and selling the same asset."" Margins also referred to it as ""the mythical free lunch that economics tells us does not exist.""Lewinsky was a White House intern in the mid-1990s who became famous after her affair with former U.S. President Bill Clinton became a public scandal. In December 1998, Clinton was impeached by the U.S. House of Representatives. However, the Senate did not vote to convict and remove him from office. He served the remainder of his second term in the White House.We previously covered similar misleading net worth stories for Sean Connery, Jaleel White, Richard Gere, Chuck Norris, Clint Eastwood, and Alex Trebek.Snopes debunks a wide range of content, and online advertisements are no exception. Misleading ads often lead to obscure websites that host lengthy slideshow articles with lots of pages. It's called advertising ""arbitrage."" The advertiser's goal is to make more money on ads displayed on the slideshow's pages than it cost to show the initial ad that lured them to it. Feel free to submit ads to us, and be sure to include a screenshot of the ad and the link to where the ad leads."
Is Biden Proposing a 3% Federal Property Tax?,['The Democratic presidential candidate has not proposed a 3% property tax.'],"During the 2020 U.S. presidential campaign, social media postings repeatedly warned readers that Democratic candidate Joe Biden was planning to impose a 3% federal tax on the value of homes, in addition to any property taxes homeowners were already paying. However, this warning about a Biden-backed federal property tax was unfounded. Property taxes in the U.S. are set and collected at the state, county, and city levels, and the announced Biden Tax Plan includes nothing that could be construed as imposing an additional federal property tax on privately owned homes. The Tax Foundation, an independent tax policy nonprofit, summarizes the Biden tax plan as including the following primary elements applicable to individuals (rather than businesses): it imposes a 12.4 percent Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance (Social Security) payroll tax on income earned above $400,000, evenly split between employers and employees. This would create a donut hole in the current Social Security payroll tax, where wages between $137,700, the current wage cap, and $400,000 are not taxed. It reverts the top individual income tax rate for taxable incomes above $400,000 from 37 percent under current law to the pre-Tax Cuts and Jobs Act level of 39.6 percent. It taxes long-term capital gains and qualified dividends at the ordinary income tax rate of 39.6 percent on income above $1 million and eliminates the step-up in basis for capital gains taxation. It caps the tax benefit of itemized deductions to 28 percent of value for those earning more than $400,000, which means that taxpayers earning above that income threshold with tax rates higher than 28 percent would face limited itemized deductions. It restores the Pease limitation on itemized deductions for taxable incomes above $400,000. It phases out the qualified business income deduction (Section 199A) for filers with taxable income above $400,000. It expands the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) for childless workers aged 65 and older and provides renewable-energy-related tax credits to individuals. It expands the Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit (CDCTC) from a maximum of $3,000 in qualified expenses to $8,000 ($16,000 for multiple dependents) and increases the maximum reimbursement rate from 35 percent to 50 percent. For 2021 and as long as economic conditions require, it increases the Child Tax Credit (CTC) from a maximum value of $2,000 to $3,000 for children 17 or younger, while providing a $600 bonus credit for children under 6. The CTC would also be made fully refundable, removing the $2,500 reimbursement threshold and 15 percent phase-in rate. It reestablishes the First-Time Homebuyers Tax Credit, which was originally created during the Great Recession to help the housing market. Biden's homebuyers credit would provide up to $15,000 for first-time homebuyers. It expands the estate and gift tax by restoring the rate and exemption to 2009 levels. Similar analyses of Biden's tax plan by other entities include no mention of a federal property tax.",['income'],False,"However, this warning about a Biden-backed federal property tax was specious. Property taxes in the U.S. are set and collected at the state, county, and city levels, and the announced Biden Tax Plan includes nothing that could be remotely construed as imposing an additional federal property tax on privately-owned homes.The Tax Foundation, an independent tax policy nonprofit, summarizes the Biden tax plan as including the following primary elements applicable to individuals (rather than businesses):Similar analysis of Biden's tax plan by other entities include no mention of a federal property tax."
Did Liberals Demand an 'Offensive' WWI Memorial Be Torn Down?,"['A popular meme about the Bladensburg Cross claimed that ""liberals"" were ""offended"" by the WWI memorial and demanded its removal.']","On 7 December 2016 , a meme appeared on social media that claimed an unnamed ""liberal group"" sought to tear down a 90-year-old World War I memorial, because they found it offensive: meme   The post contained no information or citation, did not name the ""liberal group"" involved, the location of the memorial, the date of the purported controversy, and the grounds by which these individuals believed the monument to be offensive. (Nevertheless, the item's share count reached six digits in just two days.) The image was easily identifiable as the Bladensburg, Maryland ""Peace Cross"" (known simply as the Bladensburg Cross): Bladensburg Known also as Peace Cross. The Snyder-Farmer Post of the American Legion of Hyattsville erected the forty foot cross of cement and marble to recall the forty-nine men of Prince Georges County who died in World War I. The cross was dedicated on July 13, 1925, by the American Legion. A bronze tablet at the base of the monument contains the unforgettable words of Woodrow Wilson: The right is more precious than the peace; we shall fight for the things we have always carried nearest our hearts; to such a task we dedicate ourselves. At the base of the monument are the words, Valor, Endurance, Courage, Devotion. At its heart, the cross bears a great gold star. A 7 December 2016 Washington Post article reported that years-long litigation over the cross was brought by the American Humanist Association due to the religious nature of the public memorial: reported The high court has allowed some monuments with religious content to stand and rejected others on public sites ... The towering, pink-hued cross honors the 49 Prince Georges County men who died in World War I. The monument was completed in 1925 with funds raised by the American Legion and local families. It sits on land owned by the Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission, a state agency that pays for upkeep and repairs, according to court filings. The appeal was brought by the American Humanist Association after a U.S. District Court judge [in 2015] declined to order that the cross be removed, saying that it is a historically significant secular war memorial. The original complaint [PDF] was filed in February 2015 against the Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission. In the suit's opening lines, the plaintiffs explained the action was not because they found the symbol itself offensive:  PDF This action challenges the constitutionality of the Defendants ownership, maintenance and prominent display on public property of a massive Christian cross (the Bladensburg Cross) as a violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, as applied to Maryland by the Fourteenth Amendment. Under ""Causes of Action,"" the group reiterated its motivation in bringing the suit: The Defendants ownership, maintenance and prominent display on public property of the Bladensburg Cross amounts to the endorsement and advancement of religion (and, specifically, an endorsement of and affiliation with Christianity) in violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. The Defendants ownership, maintenance and prominent display on public property of the Bladensburg Cross lacks a secular purpose in violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. The Defendants ownership, maintenance and prominent display on public property of the Bladensburg Cross fosters excessive governmental entanglement with religion in violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. The Defendant acted under color of state law in violating the First Amendment as described herein in violation of 42 U.S.C. 1983. The American Humanist Association said repeatedly that the litigation was about what the group argued was a violation of the Establishment Clause, not a matter of offense. A 26 February 2014 article in The Humanist further explained the suit: Establishment Clause explained At the core of the First Amendments Establishment Clause is the principle that the government must not favor or prefer some religions over others, or religion over non-religion. No matter how small the preference may seem to some, particularly to adherents of the favored religion, the framers of the Constitution believed that The breach of neutrality that is today a trickling stream may all too soon become a raging torrent. When the government erects an exclusively Christian monument on government property, it violates this central command of the Establishment Clause by sending a clear message that Christianity is the preferred religion over all others. When the religious monument is dedicated to fallen soldiers, it sends an even more egregious message that only Christian soldiers are worth memorializing. Non-Christian soldiers such as atheists and humanists are inherently excluded. Such is the case with a cross in Bladensburg, Maryland, commonly known as the Peace Cross, which stands forty-feet high on a government-owned median between roadways. In addition to the obvious sectarian nature of the Latin cross, the Bladensburg cross was also erected with religious motives ... In seeking the removal of the Bladensburg cross, the American Humanist Association seeks only to eliminate this stigmatic message to non-adherents of Christianity. It urges the government to erect an inclusive monument that will honor all fallen soldiers, regardless of their faith. On 30 November 2015, the Baltimore Sun reported that a federal court in Maryland ruled the Bladensburg cross was constitutional, a decision that prompted the December 2016 appeal: reported The U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland ruled [in November 2015] that even though the Bladensburg World War I Veterans Memorial, a 40-foot-tall monument erected in 1925, takes the shape of a cross, its purpose is not primarily religious. Therefore, the court found, it does not violate the First Amendment's provision that ""Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion."" Social media users were riled once again about the controversy after the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the ruling, prompting a Fox News opinion column by Todd Starnes on 18 October 2017: column In 2014, the American Humanist Association -- a group that believes in ""being good without a god"" -- filed a lawsuit alleging the cross-shaped memorial is unconstitutional and demanding it be demolished, altered, or removed ... On [17 October 2017], the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals agreed and ruled the historic memorial must be torn down -- all because the Bladensburg Memorial is in the shape of a cross.   [...] I warned Americans in my new book, The Deplorables Guide to Making America Great Again, that the war against religious liberty and traditional American values is far from over. A militant group of atheists, agnostics and free-thinkers want to eradicate Christianity in the public marketplace. The only way to stop this evil scourge is for people of faith to stand together and fight back in the courts. Starnes did not mention that the American Humanist Association's ""[urged] the government to erect an inclusive monument that will honor all fallen soldiers, regardless of their faith"" or that the cross was on public land. The Baltimore Sun reported: reported A federal appeals court ruled that a 40-foot, cross-shaped war memorial that has stood on public land in Maryland for nearly a century is unconstitutional because it excessively entangles the government with religion ... The 2-1 ruling reverses a 2015 district court decision that found the purpose of the cross is not primarily religious and that the site has been used almost exclusively for celebrating federal holidays. Supporters of the memorial have raised the impact an adverse decision could have on other sites  notably, Arlington National Cemetery. Crosses are common on headstones and elsewhere at the cemetery. A 24-foot granite cross, the Canadian Cross of Sacrifice, is positioned near the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier. The court dismissed the notion that the two sites are related. The crosses there are much smaller than the 40-foot tall monolith at issue here, the court wrote. And, significantly, Arlington National Cemetery displays diverse religious symbols, both as monuments and on individual headstones. Chief Judge Roger L. Gregory, writing in dissent, questioned the legal significance of the crosss size. In the majoritys view, the memorial is unconstitutional based predominantly on the size of the cross, and neither its secular features nor history could overcome the presumption, Gregory wrote. But such a conclusion is contrary to our constitutional directive.  Fritze, John.  ""Appeals Court Rules That Peace Cross In Bladensburg Violates The Constitution.""
  Baltimore Sun.  18 October 2017. Marimow, Anne E.  ""Could Moving a Giant Cross or Cutting Off Its Arms Resolve a 1st Amendment Case?""
  The Washington Post.  7 December 2016. Miller, Monica.  ""Why We Sued Bladensburg, Md Over a 40-Foot Cross.""
  The Humanist.  26 February 2014. Pitts, Jonathan.  ""Court Finds Cross Memorial Constitutional.""
  Baltimore Sun.  30 November 2016. Starnes, Todd.  ""Federal Court Rules World War I Memorial Cross Must Be Torn Down.""
  Fox News.  18 October 2017. U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland.  ""American Humanist Association v. Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission.""
  25 February 2014. The Town of Bladensburg.  ""Memorial Cross.""
  Accessed 9 December 2016. Updated [19 October 2017]: Added information about a 17 October 2017 reversal of the 2015 decision deeming the preservation of Bladensburg cross constitutionally sound.",['funds'],NEI,"On 7 December 2016 , a meme appeared on social media that claimed an unnamed ""liberal group"" sought to tear down a 90-year-old World War I memorial, because they found it offensive:The image was easily identifiable as the Bladensburg, Maryland ""Peace Cross"" (known simply as the Bladensburg Cross):A 7 December 2016 Washington Post article reported that years-long litigation over the cross was brought by the American Humanist Association due to the religious nature of the public memorial:The original complaint [PDF] was filed in February 2015 against the Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission. In the suit's opening lines, the plaintiffs explained the action was not because they found the symbol itself offensive: The American Humanist Association said repeatedly that the litigation was about what the group argued was a violation of the Establishment Clause, not a matter of offense. A 26 February 2014 article in The Humanist further explained the suit:On 30 November 2015, the Baltimore Sun reported that a federal court in Maryland ruled the Bladensburg cross was constitutional, a decision that prompted the December 2016 appeal:Social media users were riled once again about the controversy after the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the ruling, prompting a Fox News opinion column by Todd Starnes on 18 October 2017:Starnes did not mention that the American Humanist Association's ""[urged] the government to erect an inclusive monument that will honor all fallen soldiers, regardless of their faith"" or that the cross was on public land. The Baltimore Sun reported:"
Oranges Injected with HIV?,['Rumor: Oranges from Libya have been injected with HIV-positive blood and pose a danger of infection.'],"On 24 February 2015, a Facebook user posted a photograph of what appeared to be sliced oranges with red veining or discoloration. According to the user, the citrus fruits depicted were imported from Libya, seized in Algeria, and had been injected with the blood of an HIV-positive person. The immigration services of Algeria recovered a large quantity of these oranges coming from Libya, which were allegedly injected with HIV-positive blood. The user urged others to share the message and warn people of the dangers involved. The image attached to the post had previously appeared on a Facebook page on 19 February 2015, but the tone of that version was far more skeptical. The earlier posting noted that rumors about the oranges varied and that the source of the photograph was unknown. Prior to that, a version of the rumor was posted to a message board on 19 December 2014, similarly claiming that the oranges were tainted with HIV-positive blood. Regardless of the origin of the image, the underlying claim is not plausible. Even if oranges shipped from Libya (or elsewhere) to Algeria were injected with HIV, no threat would be posed by that sort of contamination. As noted in discussions of earlier rumors about tainted fruit, HIV cannot be transmitted in the manner described. Except for rare cases in which children consumed food that was pre-chewed by an HIV-infected caregiver, HIV has not been spread through food. The virus does not survive long outside the body. You cannot contract it from consuming food handled by an HIV-infected person; even if the food contained small amounts of HIV-infected blood or semen, exposure to air, heat from cooking, and stomach acid would destroy the virus. Despite the implausibility, rumors about unsuspecting individuals engaged in otherwise low-risk activities contracting HIV have circulated for decades. Similar versions involved a booby-trapped gas pump, deliberately tainted ketchup dispensers, and adulterated pizza purposefully contaminated with infected bodily fluids.",['share'],False,"The image appended to the post had previously appeared on a Facebook page on 19 February 2015, but the tone of that version was far more skeptical. The earlier posting observed that rumors about the oranges varied, and that the source of the photograph was not known. Prior to that, a version of the rumor was posted to a message board on 19 December 2014 and similarly claimed the oranges were tainted with HIV-positive blood.Regardless of the origin of the image, the underlying claim is not plausible. Even if oranges shipped from Libya (or elsewhere) to Algeria were injected with HIV, no threat would be posed by that sort of contamination. As we noted in discussion of earlier rumors about tainted fruit, HIV cannot be transmitted in the manner described:Plausibility notwithstanding, rumors about unwitting folks engaged in otherwise low-risk activities contracting HIV have circulated for decades. Similar versions involved a booby-trapped gas pump, deliberately tainted ketchup dispensers, and adulterated pizza purposefully contaminated with infected bodily fluids."
Tioga Hills Elementary School Controversy,['Rumor: A hearing-impaired student at Tioga Hills Elementary School was physically disciplined by a teacher and sustained a dislocated shoulder as a result.']," Claim:  A hearing-impaired student at Tioga Hills Elementary School was physically disciplined by a teacher and sustained a dislocated shoulder as a result. Example:  [Collected via Facebook, April 2015]   PLEASE SHARE! I would like to ask my friends to please share and support us at this time. I am not going to stand silent anymore. On Tuesday, March 17th, my son, Tommy suffered an attack on him by his math teacher, Mrs. Joan Barr Pokorak at Tioga Hills Elementary School in the Vestal School District. As many of you know, my 10 year old, fourth grade son, Tommy has been through many ear surgeries over the past years, resulting in a significant hearing loss in his left ear. He has a 504 Plan in place at school due to his disability. The plan specifies that he have preferential seating in the front of the room with his right ear, his ""good"" ear towards the teacher. This plan has been in place over 2 years. It came to our attention that during this math teacher's class, Tommy is seated near the back of the classroom with his impaired ear in the direction of the math teacher. During CSE meetings the hearing specialist from the school noted that Tom cannot hear in this position. Tommy and students in the classroom testify that on Tuesday, March 17th Mrs. Pokorak was working on a math problem at the front of the room and hesitating with an answer. Tommy blurted out, ""the answer is.."" giving the answer out of turn. From what students have testified, Mrs. Pokorak screamed, ""GET OUT!!!!""   Tommy said he was startled and wasn't sure if she was talking to him. She came directly behind him, dragged and lifted him up from his chair, pulled him by his right arm to the door and pushed him out into the hallway with both hands while screaming, ""GET OUT!!!"" She then slammed the door, causing the teacher from the next door classroom to come out into the hallway to see what was going on. Parents reported to me, that students still in the classroom sat there stunned. My son was hurting, shocked, and terrified what just happened to him. When Tommy came home that day, I checked with parents of students in the class to see what they would say happened. They all told the same scenario that Tom relayed of the events. Tommy complained of shoulder pain and his shoulder was making very loud popping sounds. Concerned that the teacher had injured his shoulder, I took him to Lourdes Hospital Emergency Room. X-rays and the Dr. confirmed that due to the attack on Tommy from this teacher, he suffered a third degree separation (Closed dislocation) of his Acromioclavicular Joint with significant scapular winging. At that time the hospital social worker said as a mandated reporter she must call Child Protective Services for an investigation of the case. Our family was devastated. Expecting to hear from Vestal School District regarding their concern for Tom's health and well being we waited and waited thinking we would be contacted by someone from the district. Up to this point, no explanation or even acknowledgement of the incident has been made on the part of the school. The State Police investigator has informed us that the school district has blocked him from contacting individuals, students, and has retained legal counsel for Mrs. Pokarak.  Again, to this day she refuses to speak to the investigator regarding her brutal attack on my son. Now, the Tioga County District Attorney, Eric Gartenman, is refusing to speak with our attorney regarding this incident. We are left confused and without resolution or answers as to why. When speaking with the investigating officer, he stated that Mr. Gartenman felt that Mrs. Pokarak was justified in injuring my son due to his ""talking in class."" The investigator stated that Tommy wasn't out of control, disrespectful to the teacher or others..he was ""talking."" When we explained that he MUST be seated toward the front of the room with his good ear facing the teacher (according to his 504 plan) Tommy said he truly didn't hear the teacher from where he was placed in the classroom if she had asked him to be quiet. Why couldn't she ask him to leave the class, why the brutal attack that resulted in a dislocation? What kind of force and anger causes this action and injury? Why is this okay? And WHY are there so many questions left unanswered?!  My son is now experiencing both physical and emotional trauma due to this assault. He is afraid to be in school, afraid of another attack. If not on my son..who will be next? Our elected officials are doing NOTHING!! So, when you think your kids are safe at school, think again. It is with a heavy heart that I post this and ask for support, because I am a teacher and can't even imagine EVER harming one of my students. Please, please help us get the word out regarding this cover up by Vestal School District and Eric Gartenman and ask for justice on behalf of my son. Keep all of our children safe. Please ""Share"" in hopes we migh get some help and resolution and prevent this from happening to someone else's child. Thank you so much- Sharon and Frank Russo.  [Click here to expand text]. [Click here to expand text] Origins:   Sharon Vail Russo of Binghamton, New York, posted the above-reproduced item to her Facebook page on 3 April 2015, detailing an alleged assault on her 10-year-old son Tommy by his math teacher on 17 March 2015 at the Tioga Hills Elementary School in in Apalachin, New York.  According to Ms. Russo's account, her fourth-grade son has a significant hearing loss in one ear and is therefore typically seated in classrooms towards the front of the room with his ""good"" ear positioned towards the teacher in order to help compensate for his hearing loss. For some reason Tommy was seated in a disadvantageous position in his math class, and when he supposedly blurted out something like ""c'mon, the answer is ..."" in reference to a math problem the teacher was attempting to work out on in front of the room, the teacher yelled at him to ""GET OUT"" of the classroom. When Tommy failed to respond to this command (because his hearing issue made him unsure whether it was addressed to him), the teacher physically dragged him out of his seat, pushed and pulled him out the classroom door and into the hallway, and slammed the door behind him, screaming at him and dislocating his shoulder in the process. posted The New York State Police Child Abuse hotline was contacted a day after the alleged incident, and in April 2015 state police reported they had completed an investigation into the allegations and that a decision on whether to pursue criminal charges (two possible misdemeanor charges) rested in the hands of the Tioga County District Attorney. On 6 April 2015 Ms. Russo posted again about the incident to her Facebook page, indicating that the district attorney's office had opened a case about the matter: posted I spoke with my attorney, Mr. Ronald Benjamin. He told me that he has been in contact with Mr. Gartenman (1st Assistant DA for Tioga Co.) and the case has been opened. He expressed that as soon as the big trial Tioga Co. is dealing with now is over, they will be dealing with the CPS investigation from the NY State Police regarding Mrs. P.Mr. Benjamin also said he would speak to media regarding the case and they should contact him should they wish.  As for the teacher, Mrs. P- She is still at Tioga Hills Elementary as of today. However, on 7 April 2015 Vestal Central School District Superintendent Mark LaRoach sent a letter to parents of students at Tioga Hills Elementary stating that the District Attorney's office had determined the accusations were unfounded and the teacher had been exonerated. letter Nonetheless, the Russos' attorney said they had filed an action against the school district that would ""mature into a lawsuit in the next couple of months."" Last updated:  9 April 2015 ",['share'],NEI,"[Click here to expand text].Origins:   Sharon Vail Russo of Binghamton, New York, posted the above-reproduced item to her Facebook page on 3 April 2015, detailing an alleged assault on her 10-year-old son Tommy by his math teacher on 17 March 2015 at the Tioga Hills Elementary School in in Apalachin, New York.  According to Ms. Russo's account, her fourth-grade son has a significant hearing loss in one ear and is therefore typically seated in classrooms towards the front of the room with his ""good"" ear positioned towards the teacher in order to help compensate for his hearing loss. For some reason Tommy was seated in a disadvantageous position in his math class, and when he supposedly blurted out something like ""c'mon, the answer is ..."" in reference to a math problem the teacher was attempting to work out on in front of the room, the teacher yelled at him to ""GET OUT"" of the classroom. When Tommy failed to respond to this command (because his hearing issue made him unsure whether it was addressed to him), the teacher physically dragged him out of his seat, pushed and pulled him out the classroom door and into the hallway, and slammed the door behind him, screaming at him and dislocating his shoulder in the process.The New York State Police Child Abuse hotline was contacted a day after the alleged incident, and in April 2015 state police reported they had completed an investigation into the allegations and that a decision on whether to pursue criminal charges (two possible misdemeanor charges) rested in the hands of the Tioga County District Attorney. On 6 April 2015 Ms. Russo posted again about the incident to her Facebook page, indicating that the district attorney's office had opened a case about the matter:However, on 7 April 2015 Vestal Central School District Superintendent Mark LaRoach sent a letter to parents of students at Tioga Hills Elementary stating that the District Attorney's office had determined the accusations were unfounded and the teacher had been exonerated."
Should You Avoid Getting a Flu Shot?,"['Its flu season, and that means a whole new wave of recycled anti-vaccine fearmongering.']","Every flu season sees an increase in viral web stories making largely unsubstantiated allegations about the health risks of the flu shot that include claims about their scary-sounding ingredients, connections to a variety of diseases (including Alzheimer's), and their supposed lack of efficacy in general: The pharmaceutical industry, medical experts and the mainstream media are candid in telling us that flu vaccines contain strains of the flu virus. What they are less likely to reveal though is the long list of other ingredients that come with the vaccine. It is now a known fact that flu vaccines contain mercury, a heavy metal known to be hazardous for human health. Mercury toxicity can cause depression, memory loss, cardiovascular diseases, respiratory problems, ADD, oral health problems, digestive imbalances and other serious health issues. The article quoted above, which is representative of the text and claims that appear nearly identically in hundreds of Facebook posts, makes a number of claims that need to be investigated on their own merits: identically  Claim: The flu shot makes you sick to begin with.  Flu shots work by introducing dead (inactivated) strains of influenza virus, which trigger your immune system to create antibodies to fight those strains. These antibodies make your body more prepared to fight if should it be exposed to an active strain in the future. Because the strains are inactive, any sickness you develop after the shot is not caused by influenza, according to the Harvard Medical School: according The vaccine is made from an inactivated virus that can't transmit infection. So people who get sick after receiving a flu vaccination were going to get sick anyway. It takes a week or two to get protection from the vaccine. But people assume that because they got sick after getting the vaccine, the shot caused their illness. It is, of course, possible that feelings of sickness come from some of the side effects of the injection, but the vaccine itself is not infecting you in any way. side effects Claim: Flu vaccines contain other dangerous ingredients such as mercury. false Flu shots administered from multi-use vials may contain a preservative called thimerosal, which breaks down into ethylmercury in the body. Mercury is an element and as such it can be found in many different chemical forms. But when people are concerned about mercury toxicity, they are concerned about methylmercury, which is indeed toxic at high levels and could cause some of the problems listed above. may contain methylmercury Ethylmercury, on the other hand, passes through your body quickly, and numerous studies have found it safe for use in vaccines (though there is some evidence that its use could be problematic for infants  a population that CDC does not  recommend for flu shots anyway). Saying ethylmercury is dangerous because is contains mercury is like saying that your table salt is at risk of spontaneous combustion because it contains sodium. passes for infants  recommend spontaneous combustion Thimerosal, additionally, has been used for decades by the anti-vaccine movement to stoke vaccination fear by suggesting it causes by suggesting it causes autism. This link has been discredited over, and over, and over, and over, and over again and is further compromised by the fact that autism rates are still climbing despite the fact that childhood vaccines no longer contain this ingredient. over over over over over climbing contain  Claim: The flu shot can give you Alzheimer's disease. false The leading immunogeneticist Dr. Hugh Fudenberg, whom the article cites as the authority on this claim, had his medical license revoked in 1995 for ethical misconduct and was an outspoken proponent of the widely discredited MMR-autism link. His claim of the link between Alzheimer's and vaccines, though hard to trace, may or may not come from a talk he gave at the 1997 NVIC International Vaccine Conference. The statement has not been backed up by any published peer-reviewed research since then. In fact, a 2001 study found that adults exposed to vaccines were at a lower risk of Alzheimers. revoked in 1995 may or may not study Claim: The very people pushing flu vaccinations are making billions of dollars each year.  Pharmaceutical companies (sometimes) profit from vaccines, but the fact that a company makes a profit is an appeal to emotion and is not evidence to support the claim of a faulty product or of nefarious intent. It also may not be accurate. A recent Atlantic article covered this question extensively, stating: article Not only do pediatricians and doctors often lose money on vaccine administration, it wasn't too long ago that the vaccine industry was struggling with slim profit margins and shortages. The Economist wrote that ""for decades vaccines were a neglected corner of the drugs business, with old technology, little investment and abysmal profit margins. Many firms sold their vaccine divisions to concentrate on more profitable drugs."" The suggestion of massive profits from flu shots ignores the fact that profits margins are generally much higher for other drugs than for flu vaccines, as well. The same Atlantic article cites one estimate that puts the vaccine market at around $24 billion. This sounds like a large number, but it would, in fact, account for only two to three percent of the pharmaceutical market worldwide. article Claim: There is a lack of real evidence that young children even benefit fromflu shots.  Many anti-vaccine articles parrot the claim that ""51 studies involving 260,000 children showed no benefit compared to a placebo for children under the age of two"". This stems from a 2008 meta-analysis that did indeed conclude that there is less efficacy for children under the age of two, something the CDC already recognizes on their website. However, of the 51 studies analyzed and the 260,000 observations those studies included, only one study (at the time) was performed on children below the age of two using inactive strains (the kind found in flu shots). A later study in 2011 that reviewed over 5,000 research articles concluded that flu shots consistently show highest efficacy in young children (aged 6 months to 7 years), categorically rejecting the claim that there is a lack of real evidence that young children benefit from the shot. 2008 meta-analysis recognizes study Claim: The flu shot makes you more susceptible to pneumonia and other contagious diseases. false People with compromised immune systems are at higher risk of complications from vaccines when those vaccines contain live strains (which, again, the flu shot does not), and some skin reactions are possible immediately following an injection. risk possible However, the notion that the flu shot weakens the immune system is false. According to a review paper in the journal Pediatrics: paper Vaccines may cause temporary suppression of delayed-type hypersensitivity skin reactions or alter certain lymphocyte function tests in vitro. However, the short-lived immunosuppression caused by certain vaccines does not result in an increased risk of infections with other pathogens soon after vaccination. Claim: The flu shot causes vascular disorders such as fever, jaw pain, muscle aches, pain and stiffness in the neck, upper arms, shoulder and hips and headache. MISLEADING While the term vascular disorder is fear-inducing, it merely describes anything having to do with veins and arteries. The flu shot does not, de facto, cause any of these problems, but all the complications listed above are listed by the CDC as possible side effects. It is worth noting, however, that the flu will almost certainly give you some or all of these symptomsand with a much greater intensity than the symptoms resulting from a flu shot. CDC almost certainly give you some or all Claim: Children under the age of 1 are at risk of a neurotoxic breach of the blood-brain barrier.  The blood-brain barrier is the medical term for the chemical and physical adaptations humans and other animals have that prevent pathogens and other chemicals in the body from entering the central nervous system. For this claim about neurotoxic breach be true, an infant would have to have a relatively weaker blood-brain barrier than an adult. The idea that the barrier is weaker in young infants, however, is a long-held but unsubstantiated myth. Numerous studies have refuted the claim, showing that the blood-brain barrier is fully developed in the womb, long before a child is born. blood-brain barrier myth fully developed  Claim: Flu shots carry an increased risk of narcolepsy. false There is a well-documented, though statistically minor, connection between a specific H1N1 flu vaccine (Pandemrix) and narcolepsy. But such reports concerned only that one vaccine, which was produced for a specific flu strain, and have limited relevance to the seasonal flu shot. Pandemrix is available in Europe but not the United States or Canada. well-documented connection not Claim: The flu shot weakens immunological responses.  This claim, from a scientific standpoint, is a repeat of the earlier false claim (above) that suggests your body is more susceptible to infection or disease after a flu shot. Harmful immunological responses is a broad and unhelpful term that, while it may have aided in turning up literally thousands of responses in an academic search, is not really all that surprising as the term would includes the already documented risk of a skin and allergic reactions that come with pretty much any injection. already documented Claim: The flu shot can cause serious neurological disorders. false The neurological disorder specifically associated with flu vaccines is the Guillain-Barr Syndromea terrifying disease that causes nerve damage and sometimes paralysis. A widely cited study on a population of individuals who received the H1N1 vaccine in 1976 showed an increased risk of contracting this disease  whose cause is unknown  compared to those who did not receive the vaccine: Guillain-Barr Syndrome The Institute of Medicine (IOM) conducted a scientific review of this issue in 2003 and found that people who received the 1976 swine influenza vaccine had an increased risk for developing GBS. The increased risk was approximately one additional case of GBS for every 100,000 people who got the swine flu vaccine. Scientists have several theories about the cause, but the exact reason for this link remains unknown. The link between GBS and flu vaccination in other years is unclear, and if there is any risk for GBS after seasonal flu vaccines it is very small, about one in a million. Studies suggest that it is more likely that a person will get GBS after getting the flu than after vaccination. It is important to keep in mind that severe illness and death are associated with flu, and getting vaccinated is the best way to prevent flu infection and its complications. This topic has been heavily researched for decades, and no specific consensus regarding the link or mechanism behind the flu virus and the disease has been established. What has been established, however, is how small the risk is relative to the risks of contracting complications from flu itself. A 2013 study in The Lancet stated that: study The relative and attributable risks of Guillain-Barr syndrome after seasonal influenza vaccination are lower than those after influenza illness. Patients considering immunisation should be fully informed of the risks of Guillain-Barr syndrome from both influenza vaccines and influenza illness. Current iterations of the seasonal flu shot do not have any live strains in them (though the nasal spray includes weakened strains), nor do they have any mercury (in the United States), detergent, antifreeze, or aluminum. They contain, at most, 50 times less formaldehyde than a pear. nasal spray nor aluminum pear  We, of course, are not healthcare providers and cannot make any medical decisions for you. The purpose of this post is to correct misinformation on the Internet, and there are few topics that lend themselves to as much misinformation as vaccines. All healthcare decisions, however, should be made between you and your doctor. Harvard Medical School.  ""10 Flu Myths.""
  November 2009. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.  ""Possible Side-Effects from Vaccines.""
  Accessed 8 October 2016. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.  ""Vaccine Excipient & Media Summary.""
  Accessed 8 October 2016. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.  ""Thimerosal in Vaccines.""
  Accessed 8 October 2016. World Health Organization.  ""Statement on Thimerosal.""
  July 2006. Dorea, J.G.  ""Low-Dose Mercury Exposure in Early Life: Relevance of Thimerosal to Fetuses, Newborns and Infants.""
  Current Medical Chemistry.  2013. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.  ""Key Facts About Seasonal Flu Vaccine.""
  Accessed 8 October 2016. Verreault, Rene et al.  ""Past Exposure to Vaccines and Subsequent Risk of Alzheimer's Disease.""
  CMAJ.  27 November 2001. Gorski, David.  ""Oh, Come On, Superman!: Bill Maher Versus 'Western Medicine.'""
  Science Based Medicine.  7 September 2009. Casewatch.  ""Disciplinary Actions Against Herman Hugh Fudenberg, M.D.""
  20 April 2005. Pediatrics.  ""Joint Statement of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) and the United States Public Health Service (USPHS).""
  September 1999. Taylor. Luke E. et al.  Vaccines Are Not Associated with Autism: An Evidence-Based Meta-Analysis of Case-Control and Cohort Studies.""
  Vaccine.  17 June 2014. Ball, L.K. et al.  An Assessment of Thimerosal Use in Childhood Vaccines.""
  Pediatrics.  May 2001. Madsen, Kreesten, M. et al.  A Population-Based Study of Measles, Mumps, and Rubella Vaccination and Autism.""
  New England Journal of Medicine.  7 November 2002. Hviid, Anders et al.  Association Between Thimerosal-Containing
Vaccine and Autism.""
  New England Journal of Medicine.  October 2003. The National Academies.  ""Immunization Safety Review: Vaccines and Autism.""
  2004. Vaccine Knowledge Project.  ""Vaccine Ingredients.""
  Accessed 8 October 2016. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.  ""Vaccines Adjuvants.""
  Accessed 8 October 2016. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.  ""Flublok Seasonal Influenza (Flu) Vaccine.""
  Accessed 8 October 2016. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.  ""Guillain-Barre Syndrome.""
  Accessed 8 October 2016. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.  ""Narcolepsy Following Pandemrix Influenza Vaccination in Europe.""
  Accessed 8 October 2016. Miller, Elizabeth et al.  Risk of Narcolepsy in Children and Young People Receiving As03 Adjuvanted Pandemic A/h1n1 2009 Influenza Vaccine: Retrospective Analysis.""
  BMJ.  26 February 2013. Moretti, Raffella et al.  Blood-Brain Barrier Dysfunction in Disorders of the Developing Brain.""
  Frontiers in Neuroscience.  17 February 2015. Volodin, N.N. et al.  Status of the Blood-brain Barrier in Newborn Infants of Various Gestational Ages in the Normal State and in Pathology.""
  Pediatriia.  1989. Saunders, Norman R. et al.  The Rights and Wrongs of Blood-brain Barrier Permeability Studies: S Walk Through 100 Years of History.""
  Frontiers in Neuroscience.  16 December 2014. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.  ""Flu Symptoms & Complications.""
  Accessed 8 October 2016. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.  ""Key Facts About Seasonal Flu Vaccine.""
  Accessed 8 October 2016. Osterholm, Michael T. et al.  Efficacy and Effectiveness of Influenza Vaccines: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.""
  The Lancet.  January 2012. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.  ""Vaccine Effectiveness  How Well Does the Flu Vaccine Work?""
  Accessed 8 October 2016. Jefferson, T. et al.  Vaccines for Preventing Influenza in Healthy Children.""
  Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews.  16 April 2008. Lam, Bourree.  Vaccines Are Profitable, So What?""
  The Atlantic.  10 February 2015.",['profit'],False,"The article quoted above, which is representative of the text and claims that appear nearly identically in hundreds of Facebook posts, makes a number of claims that need to be investigated on their own merits:Flu shots work by introducing dead (inactivated) strains of influenza virus, which trigger your immune system to create antibodies to fight those strains. These antibodies make your body more prepared to fight if should it be exposed to an active strain in the future. Because the strains are inactive, any sickness you develop after the shot is not caused by influenza, according to the Harvard Medical School:It is, of course, possible that feelings of sickness come from some of the side effects of the injection, but the vaccine itself is not infecting you in any way.Flu shots administered from multi-use vials may contain a preservative called thimerosal, which breaks down into ethylmercury in the body. Mercury is an element and as such it can be found in many different chemical forms. But when people are concerned about mercury toxicity, they are concerned about methylmercury, which is indeed toxic at high levels and could cause some of the problems listed above.Ethylmercury, on the other hand, passes through your body quickly, and numerous studies have found it safe for use in vaccines (though there is some evidence that its use could be problematic for infants  a population that CDC does not  recommend for flu shots anyway). Saying ethylmercury is dangerous because is contains mercury is like saying that your table salt is at risk of spontaneous combustion because it contains sodium.Thimerosal, additionally, has been used for decades by the anti-vaccine movement to stoke vaccination fear by suggesting it causes by suggesting it causes autism. This link has been discredited over, and over, and over, and over, and over again and is further compromised by the fact that autism rates are still climbing despite the fact that childhood vaccines no longer contain this ingredient.The leading immunogeneticist Dr. Hugh Fudenberg, whom the article cites as the authority on this claim, had his medical license revoked in 1995 for ethical misconduct and was an outspoken proponent of the widely discredited MMR-autism link. His claim of the link between Alzheimer's and vaccines, though hard to trace, may or may not come from a talk he gave at the 1997 NVIC International Vaccine Conference. The statement has not been backed up by any published peer-reviewed research since then. In fact, a 2001 study found that adults exposed to vaccines were at a lower risk of Alzheimers.It also may not be accurate. A recent Atlantic article covered this question extensively, stating:The suggestion of massive profits from flu shots ignores the fact that profits margins are generally much higher for other drugs than for flu vaccines, as well. The same Atlantic article cites one estimate that puts the vaccine market at around $24 billion. This sounds like a large number, but it would, in fact, account for only two to three percent of the pharmaceutical market worldwide.Many anti-vaccine articles parrot the claim that ""51 studies involving 260,000 children showed no benefit compared to a placebo for children under the age of two"". This stems from a 2008 meta-analysis that did indeed conclude that there is less efficacy for children under the age of two, something the CDC already recognizes on their website. However, of the 51 studies analyzed and the 260,000 observations those studies included, only one study (at the time) was performed on children below the age of two using inactive strains (the kind found in flu shots). A later study in 2011 that reviewed over 5,000 research articles concluded that flu shots consistently show highest efficacy in young children (aged 6 months to 7 years), categorically rejecting the claim that there is a lack of real evidence that young children benefit from the shot.People with compromised immune systems are at higher risk of complications from vaccines when those vaccines contain live strains (which, again, the flu shot does not), and some skin reactions are possible immediately following an injection.However, the notion that the flu shot weakens the immune system is false. According to a review paper in the journal Pediatrics:While the term vascular disorder is fear-inducing, it merely describes anything having to do with veins and arteries. The flu shot does not, de facto, cause any of these problems, but all the complications listed above are listed by the CDC as possible side effects. It is worth noting, however, that the flu will almost certainly give you some or all of these symptomsand with a much greater intensity than the symptoms resulting from a flu shot.The blood-brain barrier is the medical term for the chemical and physical adaptations humans and other animals have that prevent pathogens and other chemicals in the body from entering the central nervous system. For this claim about neurotoxic breach be true, an infant would have to have a relatively weaker blood-brain barrier than an adult. The idea that the barrier is weaker in young infants, however, is a long-held but unsubstantiated myth. Numerous studies have refuted the claim, showing that the blood-brain barrier is fully developed in the womb, long before a child is born.There is a well-documented, though statistically minor, connection between a specific H1N1 flu vaccine (Pandemrix) and narcolepsy. But such reports concerned only that one vaccine, which was produced for a specific flu strain, and have limited relevance to the seasonal flu shot. Pandemrix is available in Europe but not the United States or Canada.This claim, from a scientific standpoint, is a repeat of the earlier false claim (above) that suggests your body is more susceptible to infection or disease after a flu shot. Harmful immunological responses is a broad and unhelpful term that, while it may have aided in turning up literally thousands of responses in an academic search, is not really all that surprising as the term would includes the already documented risk of a skin and allergic reactions that come with pretty much any injection.The neurological disorder specifically associated with flu vaccines is the Guillain-Barr Syndromea terrifying disease that causes nerve damage and sometimes paralysis. A widely cited study on a population of individuals who received the H1N1 vaccine in 1976 showed an increased risk of contracting this disease  whose cause is unknown  compared to those who did not receive the vaccine:This topic has been heavily researched for decades, and no specific consensus regarding the link or mechanism behind the flu virus and the disease has been established. What has been established, however, is how small the risk is relative to the risks of contracting complications from flu itself. A 2013 study in The Lancet stated that:Current iterations of the seasonal flu shot do not have any live strains in them (though the nasal spray includes weakened strains), nor do they have any mercury (in the United States), detergent, antifreeze, or aluminum. They contain, at most, 50 times less formaldehyde than a pear."
Is Article 54 of Obamacare Taking Effect in May 2018?,"['A meme proclaims that ""Article 54 of Obamacare"" will take 30 percent of seniors\' social security payments to cover insurance for undocumented immigrants.']","On 14 April 2018, a Facebook page ""America - Love It Or Leave It"" shared a meme proclaiming that Article 54 of Obamacare would soon be diverting 30 percent of seniors' social security payments to pay for insurance for undocumented immigrants: shared meme   However, the full text of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act does not include an Article 54, nor does it include any provision for using 30% of seniors' Social Security payments to cover the funding of insurance of undocumented immigrants. full text Moreover, this claim originated solely with ""The ""America - Love It Or Leave It"" Facebook page, which is part of a network of fake news sites and Facebook pages that engage in political trolling under the guise of providing ""satire."" network",['insurance'],False,"On 14 April 2018, a Facebook page ""America - Love It Or Leave It"" shared a meme proclaiming that Article 54 of Obamacare would soon be diverting 30 percent of seniors' social security payments to pay for insurance for undocumented immigrants:However, the full text of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act does not include an Article 54, nor does it include any provision for using 30% of seniors' Social Security payments to cover the funding of insurance of undocumented immigrants.Moreover, this claim originated solely with ""The ""America - Love It Or Leave It"" Facebook page, which is part of a network of fake news sites and Facebook pages that engage in political trolling under the guise of providing ""satire."""
Did Libertarian Candidate Jo Jorgensen Lose 40K Votes in 10 Minutes in Pennsylvania?,"['And if so, where did they go?']","Voting in the 2020 U.S. Election may be over, but the misinformation keeps on ticking. Never stop fact-checking. Follow our post-election coverage here. here A viral post shared across multiple platforms has been used as evidence that U.S. presidential candidate Jo Jorgensen, who ran in the 2020 election on the Libertarian ticket, lost an implausible number of votes in an implausible amount of time. The sole evidence for the assertion comes from a pair of smartphone screen captures allegedly showing a Google search panel for Pennsylvania returns separated by 12 minutes. multiple platforms   The images suggest that Jorgensen went from 89,025 when 56% of the vote had been counted to 46,987 when the count reached 59%. Snopes could not verify the origin or authenticity of the screenshot  but it remains the only evidence in support of the assertion. At no point that we are aware of did Jorgensen ever have a reported number over 80,000 votes in the state. The shift from 56% reporting to 59% reporting occurred early in election night when in-person votes were being tallied. If it were a data entry error, as has been documented in other instances in this election, it would have represented the addition of votes, not the subtraction of them. At the time of this reporting (Nov. 6), with an estimated 99% of vote counted, the same Google widget shows Jorgensen with 77,091 votes. early instances   Due to the lack of corroborating evidence, we rank this claim ",['returns'],False,"Voting in the 2020 U.S. Election may be over, but the misinformation keeps on ticking. Never stop fact-checking. Follow our post-election coverage here.A viral post shared across multiple platforms has been used as evidence that U.S. presidential candidate Jo Jorgensen, who ran in the 2020 election on the Libertarian ticket, lost an implausible number of votes in an implausible amount of time. The sole evidence for the assertion comes from a pair of smartphone screen captures allegedly showing a Google search panel for Pennsylvania returns separated by 12 minutes.At no point that we are aware of did Jorgensen ever have a reported number over 80,000 votes in the state. The shift from 56% reporting to 59% reporting occurred early in election night when in-person votes were being tallied. If it were a data entry error, as has been documented in other instances in this election, it would have represented the addition of votes, not the subtraction of them. At the time of this reporting (Nov. 6), with an estimated 99% of vote counted, the same Google widget shows Jorgensen with 77,091 votes."
"101 utilities cut rates, credit GOP tax cuts.",[],"For months, President Donald Trump has been touting the benefits of the tax law he signed in December. But in early June, he began expanding his argument beyond lower tax bills to include lower energy bills. On June 7, Trump tweeted, ""$3 billion payoff: 101 utilities cut rates, credit GOP tax cuts."" The tweet linked to a Washington Examiner article that, in turn, cited research by Americans for Tax Reform, a group supportive of the tax cut. ""$3 billion payoff: 101 utilities cut rates, credit GOP tax cuts"" https://t.co/x1a1OJuRgd. This isn't the first time the White House has relied on Americans for Tax Reform for evidence of real-world impacts from the passage of the tax bill. Previously, we looked at Trump's statement that since we passed tax cuts, over 3 million workers have received tax cut bonuses, many of them thousands and thousands of dollars. That talking point, gleaned from the group's research, rated Mostly True. The energy rate-cut list, which is a sub-list of the broader one we checked previously, attracted the White House's attention not long after it hit its 100th item. For the utilities on the group's list that provided an estimate of savings per customer, most said ratepayers would save about $1 to $4 on their bill per month. Americans for Tax Reform cited a large number of company news releases and news articles, so we don't dispute the number (which had already grown to 102 a day later). That said, we will provide some additional information that helps put the list in fuller context. It shouldn't be surprising to see a lot of investor-owned utilities lowering rates after the corporate tax reduction. It also shouldn't be surprising that the companies specifically cited the tax changes as the reason for the rate cut. In most cases, experts said, utilities would have been required to do so by their regulators. The tax law impacts privately owned utilities—often called investor-owned utilities, or IOUs for short—but not public utilities. Investor-owned utilities pay corporate taxes, so the tax law's reduction of the top corporate rate from 35 percent to 21 percent should save this type of utility a substantial amount of money. By contrast, publicly held utilities do not pay corporate taxes, so they are unaffected by this provision of the tax bill. Public utilities include rural electric cooperatives, municipally owned utilities, and federal or state power authorities. Among electricity utilities, about two-thirds of Americans are served by investor-owned utilities, while about a third receive their power from public utilities. For water utilities, a few of which appear on the group's list, public utilities are dominant. So while 101 utilities cutting their rates may seem like a large number, your ability to benefit from a rate cut depends on which utilities happen to serve your area. It's also worth pointing out that many of these rate cuts were preordained by existing energy regulations. Utilities are natural monopolies, and because of that, they've been regulated for well over 100 years, said Manny Teodoro, a political scientist at Texas A&M University who has studied energy issues. It's a recognition that a pure monopoly will result in a lack of competition and abusive pricing. For that reason, under longstanding regulations, utilities need to go back to energy regulatory bodies whenever they seek to modify their rates in order to provide reasons for the change. If a utility happens to benefit from a tax change, there's a good chance it will be required under existing regulations to lower its rates to account for that. Rates are set by public utility commissions through rate-making processes that clearly identify the reasons for the rate change, whether up or down, said Billy Pizer, a Duke University public policy professor who studies energy. This doesn't undercut the larger point of the tally, but it does suggest that the rate cuts required two elements to materialize: the tax cut, which Trump touted, and the longstanding regulations that require companies to share the tax gains with ratepayers rather than just with shareholders. And the latter is an aspect Trump didn't address. Trump tweeted, ""101 utilities cut rates, credit GOP tax cuts."" The list comes from an organization that strongly supported the tax bill. The tally of rate cuts is well-documented, and the group acknowledges that it is not comprehensive. That said, it's worth noting that public utility customers will not see the same types of rate cuts cited in the list, which represents about one-third of Americans. Trump's tweet seeks full credit for the tax law while glossing over the role of energy regulations that mandate utility savings be passed along to customers. We rate the statement Mostly True.","['National', 'Energy', 'Taxes']",True,"On June 7, Trumptweeted, $3 billion payoff: 101 utilities cut rates, credit GOP tax cuts. The tweet linked to aWashington Examiner articlethat in turn citedresearch by Americans for Tax Reform, a group supportive of the tax cut.$3 billion payoff: 101 utilities cut rates, credit GOP tax cutshttps://t.co/x1a1OJuRgdThis isnt the first time the White House has relied on Americans for Tax Reform for evidence of real-world impacts from passage of the tax bill. Previously, we looked at Trumps statement that since we passed tax cuts, over 3 million workers have gotten tax cut bonuses  many of them thousands and thousands of dollars. That talking point,gleaned from the groups research, ratedMostly True.By contrast, publicly held utilities do not pay corporate taxes, so they are unaffected by this provision of the tax bill. Public utilitiesincluderural electric cooperatives, municipally owned utilities, and federal or state power authorities."
"Does a Photo Show Ice Cube, 50 Cent Wearing Trump Hats?",['A manipulated image was just a lil bit misleading.'],"Voting in the 2020 U.S. Election may be over, but misinformation continues to spread. Never stop fact-checking. Follow our post-election coverage here. On Oct. 20, 2020, U.S. President Donald Trump's son Eric Trump posted an image to social media that supposedly showed musicians Ice Cube and Curtis ""50 Cent"" Jackson wearing ""Trump 2020"" hats. This is not a genuine photograph of 50 Cent and Ice Cube wearing ""Trump 2020"" hats; it is a doctored image created from a photograph of Ice Cube and 50 Cent at a BIG3 basketball game in Las Vegas, Nevada, in 2017. In the original image, Ice Cube is wearing a hat with the BIG3 logo, while 50 Cent is wearing a hat with a New York Yankees logo. Ice Cube shared the original photograph on his Twitter page in July 2020, along with a birthday message for his friend 50 Cent. Getty Images has archived a few other photographs taken at this event. The image at the top of this article, for example, carries the caption: ""LAS VEGAS, NV - AUGUST 26: BIG3 founder and recording artist Ice Cube and Curtis '50 Cent' Jackson attend the BIG3 three-on-three basketball league championship game on August 26, 2017, in Las Vegas, Nevada. (Photo by Sean M. Haffey/BIG3/Getty Images)."" Ice Cube confirmed that the image was fake in a message posted to Twitter, and Trump has since deleted his tweet. Although this image is fake, both musicians have indeed aligned themselves, at least in part, with the Trump administration. While Ice Cube has not endorsed Trump for 2020, he did work with the president's administration to create a ""Contract With Black America."" Ice Cube stated that he would ""advise anyone on the planet who has the power to help Black Americans close the enormous wealth gap."" 50 Cent's support for Trump was more explicit. On Oct. 19, 50 Cent took to Instagram and shared a message endorsing Trump, along with a screenshot from CNBC's ""Power Lunch"" concerning a report that Biden's tax plan would raise the tax rate to as much as 62% on Americans who make more than $400,000 a year. This screenshot comes from a segment of ""Power Lunch"" that aired on Oct. 19. During this segment, CNBC's Robert Frank explained how people earning more than $400,000 a year could pay income taxes at a rate of more than 62%. Interestingly, Ice Cube and 50 Cent appear to be aligning themselves with Trump for polar opposite reasons. Ice Cube, for instance, said that he was willing to work with either presidential campaign to improve the lives of Black Americans and to ""close the enormous wealth gap."" 50 Cent, on the other hand, stated he didn't care that ""Trump doesn't like Black people"" and that he was endorsing the incumbent because his opponent's tax plan would increase taxes on wealthy Americans.",['taxes'],False,"Voting in the 2020 U.S. Election may be over, but the misinformation keeps on ticking. Never stop fact-checking. Follow our post-election coverage here.On Oct. 20, 2020, U.S. President Donald Trump's son Eric Trump posted an image to social media that supposedly showed musicians Ice Cube and Curtis ""50 Cent"" Jackson wearing ""Trump 2020"" hats:Getty Images has archived a few other photographs taken at this event. The image at the top of this article, for example, carries the caption:Ice Cube confirmed that the image was fake in a message posted to Twitter and Trump has since deleted his tweet.Although this image is fake, both of these musicians have truly aligned themselves, at least in part, with the Trump administration. While Ice Cube has not endorsed Trump for 2020, he did work with the president's administration to create a ""Contract With Black America."" Ice Cube said that he would ""advise anyone on the planet who has the power to help Black Americans close the enormous wealth gap.""50 Cent's support for Trump was more explicit. On Oct. 19, 50 Cent took to Instagram and shared a message endorsing Trump along with a screenshot from CNBC's ""Power Lunch"" concerning a report that Biden's tax plan would raise the tax rate to as much as 62% on Americans who make more than $400,000 a year:This screenshot comes from a segment of ""Power Lunch"" that aired on Oct. 19. During this segment, CNBC's Robert Frank explained how people earning more than $400,000 a year could pay income taxes at rate of more than 62%. Here's a video of Frank on another CNBC show, ""Squawk Box,"" talking about Biden's tax plan:"
Has the Government Banned School Students Bringing Sack Lunches from Home?,['Has the federal government banned public school students from bringing sack lunches to school?'],"Claim: The federal government has banned public school students from bringing sack lunches to school. Examples: [Collected via e-mail, October 2013] Naturalcuresnotmedicine.com posted an article indicating that the ""Feds"" are prohibiting school lunches from home without doctor's orders. Is this true or false? When and where? Is it true that the federal government won't allow parents to pack lunches for preschool kids without a doctor's note? It doesn't even sound slightly true to me, but it's being tossed around the internet. Origins: Intermittent rumors about imminent government control of school lunches (and specifically, a ban on lunches brought in from home) have popped up across the internet since 2011, and claims about the imposition of a government ban on brown bag lunches have continued to circulate since. Mentions of home lunch bans began cropping up on the Internet as early as 2011, with the pattern of this cyclical rumor appearing to be consistent: A parent packs a lunch, receives a note from a teacher or school official informing them of a district or program policy regarding lunches from home, and the note circulates as proof that the ""feds"" are sweeping in to seize control of the cafeteria. Back in 2001, one Chicago-area school called Little Village Academy banned home lunches. The Chicago Tribune covered the minor controversy, explaining that the school's principal (not the federal government) had instituted the rule at his school only after watching students bring lunches consisting of ""bottles of soda and flaming hot chips"" on field trips. The rumor about federal lunch bans died down a bit after 2011 but picked up again in 2013 when a mom blog relayed the story of a friend in Virginia who had received a note from her child's school about packed lunches. The note, which was quickly reproduced on a number of prominent natural news and conspiracy sites, read: ""I have received word from Federal Programs Preschool pertaining to lunches from home. Parents are to be informed that students can only bring lunches from home if there is a medical condition requiring a specific diet, along with a physician's note to that regard. I am sorry for any inconvenience. If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact Stephanie [redacted], the Health Coordinator for Federal Programs Preschool at [redacted]."" Perhaps due to the start of the school year, the same story began to circulate in September 2014, with the same image and text attached. Given the timing and the return to classrooms for the majority of America's kids, it's no surprise the tale has once more gained traction and begun to spread virally on social media sites. When the story first began to travel across the social web, the Director of Communications and Public Relations for Henrico County Public Schools responded to an inquiry on this particular incident with a statement noting that schools receiving funds to participate in the federal Head Start Nutrition Assistance Programs must provide meals to schoolchildren at no cost to their parents, and allowing schoolkids to bring their own lunches from home would (barring special medical requirements) violate that requirement: ""It is Head Start policy, not Henrico County Public Schools policy, that there cannot be any costs to parents associated with the program, meals or otherwise. Parents packing a lunch is considered a 'cost' by Head Start. As a result, every year parents are informed that students can only bring lunches from home if there is a medical condition that merits a specific diet, along with a physician's note to that regard. Meals served by the school conform to USDA nutritional requirements along with cultural, religious, and personal preferences on a case-by-case basis. Parents are always welcome to discuss their children's dietary needs with our health coordinator. While many disagree with this particular Head Start (HS) performance standard by which we are regulated and funded, as good stewards of federal dollars, it is protecting one of our most at-risk populations and operating at the highest level of expectation with all of the funding strands we utilize for Pre-K. Additionally, parents are made aware of the policy as stated in the preschool parent handbook upon entrance to the program and are required to sign that they have received and read it. The family advocates go over it with them in some of their initial meetings with parents. As indicated in this response, the issue was not one of the federal government's trying to control exactly what schoolkids may eat for lunch, but rather one of ensuring that all children covered under the Head Start program were provided with their allotted lunches at no cost to their parents. Last updated: 16 September 2014.",['funds'],False,"The rumor about federal lunch bans died down a bit after 2011 but picked up again in 2013 when a mom blog relayed the story of a friend in Virginia who had received a note from her child's school about packed lunches. The note, which was quickly reproduced on a number of prominent natural news and conspiracy sites, read:Perhaps due to the start of the school year, the same story began to circulate in September 2014, with the same image and text attached. Given the timing and the return to classrooms for the majority of America's kids, it's no surprise the tale has once more gained traction and begun to spread virally on social media sites. When the story first began to travel across the social web, the Director of Communications and Public Relations for Henrico County Public Schools responded to an inquiry on this particular incident with a statement noting that schools receiving funds to participate in the federal Head Start Nutrition Assistance Programs must provide meals to schoolchildren at no cost to their parents, and allowing schoolkids to bring their own lunches from home would (barring special medical requirements) violate that requirement:"
"Did William Phelps Eno, the 'Father of Traffic Safety,' Never Learn to Drive?",['William Phelps Eno was the man who penned some of the first traffic laws.'],"We stop for red lights and go on green lights almost by instinct, so deeply steeped into us are our traffic rules. Just as we rarely give thought to the possibility of meeting a car traveling the wrong way on a one-way street, so too do we rarely pause to wonder where our traffic laws came from or who invented the crosswalk. Meet William Phelps Eno (1858-1945), an innovator who long ago earned the sobriquet ""the Father of Traffic Safety.""  William Phelps Eno Born in New York City, this forward-thinking man observed the massive traffic jams of his era and from those observations formulated solutions that carried over from the days of horses and carriages into the automotive age. In 1900 he penned the treatise ""Reform in Our Street Traffic Urgently Needed,"" which immediately established him as a traffic safety expert, a mantle he was to wholeheartedly embrace.   In 1903 he developed the world's first city traffic code (for New York City) and the first traffic plans for New York City, London, and Paris.     It was William Phelps Eno who invented stop signs and who envisioned one-way streets, taxi stands, traffic circles, and pedestrian safety islands. He wrote the first manual of police traffic regulations, and it was he who designed the circular traffic pattern that courses around the Arc de Triomphe in Paris. stop signs In 1921 he established the Eno Transportation Foundation, a non-profit study center located in Washington, D.C.  The Foundation is dedicated to improving all modes of transportation  ground, air, and water.  Eno was always a great fan of horseback riding but did not place all that much faith in the automobile, thinking it but a fad. He never learned to drive, and when events in his life necessitated car travel, he relied on a chauffeur.  William Phelps Eno's penchant for peculiarity outlived him. In 1996 his old home in Westport, Connecticut, came under the steady assault of determined bargain hunters who misunderstood the ""bargain"" they so intently pursued. Eno's 32-room mansion and the land it stood on had been sold for $1.5 million, but the buyer wanted the choice waterfront land for the purpose of subdividing it, not for the 119-year-old building that stood upon it. The old manse was to be razed to make way for new housing. Rather than see old building torn down, the Connecticut Trust for Historic Preservation stepped in and offered it for $1 to anyone who would cart William Phelps Eno's home away and give it a good home elsewhere. The costs of barging the mansion to a new site and restoring it were estimated at $500,000 and $1.7 million, respectively. The Today Show helped publicize the scheme, but unfortunately people heard only what they wanted to hear: that they could have a mansion for $1. Everything about the land not coming with it and the building having to be carted away and set up elsewhere went in one ear and out the other. The property was overrun by folks determined to look it over, and they showed up at all hours of day and night, often necessitating calls to the police to have them removed. The previous owner (who was living in its carriage house) was driven to distraction by the never-ending stream of phone calls and letters pleading for the house. ""Keep Out"" signs had to be posted, and the road leading to the mansion had to be chained off to keep dollar-waving people out. Meanwhile, the Trust's office was also fielding hundreds of calls and letters, some coming from those who thought this was a lottery, and one from a gal who thought the mansion was a prize offered for an essay-writing contest. Even utter chaos eventually dies down. Hundreds upon hundreds of inquiries later, no one really wanted the house. It was ultimately demolished in July 1997. Meyers, Kendra.   Will a Mansion Find a Home Before All the Doorknobs Are Gone?
  The New York Times.   4 February 1996   (13CN; p. 2).
 Wallace, Irving.   Significa.
  New York: E.P. Dutton, Inc., 1983   (pp. 22-23).",['profit'],True,"We stop for red lights and go on green lights almost by instinct, so deeply steeped into us are our traffic rules. Just as we rarely give thought to the possibility of meeting a car traveling the wrong way on a one-way street, so too do we rarely pause to wonder where our traffic laws came from or who invented the crosswalk. Meet William Phelps Eno (1858-1945), an innovator who long ago earned the sobriquet ""the Father of Traffic Safety."" It was William Phelps Eno who invented stop signs and who envisioned one-way streets, taxi stands, traffic circles, and pedestrian safety islands. He wrote the first manual of police traffic regulations, and it was he who designed the circular traffic pattern that courses around the Arc de Triomphe in Paris."
"Under economic sanctions, now Iran is suffering 30 percent inflation, 20 percent unemployment.",[],"An Iranian president says hesready to resolvethe nations nuclear standoff with the West  what gives? Former U.S. Labor Secretary Robert Reich gives at least partial credit to economic pain orchestrated by the United States and international allies. While the United States must still be very cautious, he saidon ABCsThis Week, one of the big lessons here is that economic sanctions do seem to work. Right now Iran is suffering 30 percent inflation, 20 percent unemployment, he told a roundtable including CNNs Newt Gingrich, ABCs Jonathan Karl and PBS Gwen Ifill. I mean this nation is hurting and our economic sanctions, because we've been patient with them, because we have actually rounded up almost every other nation to support us, have had a huge impact. Is Iran suffering such high inflation and unemployment under economic sanctions? Tumbling oil exports Now, economic sanctions are nothing new for Iran, which hasfaced U.S. sanctionssince its 1979 Islamic revolution. But the pressure has been rising. Other nations have joined in sanctions since 2006 in response to Irans efforts to develop a nuclear weapon,according to a report by Kenneth Katzman of the Congressional Research Service, which provides nonpartisan analysis to Congress. Oil exports, which fund nearly half of Irans government spending, have fallen by about half since 2011, from about 2.5 million barrels a day to about 1.25 million. The drop has been driven, Katzman says, by a European Union embargo and U.S. pressure on Iranian oil customers. Iran also lost access to the international banking system. The combination has caused a sharp drop in the value of Irans currency, the rial, Katzman says. Meanwhile, sanctions helped trigger a recession thats driving up unemployment. Has that meant 30 percent inflation, 20 percent unemployment, as Reich told ABC viewers? Theres not a simple answer. Inflation estimates range from30 percent to 70 percent. Official unemployment statistics, meanwhile, are out of date, and outside experts question their accuracy, anyway. The International Monetary Fund, World Bank and Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development dont have up-to-date figures for Iranian unemployment. Still, Reichs in range. Gary Hufbauer, a former U.S. Treasury official and senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics who has studied sanctions for 30 years, said Reichs numbers seem reasonable. Heres how the Congressional Research Service put it in June: Inflation: 30 percent plus, according to Iran Central Bank in May 2013, but believed to be over 50 percent by outside experts. Unemployment rate: Official rate is 15.3 percent as of the end of 2011, but outside experts believe the rate is higher. Reich pointed us to news articles from theAssociated Pressand energy news siteOilPrice.com which offer some support for his numbers while highlighting the uncertainty. The Associated Press reported in June inflation over 30 percent, though it cited a 14 percent unemployment rate. OilPrices.com noted Sept. 19 that analysts outside the country found that unemployment rate impossible to believe, and quoted an estimate from Mehrdad Emadi, an Iranian-born economic adviser to the European Union, of more than 20 percent. (The OilPrices.com report echoes a Reuters report from thesame day.) So reasonable seems like a fair assessment for Reichs numbers. We should also note theres not universal agreement on the size of sanctions role in all that financial pain, which experts also attribute to Iransfiscal management. Reich, a professor of public policy at the University of California at Berkeley with a background in economics, told PolitiFact it just makes sense unemployment and inflation would follow a slash in oil exports. The typical consequence for a nation dependent on exports when those exports are cut is high inflation and high unemployment, he said. Michael Malloy, a professor at the University of the Pacifics McGeorge School of Law who specializes in banking regulation and economic sanctions, told PolitiFact it's likely to be a much more complicated picture. Our ruling Reich told ABC viewers that under economic sanctions, now Iran is suffering 30 percent inflation and 20 percent unemployment. Irans own statistics arent widely trusted and international organizations dont have recent unemployment figures. But those numbers fall within a broad range of expert estimates cited by news reports and the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service. Its worth noting that Irans economic struggle has been exacerbated by its own economic policies and other factors, not just sanctions. Still, theres good evidence theyve had a huge impact, as Reich said. We rate his claim Mostly True.","['National', 'Economy', 'Foreign Policy', 'Pundits']",True,"An Iranian president says hesready to resolvethe nations nuclear standoff with the West  what gives?While the United States must still be very cautious, he saidon ABCsThis Week, one of the big lessons here is that economic sanctions do seem to work.Now, economic sanctions are nothing new for Iran, which hasfaced U.S. sanctionssince its 1979 Islamic revolution. But the pressure has been rising.Other nations have joined in sanctions since 2006 in response to Irans efforts to develop a nuclear weapon,according to a report by Kenneth Katzman of the Congressional Research Service, which provides nonpartisan analysis to Congress.Inflation estimates range from30 percent to 70 percent. Official unemployment statistics, meanwhile, are out of date, and outside experts question their accuracy, anyway.Reich pointed us to news articles from theAssociated Pressand energy news siteOilPrice.com which offer some support for his numbers while highlighting the uncertainty.The Associated Press reported in June inflation over 30 percent, though it cited a 14 percent unemployment rate. OilPrices.com noted Sept. 19 that analysts outside the country found that unemployment rate impossible to believe, and quoted an estimate from Mehrdad Emadi, an Iranian-born economic adviser to the European Union, of more than 20 percent. (The OilPrices.com report echoes a Reuters report from thesame day.)We should also note theres not universal agreement on the size of sanctions role in all that financial pain, which experts also attribute to Iransfiscal management."
"In Wisconsin, unions can essentially give unlimited contributions to political parties, but business can't give any.",[],"Wisconsin Assembly Speaker Robin Vos sounded euphoric on Milwaukee radio on Nov. 5, 2014, the morning after the mid-term elections. How are you? he was asked by conservative talk show host Charlie Sykes. Charlie, I literally could not be better, Vos replied. Not only had Republican Gov. Scott Walker won re-election, but gains in the Assembly meant Republicans would enjoy their largest majority in that chambersince 1957. In theinterview, Vos laid out a number of his priorities for the next legislative session, which starts in January 2015. One proposal would allow business contributions to the political parties. Right now, if you are the Democratic Party, you can take unlimited union money, in many ways, but there's a prohibition on business being able to give to a political party, Vos claimed. Id like to get rid of that and create a level playing field. Vos presumably was singling out the Democratic Party because it typically gets more support from unions than the GOP does. Well check both parts of his claim -- that in Wisconsin, unions can essentially make unlimited contributions to political parties, while businesses cant make any. Unions State law allows unions to contribute directly to political parties (and to candidates, for that matter). But since at least 2008, no union has used its treasury funds to directly make a contribution to a political party, according to the state Government Accountability Board, which oversees state elections. There is a strong disincentive to contribute that way. If they did, unions would have to register with the state as a political committee and would have to disclose all their sources of revenue and all their disbursements. Instead, what unions typically do is create political action committees, which in turn make contributions to political parties (and candidates). A union can give a PAC the equivalent of $20 per union member per year without having to disclose the names of the union members. Or, the union can give unlimited amounts to PACs, as long as the union members names are disclosed. PACs, though, are limited to contributing $6,000 per year to a political party. So, unions are allowed to contribute directly to political parties -- but, in practice, they dont. They are allowed to give unlimited amounts of money to a political action committee, but a PAC is limited to how much it can give to a party. Business The second part of Vos claim is that there's a prohibition on business being able to give to a political party. In Wisconsin, campaign contributionsmust originate from individuals. That means business owners -- those who own sole proprietorships or partnerships -- can make contributions to political parties (as well as to candidates and political action committees). That is, as long as the source is personal funds and not funds from the business -- and as long as they follow the limit for a particular race. ButWisconsin prohibitscorporations, including limited liability companies, from making contributions to parties, candidates or PACs. Like unions, corporations can form political action committees to solicit campaign contributions from individuals. But as weve noted, unlike unions, corporations cant make contributions to PACs. Vos told us hed like to see state law changed so that it treats corporations like unions -- in other words, allowing corporations to make the same kind of political contributions as unions do. Our rating Vos said that in Wisconsin, unions can essentially give unlimited contributions to political parties, but business can't give any. The law allows unions to make unlimited contributions to the parties, but in practice, they make no such direct contributions at all. Rather, they give to political action committees, which in turn are limited in what they can give to parties. Business owners using their personal funds can contribute to political parties, within limits, but corporations can't make any such contributions. We rate  the claim Mostly True. To comment on this item, go to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinelwebsite.","['Campaign Finance', 'Corporations', 'Elections', 'Small Business', 'Unions', 'Wisconsin']",True,"Not only had Republican Gov. Scott Walker won re-election, but gains in the Assembly meant Republicans would enjoy their largest majority in that chambersince 1957.In theinterview, Vos laid out a number of his priorities for the next legislative session, which starts in January 2015. One proposal would allow business contributions to the political parties.In Wisconsin, campaign contributionsmust originate from individuals.ButWisconsin prohibitscorporations, including limited liability companies, from making contributions to parties, candidates or PACs.To comment on this item, go to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinelwebsite."
Trumps tax reform plan was nothing more than a middle-class tax increase.,[],"Like many California Democrats, Assemblyman Phil Ting is no fan of the Republican tax plan signed by President Donald Trump. He has likened it to a tax giveaway for big corporations. The San Francisco lawmaker has proposed a surcharge on large companies in California to claw back some of the billions of tax dollars that would be lost to the state under the plan. Such a bill, Ting said, would help blunt the impact of the federal tax plan on everyday Californians. We wondered, however, whether Ting accurately described the GOP tax plan in the statement he provided to the San Francisco Chronicle on Jan. 21, 2018. Trump's tax reform plan was nothing more than a middle-class tax increase, Ting, who formerly served as San Francisco's Assessor-Recorder, said in the statement. It is unconscionable to force working families to pay the price for tax breaks and loopholes benefiting corporations and wealthy individuals. We decided to check the facts, focusing on the first part of Ting's claim that the tax plan was nothing more than a middle-class tax increase. His words could be considered a burst of political rhetoric, but they also make an assertion about how millions of Americans would be impacted by the GOP plan. Our research involved speaking with experts at the centrist Tax Policy Center and the conservative-leaning Tax Foundation to assess Ting's claim. Both said it was off the mark. What we found is that most taxpayers would be getting a tax cut, Frank Sammartino, a senior fellow at the Tax Policy Center, told us. That includes most middle-income taxpayers, at least in the short run, he said. The Tax Policy Center estimates that 91 percent of those who earn between $50,000 and $85,000 would receive a tax cut averaging about $900 in 2018, Sammartino said. Seven percent in this group would see their taxes go up, he said, while the rest would see their taxes remain the same. Additionally, 93 percent of Americans who earn between $85,000 and $150,000 would experience a tax cut in 2018, averaging $1,800. ""We're just not seeing that in the data,"" Sammartino said of Ting's statement that the plan results in nothing more than a middle-class tax increase. ""We're not seeing that it's a tax increase for most people."" Scott Greenberg is a senior analyst at the conservative-leaning Tax Foundation. He described the GOP tax plan as a fairly substantial tax cut for the middle class in the short term. In the long term, after many of the provisions in the bill expire (at the end of 2025), the net effect of the tax bill on middle-income households will be more or less zero. The Tax Foundation concluded it will amount to a tax cut of about 1.7 percent of one's after-tax income, on average, for the middle quintile of taxpayers, Greenberg said. Meanwhile, the Tax Policy Center found it will amount to nearly the same amount, a tax cut of about 1.6 percent of one's after-tax income for middle-income earners. Greenberg said the plan accomplishes this by lowering rates for several tax brackets, expanding the standard deduction, and increasing the child tax credit. When asked about the statement, Ting's spokeswoman Jessica Duong pointed to news articles that show some in the middle class will see higher taxes under the GOP bill. She did not counter the estimate that most would see a tax cut. The quote was intended to counter Trump's claim that this is going to be one of the great gifts to the middle-income people of this country that they've ever gotten for Christmas. It is being sold as a middle-class tax cut, but the benefits for such families will expire in 2025 while the corporate tax cuts are permanent, the spokeswoman told us in an email. Assemblymember Ting's use of ""nothing more"" is intended to counter that misleading billing and highlight the fact that the plan currently and purposefully relies on the middle class paying for future tax cut deficits, she added. We also examined the California Budget and Policy Center's assessment of the tax plan. The group, considered more liberal-leaning, painted a dire picture of the plan's impact on most taxpayers. It warned in a recent post that the plan would do little if anything for middle- and low-income families across the nation, and especially in California. By scaling back the federal income tax deduction for state and local taxes, known as the SALT deduction, the plan would harm many middle-income families. It added that the plan is clearly tilted to wealthy households and major corporations while providing very little, if any, benefit for most middle- and low-income families. National tax experts don't dispute that the wealthy would see larger tax cuts. The top one percent of households by income, for example, would see a tax cut of 3.4 percent, according to the Tax Policy Center. That's about twice the rate of savings compared with middle-class households. The plan cut the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 21 percent. In California, which has high state and local taxes, the GOP plan is expected to create more financial hardships compared with lower-tax states because it caps state and local income tax deductions. Here's how Forbes.com explained the changes: Under the old tax law, all property taxes paid to state and local governments could be claimed as an itemized deduction. It was also possible to deduct state and local income or sales taxes. The new law bundles all these so-called SALT taxes together and limits the deduction, in total, to $10,000 for both individuals and married couples. For some homeowners in high-tax areas such as California, $10,000 does not come close to covering their combined property and income tax bills. There's also a change that affects mortgage interest deductions for homeowners. Under the previous law, homeowners could write off any interest they pay on mortgages up to $1 million. The new law will limit these deductions to mortgages of $750,000 or less. Given the Golden State's high housing costs, some Californians will be impacted by the new cap. The change, however, impacts new mortgages, not existing ones. Sammartino of the Tax Policy Center told us those factors would hurt some Californians. Even so, he said, the vast majority of middle-class taxpayers in the state will still see a tax cut. The overall tax cuts might be a little bit less, Sammartino said. But in general, probably upwards of 85 percent of the middle class or so should see a tax cut in California for 2018. While the plan's corporate tax cuts are permanent, the individual reductions are temporary. The national PolitiFact took a closer look at who would be paying more once the individual tax cuts expire. It found that all filers who make $75,000 or less annually will see a tax increase. Some of those are middle-class households. Only those income ranges above $75,000 will still see a cut by 2027, according to the PolitiFact analysis. That's a significantly different pattern than in 2019, when every group saves, on average. Republicans hope a future Congress will extend the individual provisions. Experts believe that's likely, though it's not guaranteed. Our ruling Democratic Assemblyman Phil Ting recently claimed the GOP tax plan is nothing more than a middle-class tax increase. That doesn't match up with estimates from the centrist Tax Policy Center and the conservative-leaning Tax Foundation. They project the plan will result in a tax cut for about 90 percent of middle-income households nationwide in 2018. Those cuts would range from about $900 to $1,800. The remaining middle-income households would see their taxes stay the same or go up. The California Budget and Policy Center, a liberal-leaning group, warns the plan will provide little if any help to middle- and low-income earners in high-tax California, given new limits placed on state and local tax deductions. But even with those new caps, plus a change to the mortgage interest deduction, national tax experts told us the vast majority of middle-class Californians -- up to 85 percent -- will still experience a tax cut in the plan's first year. That could change by 2027 after the individual tax cuts expire, when households who make $75,000 or less are expected to see a tax hike. Congress could extend those cuts, though nothing is guaranteed. We rate Ting's claim False.","['Congress', 'Taxes', 'California']",False,"The San Francisco lawmaker hasproposed a surchargeon large companies in California, to claw back some of the billions of tax dollars that would be lost to the state under the plan. Such a bill, Ting said, would help blunt the impact of the federal tax plan on everyday Californians.We wondered, however, whether Ting accurately described the GOP tax plan in thestatementhe provided to theSan Francisco Chronicleon Jan. 21, 2018.What we found is most taxpayers would be getting a tax cut,Frank Sammartino, a senior fellow at the Tax Policy Center, told us.Scott Greenbergis a senior analyst at the conservative-leaning Tax Foundation.The Tax Foundation concluded it will amount to tax cut of about1.7 percentof ones after-tax income, on average, for the middle quintile of taxpayers, Greenberg said.Meanwhile, the Tax Policy Center found it will amount to nearly the same amount, a tax cut of about1.6 percentof ones after-tax income for middle income earners.When asked about the statement, Tings spokeswoman Jessica Duong pointed to newsarticlesthat show some in the middle class will see higher taxes under the GOP bill. She did not counter the estimate that most would see a tax cut.It warned in a recentpostthe plan would do little if anything for middle- and low-income families across the nation, andespecially in California. By scaling back the federal income tax deduction for state and local taxes, known as the SALT deduction, the plan would harm many middle-income families.Heres how Forbes.comexplainedthe changes: Under the old tax law all property taxes paid to state and local governments could be claimed as an itemized deduction. It was also possible to deduct state and local income or sales taxes. The new law bundles all these so-called SALT taxes together and limits the deduction, in total, to $10,000 for both individuals and married couples.Only those income ranges above $75,000 still see a cut by 2027, according to thePolitiFact analysis. Thats a significantly different pattern than in 2019, when every group saves, on average.Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check."
Fukushima radiation results in the death of all Orca whale offspring.,['A fear-mongering article based on speculation and out-of-context quotes falsely claimed that radiation from the Fukushima disaster had caused 100% infant mortality among orca whales.'],"Fear-mongering articles claiming that radiation from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster (triggered by the tsunami that followed the Tōhoku earthquake on 11 March 2011) caused a 100% infant mortality rate among orca whales born since then have circulated online for several years. The website Humans Are Free renewed interest in this rumor in September 2016 when it published an article with the clickbait title ""Radiation from Fukushima Now Causes 100% Infant Mortality Rate in West Coast Orcas."" This piece was sourced from an article by the disreputable Natural News website, which employed a similarly misleading title (""West Coast Orcas Experiencing 100% Infant Mortality Rate as Radiation from Fukushima Drifts Across Ocean""), even though the text of that article plainly admitted that there was no proven connection between the Fukushima disaster and the mortality of infant orcas. No one has yet proven a direct link between the 100% mortality rate seen among orca infants and the effects of radiation contamination in the Pacific Ocean from the Fukushima reactor leak in Japan, but it certainly can't be ruled out as a possibility. Natural News listed several sources about whale deaths at the bottom of its article, but none of those sources mentioned radiation from Fukushima as a likely or definitive cause. Quotes from Ken Balcomb, executive director of the Center for Whale Research in Friday Harbor, Washington, were also misleadingly reproduced out of context by Natural News to bolster a claim that Balcomb's statements did not support. The recent discovery of a carcass off the coast of British Columbia, that of a 19-year-old orca female believed to be in the late stages of pregnancy, is just one example of the recent orca deaths that have scientists and conservationists worried. Ken Balcomb stated, ""Her death doesn't bode well for the southern resident population and certainly not for that matriline. Her mother died young. Her aunt had two sons, and she's probably post-reproductive. She hasn't had any babies in the last 12 years. So there's no future."" Balcomb also remarked, ""We haven't had any survivals in babies for a couple of years. We have had stillborns and newborns die and a number of whales that appear to be pregnant but didn't ultimately produce any calves. It's like zero survival in birth rate here."" While Balcomb did say that ""we haven't had any survivals in babies for a couple of years,"" he was referring only to the local Puget Sound orca whale population, and he did not connect a 100% infant orca mortality rate to radiation from Fukushima. His quotes originated from a story published by the Seattle Times in December 2014 about a baby orca whale that had died in Puget Sound. While the exact cause of that whale's death was unclear, Balcomb suggested that the whale likely died due to a diminished food supply (and not radiation). He noted that two of the whales' three biggest problems—the buildup of pollutants such as DDT and polychlorinated biphenyls in their blubber, and disturbance by marine traffic—appear to be worsened by a third issue: a reduction in available prey. These whales can eat sockeye and halibut but overwhelmingly prefer fatty chinook from Puget Sound and Canada's Fraser River, distinguishing them from other fish by using sonar to sense differences in the animals' swim bladders. However, Puget Sound chinook numbers have dropped to about 10% of their historic high, and they, too, are listed for protection under the ESA. For Balcomb, the loss of J32 suggests it's time to consider drastic measures, such as a ban or steep curtailment in chinook fishing, even though fishing is likely the least of the threats chinook face. ""It's a wake-up call—we know what the problem is, whether it's dams or fishing or habitat destruction,"" he said. ""It's just what happens when millions of people move into the watershed. (But) stopping fishing, at least for a while, is something we can do immediately."" The reality is that the basic problem is food, Balcomb said. Although apparently no baby orcas survived long after birth in Puget Sound in 2013 or 2014, that wasn't the case in the immediately following years, as 2015 saw nine successful orca births in Puget Sound. In just over a year, Puget Sound welcomed nine baby Southern-resident orcas to the fold, as the pod continued to rebound from the 30-year-low numbers reported at the end of 2014. While radiation from the Fukushima disaster did have a major impact on marine life, the leak of radioactive material from the plant did not cause a proven ""100% infant mortality"" rate among orca whales. Moreover, the Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration do not list nuclear radiation (from any source) among the threats currently facing the world's whale population.",['loss'],False,"Fear-mongering articles reporting that radiation from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster (triggered by the tsunami that followed the Thoku earthquake of 11 March 2011) had caused a 100% infant mortality among orca whales born since then have been circulated online for several years. The web site Humans Are Free renewed interest in that rumor in September 2016 when they published an article with the clickbait title ""Radiation from Fukushima Now Causes 100% Infant Mortality Rate in West Coast Orcas"":Natural News listed several sources about whale deaths at the bottom of their article, but none of those sources mentioned radiation from Fukushima as likely or definitive cause.While Balcom did say that ""we haven't had any survivals in babies for a couple of years,"" he was talking about the local Puget Sound orca whale population only, and he didn't in any way connect a 100% infant orca mortality rate to radiation from Fukushima. His quotes originated with a story published by the Seattle Times in December 2014 about a baby orca whale that had died in the Pugent Sound, and while the exact cause of that whale's death was unclear, Balcolm suggested that the whale likely died due to a diminished food supply (and not radiation):Although apparently no baby orcas survived long after birth in Puget Sound in 2013 or 2014, that wasn't the case in the immediately following years, as 2015 saw nine successful orca births in Puget Sound:While radiation from the Fukushima disaster did have a major impact on marine life, the leak of radiactive material from the plant leak did not cause a proven ""100% infant mortality"" rate among orca whales. Moreover, the Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration do not list nuclear radiation (from any source) among the threats currently facing the world's whale population. "
Is the meme an accurate portrayal of 'the significance of Kamala Harris being Vice President'?,"['Harris made history several times over when she was sworn in as U.S. vice president on Jan. 20, 2021.']","Voting in the 2020 U.S. Election may be over, but the misinformation keeps on ticking. Never stop fact-checking. Follow our post-election coverage here. here On Inauguration Day, Kamala Harris made history several times over. In being sworn in on Jan. 20, 2021, the outgoing California senator became the first Black person, first woman, and first person of South Asian heritage to be elevated to the vice presidency.  Inauguration Day The historic nature of her achievement was placed in stark context in a viral meme that showed Harris, whose parents immigrated to the United States from India and Jamaica, respectively, juxtaposed with a long list of official portraits of white men. (Charles Curtis, who served with Herbert Hoover from 1929 to 1933, had some Native American heritage and was therefore the first person of color to hold the office of vice president). Charles Curtis The meme also highlighted several purported landmarks in the slow progress of women's rights and racial desegregation in the United States, as follows: Dont understand why its a big deal that Kamala Harris is VP? Until Red box? She would have been enslaved. Until Blue box? She couldnt vote. Until Yellow box? She had to attend a segregated school. Until Green one? She couldnt have her own bank account.   The following screenshot shows a selection of instances of the meme on Facebook and demonstrates its popularity on social media in January 2021: popularity   The vice presidents highlighted in various colors were as follows (along with the dates of their tenure as vice president): Red: Andrew Johnson, March 4 to April 15,1865 Andrew Johnson Blue: Calvin Coolidge, March 4, 1921, to Aug. 3, 1923 Calvin Coolidge Yellow: Richard Nixon, Jan. 20, 1953, to Jan. 20, 1961 Richard Nixon Green: Spiro Agnew, Jan. 20, 1969, to Oct. 10, 1973 Spiro Agnew The claims made in the meme were therefore that: until Johnson's tenure as vice president (in 1865), Harris would have been enslaved due to her racial heritage; until Coolidge's tenure as vice president (1921 to 1923), she would have been denied the right to vote due to her gender; until Nixon's tenure as vice president (1953 to 1961), she would have been forced to attend a segregated school due to her racial heritage; and until Agnew's tenure as vice president (1969 to 1973), she would have been denied the right to her own bank account, due to her status as a married woman.  On the whole, the claims contained a high degree of historical accuracy, though in some cases they over-simplified certain discriminatory practices and made some relatively minor errors in identifying the vice president in office during certain major reforms. As a result, we're issuing a rating of ""true."" The following is our assessment of each of those claims.   The creator of the meme appears to have chosen the year 1865, and therefore the tenure of Johnson, because that is the year in which the 13th Amendment, which outlawed slavery, was passed. The text of the amendment reads as follows:  text Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction. Congress passed the amendment in January 1865, while Johnson was vice president-elect to President-elect Abraham Lincoln, but it was not ratified by the states until December 1865, by which time Johnson had ascended to the presidency after Lincoln's assassination, leaving the vice presidency vacant for the duration of his presidency. So the sequence of events is a bit muddled, but it is certainly reasonable to place the 13th Amendment, and the abolition of slavery, during the Johnson era.  Until the passing of the 13th Amendment, Black people in the United States lacked legal protection against enslavement. That doesn't mean that all Black people before 1865 were slaves, but the vast majority were. Based on figures included in the 1860 U.S. Census (page 14), some 89% of Black people in the country at that time were slaves. page 14 Slavery was far more prevalent in the southern states, but on average, a Black woman in the U.S. shortly before the 13th Amendment had close to a 90% likelihood of being enslaved. From a human rights perspective, Black people had no legal or constitutional protection from slavery, which is likely the thrust of the point made in the meme.   The 19th Amendment, which gave women the right to vote, was passed by Congress in June 1919 and ratified by the states in August 1920. The text of the amendment read: text The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation. On both those dates, Thomas Riley Marshall was vice president, under President Woodrow Wilson. So the meme was incorrect in stating that women could not vote until the vice presidency of Calvin Coolidge. In fact, women voted for the first time in the November 1920 election, which saw Warren Harding and his running mate Coolidge elected president and vice president, respectively.  Thomas Riley Marshall That inaccuracy does not impinge upon the truth of the broader point being made in the meme, namely that Harris, as a woman, would not have been able to vote in the United States until the early 1920s. However, the meme does miss an important additional barrier to voting rights that Harris, as a Black woman, could have faced even after the passage of the 19th Amendment.  While the 15th Amendment in principle gave Black men the right to vote, and the 19th Amendment gave all women the right to vote, states continued to discriminate against Black voters by imposing obstacles such as poll taxes, literacy tests, and ""grandfather clauses""  all of which were designed to suppress Black voters. 15th Amendment obstacles It wasn't until the Voting Rights Act of 1965 that such practices were prohibited by federal law, although many activists argue that present-day voter-ID rules continue the legacy of electoral restrictions that have a disproportionate impact on voters of color. Voting Rights Act argue   The creator of the meme appears to have selected the vice presidency of Nixon (1953 to 1961) because that was the period during which the U.S. Supreme Court declared racial segregation in public schools constituted a violation of the Equal Protection clause in the 14th Amendment of the Constitution, in the landmark 1954 ruling in Brown vs. the Board of Education. In a follow-up ruling in 1955, the court ordered school districts to arrange for the desegregation of public schools ""with all deliberate speed.""  declared follow-up ruling Most, though not all, schools were racially segregated in the 19th and early-20th centuries in the United States. So a Black student, such as Harris, would very likely have been forced to ""attend a segregated school,"" as the meme claims. Brown vs. the Board of Education marked the beginning of the end of school segregation, but it did not bring about integration overnight. Over the course of the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s, state lawmakers and local authorities fought protracted and often bitter battles to resist the Supreme Court's clear mandate. battles So while the meme was right to point out that Black students would be very likely forced to attend segregated schools before the decision in Brown vs. the Board of Education, it's also the case that many Black students were forced to attend segregated schools for many years after the ruling, as well. What changed in 1954 was that the nation's highest court clearly declared that system of racial segregation to be unconstitutional.   The meme appears to refer to the enactment of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) in the early 1970s, which made it illegal for financial services companies to discriminate against customers on the basis of anything other than their creditworthiness. The legislation stated that: stated It shall be unlawful for any creditor to discriminate against any applicant, with respect to any aspect of a credit transaction(1) on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex or marital status, or age (provided the applicant has the capacity to contract)... However, the law wasn't enacted until October 1974, when the office of vice president was vacant. Spiro Agnew resigned in late 1973, after he was charged with bribery and tax fraud, and his replacement, Gerald Ford, ascended to the presidency in August 1974, after Nixon resigned. So the meme is again mistaken on the precise sequence of events. While Agnew was vice president, banks could (and did) legally deny credit to a woman on the basis of extraneous considerations such as her marital status, her husband's income and credit history, and so on. and did The meme also somewhat overstated the restrictions in place before 1974. Women, including married women, could open their own bank accounts before the ECOA was passed, but often faced difficulty and discrimination in doing so. It was particularly difficult for women to obtain a line of credit or a credit card, in her own name. In 1972, the National Commission on Consumer Finance published a report that found the following common discriminatory practices in lending: report What the ECOA changed in 1974, and what the meme appears to allude to, is that banks and lenders could no longer legally engage in such discriminatory practices. ",['credit'],True,"Voting in the 2020 U.S. Election may be over, but the misinformation keeps on ticking. Never stop fact-checking. Follow our post-election coverage here.On Inauguration Day, Kamala Harris made history several times over. In being sworn in on Jan. 20, 2021, the outgoing California senator became the first Black person, first woman, and first person of South Asian heritage to be elevated to the vice presidency. The historic nature of her achievement was placed in stark context in a viral meme that showed Harris, whose parents immigrated to the United States from India and Jamaica, respectively, juxtaposed with a long list of official portraits of white men. (Charles Curtis, who served with Herbert Hoover from 1929 to 1933, had some Native American heritage and was therefore the first person of color to hold the office of vice president).The following screenshot shows a selection of instances of the meme on Facebook and demonstrates its popularity on social media in January 2021:Red: Andrew Johnson, March 4 to April 15,1865Blue: Calvin Coolidge, March 4, 1921, to Aug. 3, 1923Yellow: Richard Nixon, Jan. 20, 1953, to Jan. 20, 1961Green: Spiro Agnew, Jan. 20, 1969, to Oct. 10, 1973The text of the amendment reads as follows: Until the passing of the 13th Amendment, Black people in the United States lacked legal protection against enslavement. That doesn't mean that all Black people before 1865 were slaves, but the vast majority were. Based on figures included in the 1860 U.S. Census (page 14), some 89% of Black people in the country at that time were slaves.The text of the amendment read:On both those dates, Thomas Riley Marshall was vice president, under President Woodrow Wilson. So the meme was incorrect in stating that women could not vote until the vice presidency of Calvin Coolidge. In fact, women voted for the first time in the November 1920 election, which saw Warren Harding and his running mate Coolidge elected president and vice president, respectively. While the 15th Amendment in principle gave Black men the right to vote, and the 19th Amendment gave all women the right to vote, states continued to discriminate against Black voters by imposing obstacles such as poll taxes, literacy tests, and ""grandfather clauses""  all of which were designed to suppress Black voters.It wasn't until the Voting Rights Act of 1965 that such practices were prohibited by federal law, although many activists argue that present-day voter-ID rules continue the legacy of electoral restrictions that have a disproportionate impact on voters of color.The creator of the meme appears to have selected the vice presidency of Nixon (1953 to 1961) because that was the period during which the U.S. Supreme Court declared racial segregation in public schools constituted a violation of the Equal Protection clause in the 14th Amendment of the Constitution, in the landmark 1954 ruling in Brown vs. the Board of Education. In a follow-up ruling in 1955, the court ordered school districts to arrange for the desegregation of public schools ""with all deliberate speed."" Most, though not all, schools were racially segregated in the 19th and early-20th centuries in the United States. So a Black student, such as Harris, would very likely have been forced to ""attend a segregated school,"" as the meme claims. Brown vs. the Board of Education marked the beginning of the end of school segregation, but it did not bring about integration overnight. Over the course of the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s, state lawmakers and local authorities fought protracted and often bitter battles to resist the Supreme Court's clear mandate.The meme appears to refer to the enactment of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) in the early 1970s, which made it illegal for financial services companies to discriminate against customers on the basis of anything other than their creditworthiness. The legislation stated that:However, the law wasn't enacted until October 1974, when the office of vice president was vacant. Spiro Agnew resigned in late 1973, after he was charged with bribery and tax fraud, and his replacement, Gerald Ford, ascended to the presidency in August 1974, after Nixon resigned. So the meme is again mistaken on the precise sequence of events. While Agnew was vice president, banks could (and did) legally deny credit to a woman on the basis of extraneous considerations such as her marital status, her husband's income and credit history, and so on.The meme also somewhat overstated the restrictions in place before 1974. Women, including married women, could open their own bank accounts before the ECOA was passed, but often faced difficulty and discrimination in doing so. It was particularly difficult for women to obtain a line of credit or a credit card, in her own name. In 1972, the National Commission on Consumer Finance published a report that found the following common discriminatory practices in lending:"
Does Tennessee Find Kevin James Sexy?,['What is it about maps that makes them seem so credible to the internet? '],"On October 12, 2021, a map supposedly showing searches on the pornography website Pornhub went viral on Twitter as social media users laughed about the bizarre sexual preferences of their compatriots. The state of Texas, for instance, liked lesbian porn, the map claimed, the Northwest states searched for Asians, and Oklahoma liked  Gothic Hospital? And Tennessee liked  Kevin James?   This map has been floating around social media since at least February 2019 when it was posted by @sortabad. When the fake map went viral again more than two years later in October 2021, they claimed credit for the map and shared their original tweet:  Pornhub does release analytics via their insights page and they have released maps in the past that show the top searches by state. Heres one such map from around election day in 2020. insights   In 2016, they released a map that looks similar to the viral joke map (except, unfortunately, for the inclusion of Kevin James). released a map   So what does all this mean? Do Tennesseans find or do they not find Kevin James sexy? Well, we cant really answer that. But we can say that the answer isnt reflected in this viral joke map. 2020 Election Week Searches  Pornhub Insights. https://www.pornhub.com/insights/2020-election-week-searches. Accessed 14 Oct. 2021. February 26, { 72 comments }, and 2016 Tweet. The United States Top Searches  Pornhub Insights. https://www.pornhub.com/insights/united-states-top-searches. Accessed 14 Oct. 2021.",['credit'],False,"Pornhub does release analytics via their insights page and they have released maps in the past that show the top searches by state. Heres one such map from around election day in 2020.In 2016, they released a map that looks similar to the viral joke map (except, unfortunately, for the inclusion of Kevin James)."
"In altered photo, says Barack Obama wants more of Texans private data via health care.",[],"Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, campaigning for re-election,tweeteda parody of President Barack Obama promoting his signature health-care law. Around midday Dec. 12, 2013, the official White House Twitter accountposteda photo of Obama holding a sign urging Americans to get health coverage because nobody should go broke just because they get sick. Social media denizensstarted creatingversions that rewrote the signs text; Dewhursts had Obama saying, I want more of Texans private data. Some perspective: Texas in 2012 had approximately 19.5 million insured residents and 5.2 million legal residents without insurance according to a March 18, 2013,reportby the state Health and Human Services Commission. Does the Obamacare law demand private data on them that wasn't known to the government before? PolitiFact reporters have checked out several claims about how the Affordable Care Acts online marketplaces will handle personal information. Many of the concerns addressed are about how government agencies will share information they already collect -- andhow securethat information will be. As part of a May 2013fact-check, PolitiFact in Washington, D.C., reported that afederal data hubresulting from the 2010 law would pull information from government agencies, but not expand federal data collection. For example, the Social Security Administration is asked to verify a person's Social Security number, and the IRS confirms financial data to see if a person is eligible for a subsidy. PolitiFact in D.C. gave aFalse ratingSept. 19, 2013, to a claim by former New York Lt. Gov. Betsy McCaughey that Obamacare will question your sex life, finding that nothing in the health care law required such questions. So what information does the government collect under the Obamacare law? If you apply to shop in the federal online insurance marketplace or the marketplace for your state, youll supply information on yourself and perhaps family members, some of which the government already has. Healthcare.gov offers achecklistfor people preparing to fill out applications, whetheronlineorprinted: Social Security number, employer, income, current insurance policy numbers and information about your employers insurance plans (if any). Such answers will help determine whether youre eligible to buy insurance through the marketplaces and if you can get free- or reduced-cost coverage via tax credits, Medicaid or the Children's Health Insurance Program. The standardizedfamily applicationasks for information on you and everyone who lives with you, including whether you are pregnant and how many babies youre expecting, whether you have a health condition that limits daily activities, whether you live in a nursing home and whether you were in foster care after age 18. Other questions concern employment, military service, sources of income, tax deductions taken and whether you are American Indian or Alaska Native. A Sept. 18, 2013,fact sheetfrom the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services said, Personal health information (PHI) will be requested only when it is needed to complete the application and make an eligibility determination for health coverage options. Health privacy expert Deven McGraw told us by email that the applications do collect some information the government did not already have, but said its the same type of information gathered when people apply for public coverage such as Medicaid. They are questions that are specifically designed to match eligibility criteria. So none of it is extraneous, said McGraw, director of the health privacy project at the Center for Democracy and Technology, which advocates for Internet freedom. And, she said, the data cant be used for any purposes other than the marketplaces functions. More information about you could come, the fact sheet says, from common federal data sources including the Social Security Administration (SSA), Internal Revenue Service (IRS), and Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Wait -- Homeland Security? According to the National Immigration Law Centerswebsite, applicants who are not U.S. citizens will have their status verified through a Homeland/U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Servicedatabase. Agencies already use the web service, called Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE), to determine immigrants eligibility forbenefitsincluding Medicaid, housing loans and unemployment. Via email, Social Security spokeswoman Kia Anderson told us her agency can, when CMS needs the information to determine eligibility, provide applicants ID numbers, citizenship data, death or disability indicators and Social Security income and coverage earned. So the application process puts together some information the government already had with some it didnt have. People who arent applying to shop inthe marketplaces but are subject to the Obamacare laws mandate will also be sharing some new information with Uncle Sam. The mandate to have or get insurance applies, according to the immigration law center, to all U.S. citizens, naturalized citizens and legal immigrants. Via email, IRS spokeswoman Lea Crusberg said 2014 tax returns will ask whether you have health coverage that meets the new standards or an exemption, whether you got coverage through an Obamacare marketplace and whether you got a tax credit to help defray the cost. The laws new tax payments and credits will also be on returns, of course. In 2015, Crusberg said, the IRS will start collecting coverage information from insurance providers. Employers who insure their own workers in-house will report which employees are enrolled and give enough information so the IRS can tell if those workers are due a tax credit. Self-insuring employers will also put the cost of the plan theyre providing on W-2 forms so workers can see it. Is the new data private information? Per the CMS fact sheet, Obamacare applicants could be asked to cough up some personal health information. But the fact sheet also says the marketplaces systems will not store this information -- which casts some doubt on whether the government is really collecting it, but serves as an indication that its considered sensitive. How about when the IRS asks where your insurance comes from, whether you got a tax credit for it and whether it meets the Obamacare laws standards? Generally, the IRS regards what you put on your tax return as private. For example, tax preparers who disclose such information without your consentcan face criminal charges. Final IRS regulations governing who can disclose what tax return information to HHS under the Obamacare lawwere issuedAug. 13, 2013. AnFAQposted by the IRS that day said that officers and employees of the IRS will disclose to HHS, the Marketplace, and state agencies only, upon written request and subject to strict privacy and security rules, certain return information ... for the purpose of determining eligibility for certain health care affordability programs. Our ruling Dewhurst said Obama wants more of Texans private data. The subset of Texans shopping for coverage through the online marketplace are providing additional private data for a reason: to ensure theyre qualified. Dewhurst's statement overlooks these aspects. Regardless, many more Texans will be asked to give the IRS information about their health coverage that was previously not requested. We rate Dewhursts statement as Mostly True. MOSTLY TRUE The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information. Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check.","['Health Care', 'Homeland Security', 'Medicaid', 'Welfare', 'Taxes', 'Privacy Issues', 'Texas']",True,"Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, campaigning for re-election,tweeteda parody of President Barack Obama promoting his signature health-care law.Around midday Dec. 12, 2013, the official White House Twitter accountposteda photo of Obama holding a sign urging Americans to get health coverage because nobody should go broke just because they get sick. Social media denizensstarted creatingversions that rewrote the signs text; Dewhursts had Obama saying, I want more of Texans private data.Some perspective: Texas in 2012 had approximately 19.5 million insured residents and 5.2 million legal residents without insurance according to a March 18, 2013,reportby the state Health and Human Services Commission.PolitiFact reporters have checked out several claims about how the Affordable Care Acts online marketplaces will handle personal information. Many of the concerns addressed are about how government agencies will share information they already collect -- andhow securethat information will be.As part of a May 2013fact-check, PolitiFact in Washington, D.C., reported that afederal data hubresulting from the 2010 law would pull information from government agencies, but not expand federal data collection.PolitiFact in D.C. gave aFalse ratingSept. 19, 2013, to a claim by former New York Lt. Gov. Betsy McCaughey that Obamacare will question your sex life, finding that nothing in the health care law required such questions.Healthcare.gov offers achecklistfor people preparing to fill out applications, whetheronlineorprinted: Social Security number, employer, income, current insurance policy numbers and information about your employers insurance plans (if any).The standardizedfamily applicationasks for information on you and everyone who lives with you, including whether you are pregnant and how many babies youre expecting, whether you have a health condition that limits daily activities, whether you live in a nursing home and whether you were in foster care after age 18.A Sept. 18, 2013,fact sheetfrom the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services said, Personal health information (PHI) will be requested only when it is needed to complete the application and make an eligibility determination for health coverage options.According to the National Immigration Law Centerswebsite, applicants who are not U.S. citizens will have their status verified through a Homeland/U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Servicedatabase. Agencies already use the web service, called Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE), to determine immigrants eligibility forbenefitsincluding Medicaid, housing loans and unemployment.Generally, the IRS regards what you put on your tax return as private. For example, tax preparers who disclose such information without your consentcan face criminal charges.Final IRS regulations governing who can disclose what tax return information to HHS under the Obamacare lawwere issuedAug. 13, 2013. AnFAQposted by the IRS that day said that officers and employees of the IRS will disclose to HHS, the Marketplace, and state agencies only, upon written request and subject to strict privacy and security rules, certain return information ... for the purpose of determining eligibility for certain health care affordability programs.Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check."
Hillary Clinton's Premature Victory Celebration,"['A video purportedly showing Hillary, Bill, and Chelsea Clinton prematurely celebrating an election victory was likely taken after the first presidential debate.']","A video purportedly showing Chelsea, Bill, and Hillary Clinton prematurely celebrating a presidential election victory was widely shared on the internet in the wake of the Democratic nominee's loss on 8 November 2016: While this video was distributed by several web sites along with the assertion that it showed the Clintons prematurely celebrating a victory on election night that proved to be unrealized, little evidence was provided to back up this claim. The video contains no audio, is only a few seconds long, and as of this writing the sourceis still unknown. The earliest version we could uncover was published by LiveLeak on 16 November 2016, but that video was also lacking context. The Gateway Pundit attempted to prove to their readers (or possibly to mislead them into believing) that the video was takenon election night by providing a photograph ofBill, Chelsea, and Hillary Clinton in similar clothing at an 8 November 2016 campaign event: Although that photograph was taken on Election Day 2016, there were some obvious differences between the clothes the Clintons were wearing in that image and the ones they are seen wearing in the video. Mainly, Chelsea Clinton was garbed a sort of aqua sleeveless dress in the still photograph, but she sports a dark blue long-sleeved dress in the video:  photograph  Perhaps more telling is the change in Bill Clinton's attire. Photographs from Election Day 2016 show that Bill Clinton was wearing a light blue shirt with a dark blue and white tie, but in the video he is seen clothed in a white shirt with a salmon-colored tie:  In addition to the optical discrepancies, the narrative behind the claim doesn't quite add up. Clinton was likely confident heading into the election since most polls showed her with a large advantage, so it's hard to fathom a moment which would have elicited such an act of jubilation in the course of an election night in which she lost. So when was this video taken? Bill, Hillaryand Chelsea Clinton were wearing outfits that match those shown in the video at the first presidential debate of 2016 at Hofsfra University:   Embed from Getty Images   It's plausible that the Clintons would have engaged a short but jubilant celebration after this event, as many observed felt that Clinton had won the debate. won The ""premature celebration"" video is frequently shared in close proximity to a similar claim holding that Clinton threw a tantrum following her election night loss. This rumor, too, is largelyunfounded. unfounded The Economist.  ""A Win for Hillary Clinton: The First Presidential Debate.""
  27 September 2016.",['loss'],NEI,"Although that photograph was taken on Election Day 2016, there were some obvious differences between the clothes the Clintons were wearing in that image and the ones they are seen wearing in the video. Mainly, Chelsea Clinton was garbed a sort of aqua sleeveless dress in the still photograph, but she sports a dark blue long-sleeved dress in the video:It's plausible that the Clintons would have engaged a short but jubilant celebration after this event, as many observed felt that Clinton had won the debate.The ""premature celebration"" video is frequently shared in close proximity to a similar claim holding that Clinton threw a tantrum following her election night loss. This rumor, too, is largelyunfounded."
"Says 24 million people in this country can't find a full-time job, 50 million can't see a doctor when they're sick, 47 million people need government help to feed themselves and 15 million families owe more than the value of their home.",[],"Alan Grayson, an Orlando Democrat and former U.S. Representative running to reclaim a seat in 2012, emerged a big-time supporter of the Occupy Wall Street movement after appearing on HBO'sReal Time with Bill Maheron Oct. 7, 2011.A couple of Maher's panelists, and even Maher himself, mocked the protesters for their worrisome bathroom situation, lack of media spokesperson, name choice, and proficiency (or lack thereof) in economics. Saying he was a former economist, Grayson jumped in, saying he had no problem understanding the protesters' grievances.They're complaining about the fact that Wall Street wrecked the economy three years ago and nobody's held responsible for that, he said. Not a single person has been indicted or convicted for destroying 20 percent of our national net worth accumulated over the course of two centuries. They're upset about the fact that Wall Street has iron control over the economic policies of this country. And that one party is a wholly owned subsidiary of Wall Street. And the other party caters to them as well. That's what they're upset about.It gets more interesting. P.J. O'Rourke, a political theorist and author, said, Get the man a bongo drum. They've found their spokesman, okay. Take your shoes off, get a bongo drum, forget where to go to the bathroom, and it's yours. He got a few laughs. Then Grayson shot back with this:Listen, if I am a spokesman for all the people who think we should not have 24 million people in this country who can't find a full-time job, that we should not have 50 million people in this country who can't see a doctor when they're sick, that we shouldn't have 47 million people in this country who need government help in order to feed themselves, and we shouldn't have 15 million families who owe more on their mortgage than the value of their home, okay, I'll be that spokesman.Maher's audience gave Grayson a standing ovation. His retort popped up on YouTube and then spread through Facebook and Twitter. Liberal bloggers praised him for his succinct explanation. You can see the video cliphere.We decided to check Grayson's litany of claims about the economic plight of many Americans. (We previously checked a claim from Michael Moorethat gets at Grayson's other major point, that no one associated with the 2008 economic collapse was arrested or indicted. )We'll take the economic claims one by one.24 million people in this country can't find a full-time jobA similar claim -- More than 25 million Americans are unemployed -- was presented in an article in the protester-producedOccupied Wall Street Journal, which we examined in a fact-checkhere.Grayson was wise to distinguish between the number of people who are unemployed and those who can't find a full-time job.According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, 14 million Americans were unemployed as of September 2011, which is how officials determine the unemployment rate. We pointed out in our fact-check that BLS methodology has been criticized for not expanding the definition of unemployment so that it includes people who have stopped looking for work or who are working part time, even though they would rather have a full-time job.An alternative measure called the U-6 paints that picture. As of September, an additional 2.5 million Americans were deemed marginally attached to the labor force, and another 9.3 million are working part time but would prefer a full-time job. That adds up to 25.8 million people.In our item, we pointed out theOccupy Wall Street Journalarticle described the expanded definition of unemployment, not the traditional one. Grayson's statement is a little low at 24 million but more precise in its definition.50 million people in this country can't see a doctor when they're sickAgain, this is close to what is cited by theOccupied Wall Street Journalarticle but is a little different. That story claimed more than 50 million live without health insurance, and we found that they were almost exactly right. A U.S. Census Bureau study called Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage: 2010,found that49.9 million Americans were uninsured in 2010. That's about 16 percent of the population.While Grayson's statement isn't exactly the same, his point seems clear enough to us.47 million people in this country need government help in order to feed themselvesGrayson is talking about what we know as food stamps, which has been called the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program since 2008. The U.S. Department of Agriculture funds SNAP and the states administer it, sometimes by other names. The economic recession has forced more people into the program since 2008, and the numbers are climbing, according to thisannual summary.In fiscal year 2008, 28.2 million people received nearly $35 billion worth of benefits. The program served 33.4 million in FY 2009 and 40.3 million in FY 2010.Themost recent participation figure,for July 2011, is 45,344,946 people, with the most recent monthly allotment per household at $283.68. That enrollment figure isn't the program's highest number, but it's just 65,737 people short of the May 2011 record.We are dealing with historic participation, said Regan Hopper, USDA Food and Nutrition Service spokeswoman.Grayson's figure is pretty close.He probably wasn't accounting for other government food programs, such as the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children -- better known as WIC -- in his tally. But that USDA program provides low-income pregnant, post-partum and breastfeeding women, as well as infants and children up to age 5, with checks for certain kinds of food to supplement their diets.WIC served8.9 million in July 2011, said Regan Hopper, a USDA Food and Nutrition Service spokeswoman. Further, USDA funds school lunch and breakfast programs, which provide free and reduced-price meals to some schoolchildren, and provides food and money through its Emergency Food Assistance Program to states for distribution in food banks, soup kitchens and the like.15 million families owe more on their mortgage than the value of their homeThis housing phenomenon is also referred to as being underwater or upside down in mortgage payments. We asked a few companies that keep databases of mortgages and home loans, usually public records in counties, for the financial and property industries.Seattle-based Zillow.com puts the latest figure for these homes at 26.8 percent for the second quarter, which ended in June. That amounts to 15.3 million homes. It's down slightly from Zillow's first-quarter analysis, which put the number of underwater homes at 28.4 percent, or 16.2 million.We posed the same question to CoreLogic,a Sana Ana, Calif. firm.In a study released in September, CoreLogic reported that 22.5 percent of all homes with a mortgage were in negative equity in the same period. CoreLogic's number is roughly 5 million homes fewer than Zillow's, coming in at 10.9 million. The company found another 2.4 million borrowers at the brink of negative equity, or having less than 5 percent equity. You may have noticed some disparity with those estimates. Corelogic's data includes 48 million properties with a mortgage, accounting for more than 85 percent of all mortgages in the country. Zillow.com tries to provide an estimate for the country's total number of homes with outstanding mortgages, estimated by the U.S. Census bureau to be 50 million to 55 million. So part of the difference could lie in the 15 percent of homes CoreLogic does not cover. There are also estimation errors to consider, said Zillow.com chief economist Stan Humphries, particularly in guessing the value of homes and current outstanding loan balance. A difference of about 4 percent between the companies' estimates is not really significant, he said. We think this is a critically important metric in understanding the housing market, he said. The point remains that economists have never seen housing values fall so low. Housing data is scant for the Great Depression, but Humphries believes the ongoing crisis outranks that period. He says Depression-era down payments were higher in the 1930s, giving folks some cushion as the crisis set in. Our rulingGrayson's defense of the Occupy Wall Street movement earned him praise from the left-wing blosophere and pundits for its pith. No pundit or officialin the movement's first monthhad quite articulated the protesters' qualms -- high unemployment, expensive health care, poverty and underwater mortgage payments -- as Grayson did in 20 seconds on Maher's show.We examined each of his economic claims and found them accurate, point for point. We rate his claim True.","['Economy', 'Florida']",True,"Alan Grayson, an Orlando Democrat and former U.S. Representative running to reclaim a seat in 2012, emerged a big-time supporter of the Occupy Wall Street movement after appearing on HBO'sReal Time with Bill Maheron Oct. 7, 2011.A couple of Maher's panelists, and even Maher himself, mocked the protesters for their worrisome bathroom situation, lack of media spokesperson, name choice, and proficiency (or lack thereof) in economics. Saying he was a former economist, Grayson jumped in, saying he had no problem understanding the protesters' grievances.They're complaining about the fact that Wall Street wrecked the economy three years ago and nobody's held responsible for that, he said. Not a single person has been indicted or convicted for destroying 20 percent of our national net worth accumulated over the course of two centuries. They're upset about the fact that Wall Street has iron control over the economic policies of this country. And that one party is a wholly owned subsidiary of Wall Street. And the other party caters to them as well. That's what they're upset about.It gets more interesting. P.J. O'Rourke, a political theorist and author, said, Get the man a bongo drum. They've found their spokesman, okay. Take your shoes off, get a bongo drum, forget where to go to the bathroom, and it's yours. He got a few laughs. Then Grayson shot back with this:Listen, if I am a spokesman for all the people who think we should not have 24 million people in this country who can't find a full-time job, that we should not have 50 million people in this country who can't see a doctor when they're sick, that we shouldn't have 47 million people in this country who need government help in order to feed themselves, and we shouldn't have 15 million families who owe more on their mortgage than the value of their home, okay, I'll be that spokesman.Maher's audience gave Grayson a standing ovation. His retort popped up on YouTube and then spread through Facebook and Twitter. Liberal bloggers praised him for his succinct explanation. You can see the video cliphere.We decided to check Grayson's litany of claims about the economic plight of many Americans. (We previously checked a claim from Michael Moorethat gets at Grayson's other major point, that no one associated with the 2008 economic collapse was arrested or indicted.)We'll take the economic claims one by one.24 million people in this country can't find a full-time jobA similar claim -- More than 25 million Americans are unemployed -- was presented in an article in the protester-producedOccupied Wall Street Journal, which we examined in a fact-checkhere.Grayson was wise to distinguish between the number of people who are unemployed and those who can't find a full-time job.According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, 14 million Americans were unemployed as of September 2011, which is how officials determine the unemployment rate. We pointed out in our fact-check that BLS methodology has been criticized for not expanding the definition of unemployment so that it includes people who have stopped looking for work or who are working part time, even though they would rather have a full-time job.An alternative measure called the U-6 paints that picture. As of September, an additional 2.5 million Americans were deemed marginally attached to the labor force, and another 9.3 million are working part time but would prefer a full-time job. That adds up to 25.8 million people.In our item, we pointed out theOccupy Wall Street Journalarticle described the expanded definition of unemployment, not the traditional one. Grayson's statement is a little low at 24 million but more precise in its definition.50 million people in this country can't see a doctor when they're sickAgain, this is close to what is cited by theOccupied Wall Street Journalarticle but is a little different. That story claimed more than 50 million live without health insurance, and we found that they were almost exactly right. A U.S. Census Bureau study called Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage: 2010,found that49.9 million Americans were uninsured in 2010. That's about 16 percent of the population.While Grayson's statement isn't exactly the same, his point seems clear enough to us.47 million people in this country need government help in order to feed themselvesGrayson is talking about what we know as food stamps, which has been called the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program since 2008. The U.S. Department of Agriculture funds SNAP and the states administer it, sometimes by other names. The economic recession has forced more people into the program since 2008, and the numbers are climbing, according to thisannual summary.In fiscal year 2008, 28.2 million people received nearly $35 billion worth of benefits. The program served 33.4 million in FY 2009 and 40.3 million in FY 2010.Themost recent participation figure,for July 2011, is 45,344,946 people, with the most recent monthly allotment per household at $283.68. That enrollment figure isn't the program's highest number, but it's just 65,737 people short of the May 2011 record.We are dealing with historic participation, said Regan Hopper, USDA Food and Nutrition Service spokeswoman.Grayson's figure is pretty close.He probably wasn't accounting for other government food programs, such as the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children -- better known as WIC -- in his tally. But that USDA program provides low-income pregnant, post-partum and breastfeeding women, as well as infants and children up to age 5, with checks for certain kinds of food to supplement their diets.WIC served8.9 million in July 2011, said Regan Hopper, a USDA Food and Nutrition Service spokeswoman. Further, USDA funds school lunch and breakfast programs, which provide free and reduced-price meals to some schoolchildren, and provides food and money through its Emergency Food Assistance Program to states for distribution in food banks, soup kitchens and the like.15 million families owe more on their mortgage than the value of their homeThis housing phenomenon is also referred to as being underwater or upside down in mortgage payments. We asked a few companies that keep databases of mortgages and home loans, usually public records in counties, for the financial and property industries.Seattle-based Zillow.com puts the latest figure for these homes at 26.8 percent for the second quarter, which ended in June. That amounts to 15.3 million homes. It's down slightly from Zillow's first-quarter analysis, which put the number of underwater homes at 28.4 percent, or 16.2 million.We posed the same question to CoreLogic,a Sana Ana, Calif. firm.In a study released in September, CoreLogic reported that 22.5 percent of all homes with a mortgage were in negative equity in the same period. CoreLogic's number is roughly 5 million homes fewer than Zillow's, coming in at 10.9 million. The company found another 2.4 million borrowers at the brink of negative equity, or having less than 5 percent equity."
Are Biden and Dems Planning to 'Spy' on Bank and Cash App Accounts?,['Social media posts mischaracterized how the American Rescue Plan will affect users of cash apps like Venmo.'],"Various social media posts circulating in late December 2021 claimed that thanks to coronavirus stimulus legislation known as the American Rescue Plan, U.S. President Joe Biden's administration and Democratic legislators would begin ""spying"" or ""snooping"" on users of cash apps like PayPal and Venmo. Here is an example of one such post: example   The truth is, unsurprisingly, more nuanced, but the bottom line is that, contrary to what the above Twitter posts state, the effect of the legislation in question isn't that the Biden administration or Democrats will be ""tapping into"" or ""spying on"" bank or cash app accounts. This is a misleading characterization. What the legislation does is significantly lower the threshold for reporting taxable transactions made using cash apps like Venmo, PayPal, or Zelle for goods and services to the IRS. And when you reach that threshold, the app companies will then be required to send a tax form called a 1099-K to both you and the IRS. A 1099-K is, according to PayPal, an ""informational tax form that is used to report goods and services payments received by a business or individual in the calendar year."" PayPal As of this writing, the current threshold for such reporting is $20,000 and 200 payments in goods and services. Come Jan. 1, 2022, that reporting threshold will drop down to $600. threshold This could have a significant impact on platform users' tax returns. Here's how Bloomberg Tax described how users might experience the change: Bloomberg Tax For example, a model train collector may have paid $5,000 for model train pieces over several years that they now sell for $8,000, and the marketplace that introduced the seller to the buyer and through which the sale took place may charge the seller a total fee of $800. It may cost the model train seller $200 in postage to send the pieces to its buyers. The Form 1099-K that the seller will receive from the TPSO will report $8,000 in gross proceeds paid. However, the sellers taxable gain from that sale would only be $2,000. As a result, collectors and other online sellers will need to keep extensive records of their expenses going forward to avoid over-reporting of income and overpayment of tax. Also, consider the alternativea teenager who walks dogs to earn extra money. If their income in 2022 exceeds $600, their expenses may be limited to the fees charged by the website that connects them to pet owners, but they will owe income taxand possibly self-employment taxon the income they earn. According to PayPal, which owns Venmo, the change doesn't affect people who use the apps for personal transactions, like paying a friend back for your share of dinner, gifts, or chipping in for trips. PayPal also states that its app allows users to categorize their own transactions as personal versus rendering payment for ""goods and services."" PayPal Business Users on Cash Apps Will Begin Receiving Tax Forms. Heres What You Need to Know. WJHL | Tri-Cities News & Weather, 14 Oct. 2021, https://www.wjhl.com/news/business-users-on-cash-apps-to-begin-receiving-tax-forms-what-you-need-to-know/. Pflieger, Deborah. ""New Form 1099 Reporting Coming in 2022,"" Bloomberg Tax, 15 Dec. 2021, https://news.bloombergtax.com/tax-insights-and-commentary/new-form-1099-reporting-coming-in-2022. New U.S. Tax Reporting Requirements: Your Questions Answered. PayPal Newsroom, 4 Nov. 2021, https://newsroom.paypal-corp.com/2021-11-04-New-US-Tax-Reporting-Requirements-Your-Questions-Answered. ""PayPal and Venmo Taxes: What You Need to Know About P2P Platforms."" TurboTax, 27 Nov. 2021, https://turbotax.intuit.com/tax-tips/self-employment-taxes/paypal-and-venmo-taxes-what-you-need-to-know-about-p2p-platforms/L5DNjOUM1.",['income'],False,"Various social media posts circulating in late December 2021 claimed that thanks to coronavirus stimulus legislation known as the American Rescue Plan, U.S. President Joe Biden's administration and Democratic legislators would begin ""spying"" or ""snooping"" on users of cash apps like PayPal and Venmo. Here is an example of one such post:A 1099-K is, according to PayPal, an ""informational tax form that is used to report goods and services payments received by a business or individual in the calendar year.""As of this writing, the current threshold for such reporting is $20,000 and 200 payments in goods and services. Come Jan. 1, 2022, that reporting threshold will drop down to $600.This could have a significant impact on platform users' tax returns. Here's how Bloomberg Tax described how users might experience the change:According to PayPal, which owns Venmo, the change doesn't affect people who use the apps for personal transactions, like paying a friend back for your share of dinner, gifts, or chipping in for trips. PayPal also states that its app allows users to categorize their own transactions as personal versus rendering payment for ""goods and services."""
"The $12,000 Armani jacket owned by Hillary Clinton",['Outrage over an expensive Armani jacket worn by Hillary Clinton during her New York primary acceptance speech  included some inaccurate details.'],"In early June 2016, Facebook users widely shared articles reporting that Hillary Clinton wore a $12,495 Giorgio Armani jacket to deliver a speech on income inequality. The underlying implication was that Clinton's interest in the plight of middle-class Americans was visibly superficial. Interest in the claim began with a New York Post article that focused not on the jacket, but on Clinton's general wardrobe choices on the campaign trail. Its title referenced the ""surprising strategy behind Hillary Clinton's designer wardrobe,"" and the piece began by noting that Clinton's appearance and style have been publicly scrutinized and mocked for decades. Clinton's New York primary victory speech in April focused on topics including income inequality, job creation, and helping people secure their retirement. It was a clear attempt to position herself as an everywoman. But an everywoman she is not; she gave the speech in a $12,495 Giorgio Armani tweed jacket. The polished outfit was a stark contrast to the fashion choices Clinton had made in the past. As First Lady, Clinton wore frumpy pastel skirtsuits. As a New York senator and secretary of state, she attempted a more serious look, wearing pantsuits in a rainbow of colors—so mocked that they sparked memes. In comparison to Michelle Obama, who has become known as a style icon during her time in the White House and appeared on the cover of Vogue twice, Clinton has never been able to nail down a personal aesthetic that works for her. The article speculated (but didn't confirm) that Clinton paid full price for the clothing and did not wear it on loan from its designers. The paper also suggested that Clinton's fashion choices negatively affected her public perception in the past. The cost of men's suits worn by fellow politicians didn't appear in the article for contrast: It's a marked shift from Clinton's 2008 run, when she regularly recycled outfits such as blue-and-tangerine pantsuits from DC-based designer Nina McLemore. But just like Clinton's fashion choices of the past, the makeover could turn out to be divisive. On one side will be those who say it's an appropriate expense for Clinton, given that she's in the unprecedented position of running for president as a woman—and looking the part is crucial to her success. On the other side are those who will see her spending as being out of touch with her message. Not long after Clinton's 2016 campaign looks were dissected by the Post, a litany of items condensed the article to a single headline: It's true that the jacket was from Giorgio Armani's collection and bore a list price of $12,495. But on June 8, 2016, the jacket's actual retail price was $7,497, and the jacket can now be had for about one-third of that list price. The Post speculated that Clinton paid for the clothing out of pocket, but the website Fashionista, in turn, said that might not necessarily be the case: The Post also posits that Clinton must be spending her own money on all these clothes, as no designer is taking credit for dressing her as they do with First Lady Obama; with Anna Wintour backing her campaign, it would not be outrageous to think that designers might also be quietly gifting clothing to Clinton. (The Post also attacks Clinton's style by mentioning that Michelle Obama has nabbed the cover of Vogue twice; it would be worth noting that Clinton has her own cover of Vogue, for which she wore Oscar de la Renta.) It's unclear whether Clinton purchased expensive clothing for such major appearances (such as her New York speech in April 2016), and it's possible she was loaned articles of clothing to wear by major designers. Stylists Jennifer Rade and Rebecca Klein of Media Style told CNBC that no matter what Clinton did, she would be criticized for her sartorial choices: CNBC But Clinton is ""damned if she does, damned if she doesn't,"" said Rade. If Clinton were to wear a lower-priced wardrobe, she would be criticized for not wearing the same caliber of clothing as her competitors. ""It's not appropriate for the forum,"" Klein said. ""She is a presidential candidate. That would be disrespectful... She is dressing for the occasion."" A June 2014 Associated Press article examined the matter of the contents of White House closets, noting that as an issue, the debate went back at least as far as Mary Todd Lincoln. The outlet noted that some clothing was gifted to Michelle Obama under specific circumstances: In recent weeks, Mrs. Obama has turned heads with a forest-green Naeem Khan dress and shimmered in a silver Marchesa gown ... her flowered shirtdress for a Mother's Day tea at the White House (recycled from an earlier event) hit just the right note for an audience of military moms. It takes money to pull that off, month after month. Those three dresses by themselves could add up to more than $15,000 retail, not to mention accessories such as shoes and jewelry. Is it the taxpayers who foot the bill? No. (Despite what critics say.) Is it Mrs. Obama? Usually, but not always. Does she pay full price? Not likely. Does she ever borrow gowns from designers? No. The financing of the first lady's wardrobe is something that the Obama White House is loath to discuss. It's a subject that has bedeviled presidents and their wives for centuries. First ladies are expected to dress well, but the job doesn't come with a clothing allowance or a salary. Here's how Joanna Rosholm, press secretary to the first lady, explains it: ""Mrs. Obama pays for her clothing. For official events of public or historic significance, such as a state visit, the first lady's clothes may be given as a gift by a designer and accepted on behalf of the U.S. government. They are then stored by the National Archives."" The claim also included that Ms. Clinton wore the designer piece to ""deliver a speech about income inequality."" The Post originally reported that ""Clinton's New York primary victory speech in April focused on topics including income inequality, job creation, and helping people secure their retirement,"" an opener widely condensed to ""a speech about income inequality."" But in fact, neither claim was accurate; the full text of Clinton's April 2016 New York speech was available online, and the words ""income inequality"" didn't appear a single time. The wide-ranging speech only briefly touched on a theme of ""income inequality,"" in a much broader sense than the rumor suggested: Now, we all know many people who are still hurting. I see it everywhere I go. The Great Recession wiped out jobs, homes, and savings, and a lot of Americans haven't yet recovered. But I still believe with all my heart that as another greater Democratic President once said, there's nothing wrong with America that can't be cured by what's right with America. That is, after all, what we've always done. It's who we are. America is a problem-solving nation. And in this campaign, we are setting bold progressive goals backed up by real plans that will improve lives, creating more good jobs that provide dignity and pride in a middle-class life, raising wages and reducing inequality, making sure all our kids get a good education no matter what zip code they live in, building ladders of opportunity and empowerment so all of our people can go as far as their hard work and talent will take them. Let's revitalize places that have been left out and left behind, from inner cities to coal country to Indian country. And let's put Americans to work rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure, including our failing water systems like the one in Flint, Michigan. There are many places across our country where children and families are at risk from the water they drink and the air they breathe. Let's combat climate change and make America the clean energy superpower of the 21st century. Let's take on the challenge of systemic racism, invest in communities of color, and finally pass comprehensive immigration reform. And once and for all, let's guarantee equal pay for women. After the Republican National Convention (RNC) in July 2016, Hillary Clinton's infamous Armani jacket was again negatively compared to the dress worn at the convention by GOP nominee Donald Trump's daughter Ivanka, an item of clothing (from Ivanka's own label) that retails for $158. Trump's wife Melania, however, opted for a pricier Margot dress by Roksanda, which retails for $2,190.",['loan'],NEI,"It's true that the jacket was from Giorgio Armani's collection and bore a list price of $12,495. But on 8 June 2016 the jacket's actual retail price was $7,497, and the jacket can now be had for about one-third of that list price.It's unclear whether Clinton purchased expensive clothing for such major appearances (such as her New York speech in April 2016), and it's possible she was loaned articles of clothing to wear by major designers. Stylists Jennifer Rade and Rebecca Klein of Media Style told CNBC that no matter what Clinton did, she would be criticized for her sartorial choices:A June 2014 Associated Press article examined the matter of the contents of White House closets, noting that as an issue, the debate went back at least as far as Mary Todd Lincoln. The outlet noted that some clothing was gifted to Michelle Obama under specific circumstances:The claim also included that Ms. Clinton wore the designer piece to ""deliver a speech about income inequality."" The Post originally reported that ""Clintons New York primary victory speech in April focused on topics including income inequality, job creation and helping people secure their retirement,"" an opener widely condensed to ""a speech about income inequality."" But in fact neither claim was accurate; the full text of Clinton's April 2016 New York speech was available online, and the words ""income inequality"" didn't appear a single time. The wide-ranging speech only briefly touched on a theme of ""income inequality,"" an in a much broader sense than the rumor suggested:After the Republican National Convention (RNC) in July 2016, Hillary Clinton's infamous Armani jacket was again negatively compared to the dress worn at the convention by GOP nominee Donald Trump's daughter Ivanka, an item of clothing (from Ivanka's own label) that retails for $158.  Trump's wife Melania, however, opted for a pricier Margot dress by Roksanda, which retails for $2,190"
European Union Gag Order On Revealing Muslim Terrorists' Religion,['A group headed by John Bolton said an anti-racism task force blamed the press for anti-Islam violence.'],"In November 2016, rumors began to swirl that the European Union had ordered the media not to report when terrorism suspects were Muslim, presumably because of pressure from Islamic groups.  The stories were mostly fueled like the headlines such as the one reproduced above, which appears to have been taken from an 18 November 2016 post by the Gatestone Institute: post   The institute is headed up by John R. Bolton, a Fox News contributor and former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations who is reportedly under consideration by President-elect Donald Trump as his secretary of state. reportedly The headline, in turn, was similar to one published by the conservative Daily Mail in Britain on 5 October 2016: the conservative Daily Mail   The allegation is taken from a report published a day earlier by the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI), which was commissioned by the Council of Europe to monitor human rights abuses. However, Bolton's group failed to note that the council is a separate organization from the European Union, and it issued a recommendation, not a mandate. earlier ECRI Both the Mail and the institute portray the report as pinning the blame on the media for an increase in hate crimes and hate speech across the United Kingdom between 2009 and 2016. As the latter group puts it: The ECRI report establishes a direct causal link between some tough headlines in British tabloids and the security of the Muslims in the UK. In other words, the British press is allegedly inciting readers to commit ""Islamophobic"" acts against Muslims. Criticism of the report centered around this passage: ECRI regrets that a way has not been found to establish an independent press regulator and that, as a result, certain tabloids continue to publish offensive material, as indicated above. ECRI urges the media to take stock of the importance of responsible reporting, not only to avoid perpetuating prejudice and biased information, but also to avoid harm to targeted persons or vulnerable groups. ECRI considers that, in light of the fact that Muslims are increasingly under the spotlight as a result of recent ISIS-related terrorist acts around the world, fuelling prejudice against Muslims shows a reckless disregard, not only for the dignity of the great majority of Muslims in the United Kingdom, but also for their safety. In this context, it draws attention to a recent study by Teesside University suggesting that where the media stress the Muslim background of perpetrators of terrorist acts, and devote significant coverage to it, the violent backlash against Muslims is likely to be greater than in cases where the perpetrators motivation is downplayed or rejected in favour of alternative explanations. The Teesside study, which covered the period between March 2014 and February 2015, found that instances of anti-Muslim violence in Europe and Australia increased in the seven-day period immediately after terror attacks, compared to the seven days before. However, that report also stated that there were fewer Islamophobic incidents in Australia following the attack on a Sydney shopping mall in December 2014, pointing out that the reporting focused on the attacker's history of mental instability and not his religion. study, attack While the ECRI did call for an ""independent press regulator,"" it also stated that it did not want government officials ""encroaching on [media outlets'] editorial independence the need to ensure that reporting does not contribute to creating an atmosphere of hostility and rejection towards various minority ethnic groups."" It also said that media practices in the UK had already been criticized in the Leveson Inquiry, a government probe that took place after revelations that News International (owned by Fox News CEO Rupert Murdoch) engaged in phone-hacking and other dubious practices. Inquiry, From the ECRI report: The Leveson Report, published in November 2012, pointed out that certain parts of the press ride roughshod over others, both individuals and the public at large, without any justifiable public interest, and that a significant number of news stories fail to meet standards of integrity and propriety and reflect a culture of recklessness in prioritising sensational stories, almost irrespective of the harm these may cause and the rights of those who would be affected. It also noted a significant and reckless disregard for accuracy. The report stated that the Press Complaints Commission was not independent and had failed its purpose, and recommended replacing it with a new, independent, self-regulatory body established by statute, with the dual roles of promoting high standards of journalism and protecting the rights of individuals, and with a range of sanctions available to it. Bolton's organization also failed to note that the ECRI's report contained 23 recommendations for the U.K. government, covering not only how to deal with Islamophobia, but ways to integrate refugees arriving to England and Northern Ireland, as well as Romani groups. recommendations Mamou, Yves. ""Council of Europe Recommends British Press NOT Report when Terrorists are Muslims."" Gatestone Institute. 18 November 2016. Conway, Madeline. ""Bolton calls regime change the 'only long-term solution' in Iran."" Politico. 17 November 2016. Dathan, Matt. ""European human rights chiefs order the British press NOT to reveal when terrorists are Muslims in crackdown on freedom of speech."" The Daily Mail. 5 October 2016. European Commission against Racism and Intolerance. ""ECRI Report on the United Kingdom (Fifth Monitoring Cycle)."" Coe.int. 4 October 2016. Teesside University. ""New report reveals a rise in anti-Muslim hostility in Britain following acts of terrorism around the world."" www.tees.ac.uk. 18 June 2015.",['interest'],False,"The stories were mostly fueled like the headlines such as the one reproduced above, which appears to have been taken from an 18 November 2016 post by the Gatestone Institute:The institute is headed up by John R. Bolton, a Fox News contributor and former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations who is reportedly under consideration by President-elect Donald Trump as his secretary of state.The headline, in turn, was similar to one published by the conservative Daily Mail in Britain on 5 October 2016:The allegation is taken from a report published a day earlier by the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI), which was commissioned by the Council of Europe to monitor human rights abuses. However, Bolton's group failed to note that the council is a separate organization from the European Union, and it issued a recommendation, not a mandate.The Teesside study, which covered the period between March 2014 and February 2015, found that instances of anti-Muslim violence in Europe and Australia increased in the seven-day period immediately after terror attacks, compared to the seven days before. However, that report also stated that there were fewer Islamophobic incidents in Australia following the attack on a Sydney shopping mall in December 2014, pointing out that the reporting focused on the attacker's history of mental instability and not his religion.While the ECRI did call for an ""independent press regulator,"" it also stated that it did not want government officials ""encroaching on [media outlets'] editorial independence the need to ensure that reporting does not contribute to creating an atmosphere of hostility and rejection towards various minority ethnic groups."" It also said that media practices in the UK had already been criticized in the Leveson Inquiry, a government probe that took place after revelations that News International (owned by Fox News CEO Rupert Murdoch) engaged in phone-hacking and other dubious practices.Bolton's organization also failed to note that the ECRI's report contained 23 recommendations for the U.K. government, covering not only how to deal with Islamophobia, but ways to integrate refugees arriving to England and Northern Ireland, as well as Romani groups."
We've cut taxes 50 times and look what has happened to our revenues. They've grown.,[],"Gov. Rick Scotts $1 billion tax-cut request is giving the Florida Legislature plenty to chew on, especially after state economists warned that revenues wont be as high as once thought. Scott wantsa range of cuts, including a reduction in the sales tax on commercial rents and a $770 million break for manufacturers and retailers by getting rid of their corporate income tax. Despite concerns over how the size of his request will affect the budget, Scott was confident the math makes it an easy decision for lawmakers. We have plenty of money to be able to do tax cuts, Scott saidJan. 20, 2016, after state economists warned tax revenues would be less than previously estimated. Let's look at history. We've cut taxes 50 times and look what has happened to our revenues. They've grown. Scott hasused this linerepeatedly inrecent weeks. We wondered whether revenues have continued to grow even as Tallahassee has passed tax changes over recent years. Revenue roundup Scotts line about 50 tax cuts is a talking point that just keeps on growing. We have rated claims about him cutting24 tax cuts,40 tax cuts, andmore than 40 tax cuts,Half True, because Scott counted many small tax changes for specific industries as overall tax cuts. Whats new this time around, in a nutshell, are 16 provisions passed in 2015, most of which were part of a$429 million tax-cut package. The full list is largely comprised of esoteric tax credits (mostly for businesses), changes in unemployment compensation and sales tax holidays. There also was a rate reduction on the Communications Services Tax on cellphone and cable servicethat amounts to about $21 per $100 on a billand a $60,000 cap on taxes for boat repairs. Several of those may help businesses, but really dont often do much for everyday Floridians, especially if they needed to collect unemployment. Many times, local governments may raise taxes to make up for their own lost revenue. In short, its arguable whether all of those qualify as tax cuts, but they did have an impact on how many tax dollars the state brought in. Economists told us, however, that while you can project how much year-over-year revenues may be changed from cuts, its tough to attribute any concrete economic growth to those changes. Because of overall economic growth, tax revenues have been rising since Scott became governor as the state was climbing out of the Great Recession. We surveyed several years of general revenue, which is funded by taxes and fees and can be used by the Legislature for any purpose, alongside the state's rate of economic growth. Fiscal year General revenue Growth rate 2008-09 $21 billion -12.8 percent 2009-10 $21.5 billion 2.4 percent 2010-11 $22.55 billion 4.8 percent 2011-12* $23.6 billion 4.7 percent 2012-13 $25.3 billion 7.2 percent 2013-14 $26.2 billion 3.5 percent 2014-15 $27.7 billion 5.7 percent 2015-16 $28.4 billion 2.1 percent State economist Amy Baker noted that even with Floridas economy growing, that growth rate is currently below the states historical average, and the cumulative effects of prior tax changes are eating into revenues more than expected. State budget forecasters have announced that tax revenues will come in at$400 million less than previously expected. Scotts office has rejected those figures in pursuit of his biggest round of tax cuts, saying the Legislature has plenty of money to play with. But while its apparent that revenues have gone up even as Scotts tax changes have been implemented, experts said its tough to directly link them. They said there are three main reasons Floridas revenues have grown during the nationwide recovery: Population growth, rising property values and overall inflation. More than 1 million people have moved to Florida since 2010, property values are recovering from the housing bust, and inflation makes tax collections go up as costs go up. Basically, more people are paying more taxes on things that cost more. Norton Francis, senior research associate with the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, said that despite being thethird-largest state, the growth rate for Floridas tax revenues has started tolag behind the national average. What you need to look at is, are (tax revenues) growing more than they used to? Norton asked. It could be that its come back as a whole, but its hard to pin that to a tax cut. Our ruling Scott said, We've cut taxes 50 times and look what has happened to our revenues. They've grown. Scott has a debatable definition of tax cuts, but the states tax revenues have increased since he took office. Economists told us it would be difficult to attribute growth specifically to tax changes. The national economic recovery, population growth, higher property values and inflation are the major factors for the states growth. The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information. We rate it Mostly True.","['State Budget', 'Taxes', 'Florida']",True,"Scott wantsa range of cuts, including a reduction in the sales tax on commercial rents and a $770 million break for manufacturers and retailers by getting rid of their corporate income tax. Despite concerns over how the size of his request will affect the budget, Scott was confident the math makes it an easy decision for lawmakers.We have plenty of money to be able to do tax cuts, Scott saidJan. 20, 2016, after state economists warned tax revenues would be less than previously estimated. Let's look at history. We've cut taxes 50 times and look what has happened to our revenues. They've grown.Scott hasused this linerepeatedly inrecent weeks. We wondered whether revenues have continued to grow even as Tallahassee has passed tax changes over recent years.Scotts line about 50 tax cuts is a talking point that just keeps on growing. We have rated claims about him cutting24 tax cuts,40 tax cuts, andmore than 40 tax cuts,Half True, because Scott counted many small tax changes for specific industries as overall tax cuts.Whats new this time around, in a nutshell, are 16 provisions passed in 2015, most of which were part of a$429 million tax-cut package. The full list is largely comprised of esoteric tax credits (mostly for businesses), changes in unemployment compensation and sales tax holidays. There also was a rate reduction on the Communications Services Tax on cellphone and cable servicethat amounts to about $21 per $100 on a billand a $60,000 cap on taxes for boat repairs.State budget forecasters have announced that tax revenues will come in at$400 million less than previously expected. Scotts office has rejected those figures in pursuit of his biggest round of tax cuts, saying the Legislature has plenty of money to play with.Norton Francis, senior research associate with the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, said that despite being thethird-largest state, the growth rate for Floridas tax revenues has started tolag behind the national average."
Were the Trumps Pictured With the Owner of a Massage Parlor Where Robert Kraft Was Arrested?,['Be skeptical of memes because they are often inaccurate.'],"In early to mid-March 2019, photographs of President Donald Trump and members of his family posing with Li Yang, a political donor and spa entrepreneur, circulated on social media. The images were used to link the Trumps with a sting operation in Florida. Yang, who posted a widely seen selfie taken at Trump's 2019 Super Bowl party to her Facebook account, once owned what is now the Orchids of Asia massage parlor in Jupiter, Florida. New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft was one of 25 men arrested in February 2019, accused of soliciting sex there in a sweeping human-trafficking sting that targeted that site and others. Kraft, a self-described friend of Trump, faces two counts of misdemeanor solicitation, to which he has pleaded not guilty. Yang no longer owns the establishment in which police say Kraft was caught on camera paying for sex. She has not been charged with a crime. Nevertheless, the images of Yang, Trump, and members of his family were picked up and used to create an inaccurate meme claiming she is the spa's owner, which was shared with nearly 8 million followers on the Facebook page belonging to Occupy Democrats on March 8, 2019. Although the Occupy Democrats Facebook page sarcastically discouraged followers from sharing the meme, its administrators also added a ""correction"" in the post above the image. Yang was swept into the lurid story after images of her with Trump and his family members surfaced on her Facebook page, which, as the Miami Herald reported, ""raised questions about who can gain access to the president at his resorts and other private businesses, as well as at official venues like fundraisers."" Some news stories linked Yang to the day spa raided by police by describing her as the ""founder,"" although when the site changed ownership in 2012, its name also changed. Yang sold the business, which at the time was called the Tokyo Day Spa, to Hua Zhang, who changed the name of the establishment to Orchids of Asia upon incorporation in 2012, according to Florida state business records. Zhang, 58, has been charged with prostitution-related counts and has pleaded not guilty. Yang, who goes by Cindy, wasn't charged in the multi-agency anti-human trafficking operation that resulted in 25 arrests and shut down 10 Asian day spas in South Florida. None of the spas are registered to Yang or her family. She sold the Jupiter spa around 2013 to Hua Zhang, who has pleaded not guilty to racketeering and running a house of prostitution. Yang's family still owns several South Florida spas. The family's Tokyo Day Spa branches have attracted the attention of at least two police agencies, the Herald reported. Yang told the Herald, which published the photo of her with Trump on March 8, that she and her",['share'],False,"In early-to-mid-March 2019, photographs of President Donald Trump and members of his family posing with Li Yang, a political donor and spa entrepreneur, circulated on social media. The images were used to link the Trumps with a sting operation in Florida.Yang, who posted a widely seen selfie taken at Trump's 2019 Super Bowl party to her Facebook account, once owned what is now the Orchids of Asia massage parlor in Jupiter, Florida. New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft was one of 25 men arrested in February 2019, accused of soliciting sex there in a sweeping, human-trafficking sting that targeted that site and others.Kraft, a self-described friend of Trump, faces two counts of misdemeanor solicitation, to which he has pleaded not guilty.Yang no longer owns the establishment in which police say Kraft was caught on camera paying for sex. She has not been charged with a crime.Nevertheless, the images of Yang, Trump and members of his family were picked up and used to create an inaccurate meme claiming she is the spa's owner, which was shared with the nearly 8 million followers on the Facebook page belonging to Occupy Democrats on 8 March 2019.Although the Occupy Democrats Facebook page sarcastically discourages followers to share the meme, its administrators also added a ""correction"" in the post above the image:Yang was swept into the lurid story after images of her with Trump and his family members surfaced on her Facebook page, which, as the Miami Herald reported, ""raised questions about who can gain access to the president at his resorts and other private businesses, as well at official venues like fundraisers.""Yang sold the business, which at the time was called the Tokyo Day Spa, to Hua Zhang, who changed the name of the establishment to Orchids of Asia upon incorporation in 2012, according to Florida state business records. Zhang, 58, has been charged with prostitution-related counts and has pleaded not guilty. As the Associated Press reported:Yang told the Herald, which published the photo of her with Trump on Friday (March 8), that she and her family havent broken the law. She said she is out of the business, would soon be relocating to Washington and didnt want any negative news media attention."
"No, Kamala Harris Didn't Tweet, 'We Need to Focus on Defunding the Police'",['The tweet boosted a false claim about the 2020 Democratic vice presidential nominee.'],"In early October 2020, Snopes readers asked about the authenticity of an image of a tweet circulating on social media platforms that was mocked up to look like it had been written by Democratic vice presidential candidate Kamala Harris:   The post doesn't appear on Harris's Twitter timeline on Sept. 9, 2020 (the date on the tweet above), nor does it appear on Politiwoops, a database of deleted tweets from politicians run by the non-profit news outlet ProPublica.  timeline Politiwoops Furthermore, one would expect that if the vice presidential candidate on a major political party ticket stated she wanted to focus on ""defunding the police rather than supporting them,"" it would be major news. We found no stories from any reputable news organization reporting it.  The idea of defunding the police came from nationwide racial justice protests in the U.S. in the spring and summer of 2020, sparked by high-profile deaths of Black Americans while in police custody, including George Floyd in Minneapolis, and Breonna Taylor, in Kentucky. Activists advocated for taking money from local government budgets allocated to police departments and investing instead in programs like community services and mental health crisis response teams. programs like In a June 2020 interview with The New York Times, Harris stated that, ""We do have to reimagine what public safety looks like,"" but added she didn't want to ""get rid"" of police departments: interview It is status quo thinking to believe that putting more police on the streets creates more safety. Thats wrong. Its just wrong. You know what creates more safety? Funding public schools, affordable housing, increased homeownership, job skill development, jobs, access to capital for those who want to start small businesses, or who are running small businesses in communities. But, no, were not going to get rid of the police. We all have to be practical. But lets separate out these discussions Her running mate, Joe Biden, also doesn't support defunding the police, although U.S. President Donald Trump has stated otherwise. Biden has stated, ""I dont want to defund police departments. I think they need more help, they need more assistance."" doesn't support Lee, Jessica.""Does Joe Biden Support Defunding Police?""
Snopes.com.29 September 2020. Karma, Roge.""Democrats Are Running on the Most Progressive Police Reform Agenda in Modern American History.""
Vox.8 September 2020. Lerer, Lisa.""Kamala Harris Is Done Explaining Racism.""
 The New York Times. 10 June 2020.",['profit'],False,"The post doesn't appear on Harris's Twitter timeline on Sept. 9, 2020 (the date on the tweet above), nor does it appear on Politiwoops, a database of deleted tweets from politicians run by the non-profit news outlet ProPublica. The idea of defunding the police came from nationwide racial justice protests in the U.S. in the spring and summer of 2020, sparked by high-profile deaths of Black Americans while in police custody, including George Floyd in Minneapolis, and Breonna Taylor, in Kentucky. Activists advocated for taking money from local government budgets allocated to police departments and investing instead in programs like community services and mental health crisis response teams.In a June 2020 interview with The New York Times, Harris stated that, ""We do have to reimagine what public safety looks like,"" but added she didn't want to ""get rid"" of police departments:Her running mate, Joe Biden, also doesn't support defunding the police, although U.S. President Donald Trump has stated otherwise. Biden has stated, ""I dont want to defund police departments. I think they need more help, they need more assistance."""
Home Sales Tax,['Does a provision of health care legislation impose a 3.8% sales tax on all home sales?'],"Claim: A provision of ""Obamacare"" health care legislation creates a 3.8% Medicare tax on real estate transactions. Health care legislation imposes a 3.8% tax on all home sales. Health care legislation imposes a 3.8% transaction tax on profits over the capital gains threshold. Example: [Collected via e-mail, April 2010] 3.8% tax on real estate transactions. Under the new health care bill, did you know that all real estate transactions are subject to a 3.8% ""Sales Tax""? You can thank Nancy, Harry, and Barack (and your local Congressmen) for this one. If you sell your $400,000 home, this will result in a $15,200 tax. Remember Obama's battle cry: take from the workers and give to the drones. TAX ON HOME SALES imposes a 3.8 percent tax on home sales and other real estate transactions. Middle-income people must pay the full tax even if they are ""rich"" for only one day—the day they sell their house and buy a new one. Origins: One of the provisions in the reconciliation bill (HR 4872) passed in conjunction with the Patient Protection Affordable Care Act (PPACA) health care legislation calls for high-income households to be subject to a new 3.8% Medicare tax on investment income starting in 2013: HR 4872. The PPACA creates a new Code Section 1411, which will generally impose a 3.8 percent tax on the lesser of ""net investment income"" or the excess of modified adjusted gross income over a ""threshold amount"" (generally, $250,000 for taxpayers filing a joint return, $125,000 for married taxpayers filing a separate return, and $200,000 in all other cases). Net investment income generally means the excess of (i) interest, dividends, annuities, royalties, rents, income from passive activities, income from trading financial instruments and commodities, and gain from the disposition of certain non-business property, over (ii) allowable deductions properly allocable to such income. In determining the amount of net investment income, special rules apply with respect to dispositions of equity interests in certain partnerships and S corporations, and to distributions from certain qualified plans. This additional tax applies to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2012. This is a complicated section of a complicated piece of legislation, and the 3.8% Medicare tax has been frequently misreported as amounting to a 3.8% ""sales tax"" on all real estate transactions. This is incorrect: the Medicare tax is not a sales tax, nor does it apply to all real estate transactions; it is a tax on investment income (income which may or may not derive from the sale of property) only for persons who earn more than the amounts specified in the bill. First of all, the Medicare tax will be imposed only on individuals with an income above $200,000 and couples with a joint income of more than $250,000, a figure which currently excludes about 97% of all U.S. households. Second, the tax will not be assessed on every house sale, but only on real estate transactions that produce profits over a specified dollar amount. As Sara Orrange, Government Affairs Director of the Spokane Association of Realtors, noted in response to a repetition of the ""sales tax"" rumor in the Spokane Spokesman-Review: In his recent guest column regarding the impact of the health care bill, Paul Guppy of the Washington Policy Center claimed that a 3.8 percent tax on all home sales was a part of the recently passed legislation. This is inaccurate and needs to be corrected. The truth about the bill is that if you sell your home for a profit above the capital gains threshold of $250,000 per individual or $500,000 per couple, then you would be required to pay the additional 3.8 percent tax on any gain realized over this threshold. Most people who sell their homes will not be impacted by these new regulations. This is not a new tax on every seller, and that correction needs to be made. This tax is aimed at so-called ""high earners""—if you do not fall into that category, you will not pay any extra taxes upon the sale of your home. For example, let's assume that a couple with an income of $325,000 bought a house in 2004 for $300,000 and resold it in 2013 for $850,000, thus producing a $550,000 profit. Since U.S. law allows a couple to exclude from their gross income profits of up to $500,000 from the sale of their principal residence, the taxable gain from this sale would be $50,000 (i.e., a $550,000 profit minus the $500,000 exclusion), and the couple's taxable income would now be $375,000 (i.e., the original $325,000 plus the $50,000 of taxable profit from their home sale). The 3.8% Medicare tax would now apply to whichever of the following dollar figures is the lesser: exclude a) The amount by which the couple's taxable income now exceeds the $250,000 income threshold level. b) The amount of taxable income gained from the sale of their home. In case (a), the dollar figure would be the couple's taxable income ($375,000) minus the income threshold level ($250,000), or $125,000. In case (b), the dollar figure would be the amount of taxable income gained from the sale of their home, which, as detailed above, was $50,000 (i.e., $550,000 profit minus the $500,000 exclusion). The second dollar amount is the lesser of the two, and therefore the couple would have to pay an additional tax of 3.8 percent of $50,000, which would amount to $1,900. (If the hypothetical couple had realized less than a $500,000 profit on the sale of their residence, none of that gain would be subject to the 3.8% tax.) The referenced tax is therefore not a tax on all real estate sales; it is an investment income tax which could result in a very small percentage of home sellers paying additional taxes on home sales profits over a designated threshold amount. In short, if you're a ""high earner"" and you sell your home at a substantial profit, you might be required to pay an additional 3.8% tax. However, given that only about 3% of U.S. households have incomes that exceed the specified income threshold amount, the existing home sale capital gains exclusion on a principal residence ($250,000 for individuals, $500,000 for couples) still stands, and the national median existing-home price in January 2012 was only $154,700, the Medicare tax will likely affect only a very small percentage of home sellers when it is implemented in 2013. Additional information: The 3.8% Tax: Real Estate Scenarios & Examples Last updated: 15 March 2012 Sahadi, Jeanne. ""Medicare Tax Hikes: What the Rich Will Pay."" CNNMoney.com. 25 March 2010.",['taxes'],True,"Origins:  One of the provisions in the reconciliation bill (HR 4872) passed in conjunction with the Patient Protection Affordable Care Act (PPACA) health care legislation calls for high-income households to be subject to a new 3.8% Medicare tax on investment income starting in 2013:First of all, the Medicare tax will be imposed only on individuals with an income above $200,000 and couples with a joint income more than $250,000, a figure which currently excludes about 97% of all U.S. households.  Second, the tax will not be assessed on every house sale, but only on real estate transactions that produce profits over a specified dollar amount.  As Sara Orrange, Government affairs director of the Spokane Association of Realtors noted in response to a repetition of the ""sales tax"" rumor in the Spokane Spokesman-Review:For example, let's assume that a couple with an income of $325,000 bought a house in 2004 for $300,000 and resold it in 2013 for $850,000, thus producing a $550,000 profit.  Since U.S. law allows a couple to exclude from their gross incomeprofits of up to $500,000 from the sale of their principal residence, the taxable gain from this sale would be $50,000 (i.e., a $550,000 profit minus the $500,000 exclusion), and the couple's taxable income would now be $375,000 (i.e., the original $325,000 plus the $50,000 of taxable profit from their home sale).   The 3.8% Medicare tax would now apply to whichever of the following dollar figures is the lesser:The referenced tax is therefore not a tax on all real estate sales; it is an investment income tax which could result in a very small percentage of home sellers paying additional taxes on home sales profits over a designated threshold amount.   In short, if you're a ""high earner"" and you sell your home at a substantial profit, you might be required to pay an additional 3.8% tax. However, given that only about 3% of U.S. households have incomes that exceed the specified income threshold amount, the existing home sale capital gains exclusion on a principal residence ($250,000 for individuals, $500,000 for couples) still stands, and the national median existing-home price in January 2012 was only $154,700 , the Medicare tax will likely affect only a very small percentage of home sellers when it is implemented in 2013.    The 3.8% Tax:Real Estate Scenarios & Examples"
General Motors Sales,"[""In June 2012, were 79% of General Motors' sales made to the federal government?""]","Claim:  In June 2012, 79% of General Motors' sales were made to the U.S. federal government.  Examples:  [Collected via e-mail, August 2012] I just received the following & while it seems phony, I sure would liketo know.  ""79% of GM's sales last month were government purchased"" Remember how obama keeps telling us how he saved GM, and how our economy is getting better, it seems the car company he bought is being saved by Govt employees using our tax money to buy new cars. 79% of GMs sales last month was government purchased.  Origins:  In July 2012 the above-referenced item began circulating (based on information propagated by web sites such as this one), claiming that a whopping 79% of automobile manufacturer General Motors (GM) sales in June 2012 came from purchases of vehicles by the (federal) government and suggesting that the Obama administration had engineered such purchases in order to make GM ""appear financially strong"" just in time for its upcoming quarterly report  all to justify the President's 2009 decision to provide billions of dollars in federal aid to allow GM and Chrysler to restructure after government-backed bankruptcies. this one However, a closer reading the source material on which the claim was based reveals that it is not true that ""79% of GM's sales [in June 2012] were government purchased.""  The 79% figure refers to the percentage by which GM's government fleet sales increased for the month, not to the proportion of GM's overall sales that came from government purchases. Moreover, the phrase ""government purchases"" doesn't refer only to the federal government: state, county, and municipal governments  whose purchasing decisions are not directed by the White House  are also large automotive fleet sales customers. source material fleet sales A General Motors spokesman maintained in a response that the percentage of GM's overall June 2012 sales attributable to government purchases was rather low and the bulk of those purchases were from non-federal government agencies: GM sales spokesman, Jim Cain, points out that total government sales for GM in June were still below 5% of total sales and [the] majority of government sales increases were attributed to state and local governments. Bloomberg news reported that all fleet sales (including purchases by rental car companies, typically the largest fleet customers) made up only 32% of GM's overall sales in June 2012.  This number was comparable to that reported by Ford, who said  fleet sales accounted for 35% of their deliveries that month. Last updated:  10 September 2012    Trudell, Craig.  ""Auto Sales in June Provided Bright Spot for U.S. Economy.""   Bloomberg.  3 July 2012.    Press Release.  ""GM Reports June U.S. Sales Up 16 Percent.""   General Motors.  3 July 2012.",['economy'],True,"Origins:  In July 2012 the above-referenced item began circulating (based on information propagated by web sites such as this one), claiming that a whopping 79% of automobile manufacturer General Motors (GM) sales in June 2012 came from purchases of vehicles by the (federal) government and suggesting that the Obama administration had engineered such purchases in order to make GM ""appear financially strong"" just in time for its upcoming quarterly report  all to justify the President's 2009 decision to provide billions of dollars in federal aid to allow GM and Chrysler to restructure after government-backed bankruptcies.However, a closer reading the source material on which the claim was based reveals that it is not true that ""79% of GM's sales [in June 2012] were government purchased.""  The 79% figure refers to the percentage by which GM's government fleet sales increased for the month, not to the proportion of GM's overall sales that came from government purchases. Moreover, the phrase ""government purchases"" doesn't refer only to the federal government: state, county, and municipal governments  whose purchasing decisions are not directed by the White House  are also large automotive fleet sales customers."
Says people who signed recall petitions against Wisconsin state Sen. Jim Holperin received harassing phone calls from out-of-state telemarketers claiming to represent the Democratic Party and insinuating foul play by petition circulators.,[],"Kim Simac, a Wisconsintea partyleader, took aim at state Sen.JimHolperinafter the Conover Democrat fled to Illinois in February 2011.Like 13 other Democratic senators, Holperin, who represents a North Woods district where Simac lives, spent three weeks in Illinois. The move delayed a vote on Republican Gov. Scott Walkers budget-repair bill, which curtails the collective bargaining power of most state and local government employees, although the bill eventually became law.Court challenges have kept the collective bargaining changes from taking effect. But the law, and the Democrats reaction to it, spurred a recall movement ofhistoric proportions. Campaigns were launched against all 16 state senators -- eight Democrats and eight Republicans  -- who were eligible to be recalled.Simac, vice-chairwoman of theVilas County RepublicanPartyand founder of Christian values group calledNorthwoods Patriots,headedthe signature-collectingcampaignto recall Holperin,a first-termsenatorwho previously served 10 years in the state Assembly.On April 21, 2011, Simac submitted some 23,000 signatures to the Government Accountability Board, which has not completed its review. She has announcedplans to run againstHolperinif a recall election is set.Eight days after the petitions were filed, Simac issued anewsreleasethat claimed petition signers, are being subjected to harassing phone calls from out-of-state telemarketers claiming to represent the Democratic Party and insinuating foul play by petition circulators.Lets see if thats what happened.When we asked Simac for evidence to back her claim, she asked people who received the calls to contact PolitiFact Wisconsin directly.We received calls from 17 people and e-mails from more than 30 others. We interviewed 10 of the people who called. Heres what we found: Those statements back the claim made by Simac.What did Holperin and the Democrats have to say about it?Holperin said he authorized the Wisconsin Democratic Party to call about 5,000 of the people who signed recall petitions against him.Graeme Zielinski, spokesman for the party, said the Minnesota telemarketing firm was hired to call people who signed petitions against Holperin and against two other Democrats who are facing possible recall elections.Holperin said he authorized the calls because, although petition circulators who worked under Simac were earnest, honest and friendly, more than a third of the 23,000 signatures were collected byKennedy Enterprises, a Colorado marketing and consulting firm hired by the Wisconsin Republican Party. Those petition circulators were often aggressive and misleading when they asked residents to sign petitions, Holperin said.According to Holperin, 534 petition signers -- about 10 percent of those who were called by the Minnesota telemarketing firm -- said they were given misleading information and that they asked to have their names removed from the petitions. He said that was the basis for acomplainthe filed with the Government Accountability Board challenging the petitions.Holperin provided ascriptthat he said the firm used in asking questions of people who signed recall petitions against him. The script shows that, among other things, callers were to: identify themselves as representing the Wisconsin Democratic Party; ask people whether they were aware their signatures appeared on a Holperin recall petition; and state that reports had been received that out-of-state paid circulators were misleading people about what they were being asked to sign.So, did we insinuate that foul play had occurred?, Holperin said. You bet we did, and we think we offered ample evidence that backs up our claim.Lets wrap up.Simac said people who signed Holperin recall petitions received harassing phone calls from out-of-state telemarketers claiming to represent the Democratic Party and insinuating foul play by petition circulators.Some people who received calls said they felt harassed even if they received just one call because they didnt expect to be questioned about signing a petition. The callers were employed by an out-of-state firm, they did identify themselves as representing the Wisconsin Democratic Party and did claim that petition circulators misled signers of the petitions.We rate Simacs claim as True.","['Elections', 'State Budget', 'Wisconsin']",True,"Kim Simac, a Wisconsintea partyleader, took aim at state Sen.JimHolperinafter the Conover Democrat fled to Illinois in February 2011.Like 13 other Democratic senators, Holperin, who represents a North Woods district where Simac lives, spent three weeks in Illinois. The move delayed a vote on Republican Gov. Scott Walkers budget-repair bill, which curtails the collective bargaining power of most state and local government employees, although the bill eventually became law.Court challenges have kept the collective bargaining changes from taking effect. But the law, and the Democrats reaction to it, spurred a recall movement ofhistoric proportions. Campaigns were launched against all 16 state senators -- eight Democrats and eight Republicans  -- who were eligible to be recalled.Simac, vice-chairwoman of theVilas County RepublicanPartyand founder of Christian values group calledNorthwoods Patriots,headedthe signature-collectingcampaignto recall Holperin,a first-termsenatorwho previously served 10 years in the state Assembly.On April 21, 2011, Simac submitted some 23,000 signatures to the Government Accountability Board, which has not completed its review. She has announcedplans to run againstHolperinif a recall election is set.Eight days after the petitions were filed, Simac issued anewsreleasethat claimed petition signers, are being subjected to harassing phone calls from out-of-state telemarketers claiming to represent the Democratic Party and insinuating foul play by petition circulators.Lets see if thats what happened.When we asked Simac for evidence to back her claim, she asked people who received the calls to contact PolitiFact Wisconsin directly.We received calls from 17 people and e-mails from more than 30 others. We interviewed 10 of the people who called. Heres what we found:Those statements back the claim made by Simac.What did Holperin and the Democrats have to say about it?Holperin said he authorized the Wisconsin Democratic Party to call about 5,000 of the people who signed recall petitions against him.Graeme Zielinski, spokesman for the party, said the Minnesota telemarketing firm was hired to call people who signed petitions against Holperin and against two other Democrats who are facing possible recall elections.Holperin said he authorized the calls because, although petition circulators who worked under Simac were earnest, honest and friendly, more than a third of the 23,000 signatures were collected byKennedy Enterprises, a Colorado marketing and consulting firm hired by the Wisconsin Republican Party. Those petition circulators were often aggressive and misleading when they asked residents to sign petitions, Holperin said.According to Holperin, 534 petition signers -- about 10 percent of those who were called by the Minnesota telemarketing firm -- said they were given misleading information and that they asked to have their names removed from the petitions. He said that was the basis for acomplainthe filed with the Government Accountability Board challenging the petitions.Holperin provided ascriptthat he said the firm used in asking questions of people who signed recall petitions against him. The script shows that, among other things, callers were to: identify themselves as representing the Wisconsin Democratic Party; ask people whether they were aware their signatures appeared on a Holperin recall petition; and state that reports had been received that out-of-state paid circulators were misleading people about what they were being asked to sign.So, did we insinuate that foul play had occurred?, Holperin said. You bet we did, and we think we offered ample evidence that backs up our claim.Lets wrap up.Simac said people who signed Holperin recall petitions received harassing phone calls from out-of-state telemarketers claiming to represent the Democratic Party and insinuating foul play by petition circulators.Some people who received calls said they felt harassed even if they received just one call because they didnt expect to be questioned about signing a petition. The callers were employed by an out-of-state firm, they did identify themselves as representing the Wisconsin Democratic Party and did claim that petition circulators misled signers of the petitions.We rate Simacs claim as True."
Is the account of Neerja Bhanot and the 1986 Pan Am hijacking accurate?,"['In 1986, Pan Am flight 73 was attacked in Karachi airport by hijackers linked to the Palestinian Abu Nidal Organization.  ']","Sometimes, Snopes readers stumble on old stories that require us to revisit key moments of history. One such story was of the courageous actions of Neerja Bhanot, an Indian flight attendant on Pan Am flight 73, which was hijacked in 1986 by Palestinian militants on its way to the United States while on a stopover in Karachi, Pakistan. Neerja Bhano Many of our readers shared social media posts, and queries, asking us to detail some of the main events of the hijacking, including Bhanots death from a gunshot wound. posts   One reader asked us to confirm the following: When radical Islamic terrorists hijacked her A/C in Karachi, Pakistan she informed the pilots (who used their escape hatch to runaway) and kept both the passengers/remaining crew calm. When the terrorists demanded to know who the Americans were on the flight so they could execute them she gathered all the passports and hid the ones belonging to Americans under seat cushions. The terrorists confused and unable to determine the national origins of the passengers didn't execute anyone. When Pakistani police raided the plane she was able to nearly singlehandedly evacuate all the passengers as the firefight ensued. She being one of the last people on board did a last check and found three children still hiding. As she led the children to safety the surviving terrorists spotted the children and opened fire on them. Neerja jumped in the way of the bullets and was mortally wounded. She was able to evac the children to safety before dying from her wounds. Neerja was awarded the Ashok Chakra Award by India, the highest peacetime gallantry award possible. She was the youngest and first civilian to ever be awarded this honor. Through testimonies from the flight crew and passengers during the sentencing of one of the hijackers, and interviews done by the BBC, we were able to gather key facts from that fateful day. In 2004, Zayad al Safarini, a Jordanian hijacker who was part of the attack, was sentenced by a U.S. district judge to 160 years in prison. At the hearing for his sentencing, a number of passengers, flight attendants, and Bhanots brother, came forward to recount the events of the hijacking. The full transcript of their testimonies can be read here. testimonies BBC sentenced here The Palestinian militants who hijacked the aircraft were affiliated with the Abu Nidal Organization (ANO), which was opposed to U.S. and Israeli policies in the Middle East, and was described as a secular international terrorist organization. When the hijackers boarded the plane, they began trying to identify any Americans on board. A 2016 BBC report included interviews with the surviving flight attendants, described the scene: described BBC report Sunshine, Madhvi Bahuguna and another flight attendant began collecting passports, quietly avoiding collecting any that were American. They then went through the bags of passports they had collected, secretly sifting out any remaining American ones and tucking them under their seats or concealing them in their clothing. Mike Thexton, a passenger on the plane, describes the act in his book What Happened to The Hippy Man? as ""extremely brave, selfless and clever"". ""I may be biased but I feel that day proved that the flight attendants on board were some of the best in the industry."" Descriptions from passengers and family members from the sentencing of Safarini detailed the moment that flight attendants were told to gather passports, and the ways in which they tried to protect the Americans among them. Aneesh Bhanot, Neerjas brother, who was not on the plane as these events took place, described this effort as one carried out by all the flight attendants together: Descriptions Neerja was an Indian citizen. All the other flight attendants were also Indian citizens. Mr. Safarini and his gang were targeting Americans, as was very obvious from the passenger calls which you heard later on. Neerja and all the other attendants knew this. That is why when they asked them to get the passports of all the passengers, they hid the American passports on the airplane. He also cited the testimony of another passenger that was published in the Cincinnati Enquirer in September 1986. A clipping of that paper is available below (in which Bhanot is referred to as Neerja Mishra):   Michael John Thexton, a British passenger, recounted the following: recounted Then came the call for passports, and I should have ignored it. But I felt that I had to obey orders. So I took out my passport and I handed it in, still thinking that the Americans would be in front of us, not reckoning the ingenuity and the extraordinary bravery of the stewardess who was making the collection in discarding American passports that had a white face. I suppose the British were [the] third choice for the terrorists. And after the Americans and the Israelis, mine was the only one of a small handful of British passports with a white face in that pile. I think maybe six or seven, something of that sort. So the call came over the public address for passenger Michael John to come forward, then Michael John Thexton, and I knew that they wanted to shoot me. Darrell Pieper, an American passenger, credited flight attendant Sunshine Vesuwala for protecting his identity. In his testimony, he said, Sunshine hid my passport when she realized the hijackers are looking for Americans. I'm grateful to her for her quick thinking and action, which again saved my life. credited Gregg Maisel, the attorney representing the U.S. government, said, the flight attendants, risking their own lives, deliberately refused to accept United States passports from some passengers and hid several United States passports under seat cushions. said Given that Bhanot played a big role in protecting the American passengers by hiding their passports, but was not the only flight attendant doing this, we rate this part of the claim as true. In this instance, even as Bhanot showed remarkable bravery in getting passengers to safety, she was not alone in this effort. According to Maisel, passengers escaped after Bhanot and others were able to open up some exits: escaped As the bullets and grenades flew, Neerja Bhanot, as well as other flight attendants and passengers, heroically managed to force open two exits in the economy section. The opening of the rear exit triggered inflation of the emergency slide, but the opening of the exit over the wing did not trigger the inflation of a second emergency slide. People clamored to reach both exits fearful that the hijackers would resume the assault.[...]This diagram illustrates the efforts of surviving hostages to escape the aircraft using the emergency slide and climbing onto the wing of the plane. While the slide was a safer escape route, the sheer number of people attempting to leave the plane through this exit at night resulted in additional injuries to some who were unable to exit quickly enough to avoid being crushed by others behind them.[...]At the direction of several flight attendants, other passengers reentered the plane climbing over the wounded and the dead and used the rear exit where the slide was inflated to the safer escape route. Aneesh Bhanot also recounted an article written by a Pakistani passenger: recounted There's another passenger from Pakistan, a gentleman called Hussein, who had written an article in a newspaper called the Star of Pakistan. And he wrote again that says as the lights went out at 10:00 p.m. we was herded with the passengers and the shooting started. From nowhere, his savior, Neerja, and I'm sure other flight attendants also did the same thing, had the presence and the nerve to steer through the pandemonium to lead the passengers where to go. Neerja, by sheer zest, it seems, single-handedly opened the chute. Her favorite words to him and other passengers were, get out, run. In this instance, since Bhanot appeared to have taken the lead in helping passengers escape and was also aided by other crew and passengers, we rate this part of the claim as a mixture, given that she did not do this alone. Bhanots death was described through different accounts, based on information gathered in the aftermath of the attack. Some reports said she was protecting three children, while flight attendants described her being shot during the escape. Jennifer Levy, another attorney representing the U.S. government, described Bhanots final moments: described When the lights went out just before the final assault, Ms. Bhanot ran for the emergency door and activated the inflatable chute. Instead of escaping as one of the first off the aircraft, she remained on board to help others out of the plane. She was shot in the final assault. Although she was taken off the plane alive by her fellow flight attendants, she died shortly afterwards of massive bleeding. Viraf Daroga, Pan Ams director in Pakistan, described how Bhanot was brought down from the aircraft through the emergency chute: described Those who were injured were picked up as they came down the chute, put in ambulances that came rushing to the aircraft, and were driven off to various hospitals. Neerja, the senior purser, was brought down by her colleagues and was taken to the hospital. She died in the hospital in the arms of one of my staff. Aneesh Bhanots testimony described how Bhanot was indeed protecting three children when she was shot and killed: described Neerja could have been the first one to escape from the aircraft as she opened the emergency door, yet she chose not to do that. Instead, she got the passengers out and gave her own life, as we are told, while shielding three small children from gunfire. Her actions probably saved hundreds of lives. The Pan Am Historical Foundation also described her death by saying As the hijackers opened fire on passengers and crew, Neerja Bhanot lost her life shielding three children from bullets. described Since reports differ on what happened during Bhanots final moments, and some details remain uncertain, we rate the overall truth of this claim as ""Mixture."" But there is no doubting that her actions, as well as the actions of other flight attendants and crew, saved many lives. She was posthumously awarded the Ashok Chakra award, which is India's highest civilian decoration for bravery.  Ashok Chakra award",['economy'],NEI,"Sometimes, Snopes readers stumble on old stories that require us to revisit key moments of history. One such story was of the courageous actions of Neerja Bhanot, an Indian flight attendant on Pan Am flight 73, which was hijacked in 1986 by Palestinian militants on its way to the United States while on a stopover in Karachi, Pakistan.Many of our readers shared social media posts, and queries, asking us to detail some of the main events of the hijacking, including Bhanots death from a gunshot wound.Through testimonies from the flight crew and passengers during the sentencing of one of the hijackers, and interviews done by the BBC, we were able to gather key facts from that fateful day. In 2004, Zayad al Safarini, a Jordanian hijacker who was part of the attack, was sentenced by a U.S. district judge to 160 years in prison. At the hearing for his sentencing, a number of passengers, flight attendants, and Bhanots brother, came forward to recount the events of the hijacking. The full transcript of their testimonies can be read here.The Palestinian militants who hijacked the aircraft were affiliated with the Abu Nidal Organization (ANO), which was opposed to U.S. and Israeli policies in the Middle East, and was described as a secular international terrorist organization. When the hijackers boarded the plane, they began trying to identify any Americans on board. A 2016 BBC report included interviews with the surviving flight attendants, described the scene:Descriptions from passengers and family members from the sentencing of Safarini detailed the moment that flight attendants were told to gather passports, and the ways in which they tried to protect the Americans among them. Aneesh Bhanot, Neerjas brother, who was not on the plane as these events took place, described this effort as one carried out by all the flight attendants together:Michael John Thexton, a British passenger, recounted the following:Darrell Pieper, an American passenger, credited flight attendant Sunshine Vesuwala for protecting his identity. In his testimony, he said, Sunshine hid my passport when she realized the hijackers are looking for Americans. I'm grateful to her for her quick thinking and action, which again saved my life.Gregg Maisel, the attorney representing the U.S. government, said, the flight attendants, risking their own lives, deliberately refused to accept United States passports from some passengers and hid several United States passports under seat cushions.In this instance, even as Bhanot showed remarkable bravery in getting passengers to safety, she was not alone in this effort. According to Maisel, passengers escaped after Bhanot and others were able to open up some exits:Aneesh Bhanot also recounted an article written by a Pakistani passenger:Jennifer Levy, another attorney representing the U.S. government, described Bhanots final moments:Viraf Daroga, Pan Ams director in Pakistan, described how Bhanot was brought down from the aircraft through the emergency chute:Aneesh Bhanots testimony described how Bhanot was indeed protecting three children when she was shot and killed:The Pan Am Historical Foundation also described her death by saying As the hijackers opened fire on passengers and crew, Neerja Bhanot lost her life shielding three children from bullets.Since reports differ on what happened during Bhanots final moments, and some details remain uncertain, we rate the overall truth of this claim as ""Mixture."" But there is no doubting that her actions, as well as the actions of other flight attendants and crew, saved many lives. She was posthumously awarded the Ashok Chakra award, which is India's highest civilian decoration for bravery. "
Says Donald Trump contradicted his own administration when he said the decision to allow blueprints for 3D-printed guns to be distributed doesnt seem to make much sense.,[],"A federal judge issued a temporary restraining order to block the online publication of blueprints outlining how to create untraceable and undetectable 3D-printed firearms. The blueprints were originally scheduled for an August 1 release after a government settlement ended five years of litigation. However, word of the release prompted panic as legislators and officials scrambled to block the action. Before the federal judge's ruling, at least 21 attorneys general filed suit to stop the blueprints from going live. As the conversation heated up, President Donald Trump weighed in on Twitter, stating, ""I am looking into 3-D Plastic Guns being sold to the public. Already spoke to NRA, doesn't seem to make much sense!"" Politicians and pundits seized upon the president's words as proof that he was unfamiliar with a decision from his own administration. ""Trump: My own administration's latest decision doesn't seem to make much sense!"" read a July 31 headline from Addicting Info, a liberal website. This story was flagged as part of Facebook's efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. Trump's last-minute statement gave us pause, so we decided to look at the settlement. Was the Trump administration actually behind it? The White House did not respond to a request for comment, though Trump's press secretary later stated that he did not have a chance to weigh in. On May 5, 2013, Defense Distributed uploaded blueprints online that could be used to make a working 3D-printed gun called The Liberator, along with a 53-second video of founder Cody Wilson firing one. Wilson soon received a letter from the Obama administration's State Department demanding that he remove the files from the internet. The letter stated that the technical data amounted to an illegal gun export in violation of the Arms Export Control Act and International Traffic in Arms Regulations, as it could be accessed in countries where the United States does not sell weapons. The State Department instructed Wilson to take down the files until he applied for specific approval of the gun's multiple components. By that point, the blueprints had already been downloaded 100,000 times. In response, Wilson filed a lawsuit against the State Department with the help of the Second Amendment Foundation, a gun rights organization, seeking a preliminary injunction to allow continued publication of the gun files online. Under both the Obama and Trump administrations, the government maintained its assertion that the technical data constituted an illegal gun export. Wilson countered that the government's intervention violated his First Amendment right to free speech. Ultimately, both district and appeals courts rejected Wilson's injunction request. However, as the case turned to the First Amendment claim, the government made an unexpected settlement offer. With the settlement, reached in June and announced on July 10, the government waived the relevant export restrictions and allowed Wilson to post the blueprints online as early as August 1. Specifically, the State Department announced that it was in the interest of the security and foreign policy of the United States to temporarily modify the U.S. Munitions List to exclude the technical data for the 3-D-printed guns. Defense-related items on the munitions list face tight restrictions because they offer a critical military or intelligence advantage to the United States. The U.S. Commerce Department manages a separate export list with fewer restrictions. It is unclear what role Trump or the White House played in the settlement decision, though White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said during an August 1 press briefing that the Department of Justice instructed the State Department to settle without White House approval. The State Department has stated that its role in this issue relates solely to the regulation of exports of certain types of firearms and any related technical data. However, the move to shift the 3D-printed guns' technical data outside of the State Department's purview was not without precedent. The government's decision came amid a longstanding but relatively behind-the-scenes administrative project, started under the Obama administration and known as export control reform, to restructure the regulations governing exports of weapons and technologies. Just as the litigation against Wilson can be traced back to the Obama years, so too can the export control changes that may have opened the door for the State Department's settlement. Beginning in 2009, the Obama administration launched an overhaul of export control to refine regulations for items that were subject to both the State Department's International Traffic in Arms Regulations and the Commerce Department's Export Administration Regulations. The goal of the reform was to streamline export controls by transferring commercially available items, such as consumer guns, off the USML and onto the less restrictive Commerce Control List. The State Department began reviewing the munitions list, sifting through each category and removing items that were not considered military-sensitive. By 2016, it had finished reviewing all but three categories: firearms, ammunition, and artillery. However, reform of those final categories stalled before it could become policy. A proposed rule would have handed jurisdiction of commercial firearms export controls to the Commerce Department in 2012, but it was delayed following the Sandy Hook school shooting. That proposed rule did not regain momentum until 2018, under Trump. On May 24, the Departments of State and Commerce simultaneously published proposals in the Federal Register to amend the final three categories of the munitions list. The proposed revisions would keep military-grade weapons under State Department jurisdiction and place commercially available firearms under the purview of the Commerce Department. According to the New York Times, these proposals strongly resemble the Obama administration's 2012 version. CNN reported that the government is currently reviewing them. This may explain the State Department's sudden decision to settle its case with Wilson. By recommending that commercial firearm exports move under Commerce Department oversight, the May 24 proposals would likely free Wilson's blueprints from the International Traffic in Arms Regulations that previously restricted them. ""My guess is that it was somehow wrapped up in the movement of items from the (U.S. Munitions List) to the (Commerce Control List),"" said Rachel Stohl, managing director at the Stimson Center and an expert in the international arms trade. ""If you deregulate the weapons themselves, it would follow that the technical specs could be deregulated as well."" Stohl added that the settlement was unexpected and that the State and Commerce Departments have been less than forthcoming on these details. For his part, Wilson has agreed to refrain from posting his blueprints for at least another month while the multi-state lawsuit travels through the courts. A headline suggested that the government settlement that would have made 3D-printable guns available for download was actually a Trump administration decision, and that Trump said that it didn't make much sense. We could not independently determine the extent of Trump's involvement, although Sanders stated that the president was not afforded the opportunity to approve the settlement decision. However, the State Department under Trump did initiate the settlement after previously taking steps to clear a path for it. The Obama administration's export control reform made those steps possible, and it is not far-fetched to consider the Trump administration's move a continuation of that initiative.","['Foreign Policy', 'Trade', 'PunditFact', 'Guns']",True,"A federal judgeissueda temporary restraining order to block the online publication of blueprints outlining how to create untraceable and undetectable 3D-printed firearms.As conversation heated up, President Donald Trump weighed in onTwitter. I am looking into 3-D Plastic Guns being sold to the public, he said. Already spoke to NRA, doesnt seem to make much sense!Trump: My own administrations latest decision doesnt seem to make much sense! said a July 31headlinefrom Addicting Info, a liberal website.This story was flagged as part of Facebooks efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about ourpartnershipwith Facebook.)On May 5, 2013, Defense Distributeduploadedblueprints online that could be used to make a working 3D-printed gun called The Liberator, as well as a 53-secondvideoof founder Cody Wilson firing one.Wilson soon received aletterfrom the Obama administrations State Department demanding that he remove the files from the internet. The letter said the technical data amounted to an illegal gun export in violation of theArms Export Control ActandInternational Traffic in Arms Regulations, because it could be accessed in countries where the United States does not sell weapons.In response, Wilson filed alawsuitagainst the State Department with the help of Second Amendment Foundation, a guns-rights organization, in which he sought a preliminary injunction to allow continued publication of the gun files online.With thesettlement, reached in June and announced July 10, the government waived the relevant export restrictions and allowed Wilson to post the blueprints online as early as Aug. 1.Specifically, the State Departmentannouncedthat it was in the interest of the security and foreign policy of the United States to temporarily modify theU.S. Munitions Listto exclude the technical data for the 3-D-printed guns.But the move to shift the 3D-printed guns technical data outside of the State Departments purview was not without precedent. The governments decision came amid a longstanding but relatively behind-the-scenes administrative project  started under the Obama administration and known as export control reform  to restructure the regulations governing exports of weapons and technologies.Beginning in 2009, the Obama administrationlaunchedan overhaul of export control in order to refine regulations for items that were subject to both the State Departments International Traffic in Arms Regulations and the Commerce Departments Export Administration Regulations.The State Department began reviewing the munitions list, sifting through each category and removing items that were not considered military-sensitive. By 2016, it had finished reviewing all but threecategories: firearms, ammunition and artillery.However, reform of those final categories stalled before it could become policy. Aproposed rulewould have handed jurisdiction of commercial firearms export controls to the Commerce Department in 2012, but it was delayed following the Sandy Hook school shooting.That proposed rule did notregainmomentum until 2018, under Trump. On May 24, the Departments ofStateandCommercesimultaneously publishedproposalsin the Federal Register to amend the final three categories of the munitions list.According to theNew York Times, these proposals strongly resemble the Obama administrations 2012 version. CNNreportedthat the government is currently reviewing them."
The photo does not depict a crowd saluting Obama with the Nazi gesture.,['A photograph of a crowd with their hands raised in front of Obama was circulated with misleading information.'],"Shortly after Donald Trump asked his supporters to raise their hands and pledge that they would vote for him in the 2016 Presidential election (drawing comparisons to Nazi Germany), an image purportedly showing President Obama making a similar request to a crowd began circulating online. While the image is real, it does not show President Obama asking his supporters to pledge allegiance to him. This photograph was taken in Columbus, Ohio, in November 2008, and shows a crowd raising their hands after Obama asked how many people in the audience made less than $250,000 per year. People raise their hands as Democratic presidential nominee U.S. Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) asks the audience how many of them make less than $250,000 a year while speaking during a campaign rally at the Ohio State House on November 2, 2008, in Columbus, Ohio. Obama continued to campaign against Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) as Election Day drew near. A video on PBS showed President Obama asking the audience to raise their hands if they made less than $250,000: ""Let me just see a show of hands. How many people make less than $250,000 a year? Raise your hands. All right, now, I want you to be very clear here. Here are the facts. There was another report in the New York Times this morning that laid out the fact that I give much more relief to middle-income people and also that I will not raise taxes for anybody making under $250,000 a year, not your capital gains tax, not your payroll tax, not your income tax, no taxes. The middle class doesn't need a tax hike. I want to give you a tax cut. So don't be confused by what John McCain says. My tax rates will be lower than they were under Ronald Reagan.""",['income'],False,"While the image is real, it does not show President Obama asking his supporters to pledge allegiance to him. This photograph was takenin Columbus, Ohio in November 2008, and shows a crowd raising their hands after Obama asked how many people in the audience made less than $250,000 per year:"
Texas Horse Hunt,"[""A Texas business provides big game hunters with an opportunity to participate in 'horse hunt adventures'?""]","Claim:  A Texas business provides big game hunters with an opportunity to participate in ""horse hunt adventures.""   Example:  [Collected via e-mail, May 2013] There's a blog going around about ""Texas Horse Hunts"" where horses are hunted on paid hunts....could this possibly be true?   Origins:  In May 2013, social media were abuzz with chatter regarding (and at least one petition calling for the shutdown of) a three-month-old blog site for an outfit advertising Texas Horse Hunts, presented as an opportunity for big game horse hunters to bag themselves some equines:  petition blog site If youve dreamed of big game horse hunting in Texas and are interested in a superior, top quality, exciting and successful horse hunting experience, join Texas Horse Hunt Expeditions, LLC and Master Guide Tom D. Welderman IV on your next horse hunt adventure. Youll enjoy some of the most dynamic and beautiful wilderness in the world! We guide areas within National Wildlife Refuges and receive the  finest guiding expertise, personal service and attention to detail found anywhere. Im a guide because I love horse hunting, Texas, the outdoors and because I enjoy sharing these things with other humans who appreciate what horse hunts have to offer. Our goal, aside from helping you harvest a magnificent trophy horse, is to share with you this incredible state and all that it has to offer. When you leave one of our camps as a friend, we want you to take home fond lifetime memories of your horse hunt experience. The quality of your horse and your whole experience is my primary concern. We are not narcissistic; your hunt with us is not about us but about you and your horse. This is your horse hunt and we want to help fulfill all of your expectations. Multiple factors pointed to the whole thing being a satirical hoax, however, including:  The lack of any previous news coverage or any effort to publicize the business beyond a single blog entry.  The photographs on the Texas Horse Hunts blog site were all lifted from other web sites.  The picture of the dead equine in the back of a truck was taken from a May 2009 blog entry for Rogues Gallery Kennel (a  rescue kennel for sled dogs) about the picking up of a naturally deceased horse in Alaska; the photo of a pair of horses lying dead on the ground was taken from a 2010 news article about San Joaquin County Sheriffs Office investigating five dead horses believed to have died of thirst in a field off Interstate 580 in California; and the picture of a single (apparently undead) brown horse lying on the ground is a stock photo from 2004. Rogues Gallery Kennel lying dead news article stock photo Joseph Robertia, the rightful owner of the first photograph penned an article for The Redoubt Reporter describing the harm the theft of his photo had caused for him and his family, saying (in part): article Hi, my name is Joseph, and I hunt horses with sticks, crossbows and firearms. And if you believe this, Ive got some prime swampland in Florida to sell you. Sadly, though, several people do believe it, thanks in part to a photo stolen from my personal blog, https://www.rogueskennel.com, and used out of context on a site proclaiming to be for Texas Horse Hunts. Not hunting on horseback, but actually hunting and killing horses. It's left me having to assert and explain something so bizarre I never thought Id have to utter these words  I have not, do not and would not ever hunt horses. The photo they found on my site and reposted was taken in Alaska, after my wife and I retrieved a horse that died of natural causes from Sterling residents who had no way to bury it and didnt want it to attract summer bears. The part that really smarts is that the most extensive damage to our reputations was not done by the initial website post. Rather, it was from the dozens of outraged animal rights activists on Facebook pages and other social media sites who began spreading the photo with lightning speed. (A week after we published this article, all the photos and descriptive information were removed from the Texas Horse Hunt page.)  The promotional material in the Texas Horse Hunts blog states that ""All horse meats will be processed at our facilities,"" but laws forced the shutdown of the last remaining horse slaughterhouses in the U.S. (including two in Texas) back in 2007, and no such facilities are currently legally operating in the U.S. horse slaughterhouses  We could find no record of ""Texas Horse Hunt Expeditions"" being registered as an LLC (limited liability company) in Texas or any other state.  The blog site contains obvious jokes such as ""You will have the option of killing your horse traditionally (with a stick),"" and a ""Brief History of Horse Hunting"" article describing  Henry VIII as a horse hunting enthusiast who ""instituted a policy of horse hunting exclusively by club"" and referencing a ""Back to the Future lead actor who's a vocal supporter of the sport."" article  One of the best ways of determining whether web-advertised businesses of suspect nature are legitimate is by attempting to purchase what they're supposedly offering for sale (because the whole point of businesses to make money by servicing customers). But the Texas Horse Hunt Expeditions page includes neither a physical address nor even a general indication of where in the world the supposed hunts take place (somewhere in Texas, presumably), key pieces of information which any prospective customer would want to know.  And none of our e-mails or phone calls to Texas Horse Hunt Expeditions expressing interest in participating in one of their ""adventures"" was returned. Last updated:  29 May 2013 ",['liability'],False,"Origins:  In May 2013, social media were abuzz with chatter regarding (and at least one petition calling for the shutdown of) a three-month-old blog site for an outfit advertising Texas Horse Hunts, presented as an opportunity for big game horse hunters to bag themselves some equines:  The photographs on the Texas Horse Hunts blog site were all lifted from other web sites.  The picture of the dead equine in the back of a truck was taken from a May 2009 blog entry for Rogues Gallery Kennel (a  rescue kennel for sled dogs) about the picking up of a naturally deceased horse in Alaska; the photo of a pair of horses lying dead on the ground was taken from a 2010 news article about San Joaquin County Sheriffs Office investigating five dead horses believed to have died of thirst in a field off Interstate 580 in California; and the picture of a single (apparently undead) brown horse lying on the ground is a stock photo from 2004.Joseph Robertia, the rightful owner of the first photograph penned an article for The Redoubt Reporter describing the harm the theft of his photo had caused for him and his family, saying (in part): The promotional material in the Texas Horse Hunts blog states that ""All horse meats will be processed at our facilities,"" but laws forced the shutdown of the last remaining horse slaughterhouses in the U.S. (including two in Texas) back in 2007, and no such facilities are currently legally operating in the U.S. The blog site contains obvious jokes such as ""You will have the option of killing your horse traditionally (with a stick),"" and a ""Brief History of Horse Hunting"" article describing  Henry VIII as a horse hunting enthusiast who ""instituted a policy of horse hunting exclusively by club"" and referencing a ""Back to the Future lead actor who's a vocal supporter of the sport."""
Crown Fools,[''],"FACT CHECK: Do crown tattoos secretly signal that a woman is or once was sold into slavery?     Claim: Crown tattoos secretly signal that a woman is or once was sold into sexual slavery.   MOSTLY  Example: [Collected via Twitter, September 2015] Crown Tattoos Being Forced on Women Across the US. If You See One, Heres the Disturbing Meaning https://t.co/u0fabfCANc https://t.co/u0fabfCANc  Phillip Hernandez (@Flipy602) September 8, 2015 September 8, 2015  Origins: On 8 September 2015, the web site IJ Review published an article with the misleading headline ""'Crown' Tattoos Being Forced on Women Across the US. If You See One, Heres the Disturbing Meaning"": article For thousands of women across the United States their tattoos are a constant reminder of the men who enslaved them for profit. Sex trafficking in the United States affects countless women, and many are left with the scars and marks of their former pimps. A CNN interview with a victim and survivor of sexual slavery and addiction named Jennifer Kempton helped shed light on these tattoos. The article (and several subsequent republications of it) attributed its claims to a 2 September 2015 CNN piece titled ""Sex-trafficking survivors use new ink to reclaim their lives."" That report profiled Survivor's Ink, a group devoted to assisting victims of sex trafficking to remove or cover tattooed brands acquired in the course of their victimization: piece [Founder Jennifer] Kempton said the new ink changed the way she looked at herself, but she still had three other brandings. There was one on her neck, one on her back and one right above her groin that said ""Property of Salem,"" a trafficker who played a major role in bringing Kempton into the life she had now left behind. She told a human trafficking advocate about the ""property of"" tattoo. The advocate contacted a family member who agreed to pay for her to have the rest of her brandings covered. This was the beginning of Survivor's Ink. Kempton wanted other survivors to experience the freedom she had found, so she started a nonprofit organization that pays for trafficking survivors to have their branding tattoos covered by new tattoos of their choosing. Both CNN and IJ Review linked to Survivor's Ink's Facebook page, which contained photo albums illustrating before and after tattoos. Notably, only a single crown was featured among the tattoos depicted, casting the ""here's what it means"" headline into doubt.  photo albums It's likely that some pimps chose a crown as the brand forcibly inked upon their victims. But nothing in the CNN report suggested that crowns are universal (or even common) among tattoos forced on unwilling sex workers. Moreover, crown tattoos are a popular choice among the inked. We found no evidence that crown tattoos were linked to sex trafficking before 7 September 2015; however, we located a number of proudly-displayed, intentionally-chosen crown tattoo examples: crown tattoos #Blue Crown #Tattoo By Iuri Chmel #Ink #Tattoos https://t.co/CyEDUYWFGJ pic.twitter.com/RTLEVcFWuP #Blue #Tattoo #Ink #Tattoos https://t.co/CyEDUYWFGJ pic.twitter.com/RTLEVcFWuP  Tattoo Ideas (@tattooideas__) August 24, 2015 August 24, 2015  #tattoo #tattoos https://t.co/1rHc7pdmdR #Black-And-Grey Crown and Scepter pic.twitter.com/iZxtLdp9Vg #tattoo #tattoos https://t.co/1rHc7pdmdR #Black pic.twitter.com/iZxtLdp9Vg  Linda Severino (@redsomcom) August 20, 2015 August 20, 2015  Upper back tattoo of a crown by Murat Bilek. Tattoo artist: Murat Bilek#littletattoos #t https://t.co/clx2Dxo6iT pic.twitter.com/Edrj0vqg5w #littletattoos #t https://t.co/clx2Dxo6iT pic.twitter.com/Edrj0vqg5w  Little Tattoos (@little_tattoos) August 12, 2015 August 12, 2015  #tattoo #tattoos https://t.co/pfsfDphHef #Arm #Couple #Crown One Love pic.twitter.com/2hWSEfs6r3 #tattoo #tattoos https://t.co/pfsfDphHef #Arm #Couple #Crown pic.twitter.com/2hWSEfs6r3  Linda Severino (@redsomcom) July 14, 2015 July 14, 2015  Even if a small fraction of the crown tattoos (shared across the internet in body modification galleries) were coerced, the vast majority of folks with a crown tattoo were not victims of sex trafficking; the presence of one is definitely not ""disturbing"" proof its owner was once enslaved.  Last updated: 8 September 2015 Originally published:  8 September 2015",['profit'],False,"Crown Tattoos Being Forced on Women Across the US. If You See One, Heres the Disturbing Meaning https://t.co/u0fabfCANc Phillip Hernandez (@Flipy602) September 8, 2015Origins: On 8 September 2015, the web site IJ Review published an article with the misleading headline ""'Crown' Tattoos Being Forced on Women Across the US. If You See One, Heres the Disturbing Meaning"":The article (and several subsequent republications of it) attributed its claims to a 2 September 2015 CNN piece titled ""Sex-trafficking survivors use new ink to reclaim their lives."" That report profiled Survivor's Ink, a group devoted to assisting victims of sex trafficking to remove or cover tattooed brands acquired in the course of their victimization:Both CNN and IJ Review linked to Survivor's Ink's Facebook page, which contained photo albums illustrating before and after tattoos. Notably, only a single crown was featured among the tattoos depicted, casting the ""here's what it means"" headline into doubt. Moreover, crown tattoos are a popular choice among the inked. We found no evidence that crown tattoos were linked to sex trafficking before 7 September 2015; however, we located a number of proudly-displayed, intentionally-chosen crown tattoo examples:#Blue Crown #Tattoo By Iuri Chmel #Ink #Tattoos https://t.co/CyEDUYWFGJ pic.twitter.com/RTLEVcFWuP Tattoo Ideas (@tattooideas__) August 24, 2015#tattoo #tattoos https://t.co/1rHc7pdmdR #Black-And-Grey Crown and Scepter pic.twitter.com/iZxtLdp9Vg Linda Severino (@redsomcom) August 20, 2015Upper back tattoo of a crown by Murat Bilek. Tattoo artist: Murat Bilek#littletattoos #t https://t.co/clx2Dxo6iT pic.twitter.com/Edrj0vqg5w Little Tattoos (@little_tattoos) August 12, 2015#tattoo #tattoos https://t.co/pfsfDphHef #Arm #Couple #Crown One Love pic.twitter.com/2hWSEfs6r3 Linda Severino (@redsomcom) July 14, 2015"
"No, Elon Musk Did Not Die in a Car Battery Explosion",['But the hashtag #RIPELON trended on social media in March 2021.'],"On March 5, 2021, the hashtag #RIPELON started trending on social media as users shared images that supposedly showed news stories reporting that Tesla founder Elon Musk had died in a Tesla factory battery explosion: supposedly showed news stories   In addition to the fake Fox News story shown above, users created several other images that supposedly showed news headlines about Musk's death.    These are not genuine news stories. Musk did not die in a factory explosion in March 2021. While these images appear to show headlines from websites such as Fox News, these are not genuine news articles but fake headlines that were never actually published by credible news sites. The latest article about Musk on Fox News, for example, reports on a successful SpaceX Falcon 9 launch, not Musk's death.  reports We are not exactly sure why people started to spread a death hoax about Musk. Some have speculated that it may have been an attempt to manipulate the stock market. One version of this hoax, for instance, was dressed up as an official announcement from Tesla.   But this is not a genuine statement from Tesla.  Musk, the CEO of companies such as Tesla and SpaceX, is one of the richest people in the world. If he truly did die in a factory explosion, news about Musk's death would dominate on just about every news site. Yet we've not seen any credible reports about his death.  Furthermore, no official statements have been released by Tesla, SpaceX, or on Musk's social media accounts.  There is no truth to the reports that Musk died in a Tesla factory explosion. While these images appear to show headlines from websites such as Fox News, these are not genuine news articles. ",['stock market'],False,"On March 5, 2021, the hashtag #RIPELON started trending on social media as users shared images that supposedly showed news stories reporting that Tesla founder Elon Musk had died in a Tesla factory battery explosion:While these images appear to show headlines from websites such as Fox News, these are not genuine news articles but fake headlines that were never actually published by credible news sites. The latest article about Musk on Fox News, for example, reports on a successful SpaceX Falcon 9 launch, not Musk's death. "
"Extending current tax rates would average more than $100,000 a year to millionaires and even billionaires.",[],"Tax cuts passed under the Bush administration have been in place for close to ten years, but they will expire at the end of 2010 if Congress doesn't take action. Add in a weak economy, large government deficits, and an upcoming election, and you've got one of the most pressing policy issues of the year. President Barack Obama's administration wants to see the tax cuts made permanent for individuals who make less than $200,000 a year and couples who make less than $250,000 a year. Tax rates would increase for people who earn more than that. Austan Goolsbee defended that position on This Week with Christiane Amanpour. Goolsbee is one of Obama's top economic officials and was recently selected to chair the Council of Economic Advisers, which counsels the president on economic policy. ""Obama has been quite clear,"" Goolsbee said, ""that borrowing $700 billion to extend tax cuts that average more than $100,000 a year to millionaires and even billionaires is the least effective bang for the buck we have."" We were interested in that $100,000 number—extending the expiring tax cuts would average more than $100,000 a year for millionaires and even billionaires. The White House pointed us to data from the Ways and Means Committee, the committee in the U.S. House of Representatives charged with writing tax legislation. Democrats on the committee asked the Joint Committee on Taxation for an analysis of extending the expiring tax cuts. The Joint Committee on Taxation, or JCT, is a nonpartisan committee with a professional staff of economists, attorneys, and accountants who conduct research. The JCT crunched the numbers to generate several tables estimating tax revenues if the tax cuts expire and how many taxpayers would be affected. The JCT found that for those with an income of $1 million or more, extending the Bush tax cuts would mean $32.7 billion that the government would not collect in 2011. That amount would apply to 315,000 tax filers. Divide the foregone tax revenues by the number of filers, and you get $103,809, or just over $100,000, as Goolsbee stated. We also checked with the Tax Policy Center, an independent, nonpartisan think tank that generates economic projections similar to those of the JCT. The Tax Policy Center found that the average tax increase for millionaires and above would be $128,832. That's a bit higher than the JCT estimate, but for a complex economic analysis, it's fairly close. The center's numbers also support Goolsbee's statement that extending the tax cuts would average more than $100,000 a year for millionaires and even billionaires. To get the perspective of someone who opposes letting the current tax rates expire, we turned to the conservative Heritage Foundation. J.D. Foster said he didn't argue with the numbers but with Goolsbee's focus on millionaires. Many of those who make more than $200,000 or $250,000 are not millionaires, and those individuals will see a tax increase as well. ""If they only intend to raise taxes on millionaires, then they need to change their proposal,"" Foster said. ""I understand it's a convenient rhetorical ploy, but it's factually incorrect."" This is a fair point: Goolsbee talked about a $700 billion cost, which is a general estimate for what extending the tax cuts for ten years would cost for all higher earners, not just millionaires. We went back to the analysis and found calculations for what the Bush tax cuts are worth for other high incomes. The JCT found that for those who make between $500,000 and $1 million, the lower rates were worth an average of $17,467 per tax filer, and for those who make between $200,000 and $500,000, the lower rates were worth $7,152 per tax filer. The Tax Policy Center's numbers were similar. So Goolsbee is correct that the expiring tax cuts are worth, on average, more than $100,000 for millionaires and billionaires. However, the proposal the president supports would let tax cuts expire for some people who make high salaries but aren't millionaires, which Goolsbee didn't mention. Therefore, we deduct a tick from the Truth-O-Meter and rate his statement as Mostly True.","['National', 'This Week - ABC News', 'Taxes']",True,"Tax cuts passed under the Bush administration have been in place for close to ten years, but they will expire at the end of 2010 if Congress doesn't take action. Add in a weak economy, big government deficits, and an upcoming election, and you've got one of the most pressing policy issues of the year.President Barack Obama's administration wants to see the tax cuts made permanent for individuals who make less than $200,000 a year and couples who make less than $250,000 a year. Tax rates would go up for people who make more than that.Austan Goolsbee defended that position onThis Week with Christiane Amanpour. Goolsbee is one of Obama's top economic officials, and was recently selected to chair the Council of Economic Advisers, which counsels the president on economic policy.Obama has been quite clear, Goolsbee said, that borrowing $700 billion to extend tax cuts that average more than $100,000 a year to millionaires and even billionaires is the least effective bang for the buck we have.We were interested in that $100,000 number -- that extending the expiring tax cuts would average more than $100,000 a year to millionaires and even billionaires.The White House pointed us to data from the Ways and Means Committee, the committee in the U.S. House of Representatives charged with writing tax legislation. Democrats on the committee asked the Joint Committee on Taxation for an analysis of extending the expiring tax cuts. The Joint Committee on Taxation, or JCT, is a nonpartisan committee with a professional staff of economists, attorneys and accountants who conduct research.The JCT crunched the numbers to generate several tables estimating tax revenues if the tax cuts expire, and how many taxpayers would be affected. The JCT found that, for those who have income of $1 million or more, extending the Bush tax cuts would mean $32.7 billion that the government would not collect in 2011. That amount would apply to 315,000 tax filers. Divide the foregone tax revenues by the number of filers, and you get $103,809, or just over $100,000, as Goolsbee said.We also checked with the Tax Policy Center, an independent, nonpartisan think tank that generates economic projections similar to those of the JCT. The Tax Policy Center found that theaverage tax increaseto millionaires and up would be $128,832. That's a bit higher than the JCT estimate, but for a complex economic analysis, it's fairly close. The center's numbers also supports Goolsbee's statement that extending the tax cuts would average more than $100,000 a year to millionaires and even billionaires.To get the point of view of someone who opposes letting the current tax rates expire, we turned to the conservative Heritage Foundation. J.D. Foster said he didn't argue with the numbers, but with Goolsbee's focus on millionaires. Many of those who make more than $200,000 or $250,000 are not millionaires, and those people will see a tax increase as well.If they only intend to raise taxes on millionaires, then they need to change their proposal, Foster said. I understand it's a convenient rhetorical ploy, but its factually incorrect.This is a fair point: Goolsbee talked about a $700 billion cost, which is a general estimate for what extending the tax cuts for 10 years would cost for all higher earners, not just millionaires.We went back to the analysis and found calculations for what the Bush tax cuts are worth for other high incomes. The JCT found that for those who make between $500,000 and $1 million, the lower rates were worth an average $17,467 per tax filer, and for those who make between $200,000 and $500,000, the lower rates were worth $7,152 per tax filer. The Tax Policy Center's numberswere similar.So Goolsbee is correct that the expiring tax cuts are worth, on average, more than $100,000 for millionaires and billionaires. But the proposal the president supports would let tax cuts expire for some people who make high salaries but aren't millionaires, which Goolsbee didn't mention. So we deduct a tick from the Truth-O-Meter and rate his statement Mostly True."
Obama Required Banks to Lend Money to Poor People,"[""Barack Obama filed a lawsuit to require banks to 'make loans to poor people'?""]","In 1994, a class-action lawsuit was filed against Citibank, demanding that loans be made to poor people and others who could not show proof that they could pay the money back. The basis of the lawsuit was the 14th Amendment, which requires ""fair and equal"" treatment for all citizens. The legal theory was that failing to loan money to poor, indigent, or unemployed people was, on its face, a discriminatory act by lending institutions. Thousands of loans were processed, and of course, many went into default, partly explaining why we are in the financial mess we are in. It is easy for some people to point the finger of blame at President George Bush for this crisis because he is sitting in the hot seat. What many people do not know is that the suit was filed during the Clinton Administration. The lawyer filing the suit was none other than Barack Hussein Obama. 

This item seeks to shift much of the blame for America's current economic woes onto Barack Obama by claiming that as a young lawyer, Obama filed a lawsuit requiring financial institutions to lend money to ""poor people"" and ""others who could not show proof that they could pay the money back."" Although there is a vague element of fact underlying this politicking, the piece quoted above is woefully incorrect in all its particulars. The 1994 case of Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank had nothing to do with requiring lenders to do business with people ""who could not show proof that they could pay the money back."" The case was a class-action lawsuit against Citibank Federal Savings initiated by a Black Chicago woman, Selma Buycks-Roberson, who claimed she was unfairly denied a mortgage based on her race. The lawsuit sought to end the practice of redlining, a discriminatory practice by which banks, insurance companies, and other business institutions refuse or limit loans, mortgages, insurance, etc., based solely on the geographic area in which the applicant lives—a practice that commonly excludes minorities in inner-city neighborhoods, regardless of their income or ability to pay. Specifically, the lawsuit charged that Citibank ""rejected loan applications of minority applicants while approving loan applications filed by white applicants with similar financial characteristics and credit histories."" The case was eventually settled out of court, with some class members receiving cash payments and Citibank agreeing to help ease the way for low- and moderate-income people to apply for mortgages. 

Although Barack Obama was involved with the Buycks-Roberson case, he did not file the lawsuit, nor was he the lead attorney in the matter. He was a junior member of an eight-lawyer team that worked on the case; Obama admits he played a mostly behind-the-scenes role at his law firm, Miner Barnhill & Galland. He researched the law, drafted motions, prepared for depositions, and did other less glamorous work during his three years full-time and eight years ""of counsel"" to the firm. ""He wrote lots of substantial memos, but he didn't try any cases,"" said Judson Miner, a partner in the firm who was Obama's boss. Obama represented Calvin Roberson in a 1994 lawsuit against Citibank, charging the bank systematically denied mortgages to African-American applicants and others from minority neighborhoods. ""I don't recall him ever standing up and giving an impassioned speech; it was a lot of behind-the-scenes stuff,"" said Fay Clayton, the lead lawyer on the case. ""He was the very junior lawyer in that case,"" said attorney Robert Kriss. ""He had just graduated from law school. I don't recall him being in court at any time I was there. I was the lead lawyer for Citibank, and he was not very visible to me."" Kriss, Clayton, and every other co-counsel and opposing counsel interviewed for this story praised Obama's legal ability, temperament, and everything about his courtroom demeanor, even though they agree he did not say much in the courtroom. 

On February 23, 1995, Obama billed 2 hours and 50 minutes for an appearance before Judge Ruben Castillo on behalf of his client and also for reviewing some documents in advance of a deposition. That cost Citibank—which ultimately had to pay the winning side's fees—$467 at Obama's hourly rate of $165. Miner commanded the higher rate of $285 an hour. During his appearance before the judge, Obama said he would need more time to file a response to a motion, and the judge agreed. That was all Obama said during the half-hour hearing. His final bill on the case was 138 hours, or $23,000. Last updated: September 5, 2012. Associated Press. ""Some Cases Obama Worked on in His Career as an Attorney."" February 20, 2007.",['income'],False,"The 1994 case of Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank had nothing to do with requiring lenders to do business with people ""who could not show proof that they could pay the money back.""  The case was a class-action lawsuit against Citibank Federal Savings initiated by a black Chicago woman, Selma Buycks-Roberson, who claimed she was unfairly denied a mortgage based on her race.  The lawsuit sought to end the practice of redlining, a discriminatory practice by which banks, insurance companies, and other business institutions refuse or limit loans, mortgages, insurance, etc., based solely on the geographic area in which the applicant lives (a practice that commonly excludes minorities in inner-city neighborhoods, regardless of their income or ability to pay).  Specifically, the lawsuit charged that Citibank ""rejected loan applications of minority applicants while approving loan applications filed by white applicants with similar financial characteristics and credit histories.""  The case was eventually settled out of court, with some class members receiving cash payments and Citibank agreeing to help ease the way for low- and moderate-income people to apply for mortgages."
Communication from the superior.,['Employer issued letter to employees that any further taxes on his business will result in his shutting it down?'],"Claim: An employer issued a missive to his employees stating that any additional taxes on his business would result in his shutting the company down. 

To All My Valued Employees,

There have been some rumblings around the office about the future of this company, and more specifically, your jobs. As you know, the economy has changed for the worse and presents many challenges. However, the good news is this: The economy doesn't pose a threat to your jobs. What does threaten your jobs, however, is the changing political landscape in this country. Of course, as your employer, I am forbidden to tell you whom to vote for—it is against the law to discriminate based on political affiliation, race, creed, religion, etc. Please vote for whom you think will serve your interests best. However, let me share some facts that might help you decide what is in your best interest.

First, while it is easy to spew rhetoric that casts employers against employees, you must understand that for every business owner, there is a backstory. This backstory is often neglected and overshadowed by what you see and hear. Sure, you see me park my Mercedes outside. You've seen my big home at last year's Christmas party. I'm sure all these flashy icons of luxury conjure up some idealized thoughts about my life. However, what you don't see is the backstory. I started this company 12 years ago. At that time, I lived in a 300-square-foot studio apartment for three years. My entire living space was converted into an office so I could put forth 100% effort into building a company that would eventually employ you. My diet consisted of Ramen Pride noodles because every dollar I spent went back into this company. I drove a rusty Toyota Corolla with a defective transmission. I didn't have time to date. Often, I stayed home on weekends while my friends went out drinking and partying. In fact, I was married to my business—hard work, discipline, and sacrifice.

Meanwhile, my friends got jobs. They worked 40 hours a week, made a modest $50K a year, and spent every dime they earned. They drove flashy cars, lived in expensive homes, and wore fancy designer clothes. Instead of hitting Nordstrom's for the latest hot fashion item, I was trolling through the Goodwill store, extracting any clothing item that didn't look like it was birthed in the '70s. My friends refinanced their mortgages and lived a life of luxury. I, however, did not. I put my time, my money, and my life into a business with a vision that someday I too would be able to afford these luxuries my friends supposedly had.

So, while you physically arrive at the office at 9 a.m., mentally check in at about noon, and then leave at 5 p.m., I don't. There is no ""off"" button for me. When you leave the office, you are done, and you have a weekend all to yourself. I, unfortunately, do not have that freedom. I eat, sleep, and breathe this company every minute of the day. There is no rest. There is no weekend. There is no happy hour. Every day, this business is attached to my hip like a one-year-old special-needs child. You, of course, only see the fruits of that labor—the nice house, the Mercedes, the vacations... you never realize the backstory and the sacrifices I've made.

Now, the economy is falling apart, and I, the guy who made all the right decisions and saved his money, have to bail out all the people who didn't. The people who overspent their paychecks suddenly feel entitled to the same luxuries that I earned and sacrificed a decade of my life for. Yes, business ownership has its benefits, but the price I've paid is steep and without wounds. Unfortunately, the cost of running this business and employing you is starting to eclipse the threshold of marginal benefit, and let me tell you why: I am being taxed to death, and the government thinks I don't pay enough. I have state taxes, federal taxes, property taxes, sales and use taxes, payroll taxes, workers' compensation taxes, unemployment taxes, and taxes on taxes. I have to hire a tax man to manage all these taxes, and then guess what? I have to pay taxes for employing him. Government mandates, regulations, and all the accounting that goes with it now occupy most of my time. On October 15th, I wrote a check to the U.S. Treasury for $288,000 for quarterly taxes. You know what my ""stimulus"" check was? Zero. Nada. Zilch.

The question I have is this: Who is stimulating the economy? Me, the guy who has provided 14 people with good-paying jobs and serves over 2,200,000 people per year with a flourishing business? Or the single mother sitting at home, pregnant with her fourth child, waiting for her next welfare check? Obviously, the government feels the latter is the economic stimulus of this country. The fact is, if I deducted (read: stole) 50% of your paycheck, you'd quit, and you wouldn't work here. I mean, why should you? That's nuts. Who wants to be rewarded with only 50% of their hard work? Well, I agree, which is why your jobs are in jeopardy. Here is what many of you don't understand: to stimulate the economy, you need to stimulate what runs the economy. Had the government suddenly mandated that I didn't need to pay taxes, guess what? Instead of depositing that $288,000 into the Washington black hole, I would have spent it, hired more employees, and generated substantial economic growth. My employees would have enjoyed the wealth of that tax cut in the form of promotions and better salaries. But you can forget it now. When you have a comatose man on the verge of death, you don't defibrillate and shock his thumb, thinking that will bring him back to life, do you? Or do you defibrillate his heart? Business is at the heart of America and always has been. To restart it, you must stimulate it, not kill it. Suddenly, the power brokers in Washington believe the masses of America are the essential drivers of the American economic engine. Nothing could be further from the truth, and this is the type of change you can keep.

So where am I going with all this? It's quite simple. If any new taxes are levied on me or my company, my reaction will be swift and simple: I fire you. I fire your co-workers. You can then plead with the government to pay for your mortgage, your SUV, and your child's future. Frankly, it isn't my problem anymore. Then, I will close this company down, move to another country, and retire. You see, I'm done. I'm done with a country that penalizes the productive and gives to the unproductive. My motivation to work and to provide jobs will be destroyed, and with it, my citizenship. While tax cuts to 95% of America sound great on paper, don't forget the backstory: If there is no job, there is no income to tax. A tax cut on zero dollars is zero. So, when you make the decision to vote, ask yourself who understands the economics of business ownership and who doesn't. Whose policies will endanger your jobs? Answer those questions, and you should know who might be the one capable of saving your job. While the media wants to tell you, ""It's the economy, stupid,"" I'm telling you it isn't. If you lose your job, it won't be at the hands of the economy; it will be at the hands of a political hurricane that swept through this country, steamrolled the Constitution, and changed its landscape forever. If that happens, you can find me in the South Caribbean, sitting on a beach, retired, and with no employees to worry about.

Signed, Your Boss",['taxes'],False,"Origins:  In the ramp-up towards the 2008 Presidential election and in its wake, a number of anonymous ""Here's how you, the ones who voted for him, will directly suffer from a Barack Obama presidency"" missives landed in inboxes everywhere. One such was putatively from a hard-working and generous grandfather telling his beloved liberal granddaughter that her support for Obama meant Grandpa was no longer going to be in a position to help her financially. Another was supposedly penned by CEO to his 140 employees informing them that thanks to the new taxes now surely headed his way, he'd have to lay off a few of them, so he was starting with those whose cars sported Obama bumper stickers.""The response to the missive falsely attributed to him prompted Michael Crowley to pen his own letter on the plight of the small business owner, which can be read here.In October 2012, David Siegel, the founder and CEO of Westgate Resorts, sent a modified version of this letter to all of his employees. He based his missive on that much-circulated 2008 piece, saying of his offering: ""I did use the letter that had circulated before as a guideline, but I changed it [to fit my circumstances]. It speaks the truth and it gives [employees] something to think about when they go to the polls."" "
Bernie Sanders: The Life of a Defeated Individual?,['A meme about Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders displayed questionable accuracy and relevance.'],"In February 2016, a meme about the lack of business acumen and experience exhibited by Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, a Democratic presidential candidate, began circulating online. The criticisms offered in the meme were a mixture of true, false, irrelevant, and misleading statements. To wit: Never owned a business. Right off, this meme begins with a rather nebulous criticism. Although having owned a business is an experience many voters would like to see on the résumé of a potential chief executive, a literal application of that term isn't of much relevance. Technically, a person who once operated a roadside lemonade stand has ""owned a business,"" while a person who has spent his career serving as the CEO of a public multinational, multibillion-dollar corporation has not—even though everyone would agree the latter has vastly more business experience than the former. Certainly, a number of highly regarded U.S. presidents in the modern era (e.g., Franklin Roosevelt, Dwight Eisenhower, John Kennedy, Ronald Reagan) never owned their own businesses. Moreover, one might validly say that Sanders started and operated his own business (whether he ""owned"" it is somewhat arguable, as it was a non-profit), the American People's Historical Society, which was created in 1978 to produce educational film strips about the history of Vermont. The University of Vermont has archived several of the brochures produced by the American People's Historical Society, one of which includes a statement from Sanders outlining the purpose of his film strips: Director Bernard Sanders explained, ""It is our belief that state and regional history has too long been neglected by the audio-visual industry, and we are happy to begin the process of rectifying that situation. We believe that students have the right to learn about the state and region in which they are living."" While the financials of the American People's Historical Society are not available, Sanders wrote in his memoir, Outsider in the House, that the business was reasonably successful and ""a lot of fun."" A friend of Sanders told Politico that the film strip business ""wasn't just a way to make money ... He made film strips about people he admired and believed in. He just thought kids should know the truth of how things really were."" Never invented anything. Once again, this is a rather nebulous criticism. The concept of ""inventing"" something could range from simply thinking up a novel idea (but doing nothing more about it) to creating and building a device for personal use (but not marketing it) to actually obtaining a patent for a new product. Bernie Sanders is certainly no inventor and holds no patents, but it's hard to see how that fact is of any relevance, as the same is true of nearly every U.S. president. Thomas Jefferson might legitimately be considered an inventor for having conceptualized various devices (including a macaroni machine, a swivel chair, a spherical sundial, a moldboard plow, and a cipher wheel), although he held no patents because he believed them to be a form of monopoly. Abraham Lincoln was the only U.S. president who ever held a patent, having been issued Patent #6,469 for ""A Device for Buoying Vessels Over Shoals"" on May 22, 1849. Beyond that, ""inventing"" has historically had nothing to do with the qualifications or success of candidates for the White House. Never had a 9 to 5 job. This criticism is too vaguely worded to allow for much cogent analysis. What does holding a ""9 to 5 job"" mean? That one literally works from 9 AM to 5 PM (and not some other period of the day)? That one holds full-time employment? That one is paid on an hourly basis? That one toils at what is commonly referred to as a ""blue-collar"" job? That one works for someone else rather than being self-employed? If we assume the most seemingly relevant application of the term—that it refers to holding steady, full-time employment—then one might fairly say it applies to Bernie Sanders. After receiving a Bachelor of Arts degree in political science from the University of Chicago in 1964, Sanders primarily worked a series of odd jobs while attempting to get his political career off the ground, and a Politico article observed that he ""didn't collect his first steady paycheck until he was an elected official pushing 40 years old."" However, that same article did list a variety of jobs Sanders held (even if they weren't steady or didn't provide a livable wage) before he finally reached public office upon being elected mayor of Burlington, Vermont, at age 39—working as an aide at a psychiatric hospital, as a Head Start preschool teacher, as a carpenter, and as a freelance writer for local publications. Sanders rented a small brick duplex at 295 1/2 Maple Street that was filled with not much furniture and not much food in the fridge but stacks of checked-out library books and scribbled-on legal pads. ""Pretty sparse,"" Gene Bergman, an old friend, said about the apartment. ""Stark and dark,"" said Darcy Troville, a fellow Liberty Unionite who lived around the corner and shared with Sanders homemade jellies and jams. ""The electricity was turned off a lot,"" Barnett said. ""I remember him running an extension cord down to the basement. He couldn't pay his bills."" He worked some as a carpenter, although ""he was a shitty carpenter,"" [Liberty Union party member John] Bloch told me. ""His carpentry,"" [Liberty Union member Danny] Morrisseau said, ""was not going to support him, and didn't."" He worked as a freelance writer, putting intermittent pieces in the low-budget Vermont Freeman, a Burlington alternative weekly called the Vanguard Press, and a glossy, state-supported magazine called Vermont Life. His writing wasn't a living. The Vanguard paid as little as the rest. ""It would've been not more than 50 bucks,"" said Greg Guma, a former editor. Vermont Life? ""Our rate was 10 cents a word,"" said Brian Vachon, a former editor. ""He was always poor,"" Sandy Baird, another old friend, told me in Burlington. ""Virtually unemployed,"" said Nelson, the political science professor at the University of Vermont. ""Just one step above hand to mouth,"" said Terry Bouricius, who was involved with Liberty Union, served at times as a de facto campaign manager for Sanders, and at one point crashed for a couple of months on his couch. Liberty Union ""people found it difficult to support themselves while engaging in full-time political work,"" Michael Parenti, one of those people, wrote in the Massachusetts Review in the summer of 1975. ""Some held jobs that allowed free time for campaign activities, while others lived off unemployment insurance."" ""His work was to be a politician,"" Guma said. ""He put everything into what he was doing."" We would also note that by the standard used here, holding elective office (as Sanders has done for most of the last 35 years as a mayor, a U.S. representative, and a U.S. senator) is as much a ""9 to 5"" job as any other. Never proposed a bill that has passed. This statement is not literally true, as during his tenure in Congress, Sanders has sponsored three bills that were enacted, two of which were rather slight matters involving the naming of USPS facilities, and one of which was the Veterans' Compensation Cost-of-Living Adjustment Act of 2013 (which provided ""for an increase in the rates of compensation for veterans with service-connected disabilities and the rates of dependency and indemnity compensation for the survivors of certain disabled veterans""). Although that might seem like a slight achievement for someone who has spent 25 years as both a U.S. representative and a U.S. senator, we would note that only a scant handful of bills submitted in Congress (about 4 to 6 percent) are ever brought to a vote, and even fewer (about 2 to 4 percent) end up being enacted. We would also note that sponsoring original legislation is but one small part of Congress members' duties: they also co-sponsor legislation submitted by colleagues (which Sanders has done for more than 200 successful bills), muster support (or opposition) among colleagues and the public for proposed legislation, review and vote on proposed bills, serve on various committees (Sanders holds six Senate committee appointments), meet with constituents, and participate in oversight and investigation of governmental affairs. First and foremost, the Member is a decision-maker. Members are faced with hundreds of decisions in both recorded and unrecorded votes on matters major and minor. Many decisions must be made quickly. Each decision, whether spontaneous or studied, balances the conflicting perspectives received from private citizens, public officials, and party leaders. Decisions are often second-guessed by constituents, campaign opponents, colleagues, lobbyists, and media critics. Meetings are continual, in committee rooms, in private offices, in corridors, and in gatherings on the floor. Daily, sacks of mail are delivered. Faxes flow in a steady stream. Electronic mail jams congressional computers. Correspondence must be written and press releases issued. Highly visible issues are debated on the House or Senate floor, fully televised, and the absence or presence of a Member is duly noted. Scandals require investigation. Programs require oversight. Requests for information, both basic and complex, are received daily. Journalists seek comment. Constituents seek assistance obtaining federal grants, government jobs, and help in overcoming bureaucratic obstacles. Over time, these daily tasks and the always-changing expectations of the electorate have come together to establish a multi-faceted job. Lived off welfare before elected to public office. As noted above, various acquaintances who knew Sanders in the years before he achieved public office have reported that he was ""always poor,"" and he likely received public assistance at some point during that time, although what form of (and how much) assistance he received is difficult to determine at this remove. A contemporaneous newspaper account from the Bennington Banner reported that in 1974, when Sanders ran for the U.S. Senate on the Liberty Union Party ticket, he was collecting unemployment benefits: Sanders, 32, cares little what 'image' he conveys—and that's part of his image of being a bit rumpled and unshorn. He's on unemployment compensation right now, having worked for the Bread & Law Task Force, as a freelance writer, and as a carpenter in the Burlington area. But the thing he likes best, and excels at, is 'talking the issues,' and he doesn't mind repeating himself sometimes."" 74-year-old personal net worth of $300,000. As 247 Wall St. reported, determining the precise net worth of candidates is difficult for a number of reasons: net worth reporting exact values is not required. Instead, candidates may disclose their assets and income in a range. Further, candidates do not necessarily report all their assets. For instance, candidates do not need to disclose their personal real estate and property values. Jeb Bush opted to omit assets generated by several holding companies, for example. In addition, while some candidates choose to include their spouses in their disclosures, some do not. Carly Fiorina's net worth of $59 million, for example, includes that of her husband, Frank. Hillary Clinton's reported net worth, on the other hand, does not include assets jointly owned by her and former President Bill Clinton, who is worth by some estimates more than $50 million. 247 Wall St. attempted to determine each presidential candidate's net worth in an article published on August 24, 2015. They estimated that Sanders was one of the ""poorest presidential candidates"" running for office in 2016, with a likely net worth somewhere around $330,000: estimated Bernie Sanders' net worth: $194,026-$741,030. In 2013, Bernie Sanders had an average estimated net worth of $330,507, well below other prospective presidential nominees and among the lowest compared with other members of Congress. As of late 2019, Open Secrets, the website of the Center for Responsive Politics, estimated Sanders' net worth at between $729,000 and $1.8 million, making him neither the richest nor the poorest presidential hopeful in the 2020 field. In any case, the meme's characterization of Sanders as a ""loser"" based on his net worth evinces a rather skewed perspective. Although many people view financial rewards as a tangible measure of one's success, it is far from the only factor by which accomplishment can be measured. (In fact, highly regarded President Harry S. Truman had virtually no net worth even after leaving the White House in 1953 and afterwards was largely dependent upon Congress' finally establishing a pension for former presidents.) Bernie Sanders might equally be considered a ""winner"" for persevering at his goal of achieving a political career long after others might have given up, and for succeeding at that effort despite prolonged financial hardship. Unlike many others, Sanders might also be lauded for maintaining a rather plain life and not having enriched himself in public service (especially since candidates at the other end of the financial spectrum are frequently criticized for being ""out of touch with the common man""). As 247 Wall St. wrote of Sanders: The Vermont senator, who is the longest-serving independent in U.S. history, is a self-identified socialist. He is seeking the Democratic nomination and is the most popular Democratic candidate after Hillary Clinton. In keeping with Sanders' stated intention of starting a grassroots movement, more than 90% of his campaign contributions have come from individual donors. Sanders' campaign speeches have drawn record numbers of attendees. Most recently, 19,000 people watched Sanders speak at an NBA arena in Portland, Oregon, the largest political event compared with all other candidates so far this election season. All in all, that sounds like quite an impressive career achievement for anyone—regardless of net worth.",['insurance'],NEI,"Moreover, one might validly say that Sanders started and operated his own business (whether he ""owned"" it is somewhat arguable, as it was a non-profit), the American People's Historical Society, which was created in 1978 to produce educational film strips about the history of Vermont. The University of Vermont has archived several of the brochures produced by the American People's Historical Society, one of which includes a statement from Sanders outlining the purpose of his film strips:If we assume the most seemingly relevant application of the term  that it refers to holding steady, full-time employment  then one might fairly say it applies to Bernie Sanders. After receiving a Bachelor of Arts degree in political science from the University of Chicago in 1964, Sanders primarily worked a series of odd jobs while attempting to get his political career off the ground, and a Politico article observed that he ""didn't collect his first steady paycheck until he was an elected official pushing 40 years old."" However, that same article did list a variety of jobs Sanders held (even if they weren't steady or didn't provide a livable wage) before he finally reached public office upon being elected mayor of Burlington, Vermont, at age 39  working as an aide at a psychiatric hospital, as a Head Start preschool teacher, as a carpenter, and as a freelance writer for local publications:Although that might seem like slight achievement for someone who has spent 25 years as both a U.S. representative and a U.S. senator, we would note that only a scant handful of bills submitted in Congress (about 4 to 6 percent) are ever brought to a vote, and even fewer (about 2 to 4 percent) end up being enacted. We would also note that sponsoring original legislation is but one small part of Congress members' duties: they also co-sponsor legislation submitted by colleagues (which Sanders has done for more than 200 successful bills), muster support (or opposition) among colleagues and the public for proposed legislation, review and vote on proposed bills, serve on various committees (Sanders holds six Senate committee appointments), meet with constituents, participate in oversight and investigation of governmental affairs, etc., as detailed in ""The Many Roles of a Member of Congress"":As 247 Wall St. reported, determining the precise net worth of candidates is difficult for a number of reasons:247 Wall St. attempted to determine each presidential candidate's net worth in an article published on 24 August 2015. They estimated that Sanders was one of the ""poorest presidential candidates"" running for office in 2016, with a likely net worth somewhere around $330,000:As of late 2019, Open Secrets, the website of the Center for Responsive Politics, estimated Sanders' net worth at between $729,000 and $1.8 million, making him neither the richest nor the poorest presidential hopeful in the 2020 field.In any case, the meme's characterization of Sanders as a ""loser"" based on his net worth evinces a rather skewed perspective. Although many people view financial rewards as a tangible measure of one's success, it is far from the only factor by which accomplishment can be measured. (In fact, highly-regarded President Harry S. Truman had virtually no net worth even after leaving the White House in 1953 and afterwards was largely dependent upon Congress' finally establishing a pension for former presidents.)"
Canadian Richard Brunt Writes Letter About the Mid-Term Elections in America,"[""Canadian Richard Brunt penned an open letter about America's midterm elections.""]"," Claim:  Canadian Richard Brunt penned an open letter about America's midterm elections. On 7 November 2014, shortly after midterm elections in the U.S., the Detroit Free Press published Canadian Richard Brunt's open letter to American voters, a missive that quickly went viral on the Internet: published  A Canadian perspective on the #GOPtakeover. pic.twitter.com/NmBaPjnqju #GOPtakeover pic.twitter.com/NmBaPjnqju  Rick Strandlof (@RickStrandlof) November 9, 2014 November 9, 2014  Brunt wrote in his letter, titled ""You Americans have no idea just how good you have it with Obama,"" that his fellow Canadians were confused about the results of the midterm elections. For Brunt, the Republican gains in those elections did not make sense to him when things were seemingly going so well in the U.S.:  Many of us Canadians are confused by the U.S. midterm elections. Consider, right now in America, corporate profits are at record highs, the country's adding 200,000 jobs per month, unemployment is below 6%, U.S. gross national product growth is the best of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries. The dollar is at its strongest levels in years, the stock market is near record highs, gasoline prices are falling, there's no inflation, interest rates are the lowest in 30 years, U.S. oil imports are declining, U.S. oil production is rapidly increasing, the deficit is rapidly declining, and the wealthy are still making astonishing amounts of money. America is leading the world once again and respected internationally  in sharp contrast to the Bush years. Obama brought soldiers home from Iraq and killed Osama bin Laden. So, Americans vote for the party that got you into the mess that Obama just dug you out of? This defies reason. When you are done with Obama, could you send him our way? Richard Brunt Victoria, British Columbia The letter was soon shared thousands of times on Facebook and Twitter by both Republicans and Democrats, although their reasons for sharing the message were very different:  Hey Richard Brunt, of Victoria, British Columbia... if you want our Obama, you can have our Obama.  Frank Miani (@FJM2425) November 11, 2014 November 11, 2014  Richard Brunt from British Columbia, telling it like it is... pic.twitter.com/OKm0Rkfu5x pic.twitter.com/OKm0Rkfu5x  Baumer Kid (@bostonsboy87) November 11, 2014 November 11, 2014  Richard Brunt's letter represented one man's opinion, but it wasn't the first such expression of admiration from fans of President Obama up north. In a 2009 article titled ""Canada's Love Affair with Barack Obama,"" for example, author Charlie Gillis wrote: Charlie Gillis We love him, with an asterisk. The broad-band smile, the Lincolnesque bearing, the sense of the man as an avatar of multiculturalism  it all makes Barack Obama the perfect U.S. president in the eyes of Canadians. Heaven knows we've been waiting. When the motorcade rolls down Wellington Street, or pulls up to Rideau Hall, you can expect dewy-eyed kids to line barricades with paper flags, no matter how foul the Ottawa weather. Eighty-two per cent of us say we approve of Obama, the polls indicate, and the number requires a moment to digest. Never mind American politicians. Who's the last American we can say that about?   Last updated:  11 November 2014",['stock market'],False,"On 7 November 2014, shortly after midterm elections in the U.S., the Detroit Free Press published Canadian Richard Brunt's open letter to American voters, a missive that quickly went viral on the Internet:A Canadian perspective on the #GOPtakeover. pic.twitter.com/NmBaPjnqju Rick Strandlof (@RickStrandlof) November 9, 2014 Frank Miani (@FJM2425) November 11, 2014Richard Brunt from British Columbia, telling it like it is... pic.twitter.com/OKm0Rkfu5x Baumer Kid (@bostonsboy87) November 11, 2014Richard Brunt's letter represented one man's opinion, but it wasn't the first such expression of admiration from fans of President Obama up north. In a 2009 article titled ""Canada's Love Affair with Barack Obama,"" for example, author Charlie Gillis wrote:"
Says Mitt Romney wants to add $2 trillion to defense budget that the military hasnt asked for.,[],"Republican nominee Mitt Romney has stated that he plans to increase defense spending by about $2 trillion over the next 10 years if he is elected president. In the final debate of the campaign, moderator Bob Schieffer asked Romney, ""Where are you going to get the money?"" Romney responded that he would take it from other parts of the budget—by abolishing Obamacare and by changing Medicaid to a block grant and turning it over to the states. President Barack Obama argued that Romney's plan for increased defense spending is misguided because it is unnecessary. ""Romney wants to spend another $2 trillion on military spending that our military is not asking for,"" Obama said. 

Romney has outlined his national security policy on his website. There, he warned that restoring the military will not be a cost-free process and stated that he will begin by reversing Obama-era defense cuts, with the goal of setting core defense spending—meaning funds devoted to the fundamental military components of personnel, operations and maintenance, procurement, and research and development—at a floor of 4 percent of GDP. 

What is 4 percent worth? The Pentagon's budget is expected to run in the range of 3.2 to 3.5 percent of GDP in the next fiscal year. According to the Center for a New American Security, a group with ties to both Republican and Democratic administrations, even a gradual ramp-up to 4 percent would increase defense spending by $2.1 trillion over the next ten years, as reported by CNN. The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a bipartisan group focused on deficit reduction, uses that number as well, as do other budget think tanks. Romney seems to accept it, so the $2 trillion figure appears reasonably accurate.

In the past, when asked about increasing defense spending in tough economic times, the Romney campaign has emphasized that the 4-percent goal will take some time to achieve. While the campaign website describes the goal as a floor, campaign spokesperson Andrea Saul referred to it as a target in an email to a Boston Globe reporter. ""The first priority,"" Saul wrote, ""is to reverse Obama-era defense cuts."" In the same article, one Romney adviser, Mackenzie Eaglen with the conservative American Enterprise Institute, stated, ""That's not a hard number, and anybody would be crazy to suggest it is. It would have to be a very slow ramp-up, and they would be hard-pressed to even achieve a 4 percent base budget by the end of the first term."" This suggests there is some flexibility on Romney's part, although the candidate himself has not expressed that.

In the debate, Romney said, ""Our Navy is smaller now than at any time since 1917. The Navy said they needed 313 ships to carry out their mission. We're now at under 285."" In fact, the 313-ship plan reflects a 2005 strategic review. In April, the Secretary of the Navy, Ray Mabus, presented a new program that sets a goal of 300 ships. Mabus's remarks came at a moment when Romney had been vocal in his opposition to the new approach. ""A lot of this criticism is based on either incomplete and/or inaccurate or outdated information, or a failure to see beyond the short term or a willingness to protect the status quo in spite of the changing world and in spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary,"" he said. 

The president's budget calls for $487 billion in defense savings between now and 2021. His defense secretary, Leon Panetta, and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Martin Dempsey, have both spoken in support of the plan, as have the heads of all five branches of the military. ""We are developing today the Joint Force the nation will need in 2020,"" Dempsey told the Senate budget committee. ""We will be a military that is able to do more than one thing at a time—to win any conflict, anywhere."" Panetta acknowledged that the budget comes with risks, but he stated that the department's plan was based on first assessing the threats the nation might face. ""The department would need to make a strategic shift regardless of the nation's fiscal situation,"" Panetta told the budget committee. ""We are at that point in history. That's the reality of the world we live in."" 

Administration critics argue that the reality is just the opposite. A report from the conservative Heritage Foundation claimed that the administration set a goal of slashing the defense budget and then crafted a strategy justifying such drastic cuts. The president is the commander-in-chief. Panetta works for Obama, and the military answers to him. To the analysts at the Heritage Foundation, the chain of command says it all. However, in the past, when military commanders have disagreed with presidents, they have found ways to voice their complaints to the public. 

This is not to say that all commanders are pleased with the trade-offs they face. But Nora Bensahel, deputy director of studies at the Center for New American Security, believes the president invested significant time in discussions with the military, and by and large, the commanders support the plan. ""It's hard to see daylight between the military and the White House on this,"" Bensahel said. ""Broadly speaking, it is always possible that the service chiefs would disagree over funding of individual programs, but that is within the overall budget limits."" 

The president stated that Romney planned to increase defense spending by $2 trillion and that this was money the military had not requested. Military leaders have testified in support of the president's spending plan, and we found no evidence of disagreement behind the scenes. We rate the statement True.","['National', 'Debates', 'Military']",True,"Republican nominee Mitt Romney has said he plans to increase defense spending by about $2 trillion over the next 10 years if hes elected president. In the final debate of the campaign, moderator Bob Scheiffer asked Romney, Where are you going to get the money?Romney said he would take it from other parts of the budget -- by abolishing Obamacare and by changing Medicaid to a block grant and turning it over to the states.President Barack Obama said Romneys plan for more defense spending is a bad idea, because it isnt necessary. Romney wants to spend another $2 trillion on military spending that our military is not asking for, Obama said.In this fact-check, we examine the claim that Romney is promoting something the top brass dont want.Romney has outlined out hisnational security policyon his website. There, he warned that restoring the military will not be a cost-free process, and said he will begin by reversing Obama-era defense cuts ... with the goal of setting core defense spending  meaning funds devoted to the fundamental military components of personnel, operations and maintenance, procurement, and research and development  at a floor of 4 percent of GDP.Whats 4 percent worth?The Pentagons budget is expected to run in the range of 3.2 to 3.5 percent of GDP in the next fiscal year. According to theCenter for a New American Security, a group with ties to both Republican and Democratic administrations, even a gradual ramp up to 4 percent would increase defense spending by $2.1 trillion over the next ten years, asreported by CNN.The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a bipartisan group focused on deficit reduction, uses that number too, as do other budget think tanks. Romney seems to accept it, so as far as the $2 trillion figure goes, it seems reasonably accurate.In the past, when asked about increasing defense spending in tough economic times, the Romney campaign has emphasized that the 4-percent goal will take some time to achieve.While the campaign website describes the goal as a floor, campaign spokesperson Andrea Saul called it a target in an email to aBoston Globereporter. The first priority, Saul wrote, is to reverse Obama-era defense cuts.In the same article, one Romney adviser, Mackenzie Eaglen with the conservative American Enterprise Institute, said, Thats not a hard number and anybody would be crazy to suggest it is. It would have to be a very slow ramp-up and they would be hard-pressed to even achieve a 4 percent base budget by the end of the first term.This suggests there is some flexibility on Romneys part, although the candidate himself has not expressed that.What the Pentagon is asking forIn the debate, Romney said, Our Navy is smaller now than at any time since 1917. The Navy said they needed 313 ships to carry out their mission. We're now at under 285.In fact, the 313-ship plan reflects a 2005 strategic review. In April, theSecretary of the Navy, Ray Mabus, presented a new program that sets a goal of 300 ships. Mabuss remarks came at a moment when Romney had been vocal in his opposition to the new approach.A lot of this criticism is based on either incomplete and/or inaccurate or outdated information, or a failure to see beyond the short term or a willingness to protect the status quo in spite of the changing world and in spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, he said.The presidents budget calls for $487 billion in defense savings between now and 2021. His defense secretary, Leon Panetta, and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Martin Dempsey, have both spoken up for the plan, as have the heads of all five branches of the military.We are developing today the Joint Force the nation will need in 2020,Dempsey told the Senatebudget committee. We will be a military that is able to do more than one thing at a timeto win any conflict, anywhere.Panetta acknowledged that the budget comes with risks but he said the departments plan was based on looking first at the threats the nation might face.The department would need to make a strategic shift regardless of the nation's fiscal situation.,Panetta told the budget committee. We are at that point in history. That's the reality of the world we live in.Administration critics say the reality was just the reverse. A report from the conservative Heritage Foundation said, the administration set a goal of slashing the defense budget, and then crafted a strategy justifying such draconian cuts.The president is the commander-in-chief. Panetta works for Obama and the military answers to him. To the analysts at the Heritage Foundation, the chain of command says it all. But in the past, when military commanders have disagreed with presidents, they have found ways to get their complaints to the public.This is not to say that all commanders are pleased with the trade-offs they face. But Nora Bensahel, deputy director of studies at the Center for New American Security, said she believes the president put a great deal of time into discussions with the military, and by and large, the commanders support the plan.Its hard to see daylight between the military and the White House on this, Bensahel said.Broadly speaking, it is always possible that the service chiefs would disagree over funding of individual programs but that is within the overall budget limits.Our rulingThe president said Romney planned to increase defense spending by $2 trillion and that was money the military hadnt asked for.Military leaders have testified in support of the presidents spending plan, and we found no evidence of disagreement behind the scenes.We rate the statement True."
Murder of Jamie Bulger,['An outdated petition decries the true and horrific death of Jamie Bulger at the hands of Jon Venables and Robert Thompson.'],"On February 12, 1993, two-year-old James Bulger was brutally murdered by ten-year-olds Jonathan (Jon) Venables and Robert (Bobbie) Thompson in Liverpool, England. For example, a small boy who was to turn three in March was taken from a shopping mall in Liverpool by two ten-year-old boys. Jamie Bulger walked away from his mother for only a second, and Jon Venables took his hand and led him out of the mall with his friend Robert Thompson. They took Jamie on a walk for over two and a half miles, stopping every now and then to torture the poor little boy, who was constantly crying for his mommy. Finally, they stopped at a railway track, where they brutally kicked him, threw stones at him, rubbed paint in his eyes, and pushed batteries up his anus. They then left his beaten body on the tracks so a train could run him over to hide the mess they had created. These two boys, despite being young, understood that what they did was wrong, as evidenced by their attempts to make it look like an accident. This week, Lady Justice Butler-Sloss awarded the two boys anonymity for the rest of their lives when they leave custody with new identities. We cannot let this happen. They will also leave early this year, having served just over half of their sentence. One paper even stated that Robert may go on to university. They are getting away with their crime. They need to pay, and we have to do something to ensure they are held accountable for their horrific actions. They took Jamie's life violently, and in return, they get a new life. Please add your name and location to the list and forward it to friends and family. Please copy this email instead of forwarding it so we do not get > at the beginning of sentences. If you are the 200th person to sign, please forward this email to st.ser.cs@gtnet.gov.uk, addressing it to Lady Justice Butler-Sloss. Then start the list over again and send it to your friends and family. The Love-Bug virus took less than 72 hours to reach the world. I hope this does too. We need to protect our family and friends from individuals like Robert and Jon. One day, they may be living next to you and your small children without your knowledge. If Robert and Jon could be so evil at ten, imagine what they could do as adults. With only one exception (the batteries in the victim's anus; they went into his mouth), the details of the crime as outlined in the email are accurate. The boy was taken from a shopping mall while there with his mother. A video surveillance camera captured footage of the two killers leading James away. The child was brutalized as he was forced to walk along with the boys. Witnesses later reported seeing the boys dragging, pushing, and carrying the weeping two-year-old during a disjointed journey through the streets of Liverpool. They did kill him in the manner described, albeit more brutally than even the text of the e-petition suggests. Two days after the murder, James' remains were found on a lonely stretch of railroad track. He was naked from the waist down; his shoes, socks, trousers, and underpants had been removed. His penis had been manipulated by his abductors, but he had not been anally penetrated. He had been beaten to death with rocks, bricks, and an iron bar. As the boys hammered at him, they splattered him with model airplane paint stolen days earlier. Once he was dead, his killers laid him on the tracks, and his body was cut in two by a passing train. The killers hoped to hide their crime by having it mistaken for an accidental death of a young child who had foolishly played on the tracks. Venables and Thompson were taken into custody a few days later. Each sought to blame the other for the killing, but both eventually confessed. They were tried, found guilty of murder, sentenced, and placed in separate detention homes. The killers have not seen each other since the trial. All this is true and horrifying. Yet even so, there's no point in signing the petition or urging others to do so. Beyond all the usual problems with e-petitions, one issue specific to this case undermines the utility of such a plan: the situation being decried is already a done deal. On January 8, 2001, the High Court of England guaranteed both Venables and Thompson lifelong anonymity, plus an unprecedented open-ended injunction barring any publicity about them. Each of these young men was released in June 2001 when they turned 18. The email states that the two killers ""will also leave early this year, only serving just over half of their sentence."" That statement is false. Although there is no theoretical maximum length of sentence imposed, a minimum sentence of eight years had been set, and that minimum was satisfied. The boys were detained ""at Her Majesty's pleasure"" (without a maximum fixed term). Her Majesty's Pleasure (HMP) sentences are imposed only in cases of murder and manslaughter committed by children under 18. In these cases, the judge sets a tariff (minimum term, defined as the period required for retribution and deterrence). Once the tariff has been satisfied, the prisoner is assessed based on the likely risk he will pose to the outside community. Therefore, a killer sentenced to such a term is eligible for release once the tariff has been served, provided he does not impress the court as posing a danger to society. The judge at Venables' and Thompson's November 1993 trial set an eight-year tariff. In early 1994, Lord Taylor, then Lord Chief Justice, recommended increasing this minimum to ten years. Michael Howard, Home Secretary, imposed a 15-year sentence on Venables and Thompson in July 1994, but his actions were ruled unlawful by the High Court and the Court of Appeals in 1996 and struck down. Lord Woolf, the current Lord Chief Justice, ruled in 2000 that the killers' tariff was eight years, a term that was reached on February 21, 2001. Venables' and Thompson's sentences were thus eight years each, and they have been served. Had the sentences unlawfully imposed by Michael Howard been upheld, then the e-petition's claim about the killers only having served ""half their sentences"" would be relevant. The anonymity guarantee and publication ban were set in place by Dame Elizabeth Butler-Sloss, president of the High Court's Family Division. She was convinced the pair would be genuinely at risk if their identities and locations were disclosed, hence her ruling. ""Although the crime of these two young men was especially heinous, they have the right of all citizens to the protection of the law."" She said people other than James Bulger's family ""continue to feel such hatred and revulsion at the shocking crime and a desire for revenge that some at least of them might well engage in vigilante or revenge attacks."" She may well have been right, especially in light of threats received. Dame Butler-Sloss banned the media from publishing any information leading to the identification or disclosure of the whereabouts of Venables or Thompson, including photographs and descriptions of their appearance. She also banned, for 12 months, publication of information about their eight-year stay in local authority secure units. Even after that, confidential information relating to their treatment and therapy cannot be published. The judge admitted she was aware the injunctions she imposed might not be fully effective outside England and Wales. She banned the domestic media from giving wider circulation to material from the Internet or media elsewhere if it was likely to breach the injunction. Was it right for Venables and Thompson to be protected from the public? Some said yes, arguing that otherwise they'd have been torn limb from limb (and that would render society no better than those it would prosecute for such crimes), or that children (which the defendants were at the time of the Bulger murder) should not be held accountable for a crime—even a heinous one—in the same manner that we hold adults. Others said no, asserting that the public had a right to know where potentially dangerous felons are, and some on that side of the fence claimed that there are some crimes which cannot fully be expiated by time served. Jon Venables' reprieve from incarceration proved to be temporary when he violated the terms of his release by downloading and distributing indecent images of children and was returned to jail in March 2010. In July 2013, the U.K. parole board confirmed that Venables had been granted parole for a second time, although that body declined to provide details about when he would be released. In June 2006, the following related item began circulating: Hello friends, I am just so angry, frustrated, and really upset at what has happened at the Livingston Shopping Centre that I needed to let you all know the ""truth"" behind the mongrel murderer. About three years ago, when I was working at the prison, we found out that one of the boys (at the time aged about 12) who abducted James Bulger from a shopping centre in the U.K., then brutally raped and murdered him, had reached the age of 18 and had been sent out to Australia with a new identity for his family, etc. Long story short, he was given the name of Dante Arthurs; his grandfather's name is Arthur Dante, and his family moved into a house in Canning Vale. When the prison staff got wind of this, it was all supposed to be kept hushed up; it was some sort of prisoner exchange deal the Australian Government set up. Soon after he got here, he assaulted a 12-year-old girl in a park in Canning Vale and consequently came to Hakea prison, but for only about six weeks, as they couldn't get enough evidence on him, and the incident was brushed under the mat. His parents used to visit him, and their photos were on the computers at work, and I clearly recall seeing his mum at the Livingston shops one day. I even had his address, and because I've got friends and family in the area, I felt I had a right to tell them—stuff the prisons! I had even driven past his house in Lakeview Rise estate in Canning Vale! Anyway, when this happened yesterday, I said to Ron, it'd be interesting to see if it's that Dante Arthurs guy from the U.K., and sure enough, today we find out that it is him. I am, along with a lot of others, absolutely furious that the mongrel arsehole was allowed to come here via the Government in the first place and that he was allowed to appear to live a normal life! Why haven't the police done something about this? He should not be allowed to breathe air; he is the scum of the earth. And tonight he would be sitting back in a comfortable cell in prison, having just had a reasonable hot dinner and be watching TV! That innocent little girl and her poor family will never ever be the same again—all because the weak Justice System and Government allowed him to live in our country! There is a register for paedophiles so that the community is allowed to know where they're living, and yet this piece of shit can live on our doorstep with a new identity. People whinge about illegal immigrants; what about this? It will be interesting to see what unfolds over the next few days, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if he's whisked out of the country in the same manner he was brought here. Then again, knowing our pathetic laws, we'll probably keep him here in our justice system, costing taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars to feed and entertain him, PLUS the do-gooders will believe in their minds that they can rehabilitate him! I was just going to type ""sorry,"" but I'm not at all sorry for alerting my friends to something that should be publicly known. Stay safe, talk soon. This message refers to the rape and murder of eight-year-old Sofia Rodriguez-Urrutia-Shu in a suburban shopping center restroom in Canning Vale, Australia, on June 26, 2006. A 21-year-old man named Dante Wyndham Arthurs was arrested and charged in connection with that case, and the message reproduced above claims Arthurs was also one of Jamie Bulger's killers, renamed and relocated to Australia after having served out his sentence as a juvenile in England (even though both of the principals in the Bulger murder were then at least 23 years old). The British High Commission and Australian police have denied any link between the Sofia Rodriguez-Urrutia-Shu and Jamie Bulger killings. The British High Commission has ruled out claims that a man charged over the rape and murder of a Perth schoolgirl was one of two notorious English child killers. Perth police also denied that Dante Wyndham Arthurs, 21, of the Perth suburb of Canning Vale, was one of the killers of British boy James Bulger. Clive Hunton, of the British High Commission in Canberra, said there was ""no connection between the man arrested in Western Australia and the individuals involved in the James Bulger case."" Arthurs was remanded in custody after appearing in Perth Magistrates Court charged with wilful murder, sexual penetration of a child, and deprivation of liberty. He was charged following the discovery of the body of Sofia Rodriguez-Urrutia-Shu on the floor of a shopping centre toilet. The fact that Dante Arthurs was born in Australia (and was not an English immigrant using an assumed identity) has been confirmed by both his birth notice and the doctor who delivered him. Also, his fingerprints do not match those of Jonathan (Jon) Venables or Robert (Bobbie) Thompson, the murderers of James Bulger. The emailed rumor quoted above was presented as if it were written by a prison officer. According to the West Australian, that message is being investigated by Australian authorities: The Department of Corrective Services has confirmed that an investigation was underway into an email claiming to be from a prison officer, which was sent to thousands of people across Australia. ""The email appears to have come from outside the department,"" a spokeswoman said. Nonetheless, rumors persisted that Robert Thompson and Jon Venables were relocated to Australia, and in May 2008, Australian MP Liz Cunningham raised the issue of investigating whether the pair had been accepted by Queensland authorities. In March 2010, the BBC reported that Jon Venables (then age 27) was back in prison after having breached the terms of his release. Image caption: Denise Fergus, the mother of murdered two-year-old James Bulger, attends a press conference to launch an appeal to raise funds for bullied children on March 14, 2008, in Liverpool, England. The Red Balloon Learner Centre bearing James Bulger's name will be a sanctuary for bullied children.",['funds'],NEI,"This message refers to the rape and murder of 8-year-old Sofia Rodrigez-Urrutia-Shu in a suburban shopping center restroom in Canning Vale, Australia, on 26 June 2006.  A 21-year-old man named Dante Wyndham Arthurs was arrested and charged in connection with that case, and the message reproduced above claims Arthurs was also one of Jamie Bulger's killers, renamed and relocated to Australia after having served out his sentence as a juvenile in England (even though both of the principals in the Bulger murder were then at least 23 years old).  The British High Commission and Australian police have denied any link between the Sofia Rodrigez-Urrutia-Shu and Jamie Bulger killings:"
"Research performed by economists has shown no consistent, positive impact on jobs, income or tax revenues arising from stadiums or sports franchises.",[],"Debate has begun over a proposal by the new owners of the Pawtucket Red Sox to move the team to Providence, where they want to build a new riverfront stadium. The project is still in the planning phase, but the owners have said they intend to ask for some financial support from the state and the city, including possibly getting the state-owned land for the stadium for free. But would a new stadium be worth the price tag? Rhode Islands Republican National Committeeman Steve Frias says no. Ina Feb. 24, 2015 commentaryin The Providence Journal, he said giving away the valuable land, which was freed up by the relocation of Route 195, would be a mistake. Research performed by economists has shown no consistent, positive impact on jobs, income or tax revenues arising from stadiums or sports franchises, Frias argued. We thought that claim was worth checking out. When we contacted him, he immediately referred us toa 2008 summary of research in the fieldby economistsDennis Coatesof the University of Maryland, Baltimore County, andBrad Humphreysof West Virginia University. The authors reviewed more than 40 academic studies, spanning nearly two decades, that examined public subsidies for professional sports teams. Their findings were clear. There now exists almost 20 years of research on the economic impact of professional sports franchises and facilities on the local economy, they wrote, reporting that studies published in peer-reviewed economic journals show there is almost no evidence that professional sports franchises and facilities have a measurable economic impact on the economy. And that's for major-league teams. In this case, we're talking about a minor league team, said Humphreys when we contacted him by phone. For example, he and Coates found no difference in economic impact between the years when teams were playing their regular schedules and five time periods when they didn't, due to strikes. And in a subsequent analysis, they found that having postseason games did not affect real per-person income in a city. Money may shift from one part of the economy to another, but there's no net benefit. The evidence is overwhelming,Coates and Humphreys wrote. Economists reach the nearly unanimous conclusion that tangible economic benefits generated by professional sports facilities and franchises are very small; clearly far smaller than stadium advocates suggest and smaller than the size of the subsidies. They also noted that in 2005, when a random group of economists was asked if they agreed or disagreed with the statement, Local and state governments in the U.S. should eliminate subsidies to professional sports franchises, 28 percent agreed and 58 percent strongly agreed. That's a whopping 86 percent. Only 5 percent disagreed. There are special-interest reports that claim an economic benefit and contend that every dollar invested in a sports franchise generates a specific amount of money, Humphreys said, but those are never published in reputable journals because you can make them say whatever you want them to say by tinkering with the assumptions that influence how the numbers are crunched. We posed the question to other experts, including Rick Eckstein, professor of sociology at Villanova University and author of Public Dollars, Private Stadiums: The Battle over Building Sports Stadiums. There are absolutely no publicly subsidized stadiums and arenas that generate enough direct or indirect tax increases to balance the initial (and ongoing) public outlay, he said in an email. In fact, some research suggests that sports stadiums actually decrease economic activity and tax revenue in areas where they are built, said Eckstein. However, strategically placed stadiums and arenas can sometimes ride existing redevelopment trends, but they are never the cause of these trends. Coates and Humphreys said there are several reasons to explain a lack of economic benefit. In many cases -- and this would be particularly true in Rhode Island -- the state would simply be transferring the economic activity from one city to another. And even if more people went to see the Sox in a new stadium, when people spend to go to a ballgame, local entertainment spending on sports increases and local entertainment spending on other activities like movies, bowling, etc. decreases. There are other costs people need to weigh, they wrote. For every individual who derives enjoyment from the presence of the sports franchises in the community, there are likely to be other individuals who are uninterested in sports or even resent being taxed to subsidize an activity they have no use for. And the money used to subsidize a move might be better spent for other public projects with higher social rates of return than a stadium such as construction and maintenance projects, or even reducing taxes. Supporters of public support for professional sports teams often point to intangible benefits, such as boosting civic pride. But that argument is beyond the scope of this item. So here's the box score. Steven Frias said, Research performed by economists has shown no consistent, positive impact on jobs, income or tax revenues arising from stadiums or sports franchises. It appears that he belted this one out of the park. We rate his claimTrue. (If you have a claim youd likePolitiFact Rhode Islandto check, email us at[email protected]. And follow us on Twitter: @politifactri.)","['Rhode Island', 'Baseball', 'Economy', 'Recreation', 'Sports']",True,"Rhode Islands Republican National Committeeman Steve Frias says no. Ina Feb. 24, 2015 commentaryin The Providence Journal, he said giving away the valuable land, which was freed up by the relocation of Route 195, would be a mistake.When we contacted him, he immediately referred us toa 2008 summary of research in the fieldby economistsDennis Coatesof the University of Maryland, Baltimore County, andBrad Humphreysof West Virginia University.We rate his claimTrue.(If you have a claim youd likePolitiFact Rhode Islandto check, email us at[email protected]. And follow us on Twitter: @politifactri.)"
Hillary Clinton Used Hand Signals to Rig Debate?,['Conspiracy theory holds that Hillary Clinton and moderator Lester Holt rigged the first presidential debate by communicating via hand signals.'],"Just when we thought we'd had our fill of debate-related conspiracies, a new one came along, this one in the form of a video purportedly documenting that Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton and moderator Lester Holt had colluded to rig the first presidential debate through a system of secret hand signals: Scratching ones face is one of the oldest signals in the book. You can be sure if this was a blackjack table and the house noticed a player making similar signals to a dealer theyd be investigated.  When the alt-right web site True Pundit shared the video, they did so along with the additional claim that Clinton had never made similar gestures in previous debates, campaign appearances, or speeches: Before critics view this video and scream Conspiracy, True Pundit cross referenced Clintons speeches, campaign appearances and her 2008 debate performances against President Obama. According to that analysis, Clinton never previously used these hand motions to supposedly scratch her face. In fact, she rarely touches her face at all. (So, you haters can save the trouble of instructing people to remove their tin-foil hats.) The above-displayed video does not provide any evidence that Hillary Clinton and Lester Holt communicated via hand signals so that Clinton could indicate to Holt when she wanted him to call on her so she could get in a ""zinger."" The creator of the video simply strung together several unrelated events  Clinton scratching her face, Holt making a comment, Clinton replying to Trump  and then claimed that they were somehow connected to a furtive signaling plot without providing any proof. But before we dig deeper into the video, let's look at the accompanying claims about it from True Pundit and Infowars. Hillary Clinton has been in the public eye for decades. She was the First Lady of Arkansas in 1983, the First Lady of the United States in 1993, a U.S. Senator in 2001, a presidential candidate in 2008, Secretary of State in 2009, and and a presidential candidate again in 2016. It is simply ridiculous to claim that Clinton never once touched her face during a speech, campaign rally, or debate:  Clinton touched her face during speech   It should be noted that Hillary Clinton was not the only one making these gestures during the first presidential debate:   It should also be noted that (as shown in the image at the head of this page) the two candidates were physically separated on the stage, and therefore in order to catch the supposed ""signals"" from Hillary Clinton, moderator Lester Holt  who didn't have the advantage of the split-screen shot presented to television viewers  would had to have been rather obviously watching her even when she was not speaking. If Donald Trump truly ""dominated the early part of the debate"" but then lost his advantage, the more logical explanation is that his opponent's strategy to throw him off his game simply worked as expected: strategy The quiet Mr. Trump took the first shift, presenting a general-election version of his forceful campaign persona minus the bluster, insults and defenses of his anatomy. He pushed his case firmly, hitting his campaigns focal points on the economy and trade. defenses of his anatomy But it didnt take long for Mrs. Clinton to find the other Mr. Trump under that thin second skin. Her needling began immediately. She referred to her opponent as Donald, where he pointedly called her Secretary Clinton. (Yes, is that O.K.? he asked at his first reference to her.) She referred to his starting a business with a $14 million loan from his father, which Mr. Trump preferred to call a very small loan. The digs targeted Mr. Trumps status and founding mythos, triggering his image-protection reflex. He became combative and rattled, letting his opponent lead him down rhetorical detours (at one point he revived an old feud with Rosie ODonnell) knowing that he would follow his ingrained ABCs: always be counterpunching. It was Tony Soprano vs. Dr. Melfi, TVs biggest antihero blustering against the woman who had gotten inside his head. This conspiracy theory also doesn't account for the much more obvious approach that if Hillary Clinton really wanted to say something during the course of the debate when it wasn't her turn to speak, she could simply have interrupted her opponent rather than invoking secret hand signals and waiting to be called upon by the moderator  as she did in fact do multiple times ... while Donald Trump also did so, but three times as often. three times",['economy'],False,"Hillary Clinton has been in the public eye for decades. She was the First Lady of Arkansas in 1983, the First Lady of the United States in 1993, a U.S. Senator in 2001, a presidential candidate in 2008, Secretary of State in 2009, and and a presidential candidate again in 2016. It is simply ridiculous to claim that Clinton never once touched her face during a speech, campaign rally, or debate: If Donald Trump truly ""dominated the early part of the debate"" but then lost his advantage, the more logical explanation is that his opponent's strategy to throw him off his game simply worked as expected:The quiet Mr. Trump took the first shift, presenting a general-election version of his forceful campaign persona minus the bluster, insults and defenses of his anatomy. He pushed his case firmly, hitting his campaigns focal points on the economy and trade.This conspiracy theory also doesn't account for the much more obvious approach that if Hillary Clinton really wanted to say something during the course of the debate when it wasn't her turn to speak, she could simply have interrupted her opponent rather than invoking secret hand signals and waiting to be called upon by the moderator  as she did in fact do multiple times ... while Donald Trump also did so, but three times as often."
(Retail) milk has gone up 7.5% since this time last year. The price farmers are paid has dropped 23%.,"['This post oversimplifies the system a bit, since only about 30% of milk produced in the U.S. is sold in liquid form., But the numbers cited here are close to the latest national data., Payments to farmers have dropped because those are determined through a complex system that incorporates geography, commodity prices and how the milk is used., And retail milk prices have steadily risen since the start of 2019.']","The coronavirus pandemic has been especially unkind to the already staggering dairy industry. Plunging demand from restaurants and schools and an inability to quickly shift processing to meet new categories of demand has left farmers dumping milk on a massive scale. But at least milk prices are going up, right? Thats not exactly a help, one dairy farmer said in a widely-shared Facebook post. The price consumers pay at retail for a gallon of milk has gone up 7.5% since this time last year, Pennsylvania farmer Greg Hemsarth said in aMay 2, 2020, postthat was shared more than 3,500 times. The price farmers are paid has dropped 23%. Figure that one out. This post was flagged as part of Facebooks efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about ourpartnership with Facebook). Are farmers really getting paid less even as retail milk prices go up? Lets dive into the data behind this dairy dichotomy. For starters, connecting any pair of dots to explain milk pricing is tricky. This post referenced liquid milk prices, but only 30% of the milk produced in the U.S. is actually sold in liquid form, said Michael Nepveux, an economist with the American Farm Bureau Federation. While we may see fluid milk flying off grocery shelves and wonder why farmers are having to dump milk, it must be remembered that many of these other products rely heavily on the foodservice and restaurant sector, he said. And farmers pricing is part of a system that is complex to say the least. RELATED:Are bottling limitations on liquid milk to blame for milk dumping? Nepveux spent nearly 2,000 words and a handful of charts detailing how pricing works ina primer the Farm Bureauposted in June 2019. It started this way: Theres an old adage in the dairy industry that only five people in the world know how milk is priced in the U.S.  and four of them are dead. Milk payments to farmers are influenced by commodity prices, geography and whether the milk is being used for liquid sales, yogurt, cheese, butter, etc. We started with Hemsarth himself. Though the numbers in the post are stated generally, he told PolitiFact Wisconsin he was actually referring only to his own observations. Hemsarth was comparing the price of milk at a grocer in Bloomsburg, Penn., to a picture he took of the milk case a year prior. And he was looking at payments he received for milk he sold compared to a year ago. Given the generic wording and wide sharing of this post, most readers likely assumed it referenced some broader dataset, at either the state or national level. So lets check those datapoints. National data shows the trend Hemsarth highlighted isnt confined to his corner of the world. Prices paid to farmers have dropped even as retail prices rose. The retail price for a gallon of milk averaged $3.27 in April, according to thelatest datafrom the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Thats up 9.6% from the April 2019 mark ($2.98). Data provided by Dairy Management Inc., a group funded by farmers to help increase sales of dairy products, shows a nearly identical comparison. They reported a national average of $3.11 as of mid-April, compared to $2.83 a year prior. Thats an increase of 9.9%. A state-level breakdown showed a year-over-year increase in all but one state. The largest jump was in Ohio  more than 28%. Pennsylvania prices increased 9.5%, and Wisconsin was up 8.7%. So, on that part of the equation, the post was in the ballpark  actually understating the magnitude of the retail increase nationally. On the farm payment side, Hemsarth reported a milk payment drop of 23%. The Farm Bureau, using U.S. Department of Agriculture data, reported a 21.1% drop in the price paid to farmers in May 2020 compared to May 2019. Nepveux said that is based on Class 1 fluid milk, the highest valued class of milk. A month earlier, in April, farmers were seeing payments 5.6% higher than the year prior. May is the first month where 2020 was lower than that month in 2019, though prices have fallen each month since December. May milk prices dropped because the formula relies heavily on commodity prices, and those dropped sharply in April, Nepveux said. A viral Facebook post said retail milk prices are up 7.5% from last year while the price paid to farmers dropped 23%. The farmer who provided these numbers was just referencing payments for the milk he sold and prices at a local grocer, but the trends are in line with what we see nationally. Nationwide, retail milk prices in April were up nearly 10% from the prior year, while the price paid to farmers dropped sharply in May to about 21% below the prior year. The comparison oversimplifies things a bit, since the majority of milk produced in the U.S. isnt sold in liquid form. And the specific numbers arent exactly right. But the general point is. We rate this Mostly True.","['Economy', 'Wisconsin']",True,"The price consumers pay at retail for a gallon of milk has gone up 7.5% since this time last year, Pennsylvania farmer Greg Hemsarth said in aMay 2, 2020, postthat was shared more than 3,500 times. The price farmers are paid has dropped 23%. Figure that one out.This post was flagged as part of Facebooks efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about ourpartnership with Facebook).RELATED:Are bottling limitations on liquid milk to blame for milk dumping?Nepveux spent nearly 2,000 words and a handful of charts detailing how pricing works ina primer the Farm Bureauposted in June 2019. It started this way: Theres an old adage in the dairy industry that only five people in the world know how milk is priced in the U.S.  and four of them are dead.The retail price for a gallon of milk averaged $3.27 in April, according to thelatest datafrom the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Thats up 9.6% from the April 2019 mark ($2.98)."
Mistaken Dog,['A hilarious tale about a badly behaved dog.'],"A badly behaved dog wreaks havoc while two fellows stand by silently, each thinking it's the other guy's pooch. A woman is invited to visit the home of a woman who is wealthier than she is. From the moment she receives the invitation, the caller is unsure about how to behave—how to sit, how to take tea, etc. Matters are made worse when the time of the visit arrives. A large, lively, dirty beast of a dog is sitting in the front yard, and when the hostess welcomes the caller into the house, the dog follows her inside. While the caller tries to respect social amenities, that darn dog does not. It tracks mud around the room, sniffs the cookies, and paws the furniture. The caller makes small talk, but the conversation becomes strained. Still, both parties keep a stiff upper lip, observing proper etiquette. Finally, the visit comes to an end. As the caller rises to leave, the hostess, with one eye on the wreckage, remarks icily, ""And don't forget to take your dog!"" ""My dog?"" the caller says. ""I thought it was yours!"" In January 1946, Bigelow came down to Princeton for an interview with Von Neumann. He was a couple of hours late. Julian Bigelow got out of the car and walked up to the house. ""Von Neumann lived in this elegant lodge house on Westcott Road in Princeton,"" Bigelow says. ""As I parked my car and walked in, there was this very large Great Dane bouncing around on the front lawn. I knocked on the door, and Von Neumann, who was a small, quiet, modest kind of man, came to the door, bowed to me, and said, 'Bigelow, won't you come in,' and so forth, and this dog brushed between our legs and went into the living room. He proceeded to lie down on the rug in front of everybody, and we had the entire interview—whether I would come, what I knew, what the job was going to be like—and this lasted maybe forty minutes, with the dog wandering all around the house. Towards the end of it, Von Neumann asked me if I always traveled with the dog. But of course, it wasn't my dog, and it wasn't his either, but Von Neumann—being a diplomatic, middle-European type person—kindly avoided mentioning it until the end."" In passing, I must mention a funny situation in which I became involved while visiting Field Marshal Lord Alexander and his wife at their home near London. I drove there to have lunch with them, and as I emerged from my car, a huge dog appeared in the driveway. Dogs always made a dead set for me, and I wasn't worried when it began jumping around and wagging its tail. However, I did feel some concern when it followed me to the doorway and walked in as if it owned the house. A family pet, I felt sure, as it settled down in a corner of the living room while Lord and Lady Alexander greeted me warmly. At lunch, the dog settled down at my feet, and the begging for food began. Lady Alexander's attention became riveted upon me: ""Mr. Mahoney,"" she said charmingly, ""I wish you would send your dog outside."" It was only then that it dawned on me that they thought the stray dog was mine! Though this story has often been told as an actual event in an important person's life, its first appearance came in a 1924 Lucy Maud Montgomery book, Emily Climbs. In Chapter 12, Emily's call on socially superior Miss Janet Royal is interrupted by the antics of a very large muddy dog that follows her into the elegant parlor, where it proceeds to act up. According to the legend, only after the beast has made a shambles of things and Emily is about to leave does the subject of the dog's ownership arise, each girl thinking up until that time that the horrid thing belonged to the other. From those early beginnings, the ""Not my dog"" anecdote has gone on to reach a succession of new audiences, as new storytellers emerge and claim it as their own. Burt Reynolds is rumored to have told this story (starring himself as the embarrassed visitor) to Johnny Carson on The Tonight Show in the 1980s. A common element in this story is the unequal status between the visitor and the visited. The one who comes calling feels inferior for reasons relating to social standing, comparative wealth, or the celebrated householder's achievements. Whatever the cause, he comes hat in hand, filled with a determination to make a good impression—a certain recipe for social disaster! The story is one of horrific embarrassment; the faux pas is perceived as being that much more flamboyant because it plays out before someone looked up to. That matters are straightened out before the visit ends by the caller blurting out, ""My dog? I thought he was yours!"" doesn't change the momentary flash of mortification experienced or the knowledge that the sought-after host had sat there for quite a while thinking decidedly evil thoughts about his guest. The story also pokes fun at the strictures of etiquette. Neither host nor guest feels it would be proper to comment negatively on the dog's behavior, so both endure the worsening state of affairs in stoic silence. The legend underscores common misperceptions about etiquette, suggesting that the rules of polite behavior are often impractical and that adherence to them results in ridiculous situations that a more direct approach would have avoided. Those who resent the genteelly voiced demands of Miss Manners and long for less structured, more direct forms of social interaction get to savor a moment of self-congratulation through this story because it proves right what they've been saying all along. As old as this story is (1924, remember?), it continues to pop up and even sometimes changes in dramatic ways. We picked up the following non-canine version of the tale during our Internet travels, again proving that no story can't stand a little improving: The story goes along the lines of a young Indo-Asian couple who, after a non-arranged marriage, decide to get a house together. A few weeks after they move in, the husband returns from work to find an older woman in the living room of the house. Knowing they have broken with tradition by having a non-arranged marriage, the husband greets his mother-in-law, only to receive a hard silent stare. She is evidently not happy about their recent union. That evening, the old woman joins the couple at the dinner table and continues to join them for every meal for the next month, never uttering a word. Eventually, the once-close couple becomes hostile to one another, unhappy that 'Mother' has been allowed to move in with them. They stop talking and avoid one another. A few days later, the situation escalates into an argument about the old woman. The creepy truth is revealed as the wife exclaims, ""My mother? I thought she was yours!""",['returns'],True,"  Brunvand, Jan Harold.  Too Good To Be .  New York: W. W. Norton, 1999.   ISBN 0-393-04734-2  (pp. 55-57).  Healey, Phil and Rick Glanvill.  Now! That's What I Call Urban Myths.  London: Virgin Books, 1996.  ISBN 0-86369-969-3  (pp. 105-106).  The Big Book of Urban Legends.  New York: Paradox Press, 1994.  ISBN 1-56389-165-4  (p. 39)."
Rothschild Family Wealth,"[""The Rothschild family is rich, but claims that they have a net worth of $500 trillion and own 80% of the world's wealth are grossly exaggerated.""]","Images reflecting an old rumor about the Rothschild Family's unimaginable accumulated global wealth hold that the Rothschilds are worth $500 trillion and hold more than 80% of the world's total wealth:   While the Rothschilds are indeed very wealthy, claims about their net worth such as the ones displayed above are grossly exaggerated. Conspiracy theories concerning the Rothschild family date back to the 18th century, and the family's wealth was largely responsible for the anti-semitic belief that ""Jews control the world's money supply."" The Rothschilds are frequently associated with theories about the Illuminati, the New World Order, and other dark money groups that supposedly pull the strings of world governments, and the Rothschilds have been blamed for everything from starting wars for personal gain to funding the Holocaust to assassinating U.S. presidents. Skeptoid delved into the Rothschild family history in 2012, noting that: history The greatest of these financial adepts was Mayer Amschel Rothschild, born in 1744 in a Jewish slum of Frankfurt. Not much is known about his early life, as his was one of tens of thousands of marginalized, outcast families. But once he came of age he became an apprentice at a small bank in Hamburg, where he learned the trade. Returning to Frankfurt at the age of 19, he offered his own banking services in a modest way, beginning with trading of rare coins and related investments. He was energetic, clever, and most of all he was charismatic. And he was smart, seeking out wealthy clientele, and associating with nobility whenever he could. By the age of 40, he had consolidated his most important business contact: the Landgrave William, the Elector of Hesse, one of only a tiny number of nobles empowered to elect the Holy Roman Emperor. When William was younger, he had engaged in the trading of rare coins with Mayer's father, and so the two had always known one another. When William inherited his own father's massive fortune, his friendship with Mayer Rothschild gave Mayer the ability to begin conducting larger international transactions. This was the point at which the Rothschild name became first involved with the manipulation of money behind the scenes of wars. Mayer was a firm believer in family business, and insisted on using his own sons  by then he had five  as his business partners. What he did next became the model for many powerful Jewish financiers who followed: He installed each of his five sons as his agents in the five major financial centers of Europe: the eldest Amschel Mayer Rothschild in Frankfurt, Salomon Mayer Rothschild in Vienna, Nathan Mayer Rothschild in London, Calmann Mayer Rothschild in Naples, and the youngest Jakob Mayer Rothschild in Paris. Although the Rothschild family has amassed great wealth since the 1700s, claims that they have a net worth of $500 trillion or that they own 80% of the world's wealth are problematic. For one, the world's total wealth was estimated as of 2015 to be only $250 trillion, half of what the Rothchilds alone are claimed to possess: wealth Global wealth reached 250 trillion US dollars in 2015, slightly less than a year earlier, due to adverse exchange rate movements. The underlying wealth trends do, however, generally remain positive, according to the Credit Suisse Research Institute's annual ""Global Wealth Report."" Also, the Rothschilds began acquiring their wealth in the 1700s, and since then the family has spawned hundreds of descendants, so there is no longer any centralized Rothschild family wealth.  The closest thing to a ""Rothschild Family"" business in 2016 is the Rothschild Group, a multinational investment banking company, but that firm does not in itself generate nearly enough income to back up claims about the family's wealth. In 2015, the Rothschild Group's annual revenue was approximately $500 million. In comparison, the world's largest company, Walmart, has an annual revenue of nearly $500 billion. annual Walmart It should also be noted that only one member of the Rothschild family is included among Forbes' 2015 list of the world's billionaires: Benjamin de Rothschild, who was ranked at number #1121 with a net worth of $1.61 billion.  list While the Rothschild family certainly was one of the world's most significant financial powers in centuries past, they no longer wield the same sort of influence over global affairs. Dunning, B.  ""The Rothschild Conspiracy."" 
  Skeptoid Media.  22 May 2012.  Kersley, Richard.  ""Global Wealth in 2015: Underlying Trends Remain Positive.""
  Credit Suisse.  13 October 2013.",['income'],False,"Skeptoid delved into the Rothschild family history in 2012, noting that:For one, the world's total wealth was estimated as of 2015 to be only $250 trillion, half of what the Rothchilds alone are claimed to possess:Also, the Rothschilds began acquiring their wealth in the 1700s, and since then the family has spawned hundreds of descendants, so there is no longer any centralized Rothschild family wealth.  The closest thing to a ""Rothschild Family"" business in 2016 is the Rothschild Group, a multinational investment banking company, but that firm does not in itself generate nearly enough income to back up claims about the family's wealth. In 2015, the Rothschild Group's annual revenue was approximately $500 million. In comparison, the world's largest company, Walmart, has an annual revenue of nearly $500 billion.It should also be noted that only one member of the Rothschild family is included among Forbes' 2015 list of the world's billionaires: Benjamin de Rothschild, who was ranked at number #1121 with a net worth of $1.61 billion. "
Does Biden Support the Green New Deal?,"[""Presidential hopeful Joe Biden's position on climate change became a hot topic on the first night of the presidential debates in the fall of 2020.""]","Voting in the 2020 U.S. Election may be over, but misinformation continues to spread. Never stop fact-checking. Follow our post-election coverage here. During the first 2020 U.S. presidential debate held in Cleveland on Sept. 29, Democratic nominee Joe Biden stated that he does not support the Green New Deal, a resolution introduced in Congress by members of his own party proposing strategies for addressing climate change. Instead, he backs the Biden Plan for doing so, which is detailed on his campaign website. Biden's disavowal came in response to an attempt by his opponent, U.S. President Donald Trump, to link him to the Green New Deal, claiming it would cost $100 trillion if implemented. Biden's responses (which begin one hour and 20 minutes into the video clip) were as follows: ""That is not my plan. The Green New Deal is not my plan. The Green New Deal will pay for itself as we move forward. We're not going to build plants that are, in fact, great polluting plants. No, I don't support the Green New Deal. I support the Biden Plan that I put forward. The Biden Plan is different from what [Trump] calls the radical Green New Deal."" These statements sparked criticism from Republicans like Omar Navarro, who ran three unsuccessful bids for California's 43rd Congressional District in 2016, 2018, and again in 2020. On Sept. 30, Navarro shared a screenshot from Biden's website that described the Green New Deal as a crucial framework for meeting climate challenges. The language in the tweeted screenshot was indeed found on Biden's website as of Sept. 30, but it was taken out of context and does not reflect the differences between the Biden Plan and the Green New Deal, which we will discuss below. The Green New Deal resolution was introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives on Feb. 7, 2019, in response to Trump's 2017 announcement that the United States would withdraw from the Paris Agreement on climate change. The 14-page proposal outlines a number of policies aimed at lowering greenhouse gas emissions produced by American companies, creating high-wage jobs for Americans, and establishing an overall framework for environmental justice and resilience against climate change-related disasters. It is important to note that the Green New Deal is nonbinding, and if it were to pass, nothing outlined within its pages would become law. Biden made climate change a cornerstone of his 2020 presidential bid, criticizing Trump's handling of environmental affairs. It is true that the Biden Plan includes elements of the Green New Deal and is similar in that both plans agree that the U.S. needs to act urgently to meet the scope of the climate change challenge, and that the environment and the economy are completely interconnected. The Biden Plan addresses many of the issues outlined in the Green New Deal, with the addition of specific actions that a Biden administration would take if he were elected in November 2020. We examined both proposals to understand the nuances between them, where they differ, and where they align. Generally speaking, both policies establish a similar framework but differ in the specifics of how policymakers should enforce and achieve defined goals. For example, both plans highlight the importance of clean, safe drinking water and community-driven projects that promote social and environmental justice in areas disproportionately impacted by the effects of climate change. The greatest difference between the Biden Plan and the Green New Deal lies in their stances on the Paris Agreement, an international agreement established in 2015 with the central aim of coordinating and strengthening the global response to climate change and keeping the global temperature rise this century below 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. Whereas the Biden Plan promises a recommitment to the Paris Agreement, the Green New Deal does not mention it at all. When it comes to clean energy, the Green New Deal and the Biden Plan are similar in that they aim to achieve 100% clean energy and net-zero emissions, but the former sets forth a 10-year mobilization deadline, whereas the Biden Plan sets a goal of no later than 2050. Both plans establish priorities for investment in clean energy innovation and research; however, the Biden Plan is much vaguer. The Green New Deal goes into greater detail, specifying that those investments should include infrastructure and industry, sustainable farming and land-use practices, zero-emission vehicle infrastructure, manufacturing public transit, removing greenhouse gas emissions from manufacturing and industry, and the research and development of new clean and renewable energy technologies. Other key areas of overlap between the two plans include creating resilience across the nation and committing to international policy and trade that employ strong labor and environmental protections. According to his website, the Biden Plan will be funded by rolling back Trump tax incentives and will require a federal investment of $1.7 trillion over the next decade, leveraging additional private sector and state and local investments to total more than $5 trillion. This estimated cost is significantly lower than the $100 trillion bill that Trump claimed the U.S. would incur during the debate. However, serious disagreement exists over how much the implementation of the Green New Deal might actually cost. After its 2019 introduction by U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., Republican leaders and some media publications cited research by the right-wing think tank American Action Forum that speculated the Green New Deal could cost up to $93 trillion, or an estimated $600,000 per household, in its first 10 years. But a number of financial experts have countered that research, suggesting that it is more likely the Green New Deal would cost significantly less, with some estimates being half as much. In fact, a September 2020 study published in the journal Energy Research & Social Science suggested a total overall cost of just over $16 trillion over 15 years. Though both the Biden Plan and the Green New Deal provide similar general frameworks for moving towards a cleaner economy and combating the effects of climate change at a national level, subtle differences exist between the two. Although Biden stated outright that he does not support the Green New Deal, it is apparent from his own policy statements that he supports elements of it that have been incorporated into his own plan.",['investment'],NEI,"Voting in the 2020 U.S. Election may be over, but the misinformation keeps on ticking. Never stop fact-checking. Follow our post-election coverage here.These statements sparked criticism from Republicans like Omar Navarro, who ran three unsuccessful bids for Californias 43d Congressional District in 2016, 2018, and again in 2020. On Sept. 30, Navarro shared a screenshot from Bidens website that described the Green New Deal as a crucial framework for meeting the climate challengesThe Green New Deal resolution was introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives on Feb. 7, 2019, in response to Trumps 2017 announcement that the United States would withdraw from the Paris Agreement on climate change. The 14-page proposal sets forth a number of policies aimed at lowering greenhouse gas emissions produced by American companies, creating high-wage jobs for Americans, and to set an overall framework for environmental justice and resiliency against climate change-related disasters. It is important to note that the Green New Deal is nonbinding, and if it were to pass, nothing outlined within its pages would become law.Biden made climate change a cornerstone of his 2020 bid for the presidency, in turn criticizing Trump's handling of environmental affairs. It is true that the Biden Plan (archived here for reference) includes elements of the Green New Deal and is similar to it in that both plans agree that the U.S. needs to act urgently and epically to meet the scope of the climate change challenge, and that the environment and the economy are completely and totally connected. The Biden Plan addresses many of the issues outlined in the Green New Deal, with the addition of specific actions that a Biden administration would take should he be elected in November 2020.The greatest difference between the Biden Plan and the Green New Deal lies in their stances on the Paris Agreement, an international agreement established in 2015 with the central aim of coordinating and strengthening the global response to climate change and keeping the global temperature rise in this century below 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. Whereas the Biden Plan promises a recommitment to the Paris Agreement, the Green New Deal does not mention it at all. According to his website, the Biden plan will be paid for by rolling back Trump tax incentives and will require a federal investment of $1.7 trillion over the next decade, leveraging the additional private sector and state and local investments to total more than $5 trillion. This estimated cost is significantly lower than the $100 trillion bill that Trump claimed the U.S. would foot during the debate. However, serious disagreement exists over how much implementation of the Green New Deal might actually cost. After its 2019 introduction by U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., Republican leaders and some media publications cited research by the right-wing think tank American Action Forum that speculated the Green New Deal could cost up to $93 trillion, or an estimated $600,000 per household, in its first 10 years. (A supplementary brief from the organization outlining the projected costs can be found here.) But a number of financial experts have countered that research, suggesting that it is more likely that the Green New Deal would cost significantly less, and in some estimates half as much. In fact, a September 2020 study published in the journal Energy Research & Social Science suggested a total overall cost of just over $16 trillion over 15 years.Though both the Biden Plan and the Green New Deal provide similar general frameworks for moving towards a cleaner economy and combating the effects of climate change at a national level, subtle differences exist between the two. Although Biden stated outright that he does not support the Green New Deal, it is apparent from his own policy statements that he supports elements of it that have been incorporated into his own plan. As such, we rate this claim as a ""Mixture."""
We lost more jobs in this great recession than the last four recessions combined.,[],"During the April 3, 2011, edition of ABCsThis Week with Christiane Amanpour, columnist George Will said during the shows roundtable segment that we lost more jobs in this great recession than the last four recessions combined.We knew the most recent recession was bad, but we hadnt realized it was so bad in comparison to other recent recessions. So we decided to check whether Will was right.We turned to two sources. One is the National Bureau of Economic Research, an independent group of economists that is the de facto arbiter of when recessions begin and end. The other is the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the federal agency that calculates all manner of employment figures.Below we list the last five recessionsas declared by the NBER, along with the difference inU.S. non-farmemploymentlevels between the official start of the recession and the official end:Jan. 1980 to July 1980: 968,000 jobs lostJuly 1981 to Nov. 1982: 2,824,000 jobs lostJuly 1990 to March 1991: 1,249,000 jobs lostMarch 2001 to Nov. 2001: 1,599,000 jobs lostTotal jobs lost in the four prior recessions: 6,640,000Great Recession -- Dec. 2007 to June 2009: 7,490,000 jobs lostSo the numbers show that Will is right -- about 850,000 more jobs were lost during the great recession than in the previous four recessions combined.We wondered, though, whether the result would be different if we factored in the size of the labor force, which has grown over the past three decades. Its impossible to make the same exact comparison Will did -- that is, comparing the sum of the past four recessions with the current one -- because you cant simply add together percentages drawn from different time periods. But we thought wed at least see whether the 2007-2009 recession registered more jobs lost on a percentage basis than any of the prior ones.Here are the numbers for jobs lost as a percentage of the labor force:Jan. 1980 to July 1980: 1.0 percentJuly 1981 to Nov. 1982: 3.1 percentJuly 1990 to March 1991: 1.1 percentMarch 2001 to Nov. 2001: 1.2 percentGreat Recession -- Dec. 2007 to June 2009: Recession decreased jobs by 5.4 percentSo job losses in the Great Recession have, on a percentage basis, exceeded those in each of the past four recessions. We rate it True.","['National', 'Economy', 'Jobs', 'Labor', 'This Week - ABC News']",True,"During the April 3, 2011, edition of ABCsThis Week with Christiane Amanpour, columnist George Will said during the shows roundtable segment that we lost more jobs in this great recession than the last four recessions combined.We knew the most recent recession was bad, but we hadnt realized it was so bad in comparison to other recent recessions. So we decided to check whether Will was right.We turned to two sources. One is the National Bureau of Economic Research, an independent group of economists that is the de facto arbiter of when recessions begin and end. The other is the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the federal agency that calculates all manner of employment figures.Below we list the last five recessionsas declared by the NBER, along with the difference inU.S. non-farmemploymentlevels between the official start of the recession and the official end:Jan. 1980 to July 1980: 968,000 jobs lostJuly 1981 to Nov. 1982: 2,824,000 jobs lostJuly 1990 to March 1991: 1,249,000 jobs lostMarch 2001 to Nov. 2001: 1,599,000 jobs lostTotal jobs lost in the four prior recessions: 6,640,000Great Recession -- Dec. 2007 to June 2009: 7,490,000 jobs lostSo the numbers show that Will is right -- about 850,000 more jobs were lost during the great recession than in the previous four recessions combined.We wondered, though, whether the result would be different if we factored in the size of the labor force, which has grown over the past three decades. Its impossible to make the same exact comparison Will did -- that is, comparing the sum of the past four recessions with the current one -- because you cant simply add together percentages drawn from different time periods. But we thought wed at least see whether the 2007-2009 recession registered more jobs lost on a percentage basis than any of the prior ones.Here are the numbers for jobs lost as a percentage of the labor force:Jan. 1980 to July 1980: 1.0 percentJuly 1981 to Nov. 1982: 3.1 percentJuly 1990 to March 1991: 1.1 percentMarch 2001 to Nov. 2001: 1.2 percentGreat Recession -- Dec. 2007 to June 2009: Recession decreased jobs by 5.4 percentSo job losses in the Great Recession have, on a percentage basis, exceeded those in each of the past four recessions. We rate it True."
The top one-tenth of 1 percent of Americans own almost as much wealth as the bottom 90 percent.,[],"A month after launching his long-shot bid for the White House, a 73-year-old senator from Vermont appeared in Madison before perhaps the largest gathering for any candidate to that point in the 2016 campaign. Bernie Sanderscalled fora political revolution against greed and took jabs at Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, a contender on the GOP side of the field. Cheering him on was an Alliant Energy Center crowd that his aides estimated atnearly10,000people. At one point during his hourlongspeechon July 1, 2015, Sanders said: The issue of wealth and income inequality, to my mind, is the great moral issue of our time. It is the great economic issue of our time and it is the great political issue of our time. Let me be as clear as I can be: There is something profoundly wrong when today, the top one-tenth of 1 percent own almost as much wealth as the bottom 90 percent. Wealth inequality is sure to be an issue Sanders emphasizes as he challenges Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination. So, does the top one-tenth of 1 percent of Americans own almost as much wealth as the bottom 90 percent? Previous claims Two of our most-clicked fact checks have found significant gaps in wealth in the United States. Filmmaker Michael Moore -- also speaking in Madison, during the height of protests against Walker over his collective bargaining reforms in 2011 -- said 400 Americans have more wealth than half of all Americans combined. Our rating wasTrue. As of 2010, the net worth of the Forbes 400 -- $1.37 trillion -- exceeded that of the poorest 60 percent of U.S. households. We alsorated Truea2013statement by the liberal One Wisconsin Now advocacy group, which said the wealth of the Wal-Mart Walton family equalled the wealth of the bottom 42 percent of Americans combined. The wealth of Sam Waltons heirs, we found, was $89.5 billion -- equal to the bottom 42 percent of American families. A note about those fact checks, in terms of helping explain the wealth gap: Many Americans make a good income, have some savings and investments, and own a nice home; they also have debt, for a mortgage, credit cards and other bills. Some people would still have a pretty healthy bottom line, but still have a negative net worth. Meanwhile, so far in 2015, PolitiFact National has given Sanders aMostly Truefor saying income equality in the U.S. is the widest since the 1920s; and aMostly Truefor saying 99 percent of all new income is going to the top 1 percent. Now to his new claim, which is about wealth, rather than income. Sanders evidence To back Sanders statement, his Senate office cited anews articlefrom The Guardian newspaper. The headline on the article, which reported on awealth inequality studyreleased in October 2014, matched Sanders claim nearly word for word. The study was done for the National Bureau of Economic Research, a nonpartisanorganizationin Cambridge, Mass. It is perhaps best known as the arbiter for determining whether the U.S. economy isin recession. The authors of the study were economistsEmmanuel Saezof the University of California, Berkeley, andGabriel Zucmanof the London School of Economics. Using tax records, they made estimates for 2012 on wealth -- that is, the value of all assets, such as a home, and savings and retirement accounts, minus all debts, such as mortgages and credit card balances. The major finding, in terms of Sanders claim: The top 0.1 percent was composed of 160,000 families with average wealth of $72.8 million. All told, they owned 22 percent of the nations wealth. Meanwhile, the bottom 90 percent -- 144 million families with average wealth of $84,000 -- owned only 22.8 percent of the wealth. In other words, the top 0.1 percent and the bottom 90 percent of U.S. households own virtually the same share of all the nation's wealth. Wealth is getting more concentrated in the United States, the researchers observed, but this phenomenon largely owes to the spectacular dynamics of fortunes of dozens and hundreds of million dollars, and much less to the growth in fortunes of a few million dollars. Inequality within rich families is increasing. Two other prominent economists --Thomas Pikettyof the Paris School of Economics andEdward Wolffof New York University -- told us that the study makes solid estimates about wealth inequality. Wolff said he was not aware of another study that examined the wealth of the top 0.1 percent. But some fault the findings to some degree. Another view Richard Burkhauser, a professor of policy analysis at Cornell University, told us that Saez and Zucman are very well respected economists, but that he has a major complaint about their study: it excludes Social Security. To ignore it as they do grossly understates the wealth held by Americans in the bottom 99 percent of the population,  Burkhauser said. Another criticism is the study that it doesn't take into account changes in tax laws. Daniel Mitchell, a senior fellow at the libertarian Cato Institute, pointed us to an article one of his colleagues wrote in the Wall Street Journal. It said, for example, that changes in tax laws in the 1980s and 90s skew any increase in wealth inequality by requiring more capital income of high-income taxpayers be reported on individual returns, while excluding most capital income of middle-income savers and homeowners. Mitchell told us: Even if one makes the heroic assumption that the data is completely accurate, our friends on the left take these numbers and want people to believe that the wealth of the top 1 percent (or top 10 percent, or top .01 percent, etc) comes at the expense of the rest of us. This is generally nonsense. People such as Bill Gates become rich because they generate real value for others. There is no fixed pie. Our rating Sanders said the top one-tenth of 1 percent of Americans own almost as much wealth as the bottom 90 percent. His claim repeats a finding from a study by two internationally known economists that were supported by two other major economists we contacted. But the study has been criticized, for example, for not including Social Security in the wealth calculations. For a claim that is accurate but needs additional information, a rating is Mostly True.","['Economy', 'Income', 'Retirement', 'Social Security', 'Wealth', 'Wisconsin']",True,"Bernie Sanderscalled fora political revolution against greed and took jabs at Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, a contender on the GOP side of the field. Cheering him on was an Alliant Energy Center crowd that his aides estimated atnearly10,000people.At one point during his hourlongspeechon July 1, 2015, Sanders said:Filmmaker Michael Moore -- also speaking in Madison, during the height of protests against Walker over his collective bargaining reforms in 2011 -- said 400 Americans have more wealth than half of all Americans combined. Our rating wasTrue. As of 2010, the net worth of the Forbes 400 -- $1.37 trillion -- exceeded that of the poorest 60 percent of U.S. households.We alsorated Truea2013statement by the liberal One Wisconsin Now advocacy group, which said the wealth of the Wal-Mart Walton family equalled the wealth of the bottom 42 percent of Americans combined. The wealth of Sam Waltons heirs, we found, was $89.5 billion -- equal to the bottom 42 percent of American families.Meanwhile, so far in 2015, PolitiFact National has given Sanders aMostly Truefor saying income equality in the U.S. is the widest since the 1920s; and aMostly Truefor saying 99 percent of all new income is going to the top 1 percent.To back Sanders statement, his Senate office cited anews articlefrom The Guardian newspaper. The headline on the article, which reported on awealth inequality studyreleased in October 2014, matched Sanders claim nearly word for word.The study was done for the National Bureau of Economic Research, a nonpartisanorganizationin Cambridge, Mass. It is perhaps best known as the arbiter for determining whether the U.S. economy isin recession.The authors of the study were economistsEmmanuel Saezof the University of California, Berkeley, andGabriel Zucmanof the London School of Economics. Using tax records, they made estimates for 2012 on wealth -- that is, the value of all assets, such as a home, and savings and retirement accounts, minus all debts, such as mortgages and credit card balances.Two other prominent economists --Thomas Pikettyof the Paris School of Economics andEdward Wolffof New York University -- told us that the study makes solid estimates about wealth inequality. Wolff said he was not aware of another study that examined the wealth of the top 0.1 percent.Richard Burkhauser, a professor of policy analysis at Cornell University, told us that Saez and Zucman are very well respected economists, but that he has a major complaint about their study: it excludes Social Security. To ignore it as they do grossly understates the wealth held by Americans in the bottom 99 percent of the population,  Burkhauser said."
RIPTA has really some of the fullest buses for its transit agency size around the country.,[],"Public transportation was one of the topics when Abel Collins, program manager for the Rhode Island chapter of the Sierra Club, was a guest on the June 2 edition of 10 News Conference. Collins, an unsuccessful independent candidate for Congress in the 2nd District in 2012, said one goal of his organization is to cut pollution by getting better funding for the Rhode Island Public Transit Authority, which operates the states bus system. They're stuck. They have declining revenues and increasing demand. And RIPTA has really some of the fullest buses for its transit agency size around the country, he said. So it's really something that should get more attention and hopefully this is the year that the General Assembly sees fit to give RIPTA sustainable funding for the long term. There's a bill to do that and we've been pushing on it for years. We wondered whether RIPTA does, in fact, have some of the fullest buses around. We called Collins. He said he was told that factoid by Mark Therrien, the authority's assistant general manager for planning. We called Therrien. He said Collins was correct. When we asked for details, he referred us to theIntegrated National Transit Database Analysis System(INTDAS) which has national statistics over many years for transit systems throughout the United States. The database will generate a list of comparable transit systems around the country. We did that for RIPTA and decided to focus on the 30 that were closest based on a variety of measures such as size, according to the federal ranking. We also looked at six other systems -- in Eugene, Ore.; Fort Worth, Texas; Jacksonville, Fla.; Memphis, Tenn.; Louisville, Ky.; and Des Moines, Iowa -- that Therrien said were comparable as well. But what to look at? The database, whose most recent statistics were from 2011, doesn't include a direct measurement of how full the buses are. We discovered there were a lot of indirect ways to estimate capacity that gave different rankings. Therrien said we should look at passengers per hour. By that measure, RIPTA ranked 8th out of 37 systems. We also looked at the number of passenger trips divided by the number of vehicles in operation during peak hours. RIPTA ranked 9th by that measure. Meanwhile, we received an e-mail fromAlbert Gan, a professor with the department of civil and environmental engineering at Florida International University, who developed the INTDAS system. He said the correct method would be to divide the number of passenger miles in a year by the number of miles driven when the buses were picking and dropping off passengers (known as revenue miles). By that measure, RIPTA ranked 13th out of 37. Then we heard back from Therrien's office, which advised us that it was best to look at the number of passenger trips divided by the number of revenue miles. In that instance, RIPTA ranked 10th. Some other systems were pretty crowded using that yardstick. Milwaukee had 24 percent more passengers per bus than Providence; Madison had 34 percent more; Eugene had 39 percent more; and Rochester, N.Y. had 46 percent more. To sum up, Abel Collins said, RIPTA has really some of the fullest buses for its transit agency size around the country. Some of the fullest is a little vague, but it implies that Rhode Island is going to be up there in the rankings. RIPTA, asked about the claim, suggested that we look at 11 transit systems. We ultimately analyzed data on more than three times that many, using a federal rating method that listed bus services comparable to Rhode Island's. RIPTA's rankings ranged from 8th to 13th. They varied a bit because there's no standardized way to calculate who has the fullest buses. Because there's some uncertainty but the different methods show RIPTA ranking high, we rate Collins' statementMostly True. (If you have a claim youd like PolitiFact Rhode Island to check, e-mail us at[email protected]. And follow us on Twitter: @politifactri.)","['Environment', 'Rhode Island', 'Economy', 'Energy', 'Infrastructure', 'State Budget', 'Transportation']",True,"We called Therrien. He said Collins was correct. When we asked for details, he referred us to theIntegrated National Transit Database Analysis System(INTDAS) which has national statistics over many years for transit systems throughout the United States.Meanwhile, we received an e-mail fromAlbert Gan, a professor with the department of civil and environmental engineering at Florida International University, who developed the INTDAS system.Because there's some uncertainty but the different methods show RIPTA ranking high, we rate Collins' statementMostly True.(If you have a claim youd like PolitiFact Rhode Island to check, e-mail us at[email protected]. And follow us on Twitter: @politifactri.)"
Did Trump Take Credit for 'Beautiful' COVID-19 Vaccine?,"[""The former president of the United States no longer has access to a Twitter account, but he's still getting his message out.""]","On March 10, 2021, an image began circulating on social media that supposedly showed a statement from former U.S. President Donald Trump, in which he implored American citizens to remember that the United States wouldn't have had these ""beautiful"" COVID-19 vaccine shots for another five years (a dubious claim) if it weren't for him. Trump released several statements after he left office on January 20, 2021. Since the former president was banned from Twitter (as well as other social media networks) for posting content that could have incited more violence after the attack on the U.S. Capitol, these statements are being released via email and are subsequently shared on social media by reporters. Margo Martin, the lead press secretary for the office of the 45th president, confirmed to Snopes via email that this was a genuine statement released by Trump. While this is a real statement, the claims made within it (that the United States would not have had a vaccine for five years if it weren't for Trump) are dubious at best. The Trump administration attempted to speed up the development of a vaccine via Operation Warp Speed. Although the Trump administration certainly deserves some credit for aiding the development of a vaccine, some companies, such as Pfizer, developed vaccines without funding from the Trump administration. It should also be noted that companies outside of the United States managed to develop vaccines without much aid from the former president.",['credit'],True,"This was a genuine statement from Trump.Trump released several statements after he left office on Jan. 20, 2021. Since the former president was banned from Twitter (as well as other social media networks) for posting content that could have incited more violence after the attack on the U.S. Capitol, these statements are being released via email and are then subsequently shared on social media by reporters. Margo Martin, the lead press secretary for the office of the 45th president, confirmed to Snopes via email that this was a genuine statement released by Trump. While this is a real statement, the claims made within it (that the United States would not have had a vaccine for 5 years if it wasn't for Trump) are dubious at best. The Trump administration attempted to speed up the development of a vaccine via Operation Warp Speed. Although the Trump administration certainly deserves some credit for aiding the development of a vaccine, some companies, such as Pfizer, developed vaccines without funding from the Trump administration. It should also be noted that companies outside of the United States managed to develop vaccines without much aid from the former president. "
Bernie Sanders: A Loser's Life?,['A meme about Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders displayed questionable accuracy and relevance.'],"In February 2016, a meme about the lack of business acumen and experience exhibited by Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, a Democratic presidential candidate, began circulating online. The criticisms offered in the meme were a mixture of true, false, irrelevant, and misleading statements. To wit: Never owned a business. Right off, this meme begins with a rather nebulous criticism. Although having owned a business is an experience many voters would like to see on the résumé of a potential chief executive, a literal application of that term isn't of much relevance. Technically, a person who once operated a roadside lemonade stand has ""owned a business,"" while a person who has spent his career serving as the CEO of a public multinational, multibillion-dollar corporation has not—even though everyone would agree the latter has vastly more business experience than the former. Certainly, a number of highly regarded U.S. presidents in the modern era (e.g., Franklin Roosevelt, Dwight Eisenhower, John Kennedy, Ronald Reagan) never owned their own businesses. Moreover, one might validly say that Sanders started and operated his own business (whether he ""owned"" it is somewhat arguable, as it was a non-profit), the American People's Historical Society, which was created in 1978 to produce educational film strips about the history of Vermont. The University of Vermont has archived several of the brochures produced by the American People's Historical Society, one of which includes a statement from Sanders outlining the purpose of his film strips. Director Bernard Sanders explained, ""It is our belief that state and regional history has too long been neglected by the audio-visual industry, and we are happy to begin the process of rectifying that situation. We believe that students have the right to learn about the state and region in which they are living."" While the financials of the American People's Historical Society are not available, Sanders wrote in his memoir, Outsider in the House, that the business was reasonably successful and ""a lot of fun."" A friend of Sanders told Politico that the film strip business ""wasn't just a way to make money ... He made film strips about people he admired and believed in. He just thought kids should know the truth of how things really were."" Never invented anything. Once again, this is a rather nebulous criticism. The concept of ""inventing"" something could range from simply thinking up a novel idea (but doing nothing more about it) to creating and building a device for personal use (but not marketing it) to actually obtaining a patent for a new product. Bernie Sanders is certainly no inventor and holds no patents, but it's hard to see how that fact is of any relevance, as the same is true of nearly every U.S. president. Thomas Jefferson might legitimately be considered an inventor for having conceptualized various devices (including a macaroni machine, a swivel chair, a spherical sundial, a moldboard plow, and a cipher wheel), although he held no patents because he believed them to be a form of monopoly. Abraham Lincoln was the only U.S. president who ever held a patent, having been issued Patent #6,469 for ""A Device for Buoying Vessels Over Shoals"" on May 22, 1849. Beyond that, ""inventing"" has historically had nothing to do with the qualifications or success of candidates for the White House. Never had a 9 to 5 job. This criticism is too vaguely worded to allow for much cogent analysis. What does holding a ""9 to 5 job"" mean? That one literally works from 9 AM to 5 PM (and not some other period of the day)? That one holds full-time employment? That one is paid on an hourly basis? That one toils at what is commonly referred to as a ""blue-collar"" job? That one works for someone else rather than being self-employed? If we assume the most seemingly relevant application of the term—that it refers to holding steady, full-time employment—then one might fairly say it applies to Bernie Sanders. After receiving a Bachelor of Arts degree in political science from the University of Chicago in 1964, Sanders primarily worked a series of odd jobs while attempting to get his political career off the ground, and a Politico article observed that he ""didn't collect his first steady paycheck until he was an elected official pushing 40 years old."" However, that same article did list a variety of jobs Sanders held (even if they weren't steady or didn't provide a livable wage) before he finally reached public office upon being elected mayor of Burlington, Vermont, at age 39—working as an aide at a psychiatric hospital, as a Head Start preschool teacher, as a carpenter, and as a freelance writer for local publications. Sanders rented a small brick duplex at 295 1/2 Maple Street that was filled with not much furniture and not much food in the fridge but stacks of checked-out library books and scribbled-on legal pads. ""Pretty sparse,"" Gene Bergman, an old friend, said about the apartment. ""Stark and dark,"" said Darcy Troville, a fellow Liberty Unionite who lived around the corner and shared with Sanders homemade jellies and jams. ""The electricity was turned off a lot,"" Barnett said. ""I remember him running an extension cord down to the basement. He couldn't pay his bills."" He worked some as a carpenter, although ""he was a shitty carpenter,"" [Liberty Union party member John] Bloch told me. ""His carpentry,"" [Liberty Union member Danny] Morrisseau said, ""was not going to support him, and didn't."" He worked as a freelance writer, putting intermittent pieces in the low-budget Vermont Freeman, a Burlington alternative weekly called the Vanguard Press, and a glossy, state-supported magazine called Vermont Life. His writing wasn't a living. The Vanguard paid as little as the rest. ""It would've been not more than 50 bucks,"" said Greg Guma, a former editor. Vermont Life? ""Our rate was 10 cents a word,"" said Brian Vachon, a former editor. ""He was always poor,"" Sandy Baird, another old friend, told me in Burlington. ""Virtually unemployed,"" said Nelson, the political science professor at the University of Vermont. ""Just one step above hand to mouth,"" said Terry Bouricius, who was involved with Liberty Union, served at times as a de facto campaign manager for Sanders, and at one point crashed for a couple of months on his couch. Liberty Union ""people found it difficult to support themselves while engaging in full-time political work,"" Michael Parenti, one of those people, wrote in the Massachusetts Review in the summer of 1975. ""Some held jobs that allowed free time for campaign activities, while others lived off unemployment insurance."" ""His work was to be a politician,"" Guma said. ""He put everything into what he was doing."" We would also note that by the standard used here, holding elective office (as Sanders has done for most of the last 35 years as a mayor, a U.S. representative, and a U.S. senator) is as much a ""9 to 5"" job as any other. Never proposed a bill that has passed. This statement is not literally true, as during his tenure in Congress, Sanders has sponsored three bills that were enacted, two of which were rather slight matters involving the naming of USPS facilities, and one of which was the Veterans' Compensation Cost-of-Living Adjustment Act of 2013 (which provided ""for an increase in the rates of compensation for veterans with service-connected disabilities and the rates of dependency and indemnity compensation for the survivors of certain disabled veterans""). Although that might seem like a slight achievement for someone who has spent 25 years as both a U.S. representative and a U.S. senator, we would note that only a scant handful of bills submitted in Congress (about 4 to 6 percent) are ever brought to a vote, and even fewer (about 2 to 4 percent) end up being enacted. We would also note that sponsoring original legislation is but one small part of Congress members' duties: they also co-sponsor legislation submitted by colleagues (which Sanders has done for more than 200 successful bills), muster support (or opposition) among colleagues and the public for proposed legislation, review and vote on proposed bills, serve on various committees (Sanders holds six Senate committee appointments), meet with constituents, and participate in oversight and investigation of governmental affairs. First and foremost, the Member is a decision-maker. Members are faced with hundreds of decisions in both recorded and unrecorded votes on matters major and minor. Many decisions must be made quickly. Each decision, whether spontaneous or studied, balances the conflicting perspectives received from private citizens, public officials, and party leaders. Decisions are often second-guessed by constituents, campaign opponents, colleagues, lobbyists, and media critics. Meetings are continual, in committee rooms, in private offices, in corridors, and in gatherings on the floor. Daily, sacks of mail are delivered. Faxes flow in a steady stream. Electronic mail jams congressional computers. Correspondence must be written and press releases issued. Highly visible issues are debated on the House or Senate floor, fully televised, and the absence or presence of a Member is duly noted. Scandals require investigation. Programs require oversight. Requests for information, both basic and complex, are received daily. Journalists seek comment. Constituents seek assistance obtaining federal grants, government jobs, and help in overcoming bureaucratic obstacles. Over time, these daily tasks and the always-changing expectations of the electorate have come together to establish a multi-faceted job. Lived off welfare before elected to public office. As noted above, various acquaintances who knew Sanders in the years before he achieved public office have reported that he was ""always poor,"" and he likely received public assistance at some point during that time, although what form of (and how much) assistance he received is difficult to determine at this remove. A contemporaneous newspaper account from the Bennington Banner reported that in 1974, when Sanders ran for the U.S. Senate on the Liberty Union Party ticket, he was collecting unemployment benefits: Sanders, 32, cares little what 'image' he conveys—and that's part of his image of being a bit rumpled and unshorn. He's on unemployment compensation right now, having worked for the Bread & Law Task Force, as a freelance writer, and as a carpenter in the Burlington area. But the thing he likes best, and excels at, is 'talking the issues,' and he doesn't mind repeating himself sometimes."" 74-year-old personal net worth of $300,000. As 247 Wall St. reported, determining the precise net worth of candidates is difficult for a number of reasons: net worth reporting exact values is not required. Instead, candidates may disclose their assets and income in a range. Further, candidates do not necessarily report all their assets. For instance, candidates do not need to disclose their personal real estate and property values. Jeb Bush opted to omit assets generated by several holding companies, for example. In addition, while some candidates choose to include their spouses in their disclosures, some do not. Carly Fiorina's net worth of $59 million, for example, includes that of her husband, Frank. Hillary Clinton's reported net worth, on the other hand, does not include assets jointly owned by her and former President Bill Clinton, who is worth by some estimates more than $50 million. 247 Wall St. attempted to determine each presidential candidate's net worth in an article published on August 24, 2015. They estimated that Sanders was one of the ""poorest presidential candidates"" running for office in 2016, with a likely net worth somewhere around $330,000: estimated Bernie Sanders' net worth: $194,026-$741,030. In 2013, Bernie Sanders had an average estimated net worth of $330,507, well below other prospective presidential nominees and among the lowest compared with other members of Congress. As of late 2019, Open Secrets, the website of the Center for Responsive Politics, estimated Sanders' net worth at between $729,000 and $1.8 million, making him neither the richest nor the poorest presidential hopeful in the 2020 field. In any case, the meme's characterization of Sanders as a ""loser"" based on his net worth evinces a rather skewed perspective. Although many people view financial rewards as a tangible measure of one's success, it is far from the only factor by which accomplishment can be measured. (In fact, highly regarded President Harry S. Truman had virtually no net worth even after leaving the White House in 1953 and afterwards was largely dependent upon Congress finally establishing a pension for former presidents.) Bernie Sanders might equally be considered a ""winner"" for persevering at his goal of achieving a political career long after others might have given up, and for succeeding at that effort despite prolonged financial hardship. Unlike many others, Sanders might also be lauded for maintaining a rather plain life and not having enriched himself in public service (especially since candidates at the other end of the financial spectrum are frequently criticized for being ""out of touch with the common man""). As 247 Wall St. wrote of Sanders: The Vermont senator, who is the longest-serving independent in U.S. history, is a self-identified socialist. He is seeking the Democratic nomination and is the most popular Democratic candidate after Hillary Clinton. In keeping with Sanders' stated intention of starting a grassroots movement, more than 90% of his campaign contributions have come from individual donors. Sanders' campaign speeches have drawn record numbers of attendees. Most recently, 19,000 people watched Sanders speak at an NBA arena in Portland, Oregon, the largest political event compared with all other candidates so far this election season. All in all, that sounds like quite an impressive career achievement for anyone—regardless of net worth.",['insurance'],NEI,"Moreover, one might validly say that Sanders started and operated his own business (whether he ""owned"" it is somewhat arguable, as it was a non-profit), the American People's Historical Society, which was created in 1978 to produce educational film strips about the history of Vermont. The University of Vermont has archived several of the brochures produced by the American People's Historical Society, one of which includes a statement from Sanders outlining the purpose of his film strips:If we assume the most seemingly relevant application of the term  that it refers to holding steady, full-time employment  then one might fairly say it applies to Bernie Sanders. After receiving a Bachelor of Arts degree in political science from the University of Chicago in 1964, Sanders primarily worked a series of odd jobs while attempting to get his political career off the ground, and a Politico article observed that he ""didn't collect his first steady paycheck until he was an elected official pushing 40 years old."" However, that same article did list a variety of jobs Sanders held (even if they weren't steady or didn't provide a livable wage) before he finally reached public office upon being elected mayor of Burlington, Vermont, at age 39  working as an aide at a psychiatric hospital, as a Head Start preschool teacher, as a carpenter, and as a freelance writer for local publications:Although that might seem like slight achievement for someone who has spent 25 years as both a U.S. representative and a U.S. senator, we would note that only a scant handful of bills submitted in Congress (about 4 to 6 percent) are ever brought to a vote, and even fewer (about 2 to 4 percent) end up being enacted. We would also note that sponsoring original legislation is but one small part of Congress members' duties: they also co-sponsor legislation submitted by colleagues (which Sanders has done for more than 200 successful bills), muster support (or opposition) among colleagues and the public for proposed legislation, review and vote on proposed bills, serve on various committees (Sanders holds six Senate committee appointments), meet with constituents, participate in oversight and investigation of governmental affairs, etc., as detailed in ""The Many Roles of a Member of Congress"":As 247 Wall St. reported, determining the precise net worth of candidates is difficult for a number of reasons:247 Wall St. attempted to determine each presidential candidate's net worth in an article published on 24 August 2015. They estimated that Sanders was one of the ""poorest presidential candidates"" running for office in 2016, with a likely net worth somewhere around $330,000:As of late 2019, Open Secrets, the website of the Center for Responsive Politics, estimated Sanders' net worth at between $729,000 and $1.8 million, making him neither the richest nor the poorest presidential hopeful in the 2020 field.In any case, the meme's characterization of Sanders as a ""loser"" based on his net worth evinces a rather skewed perspective. Although many people view financial rewards as a tangible measure of one's success, it is far from the only factor by which accomplishment can be measured. (In fact, highly-regarded President Harry S. Truman had virtually no net worth even after leaving the White House in 1953 and afterwards was largely dependent upon Congress' finally establishing a pension for former presidents.)"
Is this a picture of valueless currency found in the drainage systems of Venezuela?,"[""The disastrous economic situation in Venezuela can't be summed up in a single image. ""]","In late March 2019, a photograph supposedly showing piles of ""worthless"" currency thrown into gutters in Venezuela circulated on social media, attached to comments blaming socialism for the phenomenon behind the striking visual. One popular posting on Facebook was captioned, ""This is a street in Venezuela. That's money in the gutter. It's worthless. Welcome to socialism."": Facebook   This is a genuine photograph of worthless money dumped in the gutter of a Venezuelan street. However, the accompanying caption presents an oversimplification of the series of events that led to this currency's worthlessness and its discarding by Venezuelan residents. The economic collapse in Venezuela that began in 2013 is a complex matter which can't be attributed to any single factor. News outlets such as Bloomberg, the New York Times, and Fox News have cited a wide range of issues that led to the country's current economic crisis, including plunging oil prices, government corruption, political unrest, and socialist policies. That brew of unfavorable economic conditions has spawned massive hyperinflation which has greatly devalued Venezuela's currency, as the Washington Post reported in January 2018: Bloomberg New York Times Fox News reported Hyperinflation is disorienting. Five or six years ago, 500 bolivars wouldve bought you a meal for two with wine at the best restaurant in Caracas. As late as early last year, they wouldve bought you at least a cup of coffee. At the end of 2016, they still bought you a cup of caf con leche, at least. Today, they buy you essentially nothing ... well, except for 132 gallons of the worlds most extravagantly subsidized gasoline. Although hyperinflation has indeed caused the bolivar to become all but worthless, the caption on this viral photograph is a bit misleading. The money shown lying in the gutter in this picture is Venezuela's old currency, the Bolvar Fuerte, which was replaced by a new form of currency, the Bolivar Soberano, in August 2018.  When the Bolivar Soberano was introduced, Bolvar Fuerte currency in amounts less than 1,000 ceased to be legal tender, and Bolivar Fuerte currency in all amounts was completely withdrawn on 5 December 2018.   Hence the discarded money seen here was literally worthless not because it had no value, because it had been completely replaced by a newer currency and was no longer legal tender. Here's an excerpt from a CNN report about the switch in currencies: CNN Venezuela issued a new currency in an attempt to bolster its crumbling economy as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) warned that inflation could hit one million percent this year. The move, part of a dramatic raft of measures aimed at halting runaway hyperinflation, comes as thousands of Venezuelans continue to flee across the border into neighboring countries amid food and medicine shortages, political turmoil and soaring crime rates. In a tweet posted following the unveiling of Venezuela's new currency, the country's president Nicolas Maduro hailed the recovery package as a ""revolutionary formula."" The new ""Bolivar Soberano"" currency is worth 100,000 ""old"" Bolivares. ""We found the revolutionary formula that puts work in the center of the general re-adjustment of society, based on the production of goods and the value of salary. With that, we're gonna put to rest forever the perverse model that dollarized the prices in the country,"" tweeted Venezuela's 55-year-old leader. ""I call on the people to defend -- conscientiously -- the adjustment of the prices on street,"" Maduro later said in another tweet. A bank holiday was declared, with banks remaining closed as the new currency took effect. The rebranded currency, which has five fewer zeroes than the country's previous currency and will be pegged to a cryptocurrency called the Petro, is intended to simplify transactions. The viral photograph was likely taken on 11 March 2019 and showed the aftermath of looting at a bank in the town of Merida. Local news outlet Maduradas.com compiled several other photographs of the incident and reported that the perpetrators had discarded the old money on the streets and even lit some of it on fire (translated via Google): Maduradas.com TERRIBLE! Encapuchados saquearon banco Bicentenario en Mrida y esparcieron bolvares del viejo cono monetario por las calles (+Fotos) Este lunes 11 de marzo, encapuchados saquearon la agencia del banco Bicentenario en la avenida 3, de Glorias Patrias, en el estado Mrida. El hecho fue confirmado por el diputado de la Asamblea Nacional Williams Dvila, as como por el corresponsal de El Nacional en el estado Mrida, Leonardo Len. A travs de la red social Twitter, informaron que los ciudadanos esparcieron montones de billetes de viejo cono monetario en las calles, los cuales despus fueron incendiados. TERRIBLE! Hooded (vandals) sacked the bank Bicentenario in Merida and scattered bolivars of the old currency through the streets (+ Photos) On Monday, March 11, hooded (vandals) sacked the Bicentenario bank agency on Avenue 3, Glorias Patrias, in the state of Merida. The fact was confirmed by the deputy of the National Assembly Williams Dvila, as well as by the correspondent of El Nacional in the state of Mrida, Leonardo Len. Through the social network Twitter, they reported that citizens scattered piles of old money bills in the streets, which were then set on fire. Venezuelan journalists and social media users shared several other photographs of the scene: Ayer se produjo el saqueo de un banco bicentenario en la ciudad de Mrida, en las cercanas de la plaza Glorias Patrias. Los saqueadores incendiaron una pila de bolvares adems de dejar muchos billetes por el suelo. pic.twitter.com/7gmL7FqMYo pic.twitter.com/7gmL7FqMYo  Descifrando la Guerra (@descifraguerra) March 12, 2019 March 12, 2019  TERRIBLE! Encapuchados saquearon banco Bicentenario en Mrida y esparcieron bolvares del viejo cono monetario por las calles https://t.co/6U3kFuMHn5 #LiberenALuisCarlos,#12Mar,#solidarioservicios pic.twitter.com/QT0fP9ifaF https://t.co/6U3kFuMHn5 #LiberenALuisCarlos #12Mar #solidarioservicios pic.twitter.com/QT0fP9ifaF  EntornoInteligente (@ENTORNOi) March 12, 2019 March 12, 2019  #MeridaBanco Bicentenario en Merida fue robado, slo haban billetes del viejo cono monetario que terminaron tapizando las calles del centro de la ciudadVenezuela es realismo magico y tragicoSarai Suarez pic.twitter.com/lIeo2mpw70 #Merida pic.twitter.com/lIeo2mpw70  Nellie B. Izarza ? ???? (@myteks) March 12, 2019 March 12, 2019  In short, the ""money in gutters"" image shown above captured an older and now invalid form of currency that was tossed aside after the looting of a bank, and not usable currency discarded by citizens because it had been made next to worthless due to ""socialism."" Sterling, Joe.  ""Venezuela Issues New Currency, Amid Hyperinflation and Social Turmoil.""
  CNN.  23 August 2018. Toro, Franciso.  ""In Venezuela, Money Has Stopped Working.""
  The Washington Post.  17 January 2018. Llorente, Elizabeth.  ""Caracas, Once a Thriving Metropolis, Is Struggling as Country Plunges Further Into Chaos.""
  Fox News.  4 April 2019. The New York Times.  ""The Crisis in Venezuela Was Years in the Making. Heres How It Happened.""
  23 January 2019. Martin, Eric and Patricia Laya.  ""What Broke Venezuela's Economy and What Could Fix It.""
  Bloomberg.  9 March 2019. Maduradas.com.  ""TERRIBLE! Encapuchados Saquearon Banco Bicentenario en Mrida y Esparcieron Bolvares Del Viejo Cono Monetario Por Las Calles (+Fotos).""
  12 March 2019. El Nacional.  ""Billetes Inferiores a 1.000 Bolvares No Tendrn Valor a Partir del 20A.""
  14 August 2018. 2001.com.ve.  ""Bolvar Fuerte Circular Hasta el Mircoles 5 de Diciembre.""
  Accessed 5 April 2019.",['economy'],False,"In late March 2019, a photograph supposedly showing piles of ""worthless"" currency thrown into gutters in Venezuela circulated on social media, attached to comments blaming socialism for the phenomenon behind the striking visual. One popular posting on Facebook was captioned, ""This is a street in Venezuela. That's money in the gutter. It's worthless. Welcome to socialism."":The economic collapse in Venezuela that began in 2013 is a complex matter which can't be attributed to any single factor. News outlets such as Bloomberg, the New York Times, and Fox News have cited a wide range of issues that led to the country's current economic crisis, including plunging oil prices, government corruption, political unrest, and socialist policies. That brew of unfavorable economic conditions has spawned massive hyperinflation which has greatly devalued Venezuela's currency, as the Washington Post reported in January 2018:Here's an excerpt from a CNN report about the switch in currencies:The viral photograph was likely taken on 11 March 2019 and showed the aftermath of looting at a bank in the town of Merida. Local news outlet Maduradas.com compiled several other photographs of the incident and reported that the perpetrators had discarded the old money on the streets and even lit some of it on fire (translated via Google):Ayer se produjo el saqueo de un banco bicentenario en la ciudad de Mrida, en las cercanas de la plaza Glorias Patrias. Los saqueadores incendiaron una pila de bolvares adems de dejar muchos billetes por el suelo. pic.twitter.com/7gmL7FqMYo Descifrando la Guerra (@descifraguerra) March 12, 2019TERRIBLE! Encapuchados saquearon banco Bicentenario en Mrida y esparcieron bolvares del viejo cono monetario por las calles https://t.co/6U3kFuMHn5 #LiberenALuisCarlos,#12Mar,#solidarioservicios pic.twitter.com/QT0fP9ifaF EntornoInteligente (@ENTORNOi) March 12, 2019#MeridaBanco Bicentenario en Merida fue robado, slo haban billetes del viejo cono monetario que terminaron tapizando las calles del centro de la ciudadVenezuela es realismo magico y tragicoSarai Suarez pic.twitter.com/lIeo2mpw70 Nellie B. Izarza ? ???? (@myteks) March 12, 2019"
"The United States imports 50 percent of at least 50 mineral commodities each year, including 100 percent of 21 of them.",[],"Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., raised concern about the United States' dependence on foreign countries for mineral needs in an opinion-editorial this fall. Manchin wrote anop-edwith Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, that was published in the Parkersburg News and Sentinel on Oct. 14, 2018. The op-ed touts several bipartisan efforts by Manchin and Murkowski on national energy policy. In a section detailing a joint amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act that the senators submitted this year, Manchin and Murkowski wrote that we import 50 percent of at least 50 mineral commodities each year, including 100 percent of 21 of them. Is that correct? We were able to trace Manchins claim back to areportpublished by the U.S. Geological Survey published in January 2018. The report includes figures showing how much the United States relies on imports for individual commodities and where these imports come from. This report, published annually, notes that in 2017, imports made up more than one-half of the U.S. apparent consumption for 50 nonfuel mineral commodities, and the United States was 100 percent import-reliant for 21 of those. Heres a chart from the report summarizing the critical minerals, the percentage of imports, and the countries of origin. The chart confirms that for 50 minerals, at least half are imported, and for 21, the U.S. supply is entirely imported. Some of the commodities that the U.S. most heavily imports include arsenic, asbestos, and gemstones. China and Canada were the heaviest suppliers of mineral commodities to the United States in 2017, the report said. We found only one thing to quibble about the statement. Manchin and Murkowski would have been more accurate if they had put the phrase at least in a different place, by writing that the United States imports at least 50 percent of 50 mineral commodities each year, including 100 percent of 21 of them. In his joint op-ed with Murkowski, Manchin wrote that the United States imports 50 percent of at least 50 mineral commodities each year, including 100 percent of 21 of them. The point is well-taken, though the language is a bit garbled. Its actually at least 50 percent of 50 mineral commodities. We rate the statement Mostly True.","['West Virginia', 'Technology', 'Trade']",True,"Manchin wrote anop-edwith Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, that was published in the Parkersburg News and Sentinel on Oct. 14, 2018. The op-ed touts several bipartisan efforts by Manchin and Murkowski on national energy policy.We were able to trace Manchins claim back to areportpublished by the U.S. Geological Survey published in January 2018. The report includes figures showing how much the United States relies on imports for individual commodities and where these imports come from."
Did the U.S. Government Pay for Mitch McConnell's Polio Care in the 1940s?,"[""Partisan web sites misrepresent the source of funding for the Republican senator's care as an infant in Alabama.""]","On 22 June 2017, the Occupy Democrats Facebook page posted a meme claiming that the United States government paid for Mitch McConnell's care and rehabilitation when the Republican senior senator contracted polio as an infant in the 1940s. meme This claim is contrasted, in the meme, with McConnell's support for the Senate Republican health care plan published that day: plan As a kid, Mitch McConnell had polio, and the government paid for ALL of his care and rehabilitation. Now, as the leader of the Republicans in the Senate, McConnell is taking government-funded care away from tens of millions of Americans. Let that sink in.   An article accompanying this meme reports that government-sponsored, publicly funded healthcare saved the young McConnell's life: article Mitch McConnell has been relentlessly working to roll back Medicaid and deprive millions of Americans of government-sponsored healthcare coverage for eight years now. But if it werent for the government, McConnell wouldnt be able to walk at all.  Young Mitch came down with a terrible case of polio as a child in Alabama. My mother was, of course, like many mothers of young polio victims, perplexed about what to do, anxious about whether I would be disabled for the rest of my life he admitted in a 2005 interview. But luckily for him, his mother took him 50 miles to the Warm Springs, where President Roosevelt won his own battle with polio and established a polio treatment center that was paid for by the public. President Roosevelt asked the people of America to send in dimes to the White House as part of his March of the Dimes foundation. Over two and a half million dimes were mailed in, and they paid for Mitchs physical therapy and treatment. A Death and Taxes article posted on the same date reports a similar story:  article How did Warm springs fund McConnells therapy, you ask? This was two decades before Lyndon Johnson launched federal health coverage by signing into law the creation of Medicare and Medicaid. In the mid-30s, Roosevelt and his law partner Basil OConnor founded the Georgia Warm Springs Foundation and started organizing fundraising balls around the country. By 1938, however, the balls grew less effective and the president needed a new strategy. Using a phrase coined by vaudeville entertainer Eddie Cantor, March of Dimes  a spin on the popular newsreel series March of Time  Roosevelt founded the March of Dimes foundation and launched a campaign asking the public to mail ten-cent donations to the White House. Within a month, Roosevelt received around 2,680,000 dimes. The campaign continued through WWII. McConnell started visiting Warm Springs in 1944. In other words, he overcame polio with the help of public money allocated by the White House. Mitch McConnell has often told the story of his childhood affliction with polio, and the role of FDR's Warm Springs rehabilitation center in his recovery. In his 2016 memoir The Long Game, McConnell recounted how he was struck with polio at the age of two while staying with his mother in his aunt's home in Five Points, Alabama.  memoir It's one of my life's great fortunes that Sister's home was only about sixty miles from Warm Springs, Georgia, where President Franklin D. Roosevelt had established a polio treatment center and where he'd often travel to find relief from the polio that paralyzed him at the age of thirty-nine. My mother took me there every chance she had. The nurses would teach her how to perform exercises meant to rehabilitate my leg while also emphasizing her need to make me believe I could walk, even though I wasn't allowed to. So it's clear that Mitch McConnell did indeed receive significant help  primarily in the form of physical therapy and physical therapy training for his mother  from the polio rehabilitation center established by Roosevelt at Warm Springs, Georgia.  However, neither this particular center nor the care given to McConnell were government-funded. Roosevelt purchased the property at Warm Springs, Georgia and established a center there in 1927, having visited frequently for therapy for his own polio, which he contracted in 1921. He (and others) set up the Warm Springs Foundation, a nonprofit organization that depended on wealthy philanthropists and donations from members of the public.  1927 In 1934, Basil O'Connor (once a partner at Roosevelt's law firm and a close associate of the recently-elected President) began organizing fundraising for the Warm Springs Foundation, set around the President's birthday celebrations each year. Within four years, these birthday balls had raised $1,350,030 for the Warm Springs rehabilitation center (the equivalent of $23.3 million in 2017). equivalent In September 1937, Roosevelt reconstituted the Warm Springs Foundation as the National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis (as polio was then widely known); in January 1938, the directors of the foundation launched the first ""March of Dimes"", a phrase coined by vaudeville star Eddie Cantor who helped promote a nationwide fundraising drive which attracted the support of Hollywood stars as well as charitable middle-class families giving 10 cents each.  In six months, the March of Dimes raised $81,073 (which would be about $1.4 million in 2017). In July 1938, the New York Times published a detailed auditor's report, which offered a breakdown of donations and expenditure. report Some aspects of the National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis perhaps reflect a more innocent time. For example, the hundreds of thousands of dimes sent by members of the public were processed at the White House and a cheque was given to Roosevelt, who then turned it over to O'Connor for distribution via the Foundation. However, in many ways the operation was a precursor of the professional, almost corporate style of non-profit fundraising and campaigning that has followed since. For example, a large portion of funds raised in 1938 came from attendees at 8,000 Presidential birthday balls throughout the country, labor organizations contributed the equivalent of $760,000, and the Western Union and Postal Telegraph companies wrote off the cost of thousands of birthday greetings sent to the President at 25 cents per message. The following year, charity sporting events were held throughout the country, and badges were distributed to donors as part of an awareness-raising ""Give a Dime and Wear a Button"" campaign.  year Funds raised for the Warm Springs Foundation and National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis were also distributed in the form of research grants to scientists hoping for a breakthrough in the treatment of polio. grants This came to fruition in the 1950s when Dr. Jonas Salk  who had received a grant from the National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis  developed a successful polio vaccine.  Jonas Salk The Warm Springs center that helped in Mitch McConnell's recovery was indeed founded by Franklin D. Roosevelt, who was President at the time McConnell was struck by the disease, in 1944. Roosevelt was the driving force behind both the Warm Springs Foundation and its successor, the National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis, and used his political office to energetically promote fundraising for polio care and research. The funding came from the kindness and charity of the public, as well as wealthy celebrities and large corporations. However, it was operated as an innovative, nationwide nonprofit organization, not a federal or state agency, and it was not taxpayer or government-funded. The Warm Springs center visited by McConnell remained owned and operated by a nonprofit organization until 1974, when the state of Georgia took it over, making it truly government-run. Since 2014, it has been owned and operated by Augusta University.  Augusta University McConnell, Mitch. ""The Long Game."" (pg 9,10).
 Penguin Random House. 31 May 2016. New York Times. ""$1,350,030 Raised for Warm Springs.""
 New York Times Archive. 16 January 1938. New York Times. ""Net of $1,021,034 to Paralysis Fund.""
 New York Times Archive. 7 July 1938. New York Times. ""Sport World Aids in Paralysis Drive.""
 New York Times Archive. 27 December 1938. ",['profit'],False,"On 22 June 2017, the Occupy Democrats Facebook page posted a meme claiming that the United States government paid for Mitch McConnell's care and rehabilitation when the Republican senior senator contracted polio as an infant in the 1940s.This claim is contrasted, in the meme, with McConnell's support for the Senate Republican health care plan published that day:An article accompanying this meme reports that government-sponsored, publicly funded healthcare saved the young McConnell's life:A Death and Taxes article posted on the same date reports a similar story: In his 2016 memoir The Long Game, McConnell recounted how he was struck with polio at the age of two while staying with his mother in his aunt's home in Five Points, Alabama. Roosevelt purchased the property at Warm Springs, Georgia and established a center there in 1927, having visited frequently for therapy for his own polio, which he contracted in 1921. He (and others) set up the Warm Springs Foundation, a nonprofit organization that depended on wealthy philanthropists and donations from members of the public. In 1934, Basil O'Connor (once a partner at Roosevelt's law firm and a close associate of the recently-elected President) began organizing fundraising for the Warm Springs Foundation, set around the President's birthday celebrations each year. Within four years, these birthday balls had raised $1,350,030 for the Warm Springs rehabilitation center (the equivalent of $23.3 million in 2017).In six months, the March of Dimes raised $81,073 (which would be about $1.4 million in 2017). In July 1938, the New York Times published a detailed auditor's report, which offered a breakdown of donations and expenditure.For example, a large portion of funds raised in 1938 came from attendees at 8,000 Presidential birthday balls throughout the country, labor organizations contributed the equivalent of $760,000, and the Western Union and Postal Telegraph companies wrote off the cost of thousands of birthday greetings sent to the President at 25 cents per message. The following year, charity sporting events were held throughout the country, and badges were distributed to donors as part of an awareness-raising ""Give a Dime and Wear a Button"" campaign. Funds raised for the Warm Springs Foundation and National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis were also distributed in the form of research grants to scientists hoping for a breakthrough in the treatment of polio.This came to fruition in the 1950s when Dr. Jonas Salk  who had received a grant from the National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis  developed a successful polio vaccine. However, it was operated as an innovative, nationwide nonprofit organization, not a federal or state agency, and it was not taxpayer or government-funded. The Warm Springs center visited by McConnell remained owned and operated by a nonprofit organization until 1974, when the state of Georgia took it over, making it truly government-run. Since 2014, it has been owned and operated by Augusta University. "
Charlie Daniels -- The Media and Paula Deen,['Country singer Charlie Daniels authored an opinion piece about press coverage of the Paula Deen racial controversy?']," Claim:  Country singer Charlie Daniels authored an opinion piece about press coverage of the Paula Deen racial controversy. CORRECTLY ATTRIBUTED Example:  [Collected via e-mail, July  2013] The was attributed to Charlie Daniels about Paula Deen.  Did he write it?  I think that if anything exemplifies the overt prejudice and determination of the American media to report only the news that suits their social and political interests and concept of what does and does not fit their agenda, it's the totally overblown coverage of something Paula Deen said 20 years ago, and some party she planned that she wanted to resemble a plantation scene featuring black male waiters in period dress. If Hollywood plans a movie featuring black waiters in a plantation scene or portray women as prostitutes or cast minorities in caricature roles does the media get upset and start calling the movie moguls racists? Is there any grown person who could truthfully declare under oath that they have never uttered something that someone might find personally offensive? ""Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."" Do the twenty-year-old words of a lady with a television cooking show trump the lie an Attorney General told Congress, or officials at the IRS usurping the rights of the American public and pleading the fifth amendment when confronted about it or the hiding of the facts surrounding the murder of four Americans at a Consulate in Libya or the incredibly shabby image of a president taking a one hundred million dollar vacation in this economy while closing down tours of the White House or the NSA invasion on the privacy of millions of unsuspecting citizens? [Rest of article here.] here Origins:  Grammy award-winning singer/musician Charlie Daniels regularly writes and posts opinion pieces about current political topics to the ""Soapbox"" section of the Charlie Daniels Band web site. As he notes in his periodic explanations of his efforts: Soapbox explanations From time to time in this column I feel somewhat obligated to explain myself, what I am, what I believe and what I am attempting to do by writing the things I write. It seems that as we acquire new readers there is some misunderstanding of what the soapbox is all about, so here we go again. First of all, this column is a series of essays made up of my personal opinion, my experiences and my beliefs.  I don't claim that the essays in this column represent anybody but myself. As far as the intellectual content is concerned it is being written by a man with limited formal education and the grammar, punctuation and spelling may from time to time leave something to be desired, but I will however, get my point across. I happen to believe very strongly in the things I write about, from the point of a private citizen who happens to love his country and its people and wants what he considers best in the national interest. My articles will range from the profound to the ridiculous, the sad to the humorous, the informative to the inane. It is not meant to be a news column and I'm not good at remembering dates and names. This above-quoted ""The Press and Paula Dean"" article was published by Charlie on 1 July 2013 in response to a racial discrimination controversy involving celebrity chef Paula Deen that broke in June 2013, stemming from a lawsuit filed by a former employee of restaurants owned by Deen and her brother, Earl ""Bubba"" Hiers. The Press and Paula Dean Last updated:  8 July 2013 ",['interest'],True,"[Rest of article here.]Origins:  Grammy award-winning singer/musician Charlie Daniels regularly writes and posts opinion pieces about current political topics to the ""Soapbox"" section of the Charlie Daniels Band web site. As he notes in his periodic explanations of his efforts:This above-quoted ""The Press and Paula Dean"" article was published by Charlie on 1 July 2013 in response to a racial discrimination controversy involving celebrity chef Paula Deen that broke in June 2013, stemming from a lawsuit filed by a former employee of restaurants owned by Deen and her brother, Earl ""Bubba"" Hiers."
Southwest Airlines Las Vegas Ticket Giveaway Scam,"['Southwest Airlines is not giving away four tickets to Las Vegas and $5,000 spending money to Facebook users who share and like a page.']","Scammers and malware purveyors are always looking for ways to entice online users into following web links that will lead those victims into the traps set for them, and offers of free airline tickets are prime bait in that pursuit of prey.  Airline tickets are something nearly everyone uses and have considerable value, but their non-material nature and the fact that they're not tremendously expensive (compared to, say, a new car) makes it seem plausible to the public that they're something a business might actually be giving away for free as part of an advertising promotion.  The name of Southwest Airlines, a major U.S. airline which is also the world's largest low-cost carrier, has frequently been invoked in various online ""free ticket"" giveaway scams in recent years.  In February 2016, social media users encountered posts that appeared to be from Southwest Airlines, offering to give away four tickets to Las Vegas and $5,000 spending money to Facebook users who shared and liked a page.  The primary type of free ticket fraud is the ""sweepstakes scam,"" which intended to lure victims into completing numerous surveys, disclosing a good deal of personal information, and then agreeing to sign up for costly, difficult-to-cancel  ""Reward Offers"" hidden in the fine print.  The scammers spread links via e-mail and Facebook that purport to offer free air travel tickets to those who follow those links. These web pages (which are not operated or sponsored by Southwest Airlines) typically ask the unwary to click what appear to be Facebook ""share"" buttons and post comments to the scammer's site (which is really a ruse to dupe users into spreading the scam by sharing it with all of their Facebook friends). Those who follow such instructions are then led into a set of pages prompting them to input a fair amount of personal information (including name, age, address, and phone numbers), complete a lengthy series of surveys, and finally sign up (and commit to paying) for at least two ""Reward Offers"" (e.g., Netflix subscriptions, credit report monitoring services, prepaid credit cards): Pursuant to the Terms & Conditions, you are required to complete 2 of the Reward Offers from the above. You will need to meet all of the terms and conditions to qualify for the shipment of the reward. For credit card offers, you must activate your card by making a purchase, transferring a balance, or making a cash advance. For loan offers you must close and fund the loan. For home security and satellite tv offers you must have the product installed. You may not cancel your participation in more than a total of 2 Reward Offers within 30 days of any Reward Offer Sign-Up Date as outlined in the Terms & Conditions (the Cancellation Limit). Not only that, but the fine print on the ""free"" tickets offers typically states that by accepting its terms, the user agrees to receive telemarketing phone calls and text messages from a variety of different companies:  Similar phony free ticket lures are used to spread malware.    In those versions of the scam, those who attempt to reach the URL provided for the purpose of claiming the free tickets are instead victimized by a Facebook ""lifejacking"" attack, a malicious script that takes over a user's Facebook profile without their knowledge and propagates itself to their friends' accounts as well. lifejacking Southwest Airlines has responded to such scams by issuing messages on Twitter that read: ""Hey folks! There is a scam being passed around on Facebook about a free ticket offer from SWA. Please don't click or share the links!"" As well, Southwest spokesperson Christi McNeill has said of these attempts to defraud that ""We are aware of the scam for free tickets being spread across Facebook. This offer is in no way affiliated with Southwest Airlines and we are working with Facebook to get it removed.""  ",['loan'],False,"Similar phony free ticket lures are used to spread malware.    In those versions of the scam, those who attempt to reach the URL provided for the purpose of claiming the free tickets are instead victimized by a Facebook ""lifejacking"" attack, a malicious script that takes over a user's Facebook profile without their knowledge and propagates itself to their friends' accounts as well."
'Media Silence' on $12B Reduction to the National Debt During Trump's First Month?,"['Although President Trump cited accurate national debt figures in a  tweet, the newsworthiness of that information was questionable.']","On 25 February 2017, President Donald Trump tweeted to complain that the news media were not reporting his success in reducing the national debt during his first month in office: ""The media has not reported that the National Debt in my first month went down by $12 billion vs a $200 billion increase in Obama's first month."" As noted by news media from the Los Angeles Times to the Washington Post, the tweet appeared shortly after a ""Fox & Friends"" segment in which guest (and former presidential candidate) Herman Cain reported the same numbers. That story seemed to have its origins in a post on the conservative blog Gateway Pundit titled ""Amazing! Trump Cuts US Debt by $12 Billion In His First Month,"" which took credit for the Trump tweet in an update to their story. 

There are two claims implicit in the tweet. The first claim is simply the factual nature of the figures reported. The second is that the numbers represent an item worthy of coverage. The numbers are factual in a literal sense, according to the online debt history search application offered by the US Treasury Department. Though the numbers regarding the debt at the end of Trump's and President Obama's first month are factual, their significance as a reportable bit of information or as an indicator of the impact or success of Trump's policies is questionable. Speaking to CBS News, Maya MacGuineas, director of the nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Budget, said, ""It is true the debt outstanding declined by $12 billion in the first month of Donald Trump's presidency. We applaud the president for focusing on the debt as an important metric of success and economic health, but would point out that the improvement this early in his term has to do with normal fluctuations in spending and revenues rather than new policies he has implemented."" 

Indeed, in terms of newsworthiness (or lack thereof), sporadic reductions of the debt are not uncommon on a month-to-month basis, according to the ""Monthly Statement of the Public Debt of the United States"" reports released during President Obama's second term in office. In fact, the Washington Post's Wonkblog reports that, even on a day-to-day basis, fluctuations even greater than the one Trump referenced are not unheard of. The Gateway Pundit article states that the change in debt under Trump translates to a 0.1 percent reduction in the U.S. debt burden. Actually, it's 0.06 percent between Jan. 20 and Feb. 21—a very small change. (The national debt has gone up or down by as much as 0.19 percent on single days this year.) 

Secondly, there are few mechanisms by which any actions Trump has taken as president would affect the national debt thus far, as he has not signed into law any financial measures related to federal borrowing. While there are arguments to be made that other factors related to Trump's presidency could affect the debt, the Post has said it is unlikely and also impossible to quantify: ""It's impossible to know whether Trump's election has really had time to filter through to concretely affect the economy. Congress has not passed any of his policies yet. The stock market has certainly continued to boom, but it was already rising before the election. While it's possible anticipation of tax cuts or regulatory relief is heating up the economy and leading to increased government receipts, investors might also be choosing not to sell assets to avoid current capital gains tax rates and waiting to see whether the Republican-dominated Congress successfully slashes rates."" 

Keith Hennessey, a former director of the U.S. National Economic Council appointed by George W. Bush, wrote a hypothetical memo to Congress analyzing the 45th President's tweet. In this document, he stated that neither Obama nor Trump had any effect on the national debt in their first month in office: ""Government borrowing in January and February is the byproduct of spending and tax policies set by Congress the year before. President Obama signed the fiscal stimulus law on February 17, 2009, but it took months before that began to change government cash flows and borrowing requirements. President Trump has so far not measurably affected fiscal policy in general or government borrowing in specific. It's unfair to assign any responsibility for borrowing in the first month to either president."" Hennessey added that it is equally unfair to compare the 2009 economic situation with the 2017 one: ""GDP was plummeting when President Obama took office. Tax revenues were down, automatic stabilizer payments (e.g., unemployment insurance and safety net spending) were up, and funds were being spent from the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP). In early 2009, government was borrowing a lot because the economy was weak, not because of President Obama's policies. In contrast, the U.S. economy is now growing. The smaller borrowing requirement for this month is mostly a result of this economic difference and may also in part be simply an artifact of choosing such a short timeframe for comparison."" 

More to the point, however, the fact that the day-to-day and month-to-month fluctuations of the national debt are so volatile, he argued, is why analysts don't typically look at the data for these time periods: ""Had the president / Mr. Cain ended his timeframe one day earlier, this tweet would have been invalid and debt would have increased (by just $1 billion) in the first month. This is why analysts look at debt on an annual basis rather than daily/weekly/monthly."" It should also be noted that, as the Fox and Friends segment aired on one of the nation's most popular national cable news networks, ""the media"" did indeed report on this story. The reason it didn't pick up much steam is that the numbers were not newsworthy because they were taken out of context and are likely irrelevant to President Trump's actions in office. 

UPDATE: 28 February 2017 -- Modified the status of this article to better explicate the difference between the accuracy of the debt figures and their newsworthiness.",['asset'],NEI,"On 25 February 2017, President Donald Trump tweeted to complain that the news media were not reporting his success in reducing the national debt during his first month in office: Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 25, 2017As noted by news media from the Los Angeles Times to the Washington Post, the tweet appeared closely after a ""Fox & Friends"" segment in which guest (and former presidential candidate) Herman Cain reported the same numbers. That story appeared to have its origins in a post on the conservative blog Gateway Pundit (""Amazing! Trump Cuts US Debt by $12 Billion In His First Month"") which took credit for the Trump tweet in an update to their story.The numbers are factual in a literal sense, according to the online debt history search application offered by the US Treasury Department:Though the numbers regarding the debt at the end of Trumps and President Obamas first month are factual, their significance as a reportable bit of information or as an indicator of the impact or success of Trumps policies is questionable. Speaking to CBS News, Maya MacGuineas, director of the nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Budget, said:Indeed, in terms of newsworthiness (or lack thereof), sporadic reductions of the debt are not uncommon (in red, below) on a month-to-month basis, according to The ""Monthly Statement of the Public Debt of the United States"" reports released during the course of President Obama's second term in office: In fact, the Washington Posts Wonkblog reports that, even on a day-to-day basis, fluctuations even greater than the one Trump referenced are not unheard of:Keith Hennessey, a former director of the U.S. National Economic Council appointed by George W. Bush, wrote a hypothetical memo to Congress analyzing the 45th Presidents tweet. In this document, he stated that neither Obama nor Trump had any effect on the national debt in their first month in office:"
No Social Security for Illegal Aliens Petition,['Petition seeks to overturn vote granting Social Security benefits to illegal aliens.'],"Claim:  Signing a petition will help overturn a recent Senate decision to give Social Security benefits to illegal aliens.  Example:  [Collected via e-mail, February 2009] Subject: Petition to President Obama It is already impossible to live on Social Security alone.  If the government gives benefits to 'illegal' aliens who have never contributed, where does that leave those of us who have paid into Social Security all our working lives? As stated below, the Senate voted this week to allow 'illegal' aliens access to Social Security benefits. Attached is an opportunity to sign a petition that requires citizenship for eligibility to that social service. Instructions are below.  If you don't forward the petition and just stop it, we will lose all these names. If you do not want to sign it, please just forward it to everyone you know. Thank you! To add your name, click on 'forward'.  Address it to all of your email correspondents, add your name to the list and send it on. When the petition hits 1,000, send it to comment@whitehouse.gov  PETITION for President Obama: Dear Mr. President: We, the undersigned, protest the bill that the Senate voted on recently which would allow illegal aliens to access our Social Security.  We demand that you and all Congressional representatives require citizenship as a pre-requisite for social services in the United States. We further demand that there not be any amnesty given to illegals, NO free services, no funding, no payments to and for illegal immigrants. We are fed up with the lack of action about this matter and are tired of paying for services to illegals.   Origins:  This item is a textbook example of the worst aspects of Internet petitions: It's an outdated exhortation that suggests dealing with a non-existent issue in a largely ineffective manner, yet it is regularly updated to make it appear as if it is addressing a real and current issue. This petition is an updating of one which first began circulating in mid-2006 (with ""President Obama"" since substituted for ""President Bush""), and thus the referenced Senate action took place not ""last week"" but back in May 2006.  Moreover, the Senate did not vote in May 2006 to ""grant Social Security benefits to illegal aliens""  as we covered in a separate article, back then the Senate tabled a prospective amendment that would have prohibited former illegals who had since gained legal status from being given credit for payments they had previously made into the Social Security system.  Not only has Congress enacted no recent legislation granting Social Security benefits to illegal aliens, but Social Security officials themselves have noted that undocumented immigrants have a positive net effect on the Social Security system: article In its 2008 annual report, Social Security officials said undocumented immigrants actual benefit the Social Security trust fund. One reason is that many of them pay Social Security taxes but never collect benefits. In previously published reports, Social Security officials have said undocumented immigrants paid about $7 billion into the trust fund in 2005, the latest year for which numbers are available. Moreover, regardless of the validity of the issue addressed, the mechanics of this e-petition are rather poor:  As with all petitions sent via e-mail, the process of circulating them poses a number of problems. Forwarding a petition through e-mail duplicates the names of hundreds and thousands of earlier signatories as each recipient adds his name and  then fans out his copy to multiple acquaintances.  Moreover, there is no verification or validation process to ensure that completed copies were actually ""signed"" by the persons listed  (rather than having their names added by someone else).  As well, any ""break"" in one branch of the chain caused by recipients' not forwarding the petition along to others means that all the collected signatures unique to that branch will be permanently lost.  The designated target for the receipt of completed petitions  in  this case  the general comments e-mail address for the White House  is not a good choice.  Petitions seeking legislative changes are best addressed to the legislative branch of government (i.e., the members of Congress who represent the petitioners).  The petition's goals are neither clear nor well-articulated.  It starts out protesting the notion that the Senate supposedly ""allowed illegal aliens to access our Social Security"" (a false premise), then demands that citizenship should be required as ""prerequisite for social services in the United States.""  Which is it?  Social Security and social services are two very different things.  In the case of social services, how should this restriction be enacted? Should abused children be denied state protective services unless they can demonstrate legal residency?  Should all emergency medical treatment be withheld from patients until they can provide documentation of their immigration status?  And in the absence of a national ID card, what standard would be used for documenting eligibility? A much more effective approach is to start with a legitimate issue; propose a clear, well-defined course of action to address it, and then phone, mail, or fax your Congressional representatives directly about it. Last updated:   7 June 2010",['taxes'],True,"This petition is an updating of one which first began circulating in mid-2006 (with ""President Obama"" since substituted for ""President Bush""), and thus the referenced Senate action took place not ""last week"" but back in May 2006.  Moreover, the Senate did not vote in May 2006 to ""grant Social Security benefits to illegal aliens""  as we covered in a separate article, back then the Senate tabled a prospective amendment that would have prohibited former illegals who had since gained legal status from being given credit for payments they had previously made into the Social Security system.  Not only has Congress enacted no recent legislation granting Social Security benefits to illegal aliens, but Social Security officials themselves have noted that undocumented immigrants have a positive net effect on the Social Security system:"
Were Millions of Mail-in Ballots Wrongly Sent to People Who Didn't Request Them?,['Some states automatically send mail-in ballots to all registered voters ... because they registered to vote.'],"Voting in the 2020 U.S. Election may be over, but misinformation continues to circulate. Never stop fact-checking. Follow our post-election coverage here. In mid-November 2020, an email from U.S. President Donald Trump's reelection campaign alleged that millions of mail-in ballots were erroneously sent to people who did not request them. A Nov. 16 email obtained by Snopes claimed, ""Millions of mail-in ballots were sent to people who never asked for them."" This claim implied that individuals ""who never asked"" for mail-in ballots wrongfully received them, suggesting that the election was tainted with fraud and that Americans should reject the results of the popular vote. Firstly, let this fact be clear: Americans have been voting by mail since the Civil War in the 1860s. In the modern era, the majority of states have allowed anyone to request an absentee ballot and submit it via mail, while others only permitted absentee voting if individuals provided a qualifying reason for not being able to attend a designated polling station on Election Day, such as illness, physical disabilities, travel, or work. Meanwhile, five states allowed all eligible voters in all elections to submit ballots entirely by mail: Colorado, Hawaii, Oregon, Washington, and Utah, while other states permitted local jurisdictions to run elections by mail under certain circumstances. The COVID-19 pandemic, however, put new pressure on the country to expand existing vote-by-mail systems to avoid spreading the virus at polling places. Several states passed new laws to allow all eligible residents to vote by mail, according to the National League of State Legislatures' compilation of state laws governing mail-in voting in 2020, or added ""COVID-19"" to their list of reasonable excuses for requesting an absentee ballot. At the core of Trump's allegation about ""millions of mail-in ballots"" being sent to people who didn't want them were the varying rules regarding ballot applications in different states. Most states, but not all, require voters to submit an application expressing their desire to vote by mail in order to receive the official ballot paperwork. Additionally, some states permit voters to apply for ""permanent absentee ballot status,"" allowing them to automatically receive ballots via mail for each election without needing to submit applications for each one. The NLSL stated: ""The ways in which voters may request a ballot vary, as do the deadlines for submitting the application to the local election official."" Some states also regulate who can distribute or collect applications for delivered ballots. Once the application is received, states have a process for verifying that the application indeed came from the intended voter before sending a ballot to that voter. That said, the handful of states that have conducted elections entirely by mail for years—Colorado, Hawaii, Oregon, Washington, and Utah—send ballots to every person listed in their respective databases of eligible voters, with no application necessary. With COVID-19, California, Nevada, New Jersey, and Vermont also conducted the 2020 presidential election in this manner, ensuring that every eligible resident received a ballot in the mail to vote for Trump or Biden, according to the NLSL. Additionally, Montana allowed counties to decide whether they would conduct the election this way, with no requests for mail-in ballots necessary. Considering the number of registered voters in those 10 states (there are more than 4.2 million in Colorado alone), there is some truth to the claim that ""millions of mail-in ballots were sent to people who never asked for them"" in the Trump-Biden race, if one considers the application process as the step in which people ""ask for"" ballots. However, that argument is flawed by the fact that recipients of those ballots had at one point registered to vote. In at least a handful of the 10 states, by registering to vote, they joined a vote-by-mail system that sends ballots without requiring applications first. In short, it is false to imply that millions of ballots were improperly or erroneously mailed in the 2020 election or to suggest that the system was a nefarious scheme to undermine Trump. The emails from Trump's campaign attempting to sound the alarm on a fictional election conspiracy asked supporters to contribute to a so-called ""Official Election Defense Fund"" or ""Election Defense Task Force,"" both of which the campaign framed as costly initiatives involving ballot recounts or various lawsuits to challenge Biden's win. However, according to Brendan Fischer, director of the federal reform program at the Campaign Legal Center, the average donor's money was not covering those expenses. ""Small donors who give to Trump thinking they are",['debt'],False,"Voting in the 2020 U.S. Election may be over, but the misinformation keeps on ticking. Never stop fact-checking. Follow our post-election coverage here.In mid-November 2020, an email from U.S. President Donald Trump's reelection campaign alleged millions of mail-in ballots were erroneously sent to people who did not request them. (Read more fact checks like this one here.)The COVID-19 pandemic, however, put new pressure on the country to expand existing vote-by-mail systems to avoid spreading the virus at polls.Several states passed new laws to allow all eligible residents to vote by mail, per the National League of State Legislature's compilation of state laws governing mail-in voting in 2020, or added ""COVID-19"" to their list of reasonable excuses to request an absentee ballot.So, considering the number of registered voters in those 10 states (there are more than 4.2 million in Colorado alone) there's some truth to the claim ""millions of mail-in ballots were sent to people who never asked for them"" in the Trump-Biden race, if you consider the application process the step in which people ""ask for"" ballots. But according to Brendan Fischer, director of the federal reform program at Campaign Legal Center, the average donor's money was not covering those expenses. ""Small donors who give to Trump thinking they are financing an 'official election defense fund' are in fact helping pay down the Trump campaigns debt or funding his post-presidential political operation,"" Fischer tweeted."
Does 'Club' in 'Club Sandwich' Stand for 'Chicken Lettuce Under Bacon'?,"['The ever-popular club sandwich dates back at least to the late 1800s, which is more than can be said for a viral theory about how it got its name.']","A considerable number of people on the internet appear to believe that a food item known as the club sandwich got its name from the acronym of its most common ingredients: ""Chicken and Lettuce Under Bacon."" While there's a modicum of logic and precedent to this notion (after all, ""BLT"" is an acronym for ""Bacon, Lettuce, and Tomato""), history doesn't support it. Quite the opposite. Club sandwiches have been around for a long time. There are references to the popular lunch item and recipes for making it in published sources dating back to the 1890s. Here, for example, is a club sandwich recipe from Janet McKenzie Hill's ""Salads, Sandwiches and Chafing-Dish Dainties,"" published in 1899. Despite the club sandwich's culinary longevity, however, the theory that it was named for its ingredients appears to be no older than the late 1990s and may well have originated on the internet. We scoured book and periodical archives and found no references to any version of ""chicken and lettuce under bacon"" in any text published prior to 2018. Etymologist Barry Popik reports finding this ""Chicken Lettuce Under Bacon"" reference posted in a Google Groups discussion dated December 8, 1998. As of this writing, we have not been able to find any published mentions predating this. In another blog post, Popik flatly asserts that ""club"" sandwich is not, in fact, an acronym, but rather a ""backronym"" (or ""back acronym,"" meaning the claim was made after the fact). Based on our own research, we agree. So, where did the name ""club sandwich"" really come from? Popik writes that the club sandwich probably originated at the Union Club of the City of New York in the 1880s. The World (New York, NY) printed on November 18, 1889: ""Have you tried a Union Club sandwich yet? Two toasted slices of Graham bread, with a layer of turkey or chicken and ham between them, served warm."" Union Club member Ely Goddard (1853-1910) was credited with the sandwich in articles in the New York (NY) Herald in 1891 and 1893, but a chef at the club could also have originated it. Hill, Janet McKenzie. Salads, Sandwiches and Chafing-Dish Dainties: With Thirty-Two Illustrations of Original Dishes. Little, Brown, 1899. Martin, Gary. Club Sandwich - the Meaning and Origin of This Phrase. Phrasefinder, https://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/club-sandwich.html. Accessed September 2, 2022. Popik, Barry. ""Club Sandwich (Club House Sandwich; Clubhouse Sandwich)."" https://www.barrypopik.com/index.php/new_york_city/entry/club_sandwich/. Accessed September 2, 2022. Popik, Barry. ""Chicken Lettuce Under Bacon (""club sandwich backronym)."" https://www.barrypopik.com/index.php/new_york_city/entry/chicken_lettuce_under_bacon/. Accessed September 2, 2022.",['credit'],False,"Club sandwiches have been around for a long, long time. There are references to the popular lunch item and recipes for making it in published sources dating back to the 1890s. Here, for example, is a club sandwich recipe from Janet McKenzie Hill's ""Salads, Sandwiches and Chafing-Dish Dainties,"" published in 1899: Etymologist Barry Popik reports finding this ""Chicken Lettuce Under Bacon"" reference posted in a Google Groups discussion dated Dec. 8, 1998: As of this writing, we've not been able to find any published mentions predating this. In another blog post, Popik flatly asserts that ""club"" sandwich is not, in fact, an acronym, but rather a ""backronym"" (or ""back acronym,"" meaning the claim was made after the fact). Based on our own research, we agree.So, where did the name ""club sandwich"" really come from? Popik writes: "
Did Cargo Ship 'Draw' a Penis Before Getting Stuck in Suez Canal?,['Some may classify getting stuck in the Suez Canal as a dick move. '],"On March 23, 2021, shipping traffic through Egypt's Suez Canal was grounded to a halt after a large vessel called the ""Ever Given"" got stuck in the passageway. Shortly after news broke about this blocked shipping route, an image started to circulate on social media that supposedly showed how the Ever Given, a nearly 200-foot wide, 224,000-ton vessel, had ""drawn"" a penis in its route movements shortly before it entered the Suez Canal:   This is a genuine image showing the Ever Given's route before it got stuck in the Suez Canal. While it may resemble a rough drawing of a penis, there's no evidence to indicate that this was ""drawn"" on purpose. The image comes from a video created by the vessel-trafficking service provider VesselFinder.com. The video shows the movements of the Ever Given as it waited for its turn to enter the Suez Canal. Vessel Finder wrote: VesselFinder.com On the occasion of the disputed incident of the ultra-large container ship Ever Given blocking the Suez Canal, the VesselFinder team made a video simulation of the movements of the ship in more detail, for some time before it got stuck in the canal and blocked the main artery of cargo flow between Asia and Europe. Here's the video:  While some social media users may have been skeptical of this image, thinking that it was just a crude joke, a spokesperson for Vesselfinder.com confirmed to Vice that the route was genuine, adding that ""there is no room for some kind of conspiracies or false data."" Vice Another map from the ship-tracking website Myshiptracking.com also shows the Ever Given's seemingly NSFW route.  map Myshiptracking.com CNN reported on March 24 that eight tugboats were working to free the vessel, but that it could be days before the Suez Canal, one of the world's busiest shipping routes, returns to normal traffic levels: reported Eight tug boats are working to free a large container ship stuck in Egypt's Suez Canal, halting marine traffic through one of the busiest and most important waterways in the world. The rescue boats are working to float and release the Ever Given, a 59-meter-wide (193.5-feet) vessel that ran aground after 40-knot winds and a sandstorm caused low visibility and poor navigation, the Suez Canal Authority said in a statement Wednesday. The 224,000-ton vessel, sailing under a Panama flag, was en route to the port of Rotterdam in the Netherlands when it was knocked off course.",['returns'],True,"The image comes from a video created by the vessel-trafficking service provider VesselFinder.com. The video shows the movements of the Ever Given as it waited for its turn to enter the Suez Canal. Vessel Finder wrote:While some social media users may have been skeptical of this image, thinking that it was just a crude joke, a spokesperson for Vesselfinder.com confirmed to Vice that the route was genuine, adding that ""there is no room for some kind of conspiracies or false data.""Another map from the ship-tracking website Myshiptracking.com also shows the Ever Given's seemingly NSFW route. CNN reported on March 24 that eight tugboats were working to free the vessel, but that it could be days before the Suez Canal, one of the world's busiest shipping routes, returns to normal traffic levels:"
We have more women living in poverty in this state than almost anywhere else.,[],"El Paso lawyer Maxey Scherr, who seeks the Democratic U.S. Senate nomination, described the Obamacare law as vital to the health of millions of Texans in an interview with progressive Houston blogger Charles Kuffner. We have more women living in poverty in this state than almost anywhere else, Scherr said in the interview, which Kuffnerrecorded and placed onlineFeb. 4, 2014. We do? By email, Scherr campaign spokesman Victor Reyes told us Scherr based her conclusion on state rankings inTexas on the Brink,a March 2013 report by the Legislative Study Group, a Texas House caucus chaired by Rep. Garnet Coleman, D-Houston. According to the report, Texas ranks fourth nationally in the percentage of women living in poverty, a conclusion attributed in a footnote toinformation sorted bythe Urban Institute and Kaiser Commission on Medicaid and the Uninsured. We clicked online to the Kaiser information and came up with a chart indicating that in 2011-12, 23 percent of Texas women were living in poverty, tying the state with California and Arizona for the fourth-highest rate nationally. According to the chart (see below), 24 percent of women in Hawaii were living in poverty; 26 percent of women in Arkansas, Louisiana and New Mexico; and 27 percent in Mississippi. Source: Web page,Adult Poverty Rate by Gender,State Health Facts, the Henry J. Kaiser Foundation (accessed Feb. 13, 2014) A Kaiserexplanatory notesays the women-in-poverty percentages reflect the share of female adults aged 19-64 with incomes less than 100 percent of the federal poverty level. For a family of four in every state but Alaska and Hawaii, that poverty level was $22,350 in 2011 and $23,050 in 2012, according to the note. This information also can be sorted by the number of women in poverty in each state. By this metric, Texas--with nearly 1.8 million women in poverty--trailed only California, with 2.7 million women in poverty (see below). Source: Web page,Adult Poverty Rate by Gender,State Health Facts, the Henry J. Kaiser Foundation (accessed Feb. 13, 2014) Next, we wondered if the presented rates and rankings were up to date. Nope: By email, Jennifer Lee, a researcher for the Austin-based Center for Public Policy Priorities, which advocates for programs serving the poor, sent us achartshe built using the latest estimates from the American Community Survey for 2012 as overseen by the U.S. Census Bureau. According to the 2012 estimates, 17.8 percent of Texas women aged 18-64 lived in poverty that year. Fourteen states had more women in poverty: Mississippi, Louisiana, New Mexico, Arkansas, Kentucky, Alabama, West Virginia, Arizona, Georgia, South Carolina, Tennessee, North Carolina, Oregon and Michigan, according to the chart. But rounding these percentages leaves Texas tied for fifth--with Ohio, Montana, Florida and Oklahoma--with 18 percent of women in poverty, the chart indicates. Mississippi, ranked No. 1, was alone with 25 percent of women in poverty. In raw numbers, California led the nation with 2 million women in poverty, according to the chart, followed by Texas (1.4 million) and Florida and New York (1 million each). Lee said: Poverty is consistently higher for females than for men across the country. There are a lot of causes of this, but one is that many women work in historically underpaid jobs. Women who must raise children alone are especially vulnerable. Our ruling Scherr said more women live in poverty in Texas than almost anywhere else. In raw numbers, California in 2012 had the most women in poverty followed by Texas. But poverty rate is a more reasonable yardstick to compare states. The rounded Texas rate--indicating about 18 percent of its women aged 18-64 lived in poverty in 2012--tied the state for fifth with some other states. Breaking out each state's rate to tenths of percentage points, though, shows 14 states with a greater share of women in poverty than Texas. We rate this claim, which could have been more precise, as Mostly True. MOSTLY TRUE The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information. Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check.","['Economy', 'Population', 'Poverty', 'Texas']",True,"We have more women living in poverty in this state than almost anywhere else, Scherr said in the interview, which Kuffnerrecorded and placed onlineFeb. 4, 2014.By email, Scherr campaign spokesman Victor Reyes told us Scherr based her conclusion on state rankings inTexas on the Brink,a March 2013 report by the Legislative Study Group, a Texas House caucus chaired by Rep. Garnet Coleman, D-Houston. According to the report, Texas ranks fourth nationally in the percentage of women living in poverty, a conclusion attributed in a footnote toinformation sorted bythe Urban Institute and Kaiser Commission on Medicaid and the Uninsured.Source: Web page,Adult Poverty Rate by Gender,State Health Facts, the Henry J. Kaiser Foundation (accessed Feb. 13, 2014)A Kaiserexplanatory notesays the women-in-poverty percentages reflect the share of female adults aged 19-64 with incomes less than 100 percent of the federal poverty level. For a family of four in every state but Alaska and Hawaii, that poverty level was $22,350 in 2011 and $23,050 in 2012, according to the note.Source: Web page,Adult Poverty Rate by Gender,State Health Facts, the Henry J. Kaiser Foundation (accessed Feb. 13, 2014)Nope: By email, Jennifer Lee, a researcher for the Austin-based Center for Public Policy Priorities, which advocates for programs serving the poor, sent us achartshe built using the latest estimates from the American Community Survey for 2012 as overseen by the U.S. Census Bureau.Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check."
Did Stalin Pluck a Live Chicken as a Lesson to His Followers?,"['A common tale expresses the thought that a dictator can do anything he wants to ""the people,"" so long as the people believe he is the source of their survival.']","A common item of interest on social media is a rather gruesome anecdote attributed to Soviet leader Josef Stalin, which describes him purportedly plucking a live chicken in order to demonstrate ""how easy it is to govern stupid people"":  We found no sources for this anecdote that were contemporaneous with Stalin's life (he died in 1953), nor from the next few decades afterwards. The earliest recountings of it seem to date from the early 1990s or late 1980s, which is consistent with the following excerpt from a 1988 New Yorker article that attributes it to the mid-1980s writings of anti-Stalinist Soviet/Kyrgyz author Chingiz Aitmatov: With the new Party line established, editors around the country unleashed an extraordinary torrent of articles damning Stalin. A novelist named Chingiz Aitmatov wrote one of the most powerful. Aitmatov has a distinguished history as an anti-Stalinist. In the early nineteen-eighties, when discipline of all kinds was lax, he managed to get past the censors a novel called ""The Day Lasts More Than a Hundred Years,"" which in elliptical, allegorical ways, attacked the Stalinist legacy, and sold five million copies. Now Aitmatov was free to use language as blunt as he liked. He began with an anecdote: Stalin called together his closest comrades-in-arms. ""I understand you're wondering how I govern the people so that every last one of them ... thinks of me as a living god. Now I'll teach you the right attitude toward the people."" And he ordered a chicken brought in. He plucked it live, in front of them all, down to the last feather, down to the red flesh, until only the comb was left on its head. ""And now watch,"" he said, and let the chicken go. It could have gone off where it wished, but it went nowhere. It was too hot in the sun and too cold in the shade. The poor bird could only press itself against Stalin's boots. And then he tossed it a crumb of grain, and the bird followed him wherever he went. Otherwise, it would have fallen over from hunger. ""That,"" he told his pupils, ""is how you govern our people."" Aitmatov appears to be the source of this tale, but as noted in the above New Yorker article and a 2008 Reuters obituary for Aitmatov, he wrote in ""elliptical, allegorical ways,"" and his works ""often interwove popular myths and folktales to create allegorical themes populated with down-to-earth characters."" Aitmatov acknowledged that of himself as well, writing in the introduction to his novel ""The Day Lasts More Than a Hundred Years"": obituary As in previous works, here I also draw on legends and myths handed down to us from former generations; together with these, for the first time in my writing career I also use fantasy to form part of the story. But, for me, neither is an end in itself, simply a method of expressing thoughts, a means of identifying and interpreting realities. Given that Aitmatov is the apparent source for this anecdote, that it did not first appear until some 30 years after Stalin's death, and that Aitmatov was known for his use of allegory, most likely the tale is not a literal account of something Stalin did, but rather an illustrative sketch that Aitmatov either invented himself or heard elsewhere and subsequently attributed to Stalin. We therefore rate this claim ""Legend."" Cullen, Robert.  ""Letter from Moscow.""
  The New Yorker.  17 October 1988  (p. 100). Aitmatov, Chingiz.  The Day Lasts More than a Hundred Years.
  Indiana University Press, 1988.  ISBN 0-253-20482-8. Reuters.  ""Kyrgyz Writer, Perestroika Ally Aitmatov Dies.""
  10 June 2008.",['interest'],True,"Aitmatov appears to be the source of this tale, but as noted in the above New Yorker article and a 2008 Reuters obituary for Aitmatov, he wrote in ""elliptical, allegorical ways,"" and his works ""often interwove popular myths and folktales to create allegorical themes populated with down-to-earth characters."" Aitmatov acknowledged that of himself as well, writing in the introduction to his novel ""The Day Lasts More Than a Hundred Years"":"
"Congress removes Child Tax Credit, Mortgage Deduction, and EITC from the Tax Code.","['Has Congress eliminated the child tax credit, earned income tax credit (EITC) and mortgage deductions due to the influence of Koch Industries?']"," Claim:  Congress has eliminated the child tax credit, the earned income tax credit (EITC), and mortgage deductions from the tax code under pressure from lobby groups and the Koch brothers.  Example:  [Collected via Twitter, November 2014] Are u kidding!? Congress Eliminates Child Tax Credit, Mortgage Deduction & E.I.T.C   Origins:  On 11 November 2014, the National Report published an article claiming a ""heavy burst of lobbying"" by groups including the Koch brothers' Koch Industries preceded a vote whereby Congress rescinded several common tax breaks long afforded to millions of Americans.  article According to the article, the child tax credit, the earned income tax credit and the mortgage interest deduction were all forms of ""entitlement payouts"" that had been eliminated beginning with the 2014 fiscal year to allow ""job creators"" to flourish: The deeply unpopular congress, whose approval rating hovers around a historic low of 10%, has voted to remove the child tax credit, the earned income tax credit and the mortgage interest deduction from the tax code starting with the 2014 fiscal year. The move is almost assured to solidify the perception of the 113rd Congress of the United States as deeply disconnected from the struggles and desires of the populace it is supposed to serve.  The move, long championed by entitlement reform advocates like congressman Paul Ryan R-Wisconsin and Ted Cruz R-Texas, will cut entitlement payouts by a staggering 177 billion dollars. 54.33 billion dollars in savings will be realized from discontinuing the earned income tax credit, which generally pays those making less than 12 thousand dollars yearly large cash tax rebates far in excess of the actual tax they paid. 69.7 billion will be saved from the mortgage interest tax deduction, which critics say primarily favors top income earners. The elimination of the child tax credit, which critics say serves no fair purpose, will result in an additional 54 billion dollar savings. The article was nothing but a chain-yanking spoof, however: The National Report is a well-known fake news outlet notorious for publishing click-baiting, completely false stories such as ""15 Year Old Who 'SWATTED' Gamer Convicted of Domestic Terrorism,"" ""Solar Panels Drain the Sun's Energy, Experts Say,"" and ""Vince Gilligan Announces Breaking Bad Season 6."" 15 Year Old Who 'SWATTED' Gamer Convicted of Domestic Terrorism Solar Panels Drain the Sun's Energy, Experts Say Vince Gilligan Announces Breaking Bad Season 6 The article also quoted economist ""Paul Horner"" on Congress' purported tax credit repeal.  If that name sounds familiar, it's because Paul Horner is a National Report writer whose name is used as a recurring character in various stories published by the site.     Last updated:  13 November 2014 <",['income'],NEI,"Origins:  On 11 November 2014, the National Report published an article claiming a ""heavy burst of lobbying"" by groups including the Koch brothers' Koch Industries preceded a vote whereby Congress rescinded several common tax breaks long afforded to millions of Americans. The article was nothing but a chain-yanking spoof, however: The National Report is a well-known fake news outlet notorious for publishing click-baiting, completely false stories such as ""15 Year Old Who 'SWATTED' Gamer Convicted of Domestic Terrorism,"" ""Solar Panels Drain the Sun's Energy, Experts Say,"" and ""Vince Gilligan Announces Breaking Bad Season 6."""
Did Donald Trump's Grandfather Make His Fortune in Prostitution?,['A meme claimed Frederick Trump was a pimp and drug dealer who made his fortune running a brothel and opium den.'],"In November 2015, the biography of Frederick Trump, Donald Trump's grandfather, was condensed into two paragraphs and then circulated on the internet via a meme. While some of the information included in the meme is accurate, much of it is either exaggerated or incomplete. This particular rumor centers on the idea that Frederick Trump made his fortune through brothels and opium dens. While there is anecdotal evidence that Trump dabbled in prostitution, there is no proof that this constituted the bulk of his fortune. In Gwenda Blair's 2000 book, The Trumps: Three Generations of Builders and a Presidential Candidate, she describes how Frederick Trump opened a series of restaurants and hotels during the Klondike Gold Rush in the 1890s. One of those hotels, The Arctic Restaurant and Hotel, was described as decadent and far superior to other restaurants in the area. In the larder were salmon and an extraordinary variety of meats, including duck, ptarmigan, grouse, goose, and swan, as well as caribou, moose, goat, sheep, rabbit, and squirrel. Incredibly, the New Arctic served fresh fruit: red currants, raspberries, strawberries, blueberries, blackberries, and even cranberries. A small oasis of luxury, the Arctic's menu was a vast improvement over what the two restaurateurs had been able to offer on the trail. An anonymous letter to the Yukon, however, claimed that The Arctic Restaurant and Hotel was also known for prostitution: ""I would advise respectable women traveling alone, or with an escort, to be careful in their selection of hotels at Bennett,"" he wrote. ""For single men, the Arctic has excellent accommodations as well as the best restaurant in Bennett, but I would not advise respectable women to go there to sleep as they are liable to hear that which would be repugnant to their feelings and uttered, too, by the depraved of their own sex."" While it's unclear if Frederick Trump directly profited from prostitution at his hotel (or whether it even occurred there), it should be noted that the world's oldest profession was relatively commonplace during the Gold Rush. The meme also claims that Frederick Trump decided to return to Germany when police started cracking down on ""his criminal rackets."" Again, this is based on little more than a morsel of truth and does not tell the whole story. In 1901, Trump sold his assets and returned to Germany. While one could argue that Trump made the decision because he believed that police were going to start enforcing prostitution laws, that is only one factor that led to Trump's departure for Germany; Frederick Trump saw that it was time to leave. If Major Wood actually enforced the laws regarding prostitution, gambling, and liquor, hotels and restaurants would be far less profitable. Not only that, the economic boom was bound to be short-lived. There was not nearly enough solid economic development to absorb these newcomers in any long-term way; when the placer deposits were emptied, they would go back home. Without the umbrella of gold, other local industries would not be strong enough to sustain themselves and compete with cheaper sources farther south. The boom was over, Frederick Trump realized. He left just in time, avoiding the uproar when his erstwhile partner hit the skids and the economic decline that would soon sweep over White Horse. In a situation that created many losers, he managed to emerge a winner. He had made money; perhaps even more unusually in the Yukon, he had also kept it and departed from White Horse with a substantial nest egg. He had accomplished his goal of making and saving enough money to marry, but he had no intention of doing so in America. For this important moment, he would have to return to Germany. While the meme exaggerated Trump's involvement in ""criminal rackets,"" it did correctly state that Trump returned to the United States after the German government determined that he had originally left Germany in 1885 to avoid taxes and the army. In summation, Donald Trump's grandfather Frederick Trump was a German immigrant who made his fortune by opening several restaurants and hotels in Seattle and British Columbia during the Yukon Gold Rush. While some of these hotels may have been used for prostitution, gambling, or other seedy activities common on the trail, it is incorrect to say that Trump built his fortune on illegal activities.",['taxes'],False,"In Gwenda Blair's 2000 book The Trumps: Three Generations of Builders and a Presidential Candidate, she described how Frederick Trump opened a series of restaurants and hotels during the Klondike Gold Rush in the 1890s. One of those hotels, The Arctic Restaurant and Hotel, was described as decadent and far superior to other restaurants in the area:While the meme exaggerated Trump's involvement in ""criminal rackets,"" it did correctly state that Trump returned to the United States after the German government determined that he had originally left Germany in 1885 to avoid taxes and the army."
The past (Obama) administration was the first administration that never had a whole year of 3 percent growth.,[],"Speaking at an event in Chicago earlier this month, U.S. Rep. Peter Roskam, R-Ill., was talking tax policy and the economy when he pointed to lackluster economic growth that occurred under former President Barack Obama. The past (Obama) administration was the first administration that never had a whole year of 3 percent growth, Roskam said during a March 6speechat the City Club of Chicago. Its an oft-cited figure Republicans tend to throw around to highlight the weak economic recovery throughout Obamas presidency, but does the data back it up? A familiar claim Roskams claim lacks some specifics, particularly the type of growth and time frame he was referring to in his speech. David Pasch, the Wheaton Republicans communications director, provided a link to data compiled by the Bureau of Economic Analysis showing both the annual and quarterly percentage change in real gross domestic product, or GDP, which is the total value of goods and services provided in the country. While annual figures on GDP growth date back to the Herbert Hoover administration and the onset of the Great Depression in 1929, the federal government did not start trackingquarterly growthuntil 1947. Considering the time frame for which this annual data is available, its safe to assume Roskam was referring to economic growth since the Hoover administration. In fact, Roskams claim is quite similar to a statement Donald Trump made during a campaign speech in October, which wasfact-checkedby our colleague Joshua Gillin at PolitiFact Florida. As was the case with Trumps claim, Roskam is right when he says that year-over-year GDP growth never topped 3 percent while Obama was in office. But as Princeton University economist Alan Blinder told PolitiFact at the time, looking at annual data can be misleading because it doesnt provide context or account for historical factors that affect economic growth, such as recessions and global crises. For example, Hoover came into office on the cusp of the Great Depression, and Obama took over during the tail end of the Great Recession and amid instability in the Middle East. Thats one of the main reasons why economists suggest looking at the percentage change in GDP by quarters, rather than growth in a single calendar year. When PolitiFact Florida fact-checked Trump saying Obama was the first president in modern history not to have a single year of 3 percent growth, data for the third and fourth quarters of 2016 was not yet available. But now it is. GDP growth in 2016 and the Obama years According to the Bureau of Economic Analysis, the percentage change in GDP growth during the third and fourth quarters of the last year of Obamas final term was 3.5 percent and 1.9 percent, respectively, resulting in an average growth rate of 1.6 percent for 2016. That was down 1 percentage point from 2015 when GDP grew by 2.6 percent, which marked the best year for average growth under Obama. Typically, economic growth in the first quarter of a new presidency is attributed to the previous administration, meaning former President George W. Bush gets credit for the 5.4 percent contraction in the economy during the first three months of 2009. As for the remainder of Obamas time in office, quarterly GDP growth averaged 2.0 percent, or 1.5 percent when averaging out annual figures. But if the data is used to compare one quarter to the same quarter from a year ago, there were two periods during Obamas tenure in which growth exceeded 3 percent. Between the third quarters of 2009 and 2010, GDP growth was about 3.1 percent; and between the first quarters of 2014 and 2015, the economy grew by 3.3 percent, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis. With the way Roskam refers to growth, however, Obama indeed was the first president who did not achieve more than 3 percent growth in GDP. Average growth under Bush Sr., was 2.1 percent; 3.9 percent for Bill Clinton; 2.3 percent for George H.W. Bush; and 3.5 percent for Ronald Reagan. The highest annual growth on record occurred in 1942 during the Franklin D. Roosevelt administration, when GDP grew by a staggering 18.9 percent as the United States entered World War II and ramped up production following the Dec. 7, 1941, attack on Pearl Harbor. Our ruling Roskam said the Obama administration was the first administration that never had a whole year of 3 percent growth. While Roskams claim is accurate when based on annual GDP growth figures between 2009 and 2016, there are other ways to look at the data, such as from one quarter to the same in the previous year. Doing so reveals economic growth has surpassed 3 percent during two periods of Obamas presidency. We rate Roskams claim Mostly True.","['Economy', 'Illinois']",True,"The past (Obama) administration was the first administration that never had a whole year of 3 percent growth, Roskam said during a March 6speechat the City Club of Chicago.While annual figures on GDP growth date back to the Herbert Hoover administration and the onset of the Great Depression in 1929, the federal government did not start trackingquarterly growthuntil 1947.In fact, Roskams claim is quite similar to a statement Donald Trump made during a campaign speech in October, which wasfact-checkedby our colleague Joshua Gillin at PolitiFact Florida."
Says Mitt Romneys plan rolls back regulations on banks.,[],"In the final days before the election, the Obama campaign has put up an ad that serves as a sort of Cliff Notes for voters before they walk into the voting booth. It lists many of the points Obama has used against Mitt Romney throughout this contest. It warns about the future of Medicare, support for education, tax breaks for the wealthiest, and banking regulation. On that last point, it states that Mitt Romney's plan rolls back regulations on the banks that crashed our economy. This fact-check examines that claim and tries to discern what Romney would do to keep banks clear of the excesses that contributed to the financial crisis. Romney has not spoken in detail about his financial regulation plans. Sifting through his website, interviews, and public comments, we see these core elements: He would repeal Dodd-Frank, the wide-ranging law that aims to fix many of the lapses associated with the meltdown. Romney has said he would replace the law but has not elaborated much beyond that concept. He supports the idea of regulations. Extensive regulation is appropriate in an industry that has such an impact on the overall economy, he said in an interview with Time. Romney supports rules to ensure that banks have their own money at risk, as this promotes greater caution. ""You have to have rules for what kind of capital has to stand behind each kind of asset on Wall Street and banks,"" he said on 60 Minutes. This is part of current law. He supports greater transparency for derivatives trading. He told a group of Americans in London, mainly bankers, that we do need to have greater transparency in the trading of derivatives, so we know what's going on—what kind of exposures various institutions have. Derivatives as investment devices are not inherently bad, but they helped hide the weaknesses of the home mortgage market and increased the exposure of many investors when the sector collapsed. Dodd-Frank has a detailed approach to shedding light on derivatives trading. Romney opposes the current plan for orderly liquidations when banks fail. ""We need to get rid of that provision because it's killing regional and small banks,"" Romney said in the first presidential debate. However, he has not specified how he would change the current law. Romney believes regulators should move faster to define the minimum standards for a home mortgage loan. The Obama campaign backs up its claim with a Boston Globe article from last spring. The article emphasizes that Romney says he would do away with Dodd-Frank without stating what would replace it. Since that time, Romney has said a bit more, captured in that list above, but not much more. In May, one of Romney's top economic advisers, Glenn Hubbard, said the public could expect more detailed proposals on several key fronts, including what to do if one of the biggest banks fails, consumer financial protections, and housing finance. However, those proposals never appeared. The only detail from Hubbard himself targeted the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. That agency, created under Dodd-Frank, aims to stand between individuals and the marketing of unfair and deceptive financial services. Hubbard said the bureau might be moved or dismantled, with its functions passed along to existing agencies. The lack of specifics from Romney has left many people reading the tea leaves. Kenneth Scott, a professor of law and business at Stanford Law School, stated, ""I very much doubt that if Romney won there would be a blanket repeal of Dodd-Frank, but there would be an effort at significant amendments."" Some have looked to Congress for clues. A Bloomberg article described the changes Republicans have passed or introduced. High on the list are looser rules governing the trade in derivatives, and especially the financial practice called swaps. Swaps are basically insurance against the risk that a borrower won't repay a loan. It gets more exotic, but that's the central idea, and it's very big business. Swaps delivered $7 billion in revenues to banks in the first quarter of 2012. Swaps played a significant role in the 2008 financial crisis. Bloomberg and other news organizations have listed other areas where Republicans have worked to ease financial regulations, such as reversing the Volcker Rule, which limits banks on using customer deposits to invest in trades offered by an arm of the same bank. Bloomberg offered this summary: Dodd-Frank would remain, but it would be a revamped Dodd-Frank that would accommodate some of the most profitable and riskiest activities while preserving a patina of protection for investors and consumers. Still, the precise changes Romney would support are unknown. In addition, some would argue that whatever changes emerge would not increase the odds of another financial crisis. For example, Lawrence White, a scholar at the libertarian Cato Institute, believes the current law on big banks makes risky behavior more likely. ""Repealing that part of Dodd-Frank would not roll back regulation on the banks that crashed our economy; quite the contrary,"" White said. We asked the Romney campaign for more specifics in several areas but received no further information. Our ruling: The Obama ad says Mitt Romney's plan rolls back regulations on banks. Romney has provided scant details on his plans, but he has said that he would push for changes. Romney has never suggested that tougher regulations are needed, and he has stated many times that government regulates too much. It is reasonable to conclude his plans would be more in line with current Republican initiatives than the present law passed by Democrats. That direction points toward fewer restrictions than are in place under Dodd-Frank. Certainly, Romney has said that the provisions for the largest banks should be replaced. Conservative analysts would argue that these changes would not put the financial system at greater risk. However, the ad simply states that Romney would roll back regulations on the institutions that contributed to the financial crisis. How much of a rollback is unclear, but Romney does support a lighter regulatory touch on banks, so we rate the statement Mostly True.","['National', 'Financial Regulation', 'Message Machine 2012']",True,"In the final days before the election, the Obama campaign has put upan adthat is a sort of Cliff Notes for voters before they walk into the voting booth. It lists many of the points Obama has used against Mitt Romney throughout this contest.It warns about the future of Medicare,support for education, tax breaks for the wealthiest, and banking regulation. On that last point, it says, Mitt Romneys plan rolls back regulations on the banks that crashed our economy.This fact-check examines that claim and tries to discern what Romney would do about keeping banks clear of the excesses that contributed to the financial crisis.Romney has not spoken in detail about his financial regulation plans. Sifting through his website, interviews and his public comments, we see these core elements: He wouldrepeal Dodd-Frank, the wide-ranging law that aims to fix many of the lapses associated with the meltdown. Romney has said he would replace the law but has not gone much beyond that concept. Romney supports the idea of regulations. Extensive regulation is appropriate in an industry that has such an impact on the overall economy, he said in an interviewwithTime. Romney supports rules to ensure that banks have their own money at risk, as this promotes greater caution. You have to have rules for what kind of capital has to stand behind each kind of asset on Wall Street and banks, he said on60 Minutes. This is part of current law. He supports greater transparency for derivatives trading. He told agroup of Americansin London, mainly bankers, that we do need to have greater transparency in the trading of derivatives, so we know whats going on - what kind of exposures various institutions have. Derivatives as investment devices are not inherently bad but they helped hide the weaknesses of the home mortgage market and increased the exposure of many investors when the sector collapsed. Dodd-Frank has a detailed approach to shedding light on derivatives trading. Romney opposes the current plan for orderly liquidations when banks fail. We need to get rid of that provision because it's killing regional and small banks, Romney said in thefirst presidential debate.However, he has not said how he would change the current law.The Obama campaign backs up its claim with aBoston Globearticle from last spring. The article emphasizes that Romney says he would do away with Dodd-Frank without saying what would replace it. Since that time, Romney has said a bit more, captured in that list above, but not much more.In May, one of Romneys top economic advisers,Glenn Hubbard,said the public could expect more detailed proposals on several key fronts, including what to do if one of the biggest banks fails, consumer financial protections, and housing finance.  However, those proposals never appeared.The only detail from Hubbard himself targeted the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. That agency, created under Dodd-Frank, aims to stand between individuals and the marketing of unfair and deceptive financial services. Hubbard said the bureau might be moved or dismantled, with its functions passed along to existing agencies.The lack of specifics from Romney has left many people reading the tea leaves. Kenneth Scott is professor of law and business at Stanford Law School. I very much doubt that if Romney won there would be a blanket repeal of Dodd-Frank, but there would be an effort at significant amendments, Scott said.Some have looked to Congress for clues. ABloomberg articledescribed the changes Republicans have passed or introduced.  High on the list are looser rules governing the trade in derivatives, and especially the financial practice called swaps. Swaps are basically insurance against the risk that a borrower wont repay a loan. It gets more exotic, but thats the central idea, and its very big business. Swaps delivered $7 billion in revenues to banks in the first quarter of 2012. Swaps played a significant role in the 2008 financial crisis.Bloomberg andother news organizationshave listed other areas where Republicans have worked to ease financial regulations, such as reversing the Volker Rule, which limits banks on using customer deposits to invest in trades offered by an arm of the same bank.Bloomberg offered this summary: Dodd-Frank would remain but it would be a revamped Dodd-Frank that would accommodate some of the most profitable and riskiest activities while preserving a patina of protection for investors and consumers.Still, the precise changes Romney would support are unknown. In addition, some would argue that whatever changes emerge would not increase the odds of another financial crisis. For example, Lawrence White, a scholar at the libertarian Cato Institute, believes the current law on big banks makes risky behavior more likely.Repealing THAT part of Dodd-Frank would not roll back regulation on the banks that crashed our economy, quite the contrary, White said.We asked the Romney campaign for more specifics in several areas but received no further information.Our rulingThe Obama ad says Mitt Romneys plan rolls back regulations on banks.Romney has provided scant details on his plans, but he has said that he would push for changes. Romney has never suggested that tougher regulations are needed, and he has said many times that government regulates too much.  It is reasonable to conclude his plans would be more in line with current Republican initiatives than the present law passed by Democrats. That direction points toward fewer restrictions than are in place under Dodd-Frank. Certainly, Romney has said that the provisions for the largest banks should be replaced.Conservative analysts would say that these changes would not put the financial system at greater risk.However, the ad simply says Romney would roll back regulations on the institutions that contributed to the financial crisis. How much of a rollback is unclear, but Romney does support a lighter regulatory touch on banks, so we rate the statement Mostly True."
Did Lionel Messi Officially Sign for Paris Saint-Germain?,"['Rumors and speculation surrounded the future of the Argentine soccer star, one of the greatest of all time, in August 2021.']","In August 2021, rumors swirled around the future of Lionel Messi, one of the greatest soccer players of all time, who broke down in tears at a press conference to announce he would be leaving FC Barcelona of Spain, for whom he had played for two decades, leading the club to extraordinary success and establishing himself as a global superstar of the sport, rivaled only by Portugal's Cristiano Ronaldo.  broke down in tears According to statements issued by both the club and Messi himself, both sides had agreed a new contract for the Argentine attacking midfielder, now aged 34, the terms of which would have seen his previous salary  reported to have be $667,000 per week  cut in half.  statements reported However, strict Financial Fair Play (FFP) rules put in place by Spain soccer authorities, combined with Barcelona's dire financial straits  the club has debts of more than 1 billion ($1.2 billion)  ultimately made the new contract impossible. debts of more than 1 billion Messi's previous contract expired earlier in the summer of 2021, meaning he was now a free agent, and could be signed by any other club without the need for a transfer fee to be paid. However, Messi's profile in the sport, and his likely wage demands, meant only a very small number of clubs were in a realistic position to sign him.  Over the weekend Aug. 6 to Aug. 8 of 2021, rumors emerged online that French giants Paris Saint-Germain (PSG) were aggressively pursuing the signing of Messi, who scored a staggering 672 goals in 778 first-team appearances at Barcelona, and won a record six Ballons d'Or  an annual award generally considered to recognize the world's best player each year  between 2009 and 2019.  scored PSG was taken over in 2012 by the Qatari government-run Qatar Investment Authority, providing an extraordinary injection of cash and sponsorship deals that have helped drastically improve the club's fortunes in the intervening decade. taken over in 2012 The club's controversial Qatari backers also funded a series of marquee signings, including the two most expensive transfers in soccer history: that of Brazilian star Neymar from Barcelona, in August 2017 for 222 million ($264 million or $293 million in 2021 terms); and that of French star Kylian Mbappe from AS Monaco, in February 2018 for 180 million ($223 million or $247 million in 2021 terms). controversial Qatari backers 222 million 180 million On Aug. 10, PSG further fueled speculation that its signing of Messi was imminent  scheduling a press conference for the next morning, and posting short videos featuring the Argentinian flag and snippets of an Argentinian soccer jersey.  press conference short videos When Messi himself was greeted by PSG fans at Paris-Le Bourget airport, on the outskirts of the French capital, and at the Royal Monceau hotel, the rumors were all but officially confirmed.  greeted by PSG fans Royal Monceau However, the club removed any remaining doubts when, on the evening of Aug. 10, they officially confirmed Messi's move to the club on a two-year contract, with the option of a third year.   In a news release posted to the club's official website, PSG wrote: news release [PSG] is very happy to announce the signing of Leo Messi on a two-year contract, with the option of a further year. The six-time Ballon d'Or winner is considered a legend of the sport, and a true source of inspiration for all generations, on and off the field. The signing of Leo reinforces the ambitions of PSG and offers our loyal supporters an exceptional team, which promises to bring incredible footballing moments in the years to come.  Messi himself further confirmed the bombshell move, providing the following statement as part of PSG's news release: I can't wait to start a new chapter of my career in Paris. The club and its vision match perfectly my own ambitions. I know just how talented the players and staff are here. By their sides, I'm determined to create something great for this club and for the fans. I cannot wait to step on to the grass at [PSG home ground] Parc des Princes.",['debt'],True,"In August 2021, rumors swirled around the future of Lionel Messi, one of the greatest soccer players of all time, who broke down in tears at a press conference to announce he would be leaving FC Barcelona of Spain, for whom he had played for two decades, leading the club to extraordinary success and establishing himself as a global superstar of the sport, rivaled only by Portugal's Cristiano Ronaldo. According to statements issued by both the club and Messi himself, both sides had agreed a new contract for the Argentine attacking midfielder, now aged 34, the terms of which would have seen his previous salary  reported to have be $667,000 per week  cut in half. However, strict Financial Fair Play (FFP) rules put in place by Spain soccer authorities, combined with Barcelona's dire financial straits  the club has debts of more than 1 billion ($1.2 billion)  ultimately made the new contract impossible.Over the weekend Aug. 6 to Aug. 8 of 2021, rumors emerged online that French giants Paris Saint-Germain (PSG) were aggressively pursuing the signing of Messi, who scored a staggering 672 goals in 778 first-team appearances at Barcelona, and won a record six Ballons d'Or  an annual award generally considered to recognize the world's best player each year  between 2009 and 2019. PSG was taken over in 2012 by the Qatari government-run Qatar Investment Authority, providing an extraordinary injection of cash and sponsorship deals that have helped drastically improve the club's fortunes in the intervening decade.The club's controversial Qatari backers also funded a series of marquee signings, including the two most expensive transfers in soccer history: that of Brazilian star Neymar from Barcelona, in August 2017 for 222 million ($264 million or $293 million in 2021 terms); and that of French star Kylian Mbappe from AS Monaco, in February 2018 for 180 million ($223 million or $247 million in 2021 terms).On Aug. 10, PSG further fueled speculation that its signing of Messi was imminent  scheduling a press conference for the next morning, and posting short videos featuring the Argentinian flag and snippets of an Argentinian soccer jersey. When Messi himself was greeted by PSG fans at Paris-Le Bourget airport, on the outskirts of the French capital, and at the Royal Monceau hotel, the rumors were all but officially confirmed. In a news release posted to the club's official website, PSG wrote:"
Komen Research and CEO Salary,"['Online criticism claims the Susan G. Komen breast cancer organization only gives 20% of their donations to cancer research and pays their CEO $684,000 per year.']"," When Susan Goodman Komen died of breast cancer at the age of 33 in 1980, her younger sister, Nancy Goodman Brinker promised she would do whatever she could to help end that disease.  Brinker fulfilled that promise by founding The Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation (later known as Susan G. Komen for the Cure, then just Susan G. Komen) in 1982, a group that has since become the largest and most well known breast cancer organization in the United States: breast cancer Brinker fulfilled a promise to her sister that she would do everything she could to help eradicate the disease  a disease that Brinker also was diagnosed with and successfully fought. ""At that time, there was a stigma and shame around breast cancer,"" Brinker said. ""You didn't talk about it. There were no 800-numbers, no Internet. Our government didn't spend much on breast cancer research. There were few major cancer centers with expertise about breast cancer. That's the world we faced when Suzy was diagnosed. It's a world I watched her suffer in, and it's a world she wanted us to change."" In 2012, Komen founder and CEO Nancy Brinker became the focus of controversy when she announced Komen would be pulling the grants the organization had been providing to Planned Parenthood for breast cancer screenings, then quickly reversed that decision.  Several months later Brinker announced she would be stepping down as Komen's CEO, but the following year she was again the focus of controversy when news outlets reported that not only did she still hold her CEO position, but she had received a hefty raise to boot that brought her annual compensation up to $684,000 per year: In early 2012, Komen announced it was pulling its grants for breast-cancer screenings from Planned Parenthood, drawing an immediate backlash from Komen supporters and abortion rights advocates. Within days, Nancy Brinker, the groups founder and CEO, reversed the decision to defund the organization. Then, in August, Brinker announced that she would be stepping down. But 10 months later, Brinker still holds her position and tax documents reveal that she received a 64 percent raise and now makes $684,000 a year, according to the charitys latest available tax filing.  Komen says the raise came in November 2010, prior to last year's controversy. Ken Berger, president and CEO of Charity Navigator, which evaluates and rates charities, called Brinker's salary ""extremely high."" ""This pay package is way outside the norm,"" he said. ""It's about a quarter of a million dollars more than what we see for charities of this size. This is more than the head of the Red Cross is making, for an organization that is one-tenth the size of the Red Cross.""  The American Red Cross had revenue of about $3.4 billion, while Komens was about $340 million last year.  Red Cross CEO Gail McGovern makes $500,000, according to the most recent financial documents available for the charity. Charity Navigator's last compensation figure for Nancy Brinker was $560,896 per year, which at the time put her below Komen president Elizabeth Thompson's reported annual compensation of $606,461.   In June 2013, Komen finally announced that Brinker would be stepping down as president and CEO of that organization and named Judith A. Salerno, M.D. as her successor.  In June 2015, Brinker reportedly resigned from her paid position to assume an unpaid role role as a top volunteer with Komen. Dr. Salerno's most recently reported compensation (in August 2017) was $479,858, while Nancy Brinker was still listed as a ""founder"" receiving a salary of $397,093. compensation announced unpaid In September 2017, Paula Schneider took over as president and CEO of Komen, with compensation of $137,155 reported as of the end of the fiscal year in March 2018. Paula Schneider The reference to Komen's applying only 20% of donated money to breast cancer research likely comes from a pie chart displayed in the ""Use of Funds"" section of Wikipedia's article about Susan G. Komen for the Cure, which showed Komen's 2009-2010 Expenses: Use of Funds  While it may have been true that breast cancer research comprised only a 21% share of Komen's program expenses (Charity Navigator puts the figure at 28.8% as of March 2018), citing that figure as a criticism of the organization reflects a common misbelief that groups dedicated to addressing particular diseases (e.g., the Muscular Dystrophy Association, the ALS Association) exist solely or primarily to fund and direct research into curing and/or preventing those diseases.  This perception is inaccurate: Komen and other groups like it have goals that include delivering a wide array of services to the communities they support beyond the funding of research, such as funding educational awareness and outreach programs, providing screening and diagnostic procedures, and arranging medical treatment and home care for persons currently living with those diseases.  A more relevant metric for assessing a charity's overall financial effectiveness is the percentage of the organization's budget that is actually spent on all the programs and services the charity delivers, and in this area the Charity Navigator charity evaluation site gives  Komen an 80.3 rating (as well as a 96.0 rating for Accountability & Transparency).  Charity Navigator does rank many other breast cancer charities higher than Susan G. Komen for the Cure, however. Komen breast cancer Regarding the seemingly excessively high level of CEO salaries at some charities, Charity Navigator advises that: advises While there are certainly some charities that overpay their leaders, Charity Navigator's data shows that those organizations are the minority. Among the charities we've evaluated (those being mid to large-sized charities), the typical CEO's annual compensation is in the low to mid six figures. Before you make any judgments about salaries higher or lower than that range, we encourage you to keep in mind that these charities are complex organizations, with multi-million dollar budgets, hundreds of employees, and thousands of constituents. These leaders could inevitably make much more running similarly sized for-profit firms. Furthermore, when making your decision it is important to consider that it takes a certain level of professionalism to effectively run a charity and charities must offer a competitive salary if they want to attract and retain that level of leadership.",['profit'],NEI,"When Susan Goodman Komen died of breast cancer at the age of 33 in 1980, her younger sister, Nancy Goodman Brinker promised she would do whatever she could to help end that disease.  Brinker fulfilled that promise by founding The Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation (later known as Susan G. Komen for the Cure, then just Susan G. Komen) in 1982, a group that has since become the largest and most well known breast cancer organization in the United States:Charity Navigator's last compensation figure for Nancy Brinker was $560,896 per year, which at the time put her below Komen president Elizabeth Thompson's reported annual compensation of $606,461.   In June 2013, Komen finally announced that Brinker would be stepping down as president and CEO of that organization and named Judith A. Salerno, M.D. as her successor.  In June 2015, Brinker reportedly resigned from her paid position to assume an unpaid role role as a top volunteer with Komen. Dr. Salerno's most recently reported compensation (in August 2017) was $479,858, while Nancy Brinker was still listed as a ""founder"" receiving a salary of $397,093.In September 2017, Paula Schneider took over as president and CEO of Komen, with compensation of $137,155 reported as of the end of the fiscal year in March 2018.The reference to Komen's applying only 20% of donated money to breast cancer research likely comes from a pie chart displayed in the ""Use of Funds"" section of Wikipedia's article about Susan G. Komen for the Cure, which showed Komen's 2009-2010 Expenses:A more relevant metric for assessing a charity's overall financial effectiveness is the percentage of the organization's budget that is actually spent on all the programs and services the charity delivers, and in this area the Charity Navigator charity evaluation site gives  Komen an 80.3 rating (as well as a 96.0 rating for Accountability & Transparency).  Charity Navigator does rank many other breast cancer charities higher than Susan G. Komen for the Cure, however.Regarding the seemingly excessively high level of CEO salaries at some charities, Charity Navigator advises that:"
What are the consequences of entering the United States border unlawfully?,['A viral Facebook post comparing U.S. immigration policy to that of North Korea and Afghanistan gets most of the facts wrong.'],"A nine-year-old viral Facebook post that portrays the United States as soft on illegal immigration experienced a resurgence in early 2018, likely due to ongoing negotiations between President Donald Trump and Congressional Democrats over the fate of immigrants who were brought to the U.S. as children by their undocumented parents and who have previously been allowed to stay in the United States under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. The wording of the post, which was turned into a meme, has been repeated since at least 2009 and has been adapted for Australian and Canadian audiences over the years. There have been small variations here and there, but it typically goes something like this: Undocumented immigrants do have some rights and entitlements, but the meme vastly overstates these entitlements and omits the many burdens and disadvantages placed on these immigrants, including the constant possibility of arrest and deportation. Adults who enter the United States illegally are not provided with a job. In fact, it's illegal to knowingly hire any immigrant who isn't authorized to work in the country (whether they entered the United States illegally or overstayed a visa after entering legally). Of course, that doesn't stop the practice from happening, and according to a 2017 analysis by the Pew Research Institute, there were around 8 million unauthorized immigrants working or looking for work in the United States in 2014. This depends on where you live. As of January 2018, there are 12 states (and the District of Columbia) that allow immigrants without legal status to obtain a driver's license. Some of the states where unauthorized immigrants can drive (California, New Jersey, Illinois) have relatively high undocumented populations. An immigrant who does not have legal status in the United States is not eligible for food stamps (the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program), although their children might be. Indeed, undocumented immigrants do not receive most kinds of welfare benefits, even though they do pay taxes. According to the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, a non-partisan think tank, undocumented immigrants collectively contribute almost $12 billion per year in state and local sales, income, and property taxes. Generally speaking, undocumented immigrants are not eligible for federal housing benefits like public housing, rental assistance, and vouchers. However, as a 2015 Congressional Research Service report outlines, some undocumented immigrants may live in a household with citizens or qualified immigrants and thereby indirectly benefit from some public housing assistance (although the level of that assistance is reduced on a pro rata basis due to the presence of that undocumented immigrant). Undocumented immigrants are eligible for emergency assistance such as homeless accommodation and domestic violence shelters. It is possible for an undocumented immigrant to own a home, either by buying it outright with cash or by using something called an individual tax identification number (ITIN) mortgage. This allows non-citizens (including undocumented immigrants) to bypass the usual requirement of having a social security number to take out a mortgage. Some 31 percent of undocumented immigrants live in a home that is owned by at least one of its residents (as opposed to rented), according to a Migration Policy Institute analysis of data from the United States Census Bureau's 2014 American Community Survey. Undocumented immigrants are not eligible to enroll in Medicaid, the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP), and the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) Health Insurance Marketplace, significantly curtailing the affordable health insurance and health care available to them. However, six states and the District of Columbia have rules that allow undocumented immigrant children to avail themselves of Medicaid benefits, and undocumented immigrants are also entitled to emergency medical care. According to a 2017 Kaiser Family Foundation analysis, non-elderly undocumented immigrants are four times more likely than United States citizens to be uninsured, and fears about immigration enforcement and detection often cause undocumented immigrants to forgo preventive healthcare, leading to worse outcomes. It's not entirely clear what the creator of this meme means by ""child benefits,"" but let's take a look. Undocumented immigrant taxpayers (using an ITIN rather than a social security number) can avail themselves of a child tax credit. Low-income undocumented immigrants are also eligible for the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC), which provides food and infant formula assistance, as well as nutritional and immunization assessments. Undocumented immigrants are not eligible for TANF (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families), a federal program that provides financial help to low-income families and pregnant women. In 1982, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that states are constitutionally barred from denying children a public school education based on their immigration status. As a result, undocumented immigrant children can attend public schools for free, like any other children. While attending public schools, undocumented children can benefit from federal nutrition services like the School Breakfast Program and National School Lunch Program. Only two states (Alabama and South Carolina) do not allow undocumented immigrants to attend public colleges and other third-level institutions, and three others (Arizona, Georgia, and Indiana) do not allow them to pay lower in-state tuition rates, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Undocumented students are not allowed to receive federal financial aid for higher education, but they might be able to get state aid or private scholarships. This is completely false. Undocumented immigrants pay taxes, and there is no provision in law at the federal or state level that grants them any kind of ""tax holiday.""",['insurance'],False,"The wording of the post, which was turned into a meme, has been repeated since at least 2009, and has been adapted for Australian and Canadian audiences over the years. There have been small variations here and there, but it typically goes something like this:Adults who enter the United States illegally are not provided with a job. In fact, it's illegal to knowingly hire any immigrant who isn't authorized to work in the country (whether they entered the United States illegally or overstayed a visa after entering legally.)Of course, that doesn't stop the practice from happening, and according to a 2017 analysis by the Pew Research Institute, there were around 8 million unauthorized immigrants working or looking for work in the United States in 2014.This depends on where you live. As of January 2018, there are 12 states (and the District of Columbia) which allow immigrants without legal status to obtain a driver's license. Some of the states where unauthorized immigrants can drive (California, New Jersey, Illinois) have relatively high undocumented populations.An immigrant who does not have a legal status in the United States is not eligible for food stamps (the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program), although their children might be. Indeed, undocumented immigrants do not receive most kinds of welfare benefits, even though they do pay taxes. According to the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, a non-partisan think tank, undocumented immigrants collectively contribute almost $12 billion per year in state and local sales, income and property taxes. However, as a 2015 Congressional Research Service report outlines, some undocumented immigrants may live in a household with citizens or qualified immigrants, and thereby indirectly benefit from some public housing assistance (although the level of that assistance is reduced on a pro rata basis, due to the presence of that undocumented immigrant.)It is possible for an undocumented immigrant to own a home, either by buying it outright with cash, or by using something called an individual tax identification number (ITIN) mortgage. This allows non-citizens (including undocumented immigrants) to bypass the usual requirement of having a social security number to take out a mortgage. Some 31 percent of undocumented immigrants live in a home that is owned by at least one of its residents (as opposed to rented), according to a Migration Policy Institute analysis of data from the United States Census Bureau's 2014 American Community Survey. Undocumented immigrants are not eligible to enroll in Medicaid, the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) and the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) Health Insurance Marketplace, significantly curtailing the affordable health insurance and health care available to them.However, six states and the District of Columbia have rules that allow undocumented immigrant children to avail themselves of Medicaid benefits, and undocumented immigrants are also entitled to emergency medical care. According to a 2017 Kaiser Family Foundation analysis, non-elderly undocumented immigrants are four times more likely than United States citizens to be uninsured, and fears about immigration enforcement and detection often cause undocumented immigrants to forgo preventive healthcare, leading to worse outcomes. It's not entirely clear what the creator of this meme means by ""child benefits,"" but let's take a look. Undocumented immigrant tax-payers (using an ITIN rather than a social security number) can avail themselves of a child tax credit. Low-income undocumented immigrants are also eligible for the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC), which provides food and infant formula assistance, as well as nutritional and immunization assessments. Undocumented immigrants are not eligible for TANF (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families), a federal program that provides financial help to low-income families and pregnant women.In 1982, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that states are constitutionally barred from denying children a public school education on the basis of their immigration status. As a result, undocumented immigrant children can attend public schools for free, like any other children.While attending public schools, undocumented children can benefit from federal nutrition services like the School Breakfast Program and National School Lunch Program. Only two states (Alabama and South Carolina) do not allow undocumented immigrants to attend public colleges and other third-level institutions, and three others (Arizona, Georgia and Indiana) do not allow them to pay lower in-state tuition rates, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.Undocumented students are not allowed to receive federal financial aid for higher education, but they might be able to get state aid or private scholarships. This is completely false. Undocumented immigrants pay taxes, and there is no provision in law at the federal or state level which grants them any kind of ""tax holiday."""
An Open Letter to President Obama - Lou Pritchett,"[""Lou Pritchett penned an 'open letter' to President Obama?""]","Claim:  Lou Pritchett penned an ""open letter"" to President Obama. CORRECTLY ATTRIBUTED Example:  [Collected via e-mail, May 2009] AN OPEN LETTER TO PRESIDENT OBAMA Dear President Obama: You are the thirteenth President under whom I have lived and unlike any of the others, you truly scare me. You scare me because after months of exposure, I know nothing about you. You scare me because I do not know how you paid for your expensive Ivy League education and your upscale lifestyle and housing with no visible signs of support. You scare me because you did not spend the formative years of youth growing up in America and culturally you are not an American. You scare me because you have never run a company or met a payroll. You scare me because you have never had military experience, thus don't understand it at its core.. You scare me because you lack humility and 'class', always blaming others. You scare me because for over half your life you have aligned yourself with radical extremists who hate America and you refuse to publicly denounce these radicals who wish to see America fail. You scare me because you are a cheerleader for the 'blame America' crowd and deliver this message abroad. You scare me because you want to change America to a European style country where the government sector dominates instead of the private sector. You scare me because you want to replace our health care system with a government controlled one. You scare me because you prefer 'wind mills' to responsibly capitalizing on our own vast oil, coal and shale reserves. You scare me because you want to kill the American capitalist goose that lays the golden egg which provides the highest standard of living in the world. You scare me because you have begun to use 'extortion' tactics against certain banks and corporations. You scare me because your own political party shrinks from challenging you on your wild and irresponsible spending proposals. You scare me because you will not openly listen to or even consider opposing points of view from intelligent people. You scare me because you falsely believe that you are both omnipotent and omniscient. You scare me because the media gives you a free pass on everything you do. You scare me because you demonize and want to silence the Limbaughs, Hannitys, O'Relllys and Becks who offer opposing, conservative points of view. You scare me because you prefer controlling over governing. Finally, you scare me because if you serve a second term I will probably not feel safe in writing a similar letter in 8 years. Lou Pritchett Origins:  Lou Pritchett is a former vice president of Procter & Gamble whose career at that company spanned 36 years before his retirement in 1989, and he is the author of the 1995 business book, Stop Paddling & Start Rocking the Boat.   Lou Pritchett Mr. Pritchett confirmed to us that he was indeed the author of the much-circulated ""open letter"" quoted above: I did write the 'you scare me' letter. I sent it to the NY Times but they never acknowledged or published it. However, it hit the internet and according to the 'experts' has had over 500,000 hits. In April 2012, the following update was added to the original: In April 2009, I sent President Obama and the New York Times a lettertitled ""You Scare Me"" because, as a candidate, he promised to""fundamentally transform America."" Now, after observing his performancefor over three years, he no longer scares me  he terrifies me for thefollowing reasons: FIRST-- He has done more to damage America's standing in the world, tolower the standard of living in America, to impoverish future generationsand to shake our faith in the country's future than any other Americanpresident in history. SECOND-- With a compliant Democrat congress, a lapdog media and a weak,almost nonexistent Republican opposition, he has shattered the Americandream of job security, home ownership and rugged individualism formillions of Americans and has poisoned and divided our civil society withhis politics of envy, class warfare, race warfare, and religious warfarewhich he is using as fundamental building blocks for his 'socialist'agenda. THIRD-- culturally, he remains totally out of touch with traditionalAmerican values. This has absolutely nothing to do with race or where hewas born, rather it has everything to do with where, how and with whom hewas raised, schooled, educated, trained and associates with still today. FOURTH-- he has surrounded himself with naive academicians, lawyers,politicians, bureaucrats and socialist leaning czars who arrogantly thinkand behave exactly as he does.People who offer no balanced suggestions or devils advocate positions andthink in lock step with him that big government is the answer to all ourproblems. FIFTH-- he not only encourages but aids and abets the unionization of allAmerican industry, the albatross around the neck of the free market. Inturn, they provide the money and muscle to intimidate his opponents. SIXTH-- he has increased the national debt by over 30% in just threeyears. If re-elected and this rate of increase continues, America will beburdened with an unsustainable 20 trillion dollar debt which will resultin the Country's financial death. Recovery will be impossible ---- Americawill be the Greece of 2016. SEVENTH-- given his fanatical beholding to the 'environmental' and'man-caused global warming' fringe, he has deliberately discouraged U.S.fossil fuel exploration and production while wasting millions of tax payerdollars on solar, wind and algae experiments. He refuses to accept thatoil, gas and coal are not America's enemies, they are America's assetswhich, properly managed, could make us energy independent within ageneration. EIGHTH-- He views the U.S. as a power in retreat which abused its Worlddominance. Therefore he systematically apologizes round the world. LastMarch he whispered to Russian President Medvedev ""--this is my lastelection. After my election, I have more flexibility"". Just what is thesecret that Obama and Putin are concealing from the American people untilafter the election? With what other leaders has he made similar secretagreements? NINTH---and finally, after all his mis-steps, bad decision making, poormanagement, and zero leadership, the fact that he has the audacity to seekre-election should terrify every American.I predict that if re-elected, future historians and political interpreterswill look back at the eight year period 2008-2016, and conclude ""the 44thPresident of the U.S. allowed the takers to overpower the payers whichresulted in the greatest economy in history vanishing from the face of theEarth"". Lou Pritchett  April 15, 2012Farewell America, the World will really miss you! Last updated:  12 May 2012 ",['asset'],True,"Origins:  Lou Pritchett is a former vice president of Procter & Gamble whose career at that company spanned 36 years before his retirement in 1989, and he is the author of the 1995 business book, Stop Paddling & Start Rocking the Boat.  "
Scam involving counterfeit $80 coupons at Wegmans,['Grocery chain Wegmans warned Facebook users that a digital coupon was a scam.'],"In late January 2016, Facebook users began sharing a post that promised a $200 coupon for the Wegmans supermarket chain to users who completed a short series of steps. In July 2019, social media users encountered a similar offer for an $80 coupon. The embedded links in those posts pointed to a URL not associated with Wegmans. Users who attempted to complete the steps and claim the coupon were directed to a page that resembled content hosted on Facebook, but its URL didn't match the social network's. The landing page was familiar to all who had encountered similar scams in the past. Wegmans' official Facebook page warned customers about the coupon scam, and a Better Business Bureau article provided shoppers with tips on avoiding survey and coupon scams operating in that fashion. The article advised, ""Don't believe what you see. It's easy to steal the colors, logos, and header of an established organization."" Scammers can also make links look like they lead to legitimate websites and emails appear to come from a different sender. Legitimate businesses do not ask for credit card numbers or banking information on customer surveys. If they do ask for personal information, like an address or email, be sure there's a link to their privacy policy. When in doubt, do a quick web search. If the survey is a scam, you may find alerts or complaints from other consumers. The organization's real website may have further information. Watch out for a reward that's too good to be true. If the survey is real, you may be entered in a drawing to win a gift card or receive a small discount off your next purchase. Few businesses can afford to give away $50 gift cards for completing a few questions.",['credit'],False,A Better Business Bureauarticle provided shoppers tips about avoiding survey and coupon scams operating in that fashion:
"Taxes and fees amount to about 20 percent of a typical $300 round-trip domestic ticket. Thats higher than taxes on products like alcohol, tobacco and firearms.",[],"On a scale of politically controversial topics, airline tickets might rank near the bottom, perhaps somewhere just above Roberts Rules of Order and a quorum call.And yet plane tickets have been part of some curious claims taken on by PolitiFact: Every time you buy an airline ticket, the federal government runs a background check on you -- PolitiFact Texas:Mostly False You can use food stamps for a plane ticket to go to Hawaii -- PolitiFact National:Pants on Fire Now coming down the runway is a claim byGary Kelly, chief executive officer of Dallas-based Southwest Airlines. Southwest carries themost domestic passengersin the U.S. and themost passengersat Milwaukees Mitchell International Airport.Kelly made his statement in a column he wrote for the February 2013 issues of the in-flight magazines of Southwest and of AirTran Airways, which Southwestacquiredin 2011.Taxes and fees amount to about 20 percent of a typical $300 round-trip domestic ticket, he stated. Thats higher than taxes on products like alcohol, tobacco and firearms.With spring break around the corner, and alcohol, tobacco and firearms always in season, lets see if Kellys claim takes flight.Cost of an airline ticketKellys opinion column focused on federal taxes on airline tickets and other products. His source for the taxes on an airline ticket isAirlines for America, the trade group that advocates for the airline industry. It spent $6.37 million in federal lobbying in 2012,accordingto the nonpartisan OpenSecrets.org.In December 2012, Airlines for Americaannounced detailsof a campaign it would undertake in 2013 to persuade lawmakers to reduce federal taxes on airlines and take other steps to help the industry.Just how high are those taxes?Southwest Airlines spokesman Brad Hawkins usedfiguresprovided by Airlines for America to give a breakdown of the four major federal taxes and fees on a ticket with a base price of $300. His example includes one connecting flight each way -- in other words, a ticket that includes two flights on the departure segment of the trip and two flights on the return. Based on Hawkins calculations, the $66.10 equals 22 percent of the cost of the $300 ticket, exceeding the 20 percent that Kelly claimed.As for the size of the taxes and fees, we found a Federal Aviation Administrationdocumentconfirming the excise tax and segment fee amounts; theyhelp fundthe FAA, which coordinates air traffic control and other aspects of the aviation system. (Anexcise taxis somewhat like a sales tax, in that it is paid on a purchase, but its often included in the purchase price. )Another FAAdocumentconfirms the passenger facility charge, which is collected by public agencies that run commercial airports and is used for FAA-approved projects at the airports. And a Transportation Security Administrationdocumentconfirms the Sept. 11 fee, which helps fund the TSA.We ran Kellys statement and his itinerary by Joakim Karlsson, a researcher with theAirline Ticket Tax Projectat the Massachusetts Institute of Technology; the project studies ticket taxes and user fees added directly to airline tickets. He called Kellys statement mathematically correct, but fundamentally misleading.Karlsson noted that fares are usually quoted with taxes and fees included. So, a $300 ticket would include a base fare of about $239.Karlsson calculated that would trigger $61 in taxes and fees, which would still amount to 20 percent of the ticket cost, the same amount Kelly claimed.But more importantly, Karlsson said, the sample ticket that Kelly uses is not typical: So, a $418 non-stop ticket would include $54 in taxes and fees, or just under 15 percent of the total. (The taxes and fees in Kellys $300 ticket example, if the trip were non-stop, also would equal just under 15 percent. )That means the first part of Kellys claim is accurate, but leaves out important details.Taxes and fees on other productsAs for the second part of Kellys statement, the Southwest Airlines spokesman cited a 2011opinion columninThe Wall Street Journalby the chief executive officer of Airlines for America, the airlines trade group. The column argued that the taxes paid by airlines are at the same excessive levels as sin taxes imposed on alcohol, tobacco and gambling.But the column provided no figures to show how the various tax rates compare.We found the followingfiguresfrom the federal Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, a division of the Department of Treasury. They represent only the federal taxes on these products. Some brands of beer cost more than others, some wine costs more in one part of the country than another, buying in bulk costs less, etc.But, to consider some examples, if a: None of this takes into account state and local taxes on the various products, but Kellys claim focuses on federal taxes.So, the tax rate on an airline ticket -- whether its 20 percent, as in the example Kelly cited, or the more typical 15 percent as cited by the MIT program -- is generally higher than the federal tax rates on the other products Kelly cited.One might argue that taxes and fees on airline tickets, which help fund aviation operations, are fundamentally different from sin taxes on things like cigarettes, which are meant to hold down consumption. But thats not an argument central to this claim.Our ratingKelly said: Taxes and fees amount to about 20 percent of a typical $300 round-trip domestic ticket. Thats higher than taxes on products like alcohol, tobacco and firearms.The first part of the claim is technically accurate, but misleading, given that the tax rate on a typical flight -- which costs more than $300 and doesnt include connecting flights -- is 15 percent. The second part of the claim, although it doesnt take into account price variations on various products, appears generally accurate.On balance, since the thrust of the claim was which had more taxes and which had less, we rate the statement Mostly True.","['Homeland Security', 'Government Regulation', 'Transportation', 'Taxes', 'Wisconsin']",True,"Every time you buy an airline ticket, the federal government runs a background check on you -- PolitiFact Texas:Mostly FalseYou can use food stamps for a plane ticket to go to Hawaii -- PolitiFact National:Pants on FireNow coming down the runway is a claim byGary Kelly, chief executive officer of Dallas-based Southwest Airlines. Southwest carries themost domestic passengersin the U.S. and themost passengersat Milwaukees Mitchell International Airport.Kelly made his statement in a column he wrote for the February 2013 issues of the in-flight magazines of Southwest and of AirTran Airways, which Southwestacquiredin 2011.Taxes and fees amount to about 20 percent of a typical $300 round-trip domestic ticket, he stated. Thats higher than taxes on products like alcohol, tobacco and firearms.With spring break around the corner, and alcohol, tobacco and firearms always in season, lets see if Kellys claim takes flight.Cost of an airline ticketKellys opinion column focused on federal taxes on airline tickets and other products. His source for the taxes on an airline ticket isAirlines for America, the trade group that advocates for the airline industry. It spent $6.37 million in federal lobbying in 2012,accordingto the nonpartisan OpenSecrets.org.In December 2012, Airlines for Americaannounced detailsof a campaign it would undertake in 2013 to persuade lawmakers to reduce federal taxes on airlines and take other steps to help the industry.Just how high are those taxes?Southwest Airlines spokesman Brad Hawkins usedfiguresprovided by Airlines for America to give a breakdown of the four major federal taxes and fees on a ticket with a base price of $300. His example includes one connecting flight each way -- in other words, a ticket that includes two flights on the departure segment of the trip and two flights on the return.Based on Hawkins calculations, the $66.10 equals 22 percent of the cost of the $300 ticket, exceeding the 20 percent that Kelly claimed.As for the size of the taxes and fees, we found a Federal Aviation Administrationdocumentconfirming the excise tax and segment fee amounts; theyhelp fundthe FAA, which coordinates air traffic control and other aspects of the aviation system. (Anexcise taxis somewhat like a sales tax, in that it is paid on a purchase, but its often included in the purchase price.)Another FAAdocumentconfirms the passenger facility charge, which is collected by public agencies that run commercial airports and is used for FAA-approved projects at the airports. And a Transportation Security Administrationdocumentconfirms the Sept. 11 fee, which helps fund the TSA.We ran Kellys statement and his itinerary by Joakim Karlsson, a researcher with theAirline Ticket Tax Projectat the Massachusetts Institute of Technology; the project studies ticket taxes and user fees added directly to airline tickets. He called Kellys statement mathematically correct, but fundamentally misleading.Karlsson noted that fares are usually quoted with taxes and fees included. So, a $300 ticket would include a base fare of about $239.Karlsson calculated that would trigger $61 in taxes and fees, which would still amount to 20 percent of the ticket cost, the same amount Kelly claimed.But more importantly, Karlsson said, the sample ticket that Kelly uses is not typical:So, a $418 non-stop ticket would include $54 in taxes and fees, or just under 15 percent of the total. (The taxes and fees in Kellys $300 ticket example, if the trip were non-stop, also would equal just under 15 percent.)That means the first part of Kellys claim is accurate, but leaves out important details.Taxes and fees on other productsAs for the second part of Kellys statement, the Southwest Airlines spokesman cited a 2011opinion columninThe Wall Street Journalby the chief executive officer of Airlines for America, the airlines trade group. The column argued that the taxes paid by airlines are at the same excessive levels as sin taxes imposed on alcohol, tobacco and gambling.But the column provided no figures to show how the various tax rates compare.We found the followingfiguresfrom the federal Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, a division of the Department of Treasury. They represent only the federal taxes on these products."
"An April study found that about 70 percent of ads in this election cycle have been negative [due to SuperPACs], up from only 9 percent through the same period in 2008.",[],"Negative campaign ads: most people say they hate them, but studies show that many people are swayed by them.Thus, major races can get pretty nasty, and there's a fear that the presidential contest this year will break all records for nastiness, thanks to the U.S. Supreme Courts 2010Citizens United decision. The court upheld the right of persons, organizations and corporations to spend as much as they would like on political advertising -- while hiding their involvement -- through the use of organizations known as super political action committees (Super-PACs).To shed some light on who is behind such attack ads, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-RI,  has been promoting the DISCLOSE Act. The name is an acronym for Democracy Is Strengthened by Casting Light on Spending in Elections.When you don't have accountability, there's no limit to the things that people will say,Whitehouse said during a debateon the floor of the Senate. One of the restraints on the vitriol and the filth that so often is part of the American political debate is that candidates have to stand by their ads.And if you say something that is awful, if you engage in relentless negative attacks, voters may charge you a price for that, Whitehouse said. Well, that of course disappears when the name behind the ad is attached to no living person or corporation. It's just an entity, it's a sham, it's a phony, it's a shell.The DISCLOSE actwould requiresome tax-exempt groups that engage in political advertising to reveal individual donors who gave $10,000 or more.Critics saythe act discriminates because it wouldn't apply to unions. They also say disclosure might open donors up to intimidation and ridicule, inhibiting free speech.During an unsuccessful push to bring the proposal to a vote in the Senate -- a drive blocked twice by Republicans, on July 16 and 17 -- Whitehouse said the Citizens United decision was already sparking a giant increase in negative political advertising.An April study found that about 70 percent of ads in this election cycle have been negative, up from only 9 percent through the same period in 2008, he said.That's a big jump in negative advertising. We wondered if it were true.The contextWhen we contacted Whitehouse's office, spokesman Seth Larson sent us toa studyreleased May 2, 2012, by the Wesleyan Media Project at Wesleyan University. It defined a negative advertisement as an ad in which the candidate's opponent is mentioned.The study looked only at TV ads in the presidential races and only ads broadcast from January 1 through April 22 of 2008 and the same period in 2012.It turns out that Whitehouse quoted the study accurately. The researchers said that 70.0 percent of all ads in 2012 were negative during that period, compared with 9.1 percent in 2008.But Whitehouse also said that the Citizens United decision is responsible for that increase in negative ads, so lets look at that aspect.The political scientists we spoke with said the Supreme Court decision is having a huge effect on the tone and rhythm of the 2012 campaign.The Wesleyan study suggests that the effect was already clear in the first four months of this year.Consider the ads purchased by special-interest groups or SuperPACs.Of the 10,062 special-interest group ads aired during the first quarter of 2008, 75 percent were rated positive and 25 percent were rated negative.By 2012, the number of special-interest ads had exploded, jumping more than 12-fold to 123,062. In addition, the mix of ads had reversed, with only 14 percent positive and 86 percent negative.Meanwhile, the number of ads bought by candidates themselves plummeted, from 289,622 in the first quarter of 2008 to 74,267 this year, an indication that they were letting the special interest ads carry the ball for promoting their candidacies.AsMichael Franz, co-director of the Wesleyan Media Project, said in the report, That's a lot of money and airtime backed by undisclosed sources.Other factors affect rateBut Franz and the other experts we consulted cautioned that additional factors are also at work.The first four months of the 2008 race were very different from the same period in the 2012 contest.In early 2008, one reason the number was so low was because the [Barack] Obama and [Hillary] Clinton campaigns didn't really attack each other on TV that much, said Franz, now at Bowdoin College in Brunswick, Maine. They did off the air, and they were obviously quite ruthless. But in the ads themselves, there wasn't a lot of sniping back and forth against each other. They promoted themselves primarily.That changed for Obama in the general election, Franz said. He was a very negative candidate and once the general election started, it became an overwhelmingly negative campaign, as it usually is in the general election.During the first four months of 2012, SuperPACs drove up the percentage of negative ads, he said, but also candidates have been overwhelmingly negative against each other in the [2012] Republican primary.So let's look at the types of ads placed by the candidates themselves.In 2008, only 9 percent of the ads placed by all the candidates in the first four months of the year were negative.By 2012 that number had grown to nearly 53 percent.The first four months of a presidential election year are not necessarily the best guide to the rhythm of the rest of a presidential campaign. I really don't think they're indicative of what's to come, said Mary Ellen Balchunis, a political scientist at LaSalle University in Philadelphia. It's how close the polls are, it's whether your opponent is going negative, it's whether you are responding.Early in the contest, the ads are generally more about who the candidate is and what the candidate would do. That's particularly true for a challenger, saidStephen Farnsworthof the University of Mary Washington in Fredericksburg, Va., a key swing state. There are always some negative ads, but they are really sprinkled in the mix. In the fall, when people are really turning their attention to the election, that's when the number of negative ads escalates.In this election cycle, things are already so negative, it's hard to imagine that there's much room for them to get more negative between now and November, said Farnsworth, author of Spinner-in-Chief: How Presidents Sell Their Policies and Themselves.Our rulingSheldon Whitehouse said, An April study found that about 70 percent of ads in this election cycle have been negative, up from only 9 percent through the same period in 2008.He is correctly quoting the study, but the context of his comment makes it clear that he blames the SuperPACs, which were freed up by the Citizens United decision.Those special-interest groups are certainly playing a much larger role this year, in part because they have become the major source of TV ad purchases.But the data also reveal that the candidates are being far more negative earlier in the campaign than they were four years ago, and that also drove up the percentage of negative ads in the beginning of 2012.Because his statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information, we rate the claim asMostly True. (Get updates from PolitiFact Rhode Island on Twitter:@politifactri. To comment or offer your ruling, visit us on ourPolitiFact Rhode Island Facebookpage.)","['Rhode Island', 'Campaign Finance', 'Corporations', 'Elections', 'Negative Campaigning', 'Transparency', 'Unions']",True,"Negative campaign ads: most people say they hate them, but studies show that many people are swayed by them.Thus, major races can get pretty nasty, and there's a fear that the presidential contest this year will break all records for nastiness, thanks to the U.S. Supreme Courts 2010Citizens United decision.  The court upheld the right of persons, organizations and corporations to spend as much as they would like on political advertising -- while hiding their involvement -- through the use of organizations known as super political action committees (Super-PACs).To shed some light on who is behind such attack ads, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-RI,  has been promoting the DISCLOSE Act. The name is an acronym for Democracy Is Strengthened by Casting Light on Spending in Elections.When you don't have accountability, there's no limit to the things that people will say,Whitehouse said during a debateon the floor of the Senate. One of the restraints on the vitriol and the filth that so often is part of the American political debate is that candidates have to stand by their ads.And if you say something that is awful, if you engage in relentless negative attacks, voters may charge you a price for that, Whitehouse said. Well, that of course disappears when the name behind the ad is attached to no living person or corporation. It's just an entity, it's a sham, it's a phony, it's a shell.The DISCLOSE actwould requiresome tax-exempt groups that engage in political advertising to reveal individual donors who gave $10,000 or more.Critics saythe act discriminates because it wouldn't apply to unions. They also say disclosure might open donors up to intimidation and ridicule, inhibiting free speech.During an unsuccessful push to bring the proposal to a vote in the Senate -- a drive blocked twice by Republicans, on July 16 and 17 -- Whitehouse said the Citizens United decision was already sparking a giant increase in negative political advertising.An April study found that about 70 percent of ads in this election cycle have been negative, up from only 9 percent through the same period in 2008, he said.That's a big jump in negative advertising. We wondered if it were true.The contextWhen we contacted Whitehouse's office, spokesman Seth Larson sent us toa studyreleased May 2, 2012, by the Wesleyan Media Project at Wesleyan University. It defined a negative advertisement as an ad in which the candidate's opponent is mentioned.The study looked only at TV ads in the presidential races and only ads broadcast from January 1 through April 22 of 2008 and the same period in 2012.It turns out that Whitehouse quoted the study accurately. The researchers said that 70.0 percent of all ads in 2012 were negative during that period, compared with 9.1 percent in 2008.But Whitehouse also said that the Citizens United decision is responsible for that increase in negative ads, so lets look at that aspect.The political scientists we spoke with said the Supreme Court decision is having a huge effect on the tone and rhythm of the 2012 campaign.The Wesleyan study suggests that the effect was already clear in the first four months of this year.Consider the ads purchased by special-interest groups or SuperPACs.Of the 10,062 special-interest group ads aired during the first quarter of 2008, 75 percent were rated positive and 25 percent were rated negative.By 2012, the number of special-interest ads had exploded, jumping more than 12-fold to 123,062. In addition, the mix of ads had reversed, with only 14 percent positive and 86 percent negative.Meanwhile, the number of ads bought by candidates themselves plummeted, from 289,622 in the first quarter of 2008 to 74,267 this year, an indication that they were letting the special interest ads carry the ball for promoting their candidacies.AsMichael Franz, co-director of the Wesleyan Media Project, said in the report, That's a lot of money and airtime backed by undisclosed sources.Other factors affect rateBut Franz and the other experts we consulted cautioned that additional factors are also at work.The first four months of the 2008 race were very different from the same period in the 2012 contest.In early 2008, one reason the number was so low was because the [Barack] Obama and [Hillary] Clinton campaigns didn't really attack each other on TV that much, said Franz, now at Bowdoin College in Brunswick, Maine. They did off the air, and they were obviously quite ruthless. But in the ads themselves, there wasn't a lot of sniping back and forth against each other. They promoted themselves primarily.That changed for Obama in the general election, Franz said. He was a very negative candidate and once the general election started, it became an overwhelmingly negative campaign, as it usually is in the general election.During the first four months of 2012, SuperPACs drove up the percentage of negative ads, he said, but also candidates have been overwhelmingly negative against each other in the [2012] Republican primary.So let's look at the types of ads placed by the candidates themselves.In 2008, only 9 percent of the ads placed by all the candidates in the first four months of the year were negative.By 2012 that number had grown to nearly 53 percent.The first four months of a presidential election year are not necessarily the best guide to the rhythm of the rest of a presidential campaign. I really don't think they're indicative of what's to come, said Mary Ellen Balchunis, a political scientist at LaSalle University in Philadelphia. It's how close the polls are, it's whether your opponent is going negative, it's whether you are responding.Early in the contest, the ads are generally more about who the candidate is and what the candidate would do. That's particularly true for a challenger, saidStephen Farnsworthof the University of Mary Washington in Fredericksburg, Va., a key swing state. There are always some negative ads, but they are really sprinkled in the mix. In the fall, when people are really turning their attention to the election, that's when the number of negative ads escalates.In this election cycle, things are already so negative, it's hard to imagine that there's much room for them to get more negative between now and November, said Farnsworth, author of Spinner-in-Chief: How Presidents Sell Their Policies and Themselves.Our rulingSheldon Whitehouse said, An April study found that about 70 percent of ads in this election cycle have been negative, up from only 9 percent through the same period in 2008.He is correctly quoting the study, but the context of his comment makes it clear that he blames the SuperPACs, which were freed up by the Citizens United decision.Those special-interest groups are certainly playing a much larger role this year, in part because they have become the major source of TV ad purchases.But the data also reveal that the candidates are being far more negative earlier in the campaign than they were four years ago, and that also drove up the percentage of negative ads in the beginning of 2012.Because his statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information, we rate the claim asMostly True.(Get updates from PolitiFact Rhode Island on Twitter:@politifactri. To comment or offer your ruling, visit us on ourPolitiFact Rhode Island Facebookpage.)"
Will All Child Support in the U.S. End on June 11th 2018?,['Reports claiming President Trump and Congress have abolished child support were completely false but massively popular on social media.'],"In April 2018, social media posts claiming ""Donald Trump and U.S. Congress voted yesterday on a bill"" to end all child support in the U.S. by 11 June 2018 were widely shared. posts  These posts were just variants of a similar hoax from September 2017 created using the prank generator React365 which suggested that President Trump and Congress had effectively ended all child support payments as of 2018, blaring ""No more child support after 2017!"" and ""CHILD SUPPORT SAID TO END BY BEGINNING OF 2018"": React365 child support The word salad ""news"" content originated with React365, a prank generator whose sole purpose is to enable users to generate fake news and share it on social media:   React365   On the footer of each page, a poorly-worded disclaimer explains that its headlines are ""created by users"" and are not a ""source of information"":   Fake news about child support typically spreads with alacrity. However, there have been no legitimate news reports of either the President or Congress ending (or even intending to end) child support. It is simply false information generated by a prank web site. child support",['share'],False,"In April 2018, social media posts claiming ""Donald Trump and U.S. Congress voted yesterday on a bill"" to end all child support in the U.S. by 11 June 2018 were widely shared.These posts were just variants of a similar hoax from September 2017 created using the prank generator React365 which suggested that President Trump and Congress had effectively ended all child support payments as of 2018, blaring ""No more child support after 2017!"" and ""CHILD SUPPORT SAID TO END BY BEGINNING OF 2018"":The word salad ""news"" content originated with React365, a prank generator whose sole purpose is to enable users to generate fake news and share it on social media:Fake news about child support typically spreads with alacrity. However, there have been no legitimate news reports of either the President or Congress ending (or even intending to end) child support. It is simply false information generated by a prank web site."
"Thanks, Kalat",['Does a photograph show a statue of a U.S. soldier crafted by an Iraqi sculptor?'],"The sculpture pictured below is real, and it was indeed crafted by an Iraqi sculptor from bronze recovered by melting down statues of former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein, but the accompanying explanatory text is quite misleading: The Iraqi sculptor was not ""forced by Saddam Hussein to make the many hundreds of bronze busts of Saddam,"" he did not produce the memorial shown because he was ""so grateful that the Americans liberated his country,"" and the monument was not his idea. Members of the U.S. Army paid the sculptor, who had previously worked on a few other Saddam statues, to create the work pictured according to a design of their choosing: Example: [Collected via e-mail, 2004] This picture of the statue was made by an Iraqi artist named Kalat, who for years was forced by Saddam Hussein to make the many hundreds of bronze busts of Saddam that dotted Baghdad. This artist was so grateful that the Americans liberated his country, he melted 3 of the fallen Saddam heads and made a memorial statue dedicated to the American soldiers and their fallen comrades. Kalat worked on this night and day for several months. To the left of the kneeling soldier is a small Iraqi girl giving the soldier comfort as he mourns the loss of his comrade in arms. It is currently on display outside the palace that is now home to the 4th Infantry division. It will eventually be shipped and shown at the memorial museum in Fort Hood, Texas.  As part of the U.S. Army's Task Force Ironhorse, the 4th Infantry Division was deployed in Iraq for most of 2003, participated in the capture of Saddam Hussein in December 2003, and saw many of their comrades killed and wounded in the violence that followed the end of major combat operations. In mid-2003, while the 4th Infantry Division was headquartered in Tikrit, Saddam Hussein's hometown, Command Sgt. Maj. Charles Fuss, the division's top noncommissioned officer, headed up a project to commemorate the unit's dead and conceived of a memorial featuring the figure of a forlorn soldier kneeling to mourn before empty helmet, boots, and rifle  an array of objects that traditionally represents a fallen compatriot: Task Force Ironhorse 4th Infantry    Needing a sculptor to carry out his vision, Sgt. Maj. Fuss and other Americans asked around for local talent, and an Iraqi contractor recommended a 27-year-old artist named Khalid Alussy to them. As it turned out, Mr. Alussy was one of several artisans who had worked on a pair of 50-foot bronze statues of Saddam Hussein on horseback that flanked the gateway on the main road into the presidential palace compound in Tikrit, the site of the 4th Infantry Division's temporary headquarters. Commissioned by 4th Infantry Division officers to fashion the memorial conceptualized by Sgt. Maj. Fuss, Khalid Alussy (whose first name is also rendered in English as 'Kalat') took the assignment not out love for Americans, but because he needed the money: The officers didn't question Mr. Alussy further about his political views. Had they pressed him, they might have learned that he's harshly critical of the U.S. and bitter over an American rocket attack during the war that killed his uncle. In an interview, he says he thinks the war was fought for oil and holds the U.S. responsible for the violence and unemployment that have plagued Iraq since.""I made the statues of Saddam  even though I didn't want to  because I needed money for my family and to finish my education,"" he says, reclining in a room decorated with several of his paintings. ""And I decided to make statues for the Americans for the exact same reasons."" Mr. Alussy's initial asking price was far higher than the officers had expected. He blamed the steep price of bronze. So the Americans decided to recycle the bronze Hussein-on-horseback twins. ""We figured we were going to blow them up anyway, so why not take the bronze and use it for our own statues?"" recalls Sgt. Fuss. ""That way we could take something that honored Saddam and use it to remember all of those we lost getting rid of him."" Without having to supply the metal, Mr. Alussy agreed to do the job for $8,000. By comparison, the former regime paid him the equivalent of several hundred dollars for his work on the Hussein statues. To finance the project, Sgt. Fuss publicized it in the task force's internal newspaper and asked officers to get soldiers to contribute $1 each. Within weeks, he raised $30,000.1 In July 2003, Army engineers blew up the two Saddam statues, cut them into pieces, melted them down, and delivered them to Mr. Alussy's house. (The delivery was done furtively in case Mr. Alussy's neighbors proved to be less than thrilled about his being in the employ of the American military.) Using a photograph of 1st Sgt. Glen Simpson as a model for the depiction of the kneeling soldier, Mr. Alussy began his work on the monument; near the end, another segment was added to his task: As the work neared completion, Sgt. Fuss and the division's commander, Maj. Gen. Ray Odierno, decided it needed a clearer connection to Iraq. The general suggested adding a small child to symbolize Iraq's new future, Sgt. Fuss says. When they told the artist they wanted another statue, Mr. Alussy demanded $10,000 more. ""He learned capitalism real fast,"" Sgt. Fuss says.1 After four months' worth of night and weekend labor, Mr. Alussy completed his assignment, and the statues were installed in an entranceway inside the 4th Infantry Division's headquarters in Tikrit. In February 2004 the statues were flown to the 4th Infantry Division Museum at the unit's home base of Fort Hood, Texas. Museum Fort Hood Somewhere along the line, this coda was added to the original e-mail: Do you know why we don't hear about this in the news? Because it is heart warming and praise worthy. The media avoids it because it does not have the shock effect that a flashed breast or controversy of politics does. But we can do something about it. We can pass this along to as many people as we can in honor of all our brave military who are making a difference. As Steve Blow of the Dallas Morning News pointed out in a later column, the Kalat story and photo ran in that paper on 27 March 2004 and was afterwards picked up and reprinted by newspapers all over the U.S. Additional information:   <!-- Original changelog: Last updated:  25 February 200616 January 2004 Updated: 16 February 2004 11 June 2004 - updated 17 October 2005 - added info about media reporting of story 25 February 2006: reformatted 16 December 2009 - updated Add'l Info links -->   Blow, Steve.  ""Sometimes, Facts Get in Way of Media-Bashing.""
  The Dallas Morning News.  23 January 2005  (p. B1).   1.  Dreazen, Yochi J.  ""In This Monument to Dead, the Medium Really Is the Message.""
  The Wall Street Journal.  8 March 2004  (p. A1).   Kibbey, Spc. Benjamin R.  ""Changing Faces: Statue Honors Fallen Heroes.""
  Army News Service.  6 January 2004.   Miles, Donna.  ""Memorial to Honor Fallen Task Force Ironhorse Troops.""
  American Forces Press Service.  20 February 2004.",['loss'],False,"As part of the U.S. Army's Task Force Ironhorse, the 4th Infantry Division was deployed in Iraq for most of 2003, participated in the capture of Saddam Hussein in December 2003, and saw many of their comrades killed and wounded in the violence that followed the end of major combat operations. In mid-2003, while the 4th Infantry Division was headquartered in Tikrit, Saddam Hussein's hometown, Command Sgt. Maj. Charles Fuss, the division's top noncommissioned officer, headed up a project to commemorate the unit's dead and conceived of a memorial featuring the figure of a forlorn soldier kneeling to mourn before empty helmet, boots, and rifle  an array of objects that traditionally represents a fallen compatriot:After four months' worth of night and weekend labor, Mr. Alussy completed his assignment, and the statues were installed in an entranceway inside the 4th Infantry Division's headquarters in Tikrit. In February 2004 the statues were flown to the 4th Infantry Division Museum at the unit's home base of Fort Hood, Texas."
"Young women today in metropolitan areaswho are childless and single are out-earning childless, single young males.",[],"Why is it that women make 77 cents for every dollar a man earns? You have likely heard this statistic, which was prominently featured on cable news networks Tuesday to mark Equal Pay Day. For many Democrats, it symbolizes an unfairness in the pay structures of jobs across America. However, conservatives argue that the situation is more complex and is as much about life choices as it is about fundamental inequality. We watched the debate unfold between conservative pundit Sabrina Schaeffer and liberal pundit Elizabeth Plank on MSNBC's The Reid Report, and again later between former White House adviser Anita Dunn and conservative pundit Genevieve Wood on CNN's The Lead with Jake Tapper. ""If you compare women to men in the same job with similar backgrounds and experiences, the wage gap all but disappears,"" Wood said. ""Women have made great strides. Instead of celebrating that, this is a political year; the White House wants to portray this as a war on women. Not only are the numbers wrong—young women today in metropolitan areas, for example, are actually outperforming males in that same category all over the country."" Dunn pushed back, stating, ""I'm going to jump in a little on that because I think that it's true that women are making enormous progress, but you know, as well as I do, that as they get older in the workforce, those disparities start to grow. There are all kinds of reasons that this happens, and an important discussion across the board is how we continue to ensure that progress continues."" PolitiFact has provided the details about the 77 cents statistic—you can read the two most important works in this area here and here. Essentially, there is a wage gap, but it tends to disappear when comparing women and men in the exact same jobs with the same levels of experience and education. We at PunditFact want to examine the argument presented by conservatives. In this case, we are checking Wood—a conservative pundit with the Heritage Foundation—who said, ""Young women today in metropolitan areas, for example, who are childless, single young women are actually outperforming males in that same category all over the country."" The basis of Wood's claim directed us to a 2012 U.S. News and World Report article that was reposted on the website of the conservative American Enterprise Institute. The article includes the following line: ""Census data from 2008 show that single, childless women in their 20s now earn 8 percent more on average than their male counterparts in metropolitan areas."" This aligns with what Wood said on CNN. Further analysis comes from James Chung of Reach Advisors, a private research firm based in New York. Chung spent about a year analyzing 2008 data from the Census Bureau's American Community Survey, focusing on the earnings of men and women in metropolitan areas. The actual study was never released, only some of the findings. Among what was released in September 2010 was this: ""The median full-time salaries of young women in America's metropolitan areas are 8 percent higher than those of the men in their peer group."" A breakdown provided for Time magazine included a look at specific cities. In Atlanta, young unmarried childless women made 21 percent more than men, while in Los Angeles, young women made 12 percent more than their counterparts. This news was also reported by NPR and CBS News. The American Enterprise Institute converted specific numbers into a graphic to illustrate how women are out-earning men in some cases. Chung mentioned that he has not updated his analysis to reflect how the figures have changed since 2008 and no longer circulates the analysis as current since it is now four years out of date. No one else, to our knowledge, has attempted to recreate Chung's specific analysis, and we found no criticism of his methodology. We did come across an analysis by Pew Research, which examined earnings trends for all women between 25 and 34 (a broader and older group). Compared to all men of the same age, Pew Research found that women earn 93 percent of what men earn. This represents a smaller gap than when considering all women and all men, according to Pew. We sent Wood's statement to Chung and asked for his perspective. While Wood is careful to note that she was discussing childless, single young women in metropolitan areas, Chung pointed out that Wood failed to mention that the analysis concerned median incomes between men and women. Why is that important? Median income figures look at earnings in the aggregate rather than comparing like jobs or professions. This leaves the claim open to the same criticism that Republicans levy against Democrats when they assert that women earn 77 cents for every dollar a man does. In the case of Chung's findings, the reason young women in metropolitan areas earn more than young men is that they are 50 percent more likely to graduate from college. As a result, they occupy more of the entry-level knowledge-based economy jobs than young men, Chung explained. He stated that it would be entirely incorrect to imply that these women outearn men with similar jobs or similar educations. The bottom line is that in a world where most players are seeking a sound bite to support a specific position, this is actually a rather complex issue. ""Things aren't exactly as equal as some people say, but it's not always as dire as others claim,"" Chung said. Our ruling: Wood stated, ""Young women today in metropolitan areas, for example, who are childless, single young women are actually outperforming males in that same category all over the country."" The statement traces back to a credible analysis of 2008 Census Bureau data that examines median incomes in metropolitan areas—a fact that Wood overlooks. However, she gets most of the other details correct, and while the information is now six years old, we were unable to find more recent research to confirm or disprove the point. Finally, we should note that this comparison holds true because childless, single young women tend to have more education and qualify for higher-paying jobs. Wood's statement is accurate but requires clarification. We rate it Mostly True.","['Income', 'Jobs', 'Women', 'PunditFact']",True,"PolitiFact has given you the nuts and bolts about the 77 cents statistic -- you can read the two most important works in this areahereandhere. Basically, there is a wage gap, but it tends to disappear when you compare women and men in the exact same jobs who have the same levels of experience and education.We at PunditFact want to look at the argument being offered by conservatives. In this case, we are checking Wood --a conservative pundit with the Heritage Foundation-- who said,  Young women today in metropolitan areas, for example, who are childless, single young women are actually outperforming males in that same category all over the country.Wood directed us to a 2012U.S. News and World Reportarticle thatwas reposted on the websiteof the conservative American Enterprise Institute.Among what was released in September 2010 was this:The median full-time salaries of young women in Americas metropolitan areas are 8 percent higherthan those of the guys in their peer group.A breakdown provided forTimemagazine included a look at specific cities. In Atlanta, young unmarried childless women made 21 percent more than men, Chung found. In Los Angeles, young women made 12 percent more than their cohorts. The newsalso was reported by NPRandCBS News.We did come across an analysis byPew Research, which looked earnings trends for all women between 25 and 34 (a broader and older group). Compared to all men of the same age, Pew Research found women earn 93 percent of what a man earns. That's a smaller gap than when considering all women and all men, Pew found."
"Did a Black Lives Matter organizer express indifference towards looting by stating, 'I am not concerned if an individual chooses to engage in looting'?","['Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot said of the looting, This is not legitimate First Amendment-protected speech ... This was straight-up felony, criminal conduct.']","After the police shooting of 20-year-old Latrell Allen in Chicago's Englewood community on the afternoon of Aug. 9, 2020, unrest in that city extended through that night and into the early morning hours of the following day, with looters hitting some stores in Chicagos wealthiest shopping district on North Michigan Avenue. Latrell Allen extended The following evening, members of the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement held a solidarity rally in that city with some of the people who had been arrested for looting the night before. Shortly after those events, social media users began circulating a meme stemming from that event, quoting a ""BLM leader & organizer"" named Ariel Atkins as saying, ""I don't care if someone decides to loot, because that makes sure that person eats or has clothes. Anything they want to take, they can, because these businesses have insurance"":  That was an accurate quote, according to Chicago NBC affiliate WMAQ-TV, who reported on the Aug. 10 event: reported Members of Black Lives Matter held a solidarity rally on Monday night [August 10] with the more than 100 individuals who were arrested after a night of looting and unrest in Chicago. The rally was held at the South Loop police station where organizers say those individuals are currently being held in custody. I dont care if someone decides to loot a Gucci or a Macys or a Nike store, because that makes sure that person eats, Ariel Atkins, a BLM organizer, said. That makes sure that person has clothes. Black Lives Matter Chicago organized the rally after overnight unrest throughout the city, with police saying that more than 100 individuals were taken into custody for a variety of offenses, including looting. That is reparations, Atkins said. Anything they wanted to take, they can take it because these businesses have insurance. Atkins said essentially the same thing a few days later, when she was interviewed by Chicago NPR station WBEZ on the subject of ""why she supports looting"": interviewed A lot of people are really attacking our pages. Theyre like, Oh, you support the looters. And yeah, we do, 100%. Thats reparations. And like however people choose to protest, especially if it was definitely in line with what happened with the shooting, which would be powerful to see people reacting ... without organizers just being like, Were angry and this is what were gonna do. Were gonna take the power back. I feel like these stores, these Macys, these Guccis, the PNC Banks, theyre not here for us. The city puts way more money and investment into spending time and protecting their spaces and making sure that they exist. And yet our people are constantly being pushed out of the city ... Unemployment is incredibly high, like we are in an incredible situation, and the fact that anybody gives a s*** about these businesses over what is happening in this city right now and the pain that people are in and the suffering that is taking place, I dont care. I will support the looters till the end of the day. If thats what they need to do in order to eat, then thats what youve got to do to eat .... The whole idea of criminality is based on racism anyway, because criminality is punishing people for things that they have needed to do to survive or just the way that society has affected them with white supremacist B.S. So its like her deciding what is criminal and what isnt. WMAQ-TV [Chicago].  ""Black Lives Matter Holds Rally Supporting Individuals Arrested in Chicago Looting Monday.""
  10 August 2020. Black, Curtis. &nbps; ""Latrell Allen Police Shooting Exposes Gaps in Body Camera and Foot Pursuit Policies.""
  The Chicago Reporter.  14 August 2020. Yoon-Ji Kang, Esther.  ""Officers Disrespected Englewood Residents Following Police Shooting, Activists Say.""
  WBEZ [Chicago].  10 August 2020. Wildeboer, Rob and Chip Mitchell.  ""Officers Disrespected Englewood Residents Following Police Shooting, Activists Say.""
  WBEZ [Chicago].  12 August 2020.",['insurance'],True,"After the police shooting of 20-year-old Latrell Allen in Chicago's Englewood community on the afternoon of Aug. 9, 2020, unrest in that city extended through that night and into the early morning hours of the following day, with looters hitting some stores in Chicagos wealthiest shopping district on North Michigan Avenue.That was an accurate quote, according to Chicago NBC affiliate WMAQ-TV, who reported on the Aug. 10 event:Atkins said essentially the same thing a few days later, when she was interviewed by Chicago NPR station WBEZ on the subject of ""why she supports looting"":"
How have the financial assets of Presidents evolved over time?,['An image comparing changes in the financial status of former and current United States presidents is not particularly revealing.'],"An image comparing changes in the financial status of former and current United States presidents was widely shared on social media at the end of 2017, with minimal text suggesting that the data it presented was particularly revealing of something (without providing any detail about what that ""something"" might be). As for the hard data, we won't dwell on precise numbers because net worth figures are typically estimates that are at least partially based on assets with fluctuating valuations, and federal election disclosure laws have only required that candidates list their assets and liabilities in ranges rather than specific amounts. However, in general, we can note that the information in the image is at least within the ballpark of reasonableness. The Clintons' net worth was reported as $700,000 in their 1992 statement, the Obamas' net worth was estimated at about $1.3 million in 2007 (mostly derived from book publishing advances and royalties), while the Trumps' net worth was pegged at $3.7 billion in 2016. As of 2017, the Clintons were estimated to have made $240 million since Bill Clinton left office in 2001, the Obamas' combined net worth was reckoned to be about $24 million, while the Trumps' net worth was thought to have dropped to about $3.1 billion. Suffice it to say that the Clinton and Obama families have done very well for themselves since leaving the White House, but the Trumps have realized no similar windfall and have possibly seen their overall wealth decline a bit. The comparison in this image is one of apples and oranges, however, and therefore it reveals nothing remarkable or surprising. It contrasts two men who each served eight years as President and are no longer in office with one man who has only been the U.S. chief executive for a year and still occupies that position. The longer one holds high office, the more opportunity one has to establish connections and build experience that might prove financially lucrative later on, so obviously, two men who sat in the White House for eight years each have a considerable advantage over the one who has barely been in Washington for a year. More importantly, though, is that former Presidents Clinton and Obama are ex-presidents who have returned to private life, and thus they can avail themselves of many money-making opportunities common to ex-presidents—writing books, giving speeches, consulting for private companies, holding board seats, advising businessmen and politicians—that are simply not available to a sitting president. For the incumbent chief executive, the position of President of the United States affords its holder little time to manage any outside business interests, and conflict of interest laws make it difficult for presidents to engage in profitable business ventures while they are serving as public officials. Most sitting presidents choose to put their business interests into blind trusts or otherwise delegate their day-to-day management to others during their terms of office. This image also conveniently omits data that demonstrates the money-making proclivities of former presidents to be neither an aberration nor an activity limited to Democrats: George H.W. Bush saw his fortune grow from $4 million in his pre-presidential days to $23 million in 2017, and his son, George W. Bush, began his presidency with $20 million and is now reportedly worth $35 million. Finally, nothing about this subject has anything to do with any presidents, current or former, ""stealing"" anyone's money. Whatever controversies may have surrounded Presidents Clinton, Obama, and Trump so far, none of them has been accused of enriching themselves by looting the public treasury.",['interest'],NEI,"The Clintons' net worth was as reported as $700,000 in their 1992 statement, the Obamas' net worth was estimated at about $1.3 million in 2007 (mostly derived from book publishing advances and royalties), while the Trumps' net worth was pegged at $3.7 billion in 2016.As of 2017, the Clintons were estimated to have made $240 million since Bill Clinton left office in 2001, the Obamas' combined net worth was reckoned to be about $24 million, while the Trumps' net worth was thought to have dropped to about $3.1 billion. Suffice it to say that the Clinton and Obama families have done very well for themselves since leaving the White House, but the Trumps have realized no similar windfall (and have possibly seen their overall wealth decline a bit).More important, though, is that former Presidents Clinton and Obama are former presidents who have returned to private life, and thus they can avail themselves of many money-making opportunities common to ex-presidents -- writing books, giving speeches, consulting for private companies, holding board seats, advising businessmen and politicians -- that are simply not available to a sitting president. But for the incumbent chief executive, the position of President of the United States affords its holder little time to manage any outside business interests, and conflict of interest laws make it difficult for presidents to engage in profitable business ventures while they're serving as public officials. (Most sitting presidents choose to put their business interests into blind trusts or otherwise delegate their day-to-day management to others during their terms of office.)"
Man who sells wedding dresses,"[""Did a man lists his ex-wife's wedding dress on eBay with a hilarious offer of sale?""]","Claim:  A man listed a wedding gown on eBay via a hilarious offer of sale that included photos of him posing in the dress.   . Example:  [Collected on the Internet, 2004] For Sale: One Slightly Used Size 12 Wedding Gown. Only worn twice: Once at the wedding and once for these pictures. Make: Victoria Style: 611 Size: 12 Divorce forces sale I found my ex-wife's wedding dress in the attic when I moved.  She took the $4000 engagement ring but left the dress.  I was actually going to have a dress burning party when the divorce became final, but my sister talked me out of it.  She said, ""Thats such a gorgeous dress.  Some lucky girl would be glad to have it. You should sell it on EBay. At least get something back for it.""  So, this is what Im doing.  Im selling it hoping to get enough money for maybe a couple of Mariners tickets and some beer.  This dress cost me $1200 that my drunken sot of an ex-father-in-law swore up and down he would pay for but didnt so I got stuck with the bill.  Luckily I only got stuck with his daughter for 5 years. Thank the Lord we didn't have kids. If they would have turned out like her or her family I would have slit my wrists. Anyway, its a really nice dress as you can see in the pictures.  Personally, I think it looks like a $1200 shower curtain, but what do I know about this.  We tried taking pictures of this lovely white garment but it didnt look right on the hanger as you can see, so my sister says, ""You need a model.""  Well, quite frankly my sister isnt exactly small, (like a size 12 is?) so she wouldnt pose for the picture. Seeing as I have sworn off women for the time being and I aint friends with any, it left me holding the bag.  I took the liberty of blacking out my face - not to protect the ex-wife but to protect me from my bar buddies and co-workers finding out about it.  I would never live it down.  Actually I didnt think my head would fit in the neck hole, but then I figured she got her Texas cheerleader hair through there I could get my head in it.  Though, after looking at the pictures, I thought it made me look fat.  How do you women wear this crap? I only had to walk 3 feet and I tripped twice. Dont worry ladies - I am wearing clothes on underneath it.  I gotta say it did make me feel very pretty.  So if it can make me feel pretty, it can make you feel pretty, especially on the most important day of your life, right?  Anyway, I was told to say it has a train and a veil and all kinds of shiny beady things.  I think it's funny that one picture makes it look like the chest plate off an Imperial Storm Trooper.  Did I mention that all I want is a ball game and beer?  Cheap at twice the price.  Ladies, you wont regret this.  You may regret the dude you marry but not the dress. Just a little side note - As I was putting this ad in EBay, it asked me for a color.  Is a wedding dress any other freaking color than white or ivory??!!  If it is it wouldn't be a wedding dress, now would it??  I suppose black would work...  On Apr-26-04 at 10:38:31 PDT, seller added the following information: Well, the auction is a little over half over and I am just amazed.  This thing has taken more hits than that pothead that lives in the next building.  Man, oh man, if hits were bucks Id be getting a suite at Safeco.  I also have received TONS of email.  I dont have the time to reply to all of them but I just want to let everyone know that I appreciate the well wishes.  Of the email I received:  Five or so were invitations to ball games in other states.  Two of those were for little league games.  Do they have those cushy executive boxes with the free chicken wings at those?  One email was from Scotland.  Its a good thing he wrote it because I wouldnt be able to understand a word he said.  Never did get through Braveheart.  Most were thanking me for the laugh. Youre entirely welcome.  Five years of misery was well worth the hearty guffaw that was my pleasure to give you. Oh, yeah.  I also got three marriage proposals.  Yes, you read it right - three marriage proposals.  I feel like one of those mass murderers on death row.  I never understood how the hell they got more chicks than I did.  Now I know.  They sold crap on eBay.  On Apr-26-04 at 23:45:56 PDT, seller added the following information: Holy Moly!  The hit counter is starting to look like the odometer in my truck! Not the new shiny black full-size 4-wheel-drive American pick-up that I had to part with, but the somewhat older, multicolored, lumpy, tiny, 2-wheel-drive foreign pick-up that belches smoke. A little something about that vehicle, though: its absolutely amazing! When I get inside it to go to the store, I am all depressed. But when I arrive at the store, Im so freaking loopy from inhaling the fumes, I forget why I went there in the first place. Im saving buckets of money. Of course, I will probably have to spend it all on the tuberculosis I will acquire, but hey, you cant have everything. I felt compelled to update this ad once more due to all of your emails. The first thing I have to say is thank you all for your support in my time of need. It was a truly harrowing experience. Some of you men know exactly what I mean. Seeing as this has turned into my little public forum, I just want to address a few of the emails that kind of left me scratching my head. I now have five marriage proposals. You would think my speaking of the ones I already got yesterday would have put a damper on it, but you women sure are persistent. One woman actually said she doesnt want to marry me, but wouldnt mind being my ex-wife. Hmmm. Let me think about that. Nope. No thanks, already got one. (Pssst. Didnt I mention I had one? Who wants an ex-wife that cant read? Now, I know what you guys are thinking - ""If she cant read, then the divorce would be smooth sailing."" Well, that would be all well and good but I didnt say her ATTORNEY couldnt read. You following me on this?) Other emails are serious buyers asking about the dress. ""How long is the train?"" and ""Does the gown come with the headdress and veil?"" Yes, headdress and veil are included, but the do-rag stays with me. And if the train was long enough for my exs caboose, its long enough for yours. You will have to supply your own baggage, though. I gave mine to Goodwill. There was this one woman who wrote, ""You should have covered your tattoos. People will be able to recognize you, like on Americas Most Wanted."" HELLO!!! Im a guy selling a dress. Im not wanted for war crimes. Some of your emails made me laugh. Like the bitter woman that wished she had her exs testicles to sell on eBay. Im not too sure theres a market for that, though. Then there was the guy that gave his wifes wedding dress to the Salvation Army by mistake, thinking it was a Christmas tree. Guess he didnt have any Christmas balls that year. This has also been a learning experience for me. I got a lot of messages correcting me about the color of wedding dresses. For Russian Orthodox, they are blue. For Chinese they are red. Mexico has multi-colored ones. All I know is, for my next wedding I will be wearing a hairy, flesh-toned ensemble because I will be buck naked with a toe tag lying on a slab in the morgue because I would have killed myself. A lot of folks were asking me if I wear womens dresses a lot. I can honestly say that this is the first time I have ever donned female attire. Its also the first time Ive been inside something feminine that didnt nag me to take out the garbage. It seems a few people have taken offense to my inferring a size 12 is big. One male even pointed out that Marilyn Monroe was a size 14. Now, I would agree with you that size 12/14 is small if I lived elsewhere. But I live right here in the good old 48 Contiguous, where binging and purging is a way of life. American women do not want to be double digits in size. Just ask any woman what size they want to be. Invariably they will say five or seven. Wealthy will be the person that opens a store for Lane Bryant-sized women but sews size 7 tags on all the clothes.  On the flip side of that, I have taken offense to some of the people that told me Im ugly and a loser. All I have to say is youd be ugly too if you had a huge white blotch on your face. And as far as being a loser, I think you have it all wrong. I am such the winner. It isnt every day an average guy can make 50,000 people laugh. Thanks to each and every one of you from the heart of my bottom. Origins:  The online auction powerhouse eBay has been the setting of many strange come-ons, some seriously meant and some far less so. In addition to a throng of earnest sellers and determined bargain hunters that frequent this popular online bazaar, it is also populated by its share of crazies intent upon sneaking   their hoax listings into the marketplace. Consequently, one can't always tell fish from fowl at first glance. Over the years, our readers have queried us about various eBay auctions because they harbored suspicions about particular listings, either due to the nature of the goods being tendered or because something about the pitch struck them as not quite right (e.g.; an offer of a tea kettle, which displayed additional wares of the seller). Yet few of the auctions so doubted have been asked about as often as the April 2004 proffering of a size 12 Victoria wedding gown, an item that isn't in and of itself all that unusual. But it wasn't the dress that set people to wondering; it was the seller's comments, which appeared to afford a hilarious look into one man's private hell. The seller wasn't so much advertising a dress as he was proclaiming from a public soapbox how awful his wife had been. The auction listing was just as much about getting even as it was about unloading an item he had no particular use for. tea kettle Or was it?  Had a gal with ""Texas cheerleader hair"" really so turned a man against marriage that he swore that ""for my next wedding I will be wearing a hairy, flesh-toned ensemble because I will be buck naked with a toe tag lying on a slab in the morgue because I would have killed myself""? Herein rested the listing's appeal: The story was entertaining, but was it real? The solicitation was on the up and up, at least in regard to the nature of the merchandise being vended  there was such a dress, and the offer of sale was genuine. However, some (if not all) of the gown's backstory was the stuff of fairy tales. The original eBay listing posted by 42-year-old Larry Star wasn't provoking much interest among those shopping for a wedding dress, so he rewrote it to make it amusing  resulting in the posting that has served to make him famous. The tale of marital woe posted by this Brooklyn native both contained invented details and omitted key bits of information. Though he has a sister, she didn't talk him out of the dress burning party he had his heart set upon by suggesting he list the  gown on eBay and so get something out of it. He also had an ex-wife prior to the one whose dress he supposedly was selling. (Star and his first missus were married in 1994, separated in 1996, and were divorced in 1998.) And contrary to his statement, ""Thank the Lord we didn't have kids. If they would have turned out like her or her family I would have slit my wrists,"" he and his second wife did indeed have a son together during their short-lived marriage. The unhappy couple wed in 2000, separated in 2001 after a domestic kafuffle (which reportedly resulted in Star's being charged with domestic violence assault in the fourth degree and interfering with the reporting of domestic violence), and divorced in 2003. Though ""five years of misery"" might well have been worth the hearty guffaw he says was his pleasure to give the online community, those years weren't spent ""stuck"" with the ""drunken sot's"" daughter; his time cohabitating with Wife #2 amounted to just a bit more than a year. It's not known if the gown in question even belonged to his ex-wife, as she hasn't surfaced to speak publicly about the matter. Also, according to the Houston Chronicle, when asked if the dress had really been hers, Mr. Star sidestepped the question, instead replying, ""I got the wedding dress, I wanted to get rid of it. I was going to burn it and had the idea of selling it on eBay. I needed to sell it on eBay with all the other dresses on there, and I needed to make it stand out."" And stand out it did. The auction of the fabled wedding gown ended 28 April 2004 with a buyer using the online handle of ""absolutsth"" placing the winning bid of $3,850. Yet all is not coming up roses for the intrepid seller who one would assume to be realizing a profit of $2,650 on the gown he says cost originally $1,200, as the sale has fallen through. According to Star, the buyer has backed out, claiming ""I left my computer on and somebody made the bid for me."" The folks at eBay have told Star he can either accept the second-highest bid or re-list the dress and hold the sale again. As of 7 May 2004, he had not decided whether he would accept the next highest legitimate bid (if there even was a legitimate bid). By the time the auction ended, Star's listing on eBay had been viewed more than 5.8 million times. Some of those visitors, possibly caught up in the frenzy of it all, placed bids they did not intend to honor. (Officials at eBay had to weed out many phonies  at one point the bidding reached $99 million.) How many of the remaining bids were legitimate is not known. And, even if all those bids were meant seriously at the time they were placed, some of those prospective buyers may now be having second thoughts, particularly those who offered more than $1,000 for a used, stained dress that was only worth $1,200 when it first came off the hanger.  The ultimate fate of the frock may take it in a far different direction than down the aisle on the back of a budget-conscious bride. Its listing (which has now been viewed 11 million times) has brought recognition to its owner and has possibly opened the way to a new career for this software test designer and part-time musician. Thanks to the dress, Larry Star has twice been a guest on both MSNBC's Countdown and NBC's Today Show, each time wearing the unsold gown. Also thanks to the dress, he has made his debut as a stand-up comedian at the Punchline Comedy Club in Atlanta. He has said he would like to pursue a comedy writing career, and all this attention might well work to get that going.  Though there are many stand-up comedians on the circuit, we know of none that perform their schtick outfitted in wedding regalia. Could this gown do for Star what a sledgehammer and a watermelon did for Gallagher? Barbara ""smash hit"" Mikkelson Additional Information:   Weddingdressguy.com  (Larry Star)  Last updated:  3 July 2007    Sources:   Brodeur, Nicole.  ""Fact Is, There's Some Fiction to Man's Pitch to Sell His Ex-wife's Wedding Dress on eBay.""   The Seattle Times.  29 April 2004  (p. B1).     Curry, Ann, Matt Lauer and Katie, Couric.  ""Today.""   NBC.  30 April 2004.     Eldredge, Richard.  ""Wedding Dress Guy Jilted by eBay Bidder.""   The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.  7 May 2004  (p. E2).     Kelso, John.  ""Best of eBay: A Wedding Dress Tale.""   Cox News Service.  2 May 2004.     Olbermann, Keith.  ""Countdown.""   MSNBC.  30 April 2004.     Olbermann, Keith.  ""Countdown.""   MSNBC.  28 April 2004.     Parks, Louis.  ""On eBay, Wedding Dress for Success.""   The Houston Chronicle.  30 April 2004  (Houston; p. 1).     Weiss, Tara.  ""A Star is Born, Selling Wedding Dress on eBay.""   Hartford Courant.  30 April 2004  (p. D2).     Associated Press.  ""Man Who Sold Ex's Wedding Dress on eBay Earns Instant Fame.""   30 April 2004.     The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.  ""15 Minutes Still Ticking for Wedding Dress Guy.""   4 May 2004  (p. E2).",['profit'],True,"Over the years, our readers have queried us about various eBay auctions because they harbored suspicions about particular listings, either due to the nature of the goods being tendered or because something about the pitch struck them as not quite right (e.g.; an offer of a tea kettle, which displayed additional wares of the seller). Yet few of the auctions so doubted have been asked about as often as the April 2004 proffering of a size 12 Victoria wedding gown, an item that isn't in and of itself all that unusual. But it wasn't the dress that set people to wondering; it was the seller's comments, which appeared to afford a hilarious look into one man's private hell. The seller wasn't so much advertising a dress as he was proclaiming from a public soapbox how awful his wife had been. The auction listing was just as much about getting even as it was about unloading an item he had no particular use for.Additional Information:   Weddingdressguy.com  (Larry Star)"
"'A Country Founded by Geniuses, but Run by Idiots' Quote","['Did a list of ""A Country Founded by Geniuses but Run by Idiots"" entries originate with comedian Jeff Foxworthy?']","Collected via email, 2013: A Country Founded by Geniuses but Run by Idiots Attributed to Jeff Foxworthy: If you can get arrested for hunting or fishing without a license, but not for entering and remaining in the country illegally  you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots. If you have to get your parents permission to go on a field trip or to take an aspirin in school, but not to get an abortion  you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots. If you MUST show your identification to board an airplane, cash a check, buy liquor, or check out a library book and rent a video, but not to vote for who runs the government  you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots. If the government wants to prevent stable, law-abiding citizens from owning gun magazines that hold more than ten rounds, but gives twenty F-16 fighter jets to the crazy new leaders in Egypt  you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots. If, in the nations largest city, you can buy two 16-ounce sodas, but not one 24-ounce soda, because 24-ounces of a sugary drink might make you fat  you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots. If an 80-year-old woman or a three-year-old girl who is confined to a wheelchair can be strip-searched by the TSA at the airport, but a woman in a burka or a hijab is only subject to having her neck and head searched  you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots. If your government believes that the best way to eradicate trillions of dollars of debt is to spend trillions more  you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots. If a seven-year-old boy can be thrown out of school for saying his teacher is ""cute,"" but hosting a sexual exploration or diversity class ingrade school is perfectly acceptable  you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots. If hard work and success are met with higher taxes and more government regulation and intrusion, while not working is rewarded with Food Stamps, WIC checks, Medicaid benefits, subsidized housing, and free cell phones  you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots. If the governments plan for getting people back to work is to provide incentives for not working, by granting 99 weeks of unemployment checks, without any requirement to prove that gainful employment was diligently sought, but couldnt be found  you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots. If you pay your mortgage faithfully, denying yourself the newest big-screen TV, while your neighbor buys iPhones, time shares, a wall-sized do-it-all plasma screen TV and new cars, and the government forgives his debt when he defaults on his mortgage  you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots. If being stripped of your Constitutional right to defend yourself makes you more ""safe"" according to the government  you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots. What a country! How about we give God a reason to continue blessing America! The above-referenced list of entries detailing ""A Country Founded by Geniuses But Run by Idiots"" was widely circulated via the internet in early 2013 with an ""Attributed to Jeff Foxworthy"" tag at its head, leading many to believe it was actually the work of that nationally famous comedian. Jeff Foxworthy However, othen than its basic ""If you ... you might be ..."" pattern that mimics Jeff Foxworthy's popular ""You might be a redneck"" routines, this item bears little resemblance to anything produced by Foxworthy: his comedic material is typically affectionate and self-deprecating and involves poking fun at his own milieu; his brand of humor is much more apolitical and non-partisan than the list reproduced above. (Nonetheless, Jeff's name has been falsely attached to other similar political pieces that have little in common with the tenor and substance of his comedy material.) attached Jeff's brother, Jay, confirmed for us that this material was not written by his sibling. The original compiler of this list appears to be Fritz Edmunds, who posted it to his ""Politically True"" blog back on Feb. 3, 2013 (albeit with a disclaimer noting that ""some of the ideas were from an email that did not contain any copyright""). Politically True As usual, the list has seen numerous alterations in the process of being passed around the Internet, and several of the entries appearing in earlier versions have since dropped off: If the only school curriculum allowed to explain how we got here is evolution, but your government stops a $15 million construction project to keep a rare spider from evolving to extinction  you might live in a country founded by geniuses and run by idiots. If your government believes that using steroids or other drugs will ruin your life, but throwing you in prison for years will not  you might live in a country founded by geniuses and run by idiots. If children are forcibly removed from parents who discipline them with spankings while children of addicts are left in filth and drug infested homes  you might live in a country founded by geniuses and run by idiots. If your government believes that the way to make a school of unarmed children safe is to pass another law, this time with the illusion that three 10-round magazines in a rifle is safer than a 30-round magazine  you might live in a country founded by geniuses and run by idiots. The phrase ""founded by geniuses and run by idiots"" appears to be a variant of a similar statement that appeared in Herman Wouk's 1951 novel ""The Caine Mutiny"": ""The Navy is a master plan designed by geniuses for execution by idiots."" In the 1954 film of the same name, the line was rendered, ""The first thing you've got to learn about this ship is that she was designed by geniuses to be run by idiots."" <!-- Sources:    Metz, Ken.  ""It's Never Wise to Insult the Police Officer.""   The Bath County News-Outlook.  30 August 2007.--> Update [Aug. 2, 2022]: Updated SEO and title.",['taxes'],False,"The above-referenced list of entries detailing ""A Country Founded by Geniuses But Run by Idiots"" was widely circulated via the internet in early 2013 with an ""Attributed to Jeff Foxworthy"" tag at its head, leading many to believe it was actually the work of that nationally famous comedian.However, othen than its basic ""If you ... you might be ..."" pattern that mimics Jeff Foxworthy's popular ""You might be a redneck"" routines, this item bears little resemblance to anything produced by Foxworthy: his comedic material is typically affectionate and self-deprecating and involves poking fun at his own milieu; his brand of humor is much more apolitical and non-partisan than the list reproduced above. (Nonetheless, Jeff's name has been falsely attached to other similar political pieces that have little in common with the tenor and substance of his comedy material.)Jeff's brother, Jay, confirmed for us that this material was not written by his sibling. The original compiler of this list appears to be Fritz Edmunds, who posted it to his ""Politically True"" blog back on Feb. 3, 2013 (albeit with a disclaimer noting that ""some of the ideas were from an email that did not contain any copyright"")."
Did Sen. Cotton Say Slavery Was a 'Necessary Evil'?,['The Republican senator faced backlash after he criticized a school curriculum on slavery. '],"A new school curriculum based on The New York Times' The 1619 Project faced opposition from U.S. Sen. Tom Cotton in July 2020, after he called it racially divisive and revisionist. based As the U.S. grappled with its history of racism amidst police custody killings of Black people in 2020, The 1619 Project, an ongoing initiative named for the year that the first slave ship arrived on American shores, became the center of a debate. The educational curriculum was launched alongside The New York Times Magazine's August 2019 special issue and aims to ""reframe the country's history by placing the consequences of slavery and the contributions of Black Americans at the very center of our national narrative."" Partnering with the Pulitzer Center, the curriculum is freely available online and is being used by teachers across the country. It includes essays, poems, photographs, and fiction from contributors, and was praised for its examination of slavery's impact on the present day. The 1619 Project launched special issue aims curriculum praised As Cotton launched an attack on the initiative by introducing legislation that would prevent the use of federal funds to spread the optional curriculum in classrooms, Snopes readers asked us if in his criticism of the project he had actually called slavery a necessary evil. launched He did use those words. But he also claimed his meaning was misinterpreted.  In an interview with the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Cotton said [emphasis ours]: Arkansas Democrat-Gazette We have to study the history of slavery and its role and impact on the development of our country because otherwise we cant understand our country. As the Founding Fathers said, it was the necessary evil upon which the union was built, but the union was built in a way, as Lincoln said, to put slavery on the course to its ultimate extinction. Later, Cotton took to Twitter and appeared to clarify that he himself wasnt backing the idea of slavery being a ""necessary evil"": Twitter   Although Cotton claimed he was citing the views of the founding fathers, there did not appear to be a record of them saying this exact phrase, according to CNN. But historians argued that some of the founding fathers believed slavery to be necessary, and more believed it to be evil, while others reported there was little overlap between the two perspectives. did not appear CNN historians argued others reported But Nikole Hannah-Jones, writer and creator of The 1619 Project pushed back on his characterization of his own words and the views of the founding fathers, citing historian Joshua Rothman who categorically stated that slavery was a choice defended or accepted by white Americans for generations. Hannah-Jones argued that Cottons use of the word as denoted agreement with the statement. She also said that the curriculum was meant to be ""supplementary"" and was not intended to ""supplant U.S. history curriculum."" pushed back citing supplementary In summary, given that Cotton himself defended and clarified his use of the phrase ""necessary evil,"" we rate this claim as Correct attribution. Foran, Clare. ""GOP Sen. Tom Cotton Pitches Bill to Prohibit Use of Federal Funds to Teach 1619 Project.""
 CNN. 24 July 2020. Jesuthasan, Meerabelle. ""The 1619 Project Sparks Dialogue and Reflection in Schools Nationwide.""
 Pulitzer Center. 20 December 2019. Lockwood, Frank E. ""Bill by Sen. Tom Cotton Targets Curriculum on Slavery.""
 Arkansas Democrat-Gazette. 26 July 2020. Porter, Tom. ""GOP Sen. Tom Cotton Called Slavery a 'Necessary Evil' in an Attack on a New York Times Project Exploring America's History of Racism.""
 Business Insider. 27 July 2020. Pulitzer Center.  ""The 1619 Project Curriculum.""
  Accessed 29 July 2020. The New York Times.  ""The 1619 Project.""
  14 August 2019. Zurcher, Anthony. ""US Senator Tom Cotton Defends Slavery Remarks.""
 BBC News. 27 July 2020.",['funds'],True,"A new school curriculum based on The New York Times' The 1619 Project faced opposition from U.S. Sen. Tom Cotton in July 2020, after he called it racially divisive and revisionist.As the U.S. grappled with its history of racism amidst police custody killings of Black people in 2020, The 1619 Project, an ongoing initiative named for the year that the first slave ship arrived on American shores, became the center of a debate. The educational curriculum was launched alongside The New York Times Magazine's August 2019 special issue and aims to ""reframe the country's history by placing the consequences of slavery and the contributions of Black Americans at the very center of our national narrative."" Partnering with the Pulitzer Center, the curriculum is freely available online and is being used by teachers across the country. It includes essays, poems, photographs, and fiction from contributors, and was praised for its examination of slavery's impact on the present day.As Cotton launched an attack on the initiative by introducing legislation that would prevent the use of federal funds to spread the optional curriculum in classrooms, Snopes readers asked us if in his criticism of the project he had actually called slavery a necessary evil.In an interview with the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Cotton said [emphasis ours]:Later, Cotton took to Twitter and appeared to clarify that he himself wasnt backing the idea of slavery being a ""necessary evil"":Although Cotton claimed he was citing the views of the founding fathers, there did not appear to be a record of them saying this exact phrase, according to CNN. But historians argued that some of the founding fathers believed slavery to be necessary, and more believed it to be evil, while others reported there was little overlap between the two perspectives.But Nikole Hannah-Jones, writer and creator of The 1619 Project pushed back on his characterization of his own words and the views of the founding fathers, citing historian Joshua Rothman who categorically stated that slavery was a choice defended or accepted by white Americans for generations. Hannah-Jones argued that Cottons use of the word as denoted agreement with the statement. She also said that the curriculum was meant to be ""supplementary"" and was not intended to ""supplant U.S. history curriculum."""
What If Only Taxpayers Voted?,"[""A map doesn't show the results of the 2012 election if only people who pay taxes had voted, but instead was stolen from an article about what voting would have looked like without universal suffrage.""]","On 28 August 2016, the web site The Burning Platform published an image purportedly showing what the electoral map would look like if only taxpayers had been allowed to vote during the 2012 election:   However, the map displayed here was stolen from Buzzfeed, then republished alongside extremely inaccurate and misleading misinformation. According to the blog post, the data in this image comes from CNN's 2012 presidential race election poll (as noted in the bottom right-hand corner of this image). poll However, by going to polling page itself, it's clear that no one was asked if they were taxpayers  or if they were asked, that answer was not factored into the CNN map. So where did the data actually come from? On 9 November 2012, Buzzfeed published an article featuring several electoral maps representing what the 2012 election would have looked like without universal suffrage. The map, therefore, is a doctored version of Buzzfeed's map for 1920, which showed the results of the 2012 election if only white people (both men and women) had been allowed to vote:  Buzzfeed   President Barack Obama has been elected twice by a coalition that reflects the diversity of America. Republicans have struggled to win with ever-higher percentages of the shrinking share of the population that is white men  a Mad Men party in a Modern Family world, in the words of one strategist. But at Americas founding, only white men could vote, and the franchise has only slowly expanded to include people of color, women, and  during the Vietnam War  people under 21. These maps show how American politics would have looked in that undemocratic past. [...] While womens suffrage passed in 1920, there were still huge impediments to minorities to vote during that period, for instance in the form of poll taxes (only finally outlawed by the 24th Amendment in 1964). So heres a version of the map that shows only white voters, men and women. Other maps published in the same article used different metrics for comparison's sake such as how the 2012 election would have looked like  for example  if only white men could vote, if only men (not just white men, but no women) could vote, if only people over age 24 could vote, and finally, how the 2012 election actually played out.   Buzzfeed.  ""What The 2012 Election Would Have Looked Like Without Universal Suffrage.""
  9 November 2012.",['taxes'],False,"However, the map displayed here was stolen from Buzzfeed, then republished alongside extremely inaccurate and misleading misinformation. According to the blog post, the data in this image comes from CNN's 2012 presidential race election poll (as noted in the bottom right-hand corner of this image).So where did the data actually come from? On 9 November 2012, Buzzfeed published an article featuring several electoral maps representing what the 2012 election would have looked like without universal suffrage. The map, therefore, is a doctored version of Buzzfeed's map for 1920, which showed the results of the 2012 election if only white people (both men and women) had been allowed to vote: "
This Cash App Email Scam About a Fake Deposit Could Cost You Thousands on Your Credit Card,"[""Here's what you and your family members need to know about this very specific and deceptive type of scam.""]","Consumers should be on the lookout for email and text message scams involving Cash App and other mobile payment services like PayPal, Venmo, and Zelle that claim there is ""trouble"" with sending a large deposit. In this article, we will explain how falling for this deceptive email scam can eventually lead to charges of hundreds or even thousands of dollars on your credit card. The first step of this scam was an email that pretended to be from Cash App. The message claimed that a $500 Cash App deposit was owed to the recipient. However, the email did not come from an address ending with @cash.app, @square.com, or @squareup.com. (A page on the Cash App website states that its correspondence will only come from email addresses with these domain names.) The scam email read, ""We're having some trouble delivering your $500.00 to your Cash App account. Please complete your contact info to ensure it is properly delivered to you. We will contact you using this information."" Upon clicking the ""Confirm here"" button, we were quickly led through several automatic website redirects. The route began with an astorage.googleapis.com link, then went through aworldnewssh.info and umiddleway.com. The redirects ended with mediansquare.com. Next, on mediansquare.com, we were presented with a survey scam. The website claimed that all we needed to do was take a 30-second survey to claim a $90 prize. (For whatever reason, the original promise of a $500 Cash App deposit had changed to a $90 reward.) After clicking through the survey in less than 30 seconds, the website presented pictures of several products, none of which were from recognizable brands. The page claimed that we could pick one of the items for free and that all we would need to do is pay for shipping and handling. We selected the robot vacuum named RoBoKleen Vacuum, a product the website claimed was normally worth $299.99. On ezrobotvacuum.com (a website that apparently has no homepage), we were presented with a form that asked for our mailing address and a credit card number. According to the checkout page, the grand total for shipping and handling would be $5.99. Not mentioned anywhere on the checkout page was the fact that there was a hidden subscription fee that would charge paying customers $71.97 every month until they found a way to cancel. These fees were only described in the fine print on a separate page for terms and conditions. Nowhere on the checkout page did we find any mention of the subscription fees, nor did we see a box to check that would indicate a customer agreed to abide by the terms and conditions. According to the terms and conditions, the purchase of the robot vacuum was ""a welcoming gift for joining the best consumer gadgets club on the web,"" which would provide a ""$125 gift card to the best consumer gadgets club on the web."" (Some websites often refer to these sorts of purported clubs as a ""VIP membership"" or ""savings"" offer.) On top of the $71.97 monthly charge, the terms and conditions also stated that it would bill customers an additional $39.99 for a ""Fitness program that is bundled with EZRobot Vacuum."" This second monthly charge would begin ""after the 45-day trial period is over,"" the page said. The contact page on the website showed the email address support@ezrobotvacuumsupport.com. We reached out to the company and will update this article if we receive a response. Other than the robot vacuum, mediansquare.com claimed to offer eight more products that could be obtained for ""free."" These, too, had hidden subscription fees that were not described anywhere on the product or checkout pages. Also, yet again, there was no box for customers to check that would have indicated that they agreed to the terms and conditions. Several of the products were hosted on captivatinggadgetessentials.com, another website that apparently had no homepage. Those items included AutoShield DashCam, TurboVac Portable Vacuum, TechProPlus Smart Watch, RoadRunner Radar Detector, and MixMate Blender. According to the terms and conditions, customers who purchased these products would eventually be charged a monthly fee of $89.85 and receive a monthly ""$199 gift card"" for the ""Exclusive Gadget Warehouse Direct store."" On top of the $89.95 monthly fee, customers would also be charged $82.45 every month for usage of an ""Elite Force Fit App,"" the terms said. The phone number for captivatinggadgetessentials.com was listed as 866-979-9572. We called and were automatically put on a long, silent hold. No human being ever joined the call. Also, the email address support@exclusivegadgetwarehousedirects.com was not active. ""Address not found,"" the automatic reply read. The remaining three products that could be selected from on mediansquare.com were Keto Ascend ACV Gummies (or Adapt Slim Keto Gummies), SureShot Innovations Light Bulb Camera, and Multi Drill King. The only product that did not mention subscription fees in the terms and conditions was the Multi Drill King. However, that product might still come with the same fees reflected on the pages for other products. If any readers went through the process of being scammed by any of the above scams or any similar ones, we recommend reaching out to any phone numbers or email addresses associated with the offers. If calling and emailing do not quickly produce any help or answers, we advise contacting your credit card company to try to get a refund and to block any future recurring charges from the seller. Also, generally, if any readers believe they have been the victim of fraud, we recommend filing a report with the FTC. Always remember with online scams that if it seems too good to be true, it probably is. ""How to Avoid Scams and Keep Your Money Safe with Cash App."" Cash.App, https://cash.app/help.",['credit'],False,"The first step of this scam was an email that pretended to be from Cash App. The message claimed that a $500 Cash App deposit was owed to the recipient. However, the email did not come from an address ending with @cash.app, @square.com, or @squareup.com. (A page on the Cash App website says that its correspondence will only come from email addresses with these domain names.)Also, generally, if any readers believe they have been the victim of fraud, we recommend filing a report with the FTC."
$500 Walmart Store Credit Offer in Facebook Posts Is a Scam,"['Facebook posts about winning a ""$500 store credit"" or ""$500 Walmart credit"" are not legitimate offers from Walmart.']","On Nov. 22, 2022, we received an email from a reader who spotted a survey scam on the Facebook page named ""Groceries today"" that promised a ""$500 store credit"" or ""$500 Walmart credit"" to users.  We were unable to find the origins of the picture of the Walmart employee and the carful of groceries, but it likely showed products provided in the past as part of a charity food drive. In other words, the person pictured in the post had nothing to do with the scam. Survey scams usually begin on social media with a big promise, then ask users who clicked on the posts to fill out a seemingly endless amount of online surveys with further promises of other prizes. This survey scam that promised a $500 store credit to Walmart asked for personal information and perhaps even financial data. We strongly recommend against believing in any offers that don't come from a company's official social media pages. As we've mentioned in the past, some survey scams often begin with a big promise of $750 delivered via PayPal or Cash App. Usually, the scammers who create the Facebook posts are hoping that users sign up for accounts on various websites that pop up during the survey scams, as they might land them small amounts of referral commission. At the same time, survey scams also have a chance of being quite dangerous,reported AARP.org: reported AARP.org Amid questions about the supposed subject, sham surveys solicit personal or financial information, such as a credit card number to pay a shipping fee for your prize  something a legit survey will not do. They might trick you into signing up for a""free trial"" offerthat's actually a costly subscription for adietary supplementor other product. Clicking on the link might also launch malware that can scrape sensitive data from your device. Either way, the scammers get information they can use foridentity theftor sell on to other bad actors. Some major retailers, including Amazon and Walmart, do offer gift cards as prizes for customers who complete online surveys about their shopping experience, but those companies say they will never ask participants to provide sensitive data. We strongly advise all of our readers to never click any links in offers that seem too good to be true. Also, we recommend sharing this article with family members or friends who often shop at Walmart, as they might be more susceptible to falling for the scams. Note: Walmart does give away gift cards in an official and recurring promotion, but they don't use Facebook to do it. does give away gift cards in an official and recurring promotion ""Beware of Survey Scams That Require Personal Information.""AARP, 1 Sept. 2021, https://www.aarp.org/money/scams-fraud/info-2021/survey.html. ""Groceries Today."" Facebook, https://www.facebook.com/Groceries-today-107660332152080/. Liles, Jordan. ""Was Walmart Giving Away $1,000 Gift Cards by Email?"" Snopes, 7 Mar. 2022, https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/walmart-1000-gift-cards/.",['credit'],False,"At the same time, survey scams also have a chance of being quite dangerous,reported AARP.org:Note: Walmart does give away gift cards in an official and recurring promotion, but they don't use Facebook to do it."
Were customers at Kroger Supermarkets charged extra because of a shortage of coins?,"[""Widely shared Facebook posts claimed that Kroger's new policy was to not give out cash change. ""]","In the summer of 2020, readers asked us to examine widely shared Facebook posts that claimed the Kroger supermarket chain was refusing to give customers cash change, and thereby overcharging them.  One widely shared post from July 9 stated that: post ""Kroger will no longer keep coins in the drawer. Starting tomorrow. We will take them, but we can't give change. You can round up to the nearest dollar and donate it to the food bank, or round up and it goes onto your Kroger card as a credit. So it begins ...""   One week later, Facebook users began sharing a post that purported to describe a contentious transaction and conversation at a Kroger supermarket in Bourbonnais, Illinois. The post claimed that, in light of a coin shortage, Kroger was rounding up the price of items to the next dollar, where a customer pays in cash, and then refusing to give out change, thus effectively overcharging customers: users began sharing post ... Stopped by Kroger today for just a gallon of milk. Seems due to this ""Change Shortage"", their new policy is to round every cash purchase UP to the next full dollar! I can even accept if they insisted on they could not ""give"" any coin back.It cost $2.41. I offered $2.50 payment. The clerk refused the quarters, explained ""due to change shortage"" policy & demanded another dollar instead. I offered the $2.50 again.Clerk: ""Your total is $3.00.""Me: The total is $2.41, which $2.50 adequately covers & I don't care to give up the 9 cent, but I do NOT accept being up charged 60 cent while you refuse to take the coins I am offering.Clerk: it's $3.00 So literally the clerk was insisting I pay the $3 or they were refusing the sale. WTF ?!?...   A nationwide coin shortage did take place in the summer of 2020, contrary to a prevalent conspiracy theory that falsely claimed the crisis was fabricated or manufactured in order to usher in a cashless economy as part of a broader push towards a ""New World Order."" That conspiracy theory reared its head in the Kroger post, which included the line, ""This is how being FORCED into a Cashless economy begins!"" did take place conspiracy theory Remarkably, it is not clear what Kroger's company policy was with regard to providing cash change to customers, at the time the Bourbonnais Facebook post was originally published, in the early hours of July 16.  Initially, a spokesperson for the company provided Snopes a statement which asserted that, in light of the ongoing nationwide coin shortage, Kroger was offering customers the option of receiving the amount of their change in the form of loyalty card credit or rounding up their total and donating the remainder to charity, as well as the existing options of paying by credit or debit card, or paying by cash and getting cash change. The statement read: ""We remain committed to providing our customers with an uplifting shopping experience and the freedom and flexibility to choose their payment method, including cash, during this unprecedented time. The Federal Reserve is experiencing a significant coin shortage across the U.S., resulting from fewer coins being exchanged and spent during the COVID-19 pandemic. Like many retailers and businesses, we are adjusting to the temporary shortage in several ways while still accepting cash. ""Customers can switch their payment type (e.g., use debit or credit vs. cash), and through our upgraded technology, we can now load coin change to their loyalty card for use during the next shopping trip, provide coin change at a lane with coins available or round up their order to support The Kroger Co. Zero Hunger | Zero Waste Foundation, a public charity committed to creating communities free of hunger and waste."" [Emphasis is added.] However, after this fact check was first published, we became aware of contradictory public statements attributed to Kroger earlier in July. In a July 15 article, KABC-TV reported that Kroger had ""announced this week that they will not be returning coin change to customers who pay with cash."" The article attributed the following statement to the company: KABC-TV ""Currently our stores are collecting donations... by allowing customers to round up their order total to the next dollar... For customers that choose not to donate, our cashiers will load the coin value due back through their loyalty card. Customers can redeem the amount on their next transaction. We know this is an inconvenience for our customers and we appreciate their patience."" That statement made no mention of the continued possibility of customers receiving their coin change as coin change, an omission which naturally indicates that Kroger policy at that time was to not provide customers with coin change.  On July 10, a named company spokesperson appears to have told another news outlet that Kroger policy was to no longer give out coin change. WXIX reported that: ""Kroger spokesperson Erin Rofles confirmed Friday the grocer will no longer return coin change to customers. Instead, the remainders from cash transactions will be applied to customers loyalty cards and automatically used on their next purchase."" WXIX We asked Kroger to explain these glaring discrepancies in the company's various public articulations of its policy on coin change. A spokesperson said that the statement initially provided to Snopes (which asserted that company policy was to give customers the option of receiving coin change) was ""first issued on July 13,"" suggesting the company had been consistent in its messaging on the subject. We found the same wording in a series of tweets the company sent to a customer on July 14. Nevertheless, the company also told KABC-TV the opposite in an article published the following day.  tweets In one particularly egregious example of the confusion surrounding Kroger's articulation of its policy, on July 14 the company actually posted two different sets of tweets in response to the same customer's inquiries on Twitter. In one pair of tweets, Kroger told @bbaum17 that customers could either have their change loaded on to their loyalty card or donated to charity (no mention of coin change). In a second pair of tweets, Kroger told @bbaum17 that the company could accept a credit or debit card as payment, or load the customer's change on to their loyalty card, or have it donated to charity, or they could ""provide coin change at a lane with coins available.""  sets of tweets The company spokesperson suggested to Snopes that news articles reporting that Kroger was no longer giving out coin change might have been based on signs that have been erected inside Kroger supermarkets. The spokesperson provided the following example, which reads: ATTENTION CUSTOMERS:The Federal Reserve is currently experiencing a coin shortage. Please consider Rounding Up for Zero Hunger ZeroWaste, using exact change or another form of payment. We apologize for any inconvenience this maycause and appreciate your help.   A sign that apologizes to customers for the inconvenience associated with an ongoing nationwide coin shortage, suggests three ways to avoid the need to provide change, and omits to mention that customers can still get their change in coin form is very obviously likely to create the perception that Kroger no longer gives out coin change.  We asked Kroger for exact details on whether, when and how its policy on coin change had changed; as well as whether, when, and how those changes had been communicated to Kroger's regional divisions, in-store employees, and paying customers. We will update this fact check if we receive a response to those questions.  In its initial statement to Snopes, Kroger gave us the clear impression that its policy on coin change was unambiguous, made no mention of any existing confusion or misinformation over that policy, and made no mention whatsoever that the company and its spokespersons had previously made directly contradictory public statements about that policy.  In reality, Kroger and its spokespersons had indeed issued contradictory and confusing public statements, and had done so before the original ""Bourbonnais"" Facebook post was published in the early hours of July 16. As a result, we are changing the rating in this fact check from ""false"" to ""Mixture."" It's not entirely clear what took place at the Kroger supermarket in Bourbonnais, Illinois, specifically, but it appears to have been at least similar to the description in the widely shared Facebook post. A spokesperson for the company told Snopes:  ""The associate who engaged with this customer was newly trained to the cashier role and misunderstood the various ways were adapting to the temporary national coin shortage. It is an isolated event, and weve since coached the associate and contacted the customer."" This appears to be a tacit admission by the company that, in the specific instance highlighted in the Facebook post, the cashier did incorrectly insist on receiving $3 in cash for the milk, but that this was not in keeping with the company's policy, although as we outlined above, the company's public articulation of its policy on coin change has not been consistent. The image of a receipt that accompanied the viral Facebook post was dated July 15, and indicates that the customer in question paid $3 in cash for a $2.41 container of milk (after tax). A line in the receipt labelled ""change shortage"" had $0.59 next to it, and the ""change"" line had 0.00 next to it. That indicates that the customer did not receive cash change.  Shortly after midnight on July 16, a person who lives near Bourbonnais, whose name we are withholding because their original Facebook post was private, published what appears to be the original version of the subsequently widely shared post. (That original version of the post began ""Stopped by Kroger today"" while versions published later began ""Stopped by Kroger yesterday,"" and the edit history of the post shows that a photograph of the receipt that showed the name of the cashier was replaced with a photograph showing the cashier's name obscured -- both signs that the post was published by the customer in question).  We contacted that person, whose identity we verified. In an email to Snopes, that person reiterated the version of events presented in the original Facebook post. The customer clarified that it was not possible to purchase the milk with a debit or credit card because the patron lives on ""a cash basis."" To complicate matters further, on July 22 a Facebook page with the name ""KROGER-Bourbonnais"" published responses to the viral post, explaining that the company was ""currently allocating the remaining change that you would typically receive after your purchase to your Kroger Loyalty Card,"" but later wrote that ""we are not rounding up ... it was just a mistake of [sic] a cashier."" explaining later Those posts were not written by an authentic Kroger company account, a spokesperson told Snopes, adding ""Our social media team isnt affiliated with it."" Mac Guill, Dan. ""Did a Nationwide US Coin Shortage Occur in Summer 2020?""
  Snopes.com.  8 July 2020. Grider, Geoffrey.  ""Remember the Psy-Op Called the Great Toilet Paper Shortage? Now We Are Pretending There's a National Coin Shortage ...""
  NowTheEndBegins.com.  11 July 2020. Updated [23 July 2020]: Rating changed from ""false"" to ""Mixture."" Article substantially updated to include Kroger's previous, contradictory public articulations of its policy on coin change.",['credit'],NEI,"One widely shared post from July 9 stated that:One week later, Facebook users began sharing a post that purported to describe a contentious transaction and conversation at a Kroger supermarket in Bourbonnais, Illinois. The post claimed that, in light of a coin shortage, Kroger was rounding up the price of items to the next dollar, where a customer pays in cash, and then refusing to give out change, thus effectively overcharging customers:A nationwide coin shortage did take place in the summer of 2020, contrary to a prevalent conspiracy theory that falsely claimed the crisis was fabricated or manufactured in order to usher in a cashless economy as part of a broader push towards a ""New World Order."" That conspiracy theory reared its head in the Kroger post, which included the line, ""This is how being FORCED into a Cashless economy begins!""However, after this fact check was first published, we became aware of contradictory public statements attributed to Kroger earlier in July. In a July 15 article, KABC-TV reported that Kroger had ""announced this week that they will not be returning coin change to customers who pay with cash."" The article attributed the following statement to the company:On July 10, a named company spokesperson appears to have told another news outlet that Kroger policy was to no longer give out coin change. WXIX reported that: ""Kroger spokesperson Erin Rofles confirmed Friday the grocer will no longer return coin change to customers. Instead, the remainders from cash transactions will be applied to customers loyalty cards and automatically used on their next purchase.""We asked Kroger to explain these glaring discrepancies in the company's various public articulations of its policy on coin change. A spokesperson said that the statement initially provided to Snopes (which asserted that company policy was to give customers the option of receiving coin change) was ""first issued on July 13,"" suggesting the company had been consistent in its messaging on the subject. We found the same wording in a series of tweets the company sent to a customer on July 14. Nevertheless, the company also told KABC-TV the opposite in an article published the following day. In one particularly egregious example of the confusion surrounding Kroger's articulation of its policy, on July 14 the company actually posted two different sets of tweets in response to the same customer's inquiries on Twitter. In one pair of tweets, Kroger told @bbaum17 that customers could either have their change loaded on to their loyalty card or donated to charity (no mention of coin change). In a second pair of tweets, Kroger told @bbaum17 that the company could accept a credit or debit card as payment, or load the customer's change on to their loyalty card, or have it donated to charity, or they could ""provide coin change at a lane with coins available."" To complicate matters further, on July 22 a Facebook page with the name ""KROGER-Bourbonnais"" published responses to the viral post, explaining that the company was ""currently allocating the remaining change that you would typically receive after your purchase to your Kroger Loyalty Card,"" but later wrote that ""we are not rounding up ... it was just a mistake of [sic] a cashier."""
Baseball's Jim Gentile Received $5K 'Bonus' – 50 Years Late,"[""How would you feel if you had qualified for a performance bonus at your job, but nobody recognized you'd met your goal until half a century later?  Ask Jim Gentile.""]","How would you feel if you had qualified for a performance bonus at your job, but nobody recognized you'd met your goal until half a century later? Just ask former baseball pro Jim Gentile. Jim Gentile was a slugging first baseman of the 1950s who had the misfortune of being signed to the Dodgers organization at a time when perennial all-star Gil Hodges had a lock on the first base position. Gentile spent several years in the Dodgers' minor league system with little opportunity to play for the big club until he was finally traded to the Baltimore Orioles after the 1959 season. Jim Gentile Gil Hodges Gentile had a few solid seasons as a full-time player in Baltimore, including a monster year in 1961 when he hit .302 with 46 home runs and 141 RBI. Unfortunately for Gentile, a few other players had monster years in 1961 as well, so he didn't lead the league in any offensive category: He was fifth in batting average (far behind Norm Cash's impressive .361), finished third in the home run race behind the Yankees' Roger Maris and Mickey Mantle (the former of whom broke Babe Ruth's single-season home run record that year with 61), and was one RBI shy of Maris' league-leading total of 142.  Brooklyn Dodger Gil Hodges poses for a portrait after clubbing four home runs in a game in 1950.  But ... thirty-four years later, in 1995, a researcher discovered that Maris had erroneously been credited with an extra RBI, which meant that Gentile had actually tied for the American League lead in that category in 1961: researcher discovered Ron Rakowski, a member of the Society for American Baseball Research, maintains that Maris mistakenly was credited with an extra RBI July 5 against the Cleveland Indians at Yankee Stadium. Therefore, Rakowski says, Gentile and Maris should be co-leaders at 141. In the third inning, with Tony Kubek on first, Maris singled to right. Third baseman Bubba Phillips took the throw from Willie Kirkland, then threw to first trying to catch Maris rounding the base. Phillips' throw went into the seats, allowing Kubek to score. Maris later hit a bases-empty homer, but the official scorer reported two RBIs for him, one on Phillips' error that enabled Kubek to score. Reached for comment, Gentile recognized that Major League Baseball doesn't necessarily adjust its record books when statistical discrepancies are found many years after the fact. And, he wryly noted, he might have received an extra $5,000 in pay if the correct RBI totals had been reported back in 1961: ""After 34 years, no one is likely to change it,"" said Gentile, who lives in Edmond, Okla., and helps conduct the Orioles Fantasy Camp as well as baseball camps for youngsters in Oklahoma. ""Well, maybe it's worth an asterisk."" ""I wish I'd known that then,"" said Gentile, whose 141 are an Orioles record. ""The next winter, [general manager] Lee MacPhail said if I had led the league in RBIs, that alone would have been worth an extra $5,000."" Laughing, Gentile added, ""Maybe I should write the Orioles a letter."" But ... another fifteen years later, in 2010, the corrected statistic was finally recognized, and Gentile became the official American League co-leader in RBI for 1961. corrected statistic was finally recognized Gentile received another boost in August 2010, when -- nearly fifty years late -- the Orioles came through and presented him with a check for $5,000 in recognition of his newfound status: presented him with a check for $5,000 It took almost 50 years, and there was no interest added. But a promise is a promise, and Jim Gentile finally got his $5,000 bonus from the Baltimore Orioles. The Orioles honored Gentile, now 76, for his achievement before their game at Camden Yards on [Aug. 6]. Andy MacPhail, the Orioles president of baseball operations whose father made that long-ago promise, presented him with a $5,000 check. It should be noted that no ""promise"" had actually been made to Gentile back in 1961, nor did his contract for that year include any clause calling for payment of a $5,000 bonus if he led the league in RBI. According to Gentile, the Orioles' general manager merely quipped to him during the next year's salary negotiations that Gentile's being the league leader in the RBI category might have prompted the club to offer him a somewhat higher salary for 1962. Nonetheless, Gentile didn't appear to have fared too badly in the pay department. According to a Feb. 14, 1962, report in The Sporting News, Gentile's 1962 salary of $30,000 was double his 1961 figure. Brown, Doug.  ""Diamond Jim Hit $$ Jackpot with New Oriole Pact.""
  The Sporting News.  14 February 1962.
 Brown, Doug.  '61 RBI Race Resumes: Researcher Says O's Gentile Tied Maris at 141.""
  The Baltimore Sun.  26 July 1995.
 Kepner, Tyler.  ""For Jim Gentile, A Long-Awaited Bonus.""
  The New York Times.  6 August 2010.
",['interest'],True,"Jim Gentile was a slugging first baseman of the 1950s who had the misfortune of being signed to the Dodgers organization at a time when perennial all-star Gil Hodges had a lock on the first base position. Gentile spent several years in the Dodgers' minor league system with little opportunity to play for the big club until he was finally traded to the Baltimore Orioles after the 1959 season. Brooklyn Dodger Gil Hodges poses for a portrait after clubbing four home runs in a game in 1950.But ... thirty-four years later, in 1995, a researcher discovered that Maris had erroneously been credited with an extra RBI, which meant that Gentile had actually tied for the American League lead in that category in 1961:But ... another fifteen years later, in 2010, the corrected statistic was finally recognized, and Gentile became the official American League co-leader in RBI for 1961.Gentile received another boost in August 2010, when -- nearly fifty years late -- the Orioles came through and presented him with a check for $5,000 in recognition of his newfound status:"
Pascua-Lama,['Petition addresses environmental issues associated with the Pascua-Lama mining operation in Chile.'],"Claim: The petition addresses environmental issues associated with the Pascua-Lama mining operation in Chile. Example: [Collected via e-mail, 2006] Dear friends who care about our earth, judge for yourself if you want to take action. In the Valle de San Félix, the purest water in Chile flows from two rivers, fed by two glaciers. Water is a precious resource, and wars will be fought for it. Indigenous farmers use this water; there is no unemployment, and they provide the second largest source of income for the area. Beneath the glaciers, a huge deposit of gold, silver, and other minerals has been found. To access these resources, it would be necessary to break and destroy the glaciers—something never conceived of in the history of the world—and to create two massive holes, each as large as an entire mountain: one for extraction and one for the mine's waste. The project is called Pascua-Lama, and the company behind it is Barrick Gold. This operation is planned by a multinational company, one of whose members is George Bush Senior (what a surprise, eh?). The Chilean government has approved the project to start this year, 2006. The only reason it hasn't begun yet is that the farmers have obtained a temporary stay of execution. If they destroy the glaciers, they will not only eliminate the source of especially pure water but will also permanently contaminate the two rivers, rendering them unfit for human or animal consumption due to the use of cyanide and sulfuric acid in the extraction process. Every last gram of gold will go abroad to the multinational company, leaving the people whose land it is with only poisoned water and resulting illnesses. The farmers have been fighting for their land for a long time but have been forbidden to make a TV appeal due to a ban from the Ministry of the Interior. Their only hope now of putting brakes on this project is to seek help from international justice. The world must know what is happening in Chile. The only place to start changing the world is from here. We ask you to circulate this message among your friends in the following way: please copy this text, paste it into a new email, add your signature, and send it to everyone in your address book. We ask the 100th person to receive and sign the petition to send it to noapascualama@yahoo.ca to be forwarded to the Chilean government. No to Pascua Lama! Open-cast mine in the Andean Cordillera on the Chilean-Argentine frontier. We ask the Chilean government not to authorize the Pascua Lama project to protect the three glaciers, the purity of the water in the San Félix Valley and El Tránsito, the quality of the agricultural land in the Atacama region, and the quality of life for the Diaguita people and the entire population of the region. Origins: The Pascua-Lama project is an effort undertaken by the Barrick Gold Corporation to mine rich gold and silver fields in the mountainous region along the border between Chile and Argentina. Environmental concerns associated with the project, particularly the potential destruction or relocation of glaciers that sit atop a portion of the gold fields, have led to numerous protests and petitions urging the Chilean government to intervene and stop or modify the Pascua-Lama mining plan. The above-quoted petition is ""True"" in the broad sense that it addresses a real issue, but, not surprisingly, the two sides (environmentalists and Barrick) make substantially different claims about the environmental and social effects of the Pascua-Lama project. Pascua-Lama Barrick Gold Corporation The controversial plan was described by The Santiago Times in March 2005: Canadian international mining company Barrick Gold has plans to relocate three glaciers in the mountain range between Argentina and Chile to gain access to 17.6 million ounces of rich gold and silver deposits. Chilean farmers and residents of the surrounding Huasco Valley are strongly opposed to the proposal to transfer the ice masses. The glaciers' tributaries are used for irrigation by the farmers, and their removal would threaten the ecological balance and agricultural production of the fertile river valley. Barrick hopes to transfer 300,000 cubic meters of ice with a 20-hectare surface area from the glaciers that surround the deposits. To mitigate ecological impact and prevent ice from melting, Barrick hopes to transfer the three glaciers, Toro I, Toro II, and Esperanza, to an area with similar surface characteristics and elevation by merging the three into a larger glacier, Guanaco, located several kilometers south with a surface area of over 200 hectares. The proposal is part of the ""Pascua Lama"" mining treaty, signed by Chile and Argentina in August 2004 after four years of discussion. Citizens of the Huasco Valley and Region III are taking a stand against the multibillion-dollar foreign company. Last week, an environmental group, Valley Defense, organized a demonstration against the project, where close to 200 farmers, community leaders, and neighbors marched in protest. ""We don't want to live in an area contaminated by the fault of foreign economic interests,"" they said. Ral Montenegro, an Argentine biologist and Alternative Nobel Prize (formally Right Livelihood Award) winner, agrees with the farmers. ""The issue is serious in that the project would put pressure on two important river basins that serve as the principal water supply for communities within a semi-arid environment,"" Montenegro said. In a letter earlier this year to President Ricardo Lagos, agricultural and community associations of the Huasco Valley voiced their concerns about the mining initiative, insisting that it threatens the ecosystem, agriculture, and water quality of the valley, which not only sacrifices agricultural exports and trade agreements but also human health. ""If almost 24 hectares of glacier have been exploited solely for the project's experiments, imagine how much could be destroyed in the end,"" said Francisco Bou, leader for the Huasco Valley agriculturists. Other environmental concerns involve potential contamination from the chemicals to be used in the mining operation: ""Pascua Lama will use sodium cyanide, arsenic, and produce toxic byproducts. The rivers El Estrecho, San Félix, and El Tránsito, together with the Santa Juana dam, are liable to be polluted by Pascua Lama. These dangerous poisons will be handled at the sources of the rivers and could damage water supplies to farms,"" said César Padilla of the Latin American Observatory for Environmental Conflicts. A December 2005 statement from Barrick downplayed the expressed concerns: Vincent Borg, vice president of corporate communications at Barrick in Canada, said 'glacier experts' had defined the icefields in question as 'ice reservoirs or icefields.' ""Regardless of what the experts call them, Barrick is committed to their preservation and conservation. We will move only 5 acres of ice, and it is a straightforward procedure that has been proven in the past to conserve the ice. The ice in question only affects about 3-4% of the ice in the Valley, so it is not an amount that some sensationalists would like to make it appear,"" he said. On the issue of the use of toxic chemicals such as cyanide, he said, ""Cyanide is used worldwide and can be safely used in many industrial applications. Mining comprises only 13% of cyanide use."" Opponents contend that Barrick's planned procedures to move ice from the glaciers are not nearly as straightforward and safe as the company asserts: the lack of relevant technical expertise in removing glaciers implies an irreversible environmental impact. What is certain is that the three affected glaciers would suffer an environmental impact. Nevertheless, there is no certainty whatsoever of what the impact would be on glaciers or permafrost (frozen rock or soil) from the road network and the associated stabilization measures that generally involve the use of salts. With respect to the measures and actions that will be implemented for handling glaciers, there are the following concerns: The ""clearing"" of ice or ""pieces of glacier"" will be done by bulldozer and front-end loader until the entire rock bed is uncovered. In this case, any mechanical action on the glacier will cause heat transfer, which will raise the temperature of the ice, and this would be exacerbated by the high local insolation. Despite the fact that diurnal temperatures are low, the radiative balance includes more than caloric energy. There are no measurements of radiative energy, but the albedo differences between ice and rock mean that the absorption of energy is greater in rock, which would expose the glacier even more. This is also the case for controlled blasting and pushing the glaciers by the aforementioned means until their final disposition. In the case of blasting, this could elevate the temperature to thresholds of melting and evaporation, which would further encourage the destruction of the glacier. Barrick has published a Pascua-Lama Fact Sheet that counters many of the statements made in the circulated e-mail message: Pascua-Lama Fact Sheet Misleading Assertions and Facts The chain letter makes some very misleading characterizations and inaccurate statements. Here are a few examples: Statement: ""Water in Chile runs from two rivers, fed by two glaciers."" Fact: The Huasco Valley has more than 50 different glaciers and ice fields. The three smaller glaciers or ice fields that are adjacent to the orebody comprise only 0.3% of the potential water resources in the Valley if they were to be destroyed, which was never to be the case. Statement: ""There is no unemployment ..."" Fact: Contrary to this statement, unemployment levels in Region III are among the highest in Chile; the most recent statistics according to the Chilean Statistics Agency reveal rates in the valley in question to be approximately 18%. The mayors representing the four municipalities and most of the community leaders in the Huasco Valley have vocally expressed their support for Pascua-Lama, indicating that they believe Barrick will conduct an environmentally responsible project and that the generation of economic benefits is needed for the long-term sustainable development of the region. As an illustration of the lack of employment opportunities, Barrick has received over 50,000 applications for jobs. Chileans in Region III and Argentinians from San Juan are looking for meaningful employment opportunities and the ability to support their families. Human beings deserve the opportunity to make a decent livelihood. Statement: ""Under the glaciers has been found a huge deposit of gold ... it would be necessary to break, to destroy the glaciers."" Fact: Contrary to the fundamental premise of the email chain letter, the orebody is NOT under glaciers. This is simply not the case: 95% of the orebody is NOT under glaciers or ice fields. Protection of the remaining 5% is a key condition of the Chilean authorities' approval of the project. Statement: ""The operation is planned by a multinational company, one of whose members is George Bush, Sr."" Fact: Mr. Bush served in an honorary capacity as an advisor to Barrick's International Advisory Board for two years in the mid-1990s. Mr. Bush was neither a director nor an officer of the company. Statement: ""If they destroy the glaciers, they will not just destroy the source of especially pure water, but they will permanently contaminate the two rivers."" Fact: To underline its confidence in its operations and commitment to responsible mining practices, Barrick has committed that should the water quality change, it would immediately stop the project. In addition to the multiple barriers of protection built into the design, the company has a comprehensive water quality monitoring and management program, which will include 30 automated points from which data will be readily available in real-time for authorities and the public. This program will be subject to regular independent verification. The expanded number of monitoring points is a direct result of community consultation and dialogue with stakeholders. Statement: ""Every last gram of gold will go abroad ... and not one will be left with the people."" Fact: There will be substantial economic benefits that include 5,500 direct jobs during construction, 1,660 jobs during the two decades of operation, and the indirect job creation and tax revenues generated that will flow back to the communities. In addition, there will be substantial investment in infrastructure, the development of hundreds of local suppliers of goods and services, and the implementation of sustainable development programs. Statement: ""The farmers ... have been forbidden to make a TV appeal by a ban from the Ministry of the Interior."" Fact: The Water Users Cooperative, representing 2,000 farmers of the Huasco Valley, is fully supportive of the project. Chile is a democratic country, and the media play an important role in the public discussion of community concerns and interests. There has already been an extensive and open discussion of issues, including the participation of farmers. From a practical standpoint, the petition reproduced at the head of this page is not now valid in that the e-mail address supplied is no longer collecting or forwarding copies. The Pascua Lama project remains an issue of ongoing concern, however, and interested parties can find updated information on the subject (and a list of government and business officials to contact) at the Mining Watch Canada website. Mining Watch Canada Additional information: Pascua-Lama Fact Sheet (Barrick Gold Corporation) Campaign Against Barrick Gold's Pascua Lama Project (MiningWatch Canada) Last updated: 3 June 2006 Sources: Frank, Jade. ""Farmers Protest Mining Project in Chile's Region III."" The Santiago Times. 31 March 2005. Jimena, Jaquelina. ""Vast Chilean Gold Mine Meets Opposition."" Decanter.com. 2 December 2005.",['income'],True,"Origins:   The Pascua-Lama project is an effort being undertaken by the Barrick Gold Corporation to mine rich gold and silver fields in the mountainous region along the border between Chile and Argentina.  Environmental concerns associated with the project, particularly the potential destruction or relocation of glaciers that sit atop a portion of the gold fields, have led to a number of protests and petitions entreating the Chilean government to intervene and stop or modify the Pascua-Lama mining plan.   So, the above-quoted petition is ""True"" in the broad sense that it addresses a real issue, but, not surprisingly, the two sides (environmentalists and Barrick) make substantially different claims about what the environmental and social effects of the Pascua-Lama project will be.A December 2005 statement from Barrick downplayed the expressed concerns:Barrick has published a Pascua-Lama Fact Sheet that counters many of the statements made in the circulated e-mail message:<!--Although the text of the petition states that former U.S. president George Bush is a (board) member of the Barrick Gold Corporation, this does not appear to be the case.  George H. W. Bush (who served as President of the United States of America from 1989-1993 and is the father of the current U.S. president, George W. Bush) was Honorary Chairman of Barrick's International Advisory Board from 1995 to 1999.  He is not now listed as a member of the corporation's Board of Directors.-->From a practical standpoint, the petition reproduced at the head of this page is not now valid in that the e-mail address supplied is no longer collecting or forwarding copies.  The Pascua Lama project remains an issue of ongoing concern, however, and interested parties can find updated information on the subject (and a list of government and business officials to contact) at the Mining Watch Canada web site.    Pascua-Lama Fact Sheet  (Barrick Gold Corporation)      Campaign Against Barrick Gold's Pascua Lama Project  (MiningWatch Canada) "
Obama has admitted a cap and trade plan would cause electricity bills to skyrocket.,[],"In her new book, Going Rogue, Sarah Palin stated that President Barack Obama's support for a cap-and-trade plan was misguided. The president has already admitted that the policy he seeks will cause our electricity bills to ""skyrocket."" Sadly, those hit hardest will be those who are already struggling to make ends meet, she wrote. Here, we are examining Obama's comments on electricity bills. First, though, here's a quick summary of cap and trade for those who aren't familiar with it: To slow climate change, the government would set a cap on carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions. To comply, companies such as electric utilities must either upgrade to cleaner technologies or buy credits, also known as allowances, to continue polluting. Companies can buy and sell the credits as necessary to conduct their business. We are familiar with Obama's original quote from his campaign for president. It came from a videotaped interview he did with the San Francisco Chronicle editorial board very early in the campaign in January 2008. ""Under my plan of a cap-and-trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket,"" Obama told the Chronicle. ""Coal-powered plants, you know, natural gas, you name it, whatever the plants were, whatever the industry was, they would have to retrofit their operations. That will cost money. They will pass that money on to consumers."" Obama also said the biggest challenge would be making sure voters understand why such a plan is necessary. ""The problem is, can you get the American people to say this is really important?"" Obama said. He was talking in general about cap and trade, but there is now a specific bill making its way through Congress, written by Reps. Henry Waxman and Edward Markey, Democrats from California and Massachusetts, respectively. Their goal is to lower carbon pollution by 17 percent by 2020 and 83 percent by 2050. Under their plan, most pollution permits initially would be given out for free. But eventually, companies would have to buy those permits from the government. The latest version of the bill includes a number of measures to offset higher utility bills for consumers. Revenue from the permits would be passed to consumers through rebates or expanded efficiency programs, and an additional 15 percent of the revenue would go directly to low-income consumers. Legislators have opted to give 85 percent of the polluting permits away for free instead of putting them up for sale, as Obama pledged to do on the campaign trail. In theory, this approach should reduce costs to consumers. So how much would rates go up for consumers? It's hard to say. There has been much debate about the costs, and it's been difficult to come up with a reliable number because the bills have been changing as they move through the House and the Senate. Republicans have cited numbers as high as $3,000 per year, a claim that, when combined with a falsehood on health care, earned our Pants on Fire rating. Recent estimates by the Congressional Budget Office and the Environmental Protection Agency are much lower—between $80 and $340 a year, depending on income. So the climate debate has changed substantially since Obama sat down with the Chronicle nearly two years ago. Despite those potential cost cuts, there's still little disagreement that consumers will pay for cap and trade, whether it's $3,100 a year or $340. Because that hasn't changed since Obama first said that utility rates would necessarily skyrocket, and because Palin accurately quoted Obama's words, we give Palin a True.","['Environment', 'National', 'Cap and Trade', 'Climate Change', 'Energy']",True,"There has been much debate about the costs, and it's been difficult to come up with a reliable number because the bills have been changing as they move through the House and the Senate. Republicans have cited numbers as high as $3,000 per year, a claim that when it was combined with a falsehood on health care, earned ourPants on Firerating. Recent estimates by the Congressional Budget Office and the Environmental Protection Agency are much lower  between $80 and $340 a year, depending on income."
Vladimir Putin did not label Obama as foolish for implementing socialist policies.,['A years-old fake quote from Vladimir Putin started recirculating on the internet for some reason in February 2016.'],"On 15 February 2016, the Facebook page ""The Original Wake Up People"" posted a years-old memefeaturing a quote ostensibly uttered by Vladimir Putin:   This is not a real quote from the Russian president.The above-displayed quote has been circulating since 2009 in one form or another (usually in the form of a meme such as the above image) when it was originally published on the satirical web siteScooter's Report: published Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin haswarned the Obama administration against adopting further socialism, saying Russian historyclearly proves it is a recipe for failure. ""Any fourth grade history student knows socialism has failed in every country, at every time in history,"" saidPutin. ""President Obama and his fellow Democrats are either idiots or deliberately trying to destroy their own economy."" Scooter's Report, whichfrequently featured anti-Obama rhetoric, has adisclaimer on the web site that states, ""Like I have to tell you: This isfictitious satire and any resemblance to persons, places, or events is coincidental."" Putin has, however, addressed the responsibilities of businesses to the community in the past: addressed We need business to understand its social responsibility, that the main task and objective for a business is not to generate extra income and to become rich and transfer the money abroad, but to look and evaluate what a businessman has done for the country, for the people, on whose account he or she has become so rich. ",['income'],False,"This is not a real quote from the Russian president.The above-displayed quote has been circulating since 2009 in one form or another (usually in the form of a meme such as the above image) when it was originally published on the satirical web siteScooter's Report:Putin has, however, addressed the responsibilities of businesses to the community in the past:"
Concepts worthy of discarding.,[''],"FACT CHECK: Was Nick Hanauer's 2012 TED Talk about income inequality banned because it was ""too politically controversial"" to release? Claim: A 2012 TED Talk video featuring wealthy entrepreneur Nick Hanauer speaking on the subject of income inequality was banned because it was deemed ""too politically controversial."" Example: [Collected via e-mail, July 2015] There are several articles that claim ""TED Banned This Billionaire For Exposing Capitalism's Biggest Lie"" or similar wording. This refers to the speech of Nick Hanauer, a Seattle venture capitalist. The sensational language of this claim makes me suspicious, as does the unlikelihood of the assertion. Is it true? What is the source of the rumor? Origins: On 1 March 2012, Seattle-based venture capitalist and entrepreneur Nick Hanauer participated in the global conference series of ""TED Talks."" The video of his six-minute talk, widely circulated since its release, captured him addressing a range of issues pertaining to income inequality and capitalism from the perspective of a very wealthy individual. Not long after Hanauer's March 2012 talk was filmed, rumors began circulating that TED had deliberately suppressed the clip due to its potentially offensive nature to wealthy individuals. On 16 May 2012, National Journal published an article contending that TED's organizers had quashed the groundbreaking talk because its content was simply too controversial to release, an odd assertion considering the 2011 emergence of a well-known protest movement known as Occupy Wall Street. The article noted that TED organizers invited multimillionaire Seattle venture capitalist Nick Hanauer, the first non-family investor in Amazon.com, to give a speech on March 1 at their TED University conference. Inequality was the topic, specifically Hanauer's contention that the middle class, and not wealthy innovators like himself, are America's true ""job creators."" ""We've had it backward for the last 30 years,"" he said. ""Rich businesspeople like me don't create jobs. Rather, they are a consequence of an ecosystemic feedback loop animated by middle-class consumers, and when they thrive, businesses grow and hire, and owners profit. That's why taxing the rich to pay for investments that benefit all is a great deal for both the middle class and the rich."" You can't find that speech online. TED officials initially told Hanauer they were eager to distribute it. ""I want to put this talk out into the world!"" one of them wrote to him in an e-mail in late April. But early this month, they changed course, telling Hanauer that his remarks were too ""political"" and too controversial for posting. In the years since 2012, Hanauer's TED clip has paradoxically been viewed millions of times while remaining the focus of articles describing it as ""banned,"" ""too controversial,"" or the speech TED ""doesn't want you to see."" While it's difficult to determine the accuracy of statements about its online availability in March 2012, the clip clearly became widely available and was frequently viewed on sharing sites such as YouTube shortly thereafter, and it has remained popular ever since. However, in 2015, many social media users continued to assert that Hanauer's talk was banned. In late May 2012, a contributor to TED's forums specifically asked why Hanauer's talk had been ""banned,"" prompting a lengthy discussion during which individuals affiliated with TED linked to a statement issued by TED curator Chris Anderson explaining why Hanauer's talk had not been promoted. The service by which Anderson published the explanation (Posterous) shuttered in April 2013, taking Anderson's remarks with it. However, a cached version revealed the date (17 May 2012), title (""TED and inequality: The real story""), and content of Anderson's rebuttal. Anderson opened by stating that ""TED was subject to a story so misleading it would be funny... except it successfully launched an aggressive online campaign against us."" He described an ensuing ""firestorm of outrage"" on sites including Reddit and Huffington Post, wherein TED was ""accused of being cowards ... in the pay of our corporate partners ... [and] the despicable puppets of the Republican party."" Anderson's account of the decision not to release Hanauer's talk differed dramatically from the circulating rumors: Here's what actually happened. At TED this year, an attendee pitched a 3-minute audience talk on inequality. The talk tapped into a really important and timely issue. But it framed the issue in a way that was explicitly partisan. (The talk explicitly attacked what he called an article of faith for Republicans. He criticized Democrats too, but only for not also attacking this idea more often.) It included a number of arguments that were unconvincing, even to those of us who supported his overall stance, such as the apparent ruling out of entrepreneurial initiative as a root cause of job creation. The audience at TED who heard it live (and who are often accused of being overly enthusiastic about left-leaning ideas) gave it, on average, mediocre ratings—some enthusiastic, others critical. At TED, we post one talk a day on our home page. We're drawing from a pool of 250+ that we record at our own conferences each year and up to 10,000 recorded at various TEDx events around the world, not to mention our other conference partners. Our policy is to post only talks that are truly special. We try to steer clear of talks that are bound to descend into the same dismal partisan head-butting people can find every day elsewhere in the media. We discussed this internally and ultimately told the speaker we did not plan to post. He did not react well. He had hired a PR firm to promote the talk to MoveOn and others, and the PR firm warned us that unless we posted, he would go to the press and accuse us of censoring him. We again declined, and this time I wrote to him and tried gently to explain in detail why I thought his talk was flawed. He then forwarded portions of the private emails to a reporter, and National Journal duly picked up the story, which was subsequently reported by various other outlets. As Anderson noted, income inequality was the subject of at least one TED Talk video in 2011. Much of the rumor regarding Nick Hanauer's purportedly banned TED Talk segment hinged upon the differing assertions made by TED and Nick Hanauer at the time of the controversy in 2012. However, Anderson's claims (that TED curators are tasked with promoting only the most impactful clips) weren't implausible or suggestive of a cover-up. It would be difficult to determine whether Hanauer or anyone working on his behalf threatened a public relations offensive, but TED maintained that quality and not content was behind the decision not to feature the video (which clearly was not ""banned"" from public view but was simply not promoted by TED). Since the time of the initial debate over whether or why the TED talk was ""banned,"" the clip has been distributed both by TED and other outlets and widely viewed by a large online audience. In August 2014, Hanauer returned for a TED Talk titled ""Beware, fellow plutocrats, the pitchforks are coming."" While it's true that TED opted not to promote Hanauer's initial appearance (during which he discussed income inequality), his segment was not banned, and the organization cited his lack of substantive content alongside his primary reliance on partisan ideas as the reason it was not curated alongside other featured TED Talks. At no point during the immediate controversy did TED appear to deny the existence of the video, remove it from the Internet, interfere with its distribution, or otherwise thwart the ideas advocated by Hanauer from spreading. The group simply chose initially not to promote the clip (as they do for a large number of TED Talks) in favor of other content selected by their curators. Last updated: 27 July 2015 Originally published: 27 July 2015",['income'],True,"Not long after Hanauer's March 2012 talk was filmed, rumors began circulating claiming that TED had deliberately suppressed the clip due to its potentially offensive (to rich people) nature. On 16 May 2012, National Journal published an article contending that TED's organizers had quashed the groundbreaking talk because its content was simply too controversial to release, an odd assertion considering the 2011 emergence of a well-known (and widely reported upon) protest movement known as Occupy Wall Street):Banned TED Talk: Nick Hanauer  Rich People Dont Create Jobs (VIDEO) #news https://t.co/wmlAmaIZ48 Hannah Kennison (@HannahKennison1) July 6, 2015Nick Hanauer on His Banned TED Talk & Why the Middle Class are the Job Creators https://t.co/KKQOqIK5PQ Jonathan Goodman (@GoodmanJonathan) July 20, 2015if you are interested in #economics, then it is worth listeningBanned TED Talk: Nick Hanauer 'Rich people don't... https://t.co/00E6rlPF1g Mudassar Bashir (@mb62020) June 15, 2015Nick Hanauer too politically controversial: rich people dont create jobs, consumers do - via Reese Jones https://t.co/9xzs0vn1kz VritTV (@Verite_TV) June 11, 2015In late May 2012 a contributor to TED's forums specifically asked why Hanauer's talk had been ""banned,"" prompting a lengthy discussion during the course of which individuals affiliated with TED linked to a statement issued by TED curator Chris Anderson on why Hanauer's talk had not been promoted.     The service by which Anderson published the explanation (Posterous) shuttered in April 2013, taking Anderson's remarks with it. However, a cached version revealed the date (17 May 2012), title (""TED and inequality: The real story""), and content of Anderson's rebuttal.As Anderson noted, income inequality was the subject of at least one [uncensored] TED Talk video in 2011.Since the time of the initial debate over whether or why the TED talk was ""banned,"" the clip has been distributed both by TED and other outlets and widely viewed by a large online audience. In August 2014, Hanauer returned for a TED Talk titled ""Beware, fellow plutocrats, the pitchforks are coming."""
Did Betsy DeVos Say COVID-19 Will 'Only' Kill .02% of US Students?,"['Per the claim, which circulated widely among U.S. teachers and parents, that would mean 14,740 children and teens would die.']","Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And, please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease.  fighting Find out Read Submit Become a Founding Member CDC WHO In July 2020, as America's total of confirmed coronavirus cases surpassed 3.3 million, U.S. President Donald Trump criticized the advice of public health experts on how to safely reopen the country's K-12 school system during the pandemic, and campaigned in full force for in-person classes to resume nationwide. coronavirus cases criticized nationwide The push by the Republican president included threats to withhold federal funding to school systems that did not agree with his approach (see the July 8, 2020, tweet here), unsubstantiated claims that state Democrats had political motivations to keep schools closed ahead of the November 2020 election, and several media appearances in which he and ally Betsy DeVos, the secretary of education, emphasized how opening K-12 classrooms would jump-start the country's distressed economy. his approach here claims media appearances And during that parade of public events, critics of the country's top education official and the president claimed that DeVos had nonchalantly stated the cost of young American's lives should schools fully reopen during the pandemic. Facebook statuses and tweets went viral among educators, parents and activists, stating:       It's unclear from where, exactly, the claim originated. And first, to measure its legitimacy, we did some back-of-the-napkin math. According to the National Center for Education Statistics, the federal government prepared for 56.6 million K-12 students in fall 2019 (50.8 million in public schools and 5.8 million in private education). That means 11,320  not 14,740  is .02% of the country's student population. National Center for Education Statistics Apart from the statement's inaccuracy, our analysis of DeVos' public appearances found no evidence to show she made the comment. We deemed several speeches at the White House, as well as televised interviews on CNN's ""State of the Union"" and ""Fox News Sunday"" on July 12, 2020, as the likely sources of inspiration for the rumor, considering the timing and content of those events. In the first of those appearances, which took place on July 7, 2020, for instance, DeVos said: State of the Union Fox News Sunday Its clear our nations schools must fully reopen and fully operate this school year. Anything short of that robs students, not to mention taxpayers, of their futures  and their futures represent our nations future. So its not a question of 'if'; its just a question of 'how.' The following day, after a meeting of the White House coronavirus task force, she made similar remarks, and praised several school systems for their quick transition to remote learning in the early weeks of the outbreak, including New York City's Success Academy Charter Schools and Miami-Dade County Public Schools. Simultaneously, she claimed, other local school districts were ""doing next to nothing"" to teach students during the unprecedented rules against in-classroom learning. New York City's Success Academy Charter Schools Miami-Dade County Public Schools Three days later, DeVos addressed CNN's audience via an interview on why she believed schools should fully reopen in the fall, even though the country's daily spike in COVID-19 cases was on the rise and did not show signs of a decline. There, DeVos mostly re-emphasized talking points she made during the White House briefings and downplayed the health risks to students should schools fully reopen, essentially affirming the underlying sentiment to critics' claim about the projected death toll. DeVos stated, referring to ""data"" that she did not define: on the rise There's nothing in the data that would suggest that kids being back in school is, is dangerous to them  in fact, it's more a matter of their health and well-being that they be back in school. In both the CNN and Fox News interviews, DeVos pointed to research that suggests children are less likely to suffer severe symptoms due to COVID-19 compared to adults.   While people of any age with certain underlying conditions are at higher risk of serious illnesses should they catch COVID-19, children are more likely than adults to have mild illnesses, and patients over the age of 18 may have different symptoms than youth, per the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). According to a study of U.S. children infected with COVID-19 between February and April 2020 by the CDC, for instance, the youth population made up less than 2% of the country's cases, totaling 150,000. Additionally, three COVID-19 patients under the age of 18 died during that time frame, compared to roughly 5,450 fatal cases among adults. The study stated: study [Relatively] few children with COVID-19 are hospitalized, and fewer children than adults experience fever, cough, or shortness of breath... Social distancing and everyday preventive behaviors remain important for all age groups because patients with less serious illness and those without symptoms likely play an important role in disease transmission. In other words, the CDC says: ""If children meet in groups, it can put everyone at risk. Children can pass this virus onto others who have an increased risk of severe illness from COVID-19."" says DeVos said school systems should consider those recommendations on a case-by-case basis, and urged local leaders to consider ""granular data"" that depicts COVID-19's impact on their community, specifically.  However, at no point during the broadcast interviews or the previously-mentioned White House speeches in July 2020 did the education secretary make the alleged statement about a percentage of students dying as a result of COVID-19 when schools fully reopen. Additionally, there was no evidence that she had made the statement on social media accounts, nor via press releases, around the time the claim went viral. For those reasons, we rate this claim  U.S. Department of Education. Press Releases.
 Accessed 13 July 2020. Aivalis, Christo. ""Data Bash GRILLS Betsy DeVos Over Trump Plan to FORCE Kids Back to Unsafe Schools.""
 YouTube. 12 July 2020. New York Times. ""Coronavirus in the U.S.: Latest Map and Case Count.""
 The New York Times. 13 July 2020. CNN Politics. ""Bash Questions DeVos: Why Do You Not Have Guidance?""
 Accessed 13 July 2020.
 Binkley, Collin. ""Trump Pushes State, Local Leaders to Reopen Schools in Fall.""
 The Associated Press. 7 July 2020. Seewer, John. ""'Moving Target': Schools Deal with New Plans, Trump Demands.""
 The Associated Press. 12 July 2020. Tanner, Lindsey. ""Virus Spread, Not Politics Should Guide Schools, Doctors Say.""
 The Associated Press. 12 July 2020. CDC. ""Coronavirus Disease 2019 in Children  United States, February 12April 2, 2020.""
 Accessed 13 July 2020. Mayo Clinic. ""COVID-19 (coronavirus) in Babies and Children.""
 Accessed 13 July 2020. White House. ""Press Briefing by Vice President Pence and Members of the Coronavirus Task Force.""
 8 July 2020. National Center for Education Statistics. ""Back to School Statistics.""
 Accessed 13 July 2020.

 John Hopkins University and Medicine. ""Mortality Analyses.""
 Accessed 13 July 2020. Correction [16 July 2020]: A paragraph comparing the "".02%"" figure cited in the meme with the actual U.S. case fatality rate has been removed because the comparison was not apt.",['economy'],False,"Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And, please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease. In July 2020, as America's total of confirmed coronavirus cases surpassed 3.3 million, U.S. President Donald Trump criticized the advice of public health experts on how to safely reopen the country's K-12 school system during the pandemic, and campaigned in full force for in-person classes to resume nationwide.The push by the Republican president included threats to withhold federal funding to school systems that did not agree with his approach (see the July 8, 2020, tweet here), unsubstantiated claims that state Democrats had political motivations to keep schools closed ahead of the November 2020 election, and several media appearances in which he and ally Betsy DeVos, the secretary of education, emphasized how opening K-12 classrooms would jump-start the country's distressed economy.It's unclear from where, exactly, the claim originated. And first, to measure its legitimacy, we did some back-of-the-napkin math. According to the National Center for Education Statistics, the federal government prepared for 56.6 million K-12 students in fall 2019 (50.8 million in public schools and 5.8 million in private education). That means 11,320  not 14,740  is .02% of the country's student population.Apart from the statement's inaccuracy, our analysis of DeVos' public appearances found no evidence to show she made the comment. We deemed several speeches at the White House, as well as televised interviews on CNN's ""State of the Union"" and ""Fox News Sunday"" on July 12, 2020, as the likely sources of inspiration for the rumor, considering the timing and content of those events. In the first of those appearances, which took place on July 7, 2020, for instance, DeVos said:The following day, after a meeting of the White House coronavirus task force, she made similar remarks, and praised several school systems for their quick transition to remote learning in the early weeks of the outbreak, including New York City's Success Academy Charter Schools and Miami-Dade County Public Schools. Simultaneously, she claimed, other local school districts were ""doing next to nothing"" to teach students during the unprecedented rules against in-classroom learning.Three days later, DeVos addressed CNN's audience via an interview on why she believed schools should fully reopen in the fall, even though the country's daily spike in COVID-19 cases was on the rise and did not show signs of a decline. There, DeVos mostly re-emphasized talking points she made during the White House briefings and downplayed the health risks to students should schools fully reopen, essentially affirming the underlying sentiment to critics' claim about the projected death toll. DeVos stated, referring to ""data"" that she did not define:According to a study of U.S. children infected with COVID-19 between February and April 2020 by the CDC, for instance, the youth population made up less than 2% of the country's cases, totaling 150,000. Additionally, three COVID-19 patients under the age of 18 died during that time frame, compared to roughly 5,450 fatal cases among adults. The study stated:In other words, the CDC says: ""If children meet in groups, it can put everyone at risk. Children can pass this virus onto others who have an increased risk of severe illness from COVID-19."""
Ed Koch on Anti-Semitism,['Did former New York mayor Ed Koch deliver a radio address on anti-semitism?'],"Claim:  Former New York mayor Ed Koch delivered a radio address on anti-semitism.  Example:  [Collected on the Internet, 2002] We are now going through the most virulent anti-Semitic period since Hitler and Stalin. Nearly 60 years after the end of World War II almost every country on the European continent, including England, France, Germany, Holland, Belgium and the Scandinavian countries, has seen major outbreaks of physical violence against their Jewish citizens, and against Jewish institutions, including synagogues and cemeteries. At the same time, open hostility toward the State of Israel is at an all-time high.  Only in the United States have we seen a full acceptance of Jews as citizens and the Jewish state treated as a friend and ally by an overwhelming number of fellow citizens. In the U.S., Jews have been permitted to rise and fall based on their individual talents, virtues and faults. In one elite bastion after another, Jews have been selected to head institutions heretofore seen as beyond their reach. Today the presidents of Harvard and Yale Universities are Jews, as are recent former presidents of Columbia and Princeton. Having been elected three times as mayor of the City of New York, I have been the beneficiary of this country's generosity and freedom from bigotry, and I will be eternally grateful.  Americans traditionally make New Years resolutions. Before I list my own resolutions, I want to thank President George W. Bush and his advisers, Vice President Dick Cheney, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of State Colin Powell and National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice for their support of the State of Israel. They could easily have jettisoned Israel as a liability in their efforts to forge an international coalition against worldwide terrorism. I will be forever grateful to them, and I hope that many other supporters of the State of Israel will recognize and appreciate what they have done.  Fortunately for Jews and the State of Israel, American support of the Jewish nation has been bipartisan. Particularly helpful has been the Democratic leadership in both houses including Senator Tom Daschle, outgoing Minority Leader Dick Gephardt, as well as former President Bill Clinton and Senator Hillary Clinton. There are many others on both sides of the political aisle who deserve similar praise.  In the religious sector, I am grateful to the Reverends Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell, both of whom have stood up time and again in support and defense of the Jewish nation. Regrettably, there have been many clergy who have unfairly attacked Israel for attempting to defend itself against near-daily terrorist acts against its citizens. We were made privy to the true thoughts of Rev. Billy Graham caught on tape telling President Nixon his real feelings about Jews and Israel. He has since apologized, but what is an apology without contrition and efforts to right the wrong done? Worthless.  Now to my personal New Years resolutions. I will avoid France as a place to vacation. France leads those countries in the Security Council who are the enemies of the State of Israel. So too is Mexico, joining as a consistent supporter of resolutions unfairly denouncing Israel at the U.N. Security Council.  I will not support National Public Radio in any way. NPRs reporters and management delight in unfairly attacking Israel.  I will no longer lend financial support to New Yorks Channel Thirteen public television station. That station recently showed a documentary that was blatantly biased against Israel and has refused to acknowledge the bias or to try to correct it.  I will not watch ABCs World News Tonight anchored by Peter Jennings. For many years, Jennings has specialized in vicious and unfair portrayals of Israel intended to injure the Jewish state and lionize Palestinians.  BBC News is horrifically anti-Israel and I will shun it completely.  Susan Sontag will occupy the Ninth Circle of Hell for her outrageous assaults on Israel. I will no longer read her works.  Regrettably, there are many others whom I could include on this list, but I will leave that for another day. I must confess I got enormous pleasure from the defeat of Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney and her father in the recent primary elections in Georgia. In my view, both are anti-Semitic and anti-Israel. No longer able to feed at the public trough, I doubt that either will make a comparable living in the private sector.  I must close now to get ready for my Chanukah and Christmas shopping. I enjoy celebrating those holidays with Jewish and Christian friends whose goodwill and affection I will always cherish. Origins:  Ed Koch, mayor of New York City from 1978 to 1989,   mayor  was a regular commentator on Bloomberg Radio until his death in 2013.  On 7 December 2002, he delivered a commentary dealing with his perception that western society is experiencing its most""virulent anti-Semitic period since Hitler and Stalin"" and offered a list of new year's resolutions regarding people and institutions he would shun for being anti-Israel.  Transcripts of that commentary (reproduced above) have since been posted to a variety of web sites. Bloomberg Radio Just to be sure this information was accurate, we contacted Bloomberg Radio for verification and received an affirmative response: Hello and thank you for your inquiry. Former Mayor Ed Koch is a regular commentator on Bloomberg Radio.  On 7 December 2002, Mr. Koch delivered a commentary on our ""Bloomberg On the Weekend"" broadcast in which he postulated a growing anti-semitism in America and elsewhere in the western world.  He asserted that public broadcasting  had an anti-Israeli attitude and declared he would no longer contribute.  I hope this answers your question, and I invite you to listen to us each weekend for Ed Koch and much more.   If you are in the greater New York area you will find us on Bloomberg Radio, WBBR, 1130 on your AM radio dial. Elsewhere we can be heard on the internet at http:/www.bloomberg.net/radio. http:/www.bloomberg.net/radio Sincerely,Wes Richards, Host. Last updated:  6 January 2014  ",['liability'],False,"Origins:  Ed Koch, mayor of New York City from 1978 to 1989,  was a regular commentator on Bloomberg Radio until his death in 2013.  On 7 December 2002, he delivered a commentary dealing with his perception that western society is experiencing its most""virulent anti-Semitic period since Hitler and Stalin"" and offered a list of new year's resolutions regarding people and institutions he would shun for being anti-Israel.  Transcripts of that commentary (reproduced above) have since been posted to a variety of web sites.I hope this answers your question, and I invite you to listen to us each weekend for Ed Koch and much more.   If you are in the greater New York area you will find us on Bloomberg Radio, WBBR, 1130 on your AM radio dial. Elsewhere we can be heard on the internet at http:/www.bloomberg.net/radio."
Is the USPS intentionally delaying mail in order to boost Trump's chances of being reelected?,['U.S. Postal Service workers nationwide reported backlogs of letters and packages in summer 2020. But was the issue political?'],"As U.S. President Donald Trump accelerated unsubstantiated attacks on the legitimacy of mail-in voting during the summer of 2020, numerous Snopes readers asked us to investigate whether the leader of the U.S. Postal Service was carrying out a nefarious scheme to help Trump win another presidential term. mail-in voting In late July and early August, various rumors surfaced regarding Louis DeJoy, a North Carolina businessman whom the Postal Service's governing board selected to run the agency in May 2020. For example, a viral tweet thread alleged: viral tweet My mailman just confirmed they have all officially been told to ""SLOW THE MAIL DOWN,"" per trump's Postmaster General...He says that there is backed up mail ALL OVER THE FLOOR. He's never seen anything like it. It has ALREADY begun. But as long as we keep each other informed, we can beat their dirty tricks with INFORMATION.   The claim's underlying notions were these: DeJoy was a political ally to the Republican president, and the new postmaster general had used his new authority to order Postal Service carriers and clerks to slow deliveries to help Trump win the 2020 November election. A backlog of ballots in the weeks or days before Election Day, critics of the president worried, could lead to votes going uncounted or deemed invalid due to state laws governing mail-in election deadlines. state laws What follows is an examination of federal documents obtained by Snopes  including letters by members of Congress, campaign finance reports, and internal memos to Postal Service employees  as well as interviews with postal union representatives and a Postal Service spokesperson, to determine the legitimacy of those questions. DeJoy could not be reached for an interview for this report.  Note: Snopes not only investigated DeJoy's relationship to Trump, but his financial stake in companies that compete with the Postal Service to evaluate if, or to what extent, his past investments provided any evidence of a plan to undermine the Postal Service's longstanding mission: to provide mail service to every American, no matter their address or income. Yes. DeJoy, who lives in Greensboro, donated more than $1.2 million to the Trump campaign between August 2016 and February 2020, according to campaign finance reports compiled by the Federal Elections Commission (FEC). Federal Elections Commission It's unclear when or how DeJoy developed a relationship with Trump, and why he decided to support the billionaire's political pursuits. In a 2005 interview with Greensboro's local newspaper, DeJoy  then-CEO of New Breed Logistics, a distribution and warehousing company  appeared less supportive of Trump, saying his self-important attitude on the reality-TV show ""The Apprentice"" was destructive. 2005 interview The Apprentice ""I'd be fired,"" DeJoy said, if he was a contestant. Nonetheless, by early 2017, DeJoy was among his state's top donors to Trump (see below for The Charlotte Observer's list that ranks DeJoy at No. 3 with a total contribution of $111,000). And by October of that year, DeJoy had become close enough to the president to host him and other donors for fundraiser at his Greensboro house. top donors Greensboro house.     Also, by that time, DeJoy's wife, Aldona Wos, had been appointed by the president to serve as vice chair of a White House commission that oversees paid fellowships in federal offices, according to the couple's foundation website. foundation website In addition to his contributions to Trump's political campaigns specifically, DeJoy has given hundreds of thousands of dollars to Republican causes or campaigns over decades, the FEC records show. The Postal Service's governing board, a group appointed by the president with confirmation from the Senate, selected DeJoy as Postmaster General on May 6, 2020, after what it described as an extensive nationwide search for qualified candidates. At the time of that decision, Trump had appointed all six board members  Chairman Robert Duncan, John Barger, Ron Bloom, Roman Martinez IV, Donald Moak, and William Zollars  since the early days of his presidency. what it described Robert Duncan John Barger Ron Bloom Roman Martinez IV Donald Moak William Zollars  DeJoy, who was in charge of fundraising for the Republican National Convention (RNC) in Charlotte when the board made its announcement, made the following donations since the start of 2020, according to filings from the FEC: National Republican Congressional Committee. National Republican Congressional Committee Facebook In sum, considering DeJoy's record of donations, as well as evidence of him hosting a Trump fundraiser at his Greensboro home in fall 2017, it is accurate to claim that the new postmaster general is a political ally to the Republican president.  home The answer to this question is less clear. In summer 2020, the viral claim about DeJoy  that he had directed carriers to delay mail to benefit Trump's reelection campaign (which we unpack below)  took on another layer: that DeJoy had also allegedly invested $70 million of his own money in delivery companies that compete with the Postal Service. another layer allegedly     That allegation, which we deemed true (see the explanation below), was particularly worrisome for critics of Trump and DeJoy, who believed the alleged holdings were more proof of the two leaders conspiring together  this time in an attempt to privatize the Postal Service. critics Here's some context before we dive into DeJoy's personal assets: Conservative Republicans have long pushed to remove government from mail services that they believe should be left to the private commercial market. Since Trump took office, he has called the Postal Service ""a joke"" or Amazon's ""delivery boy,"" considering its package rates, and has floated the idea of eventually privatizing the agency. a joke delivery boy eventually privatizing the agency Meanwhile, others fear dismantling the federally-mandated mail service would disproportionately affect people who live in rural areas, where private companies such as FedEx and UPS either charge higher rates or do no shipments at all. At the same time, the Postal Service  which does not receive tax dollars for its operating expenses  faces a worsening financial situation due to a 2006 congressional mandate that required the agency to prepay health care benefits of retirees, as well as a decline in first-class mail customers. The coronavirus pandemic exacerbated those long-standing problems, forcing several post offices nationwide to completely close or scale back hours. congressional mandate coronavirus pandemic scale back hours For instance, on April 9, 2020, roughly one month before DeJoy was selected to lead the Postal Service, then-Postmaster General Megan Brennan said the agency was preparing for a $13 billion revenue shortfall due directly to COVID-19 and an additional $54.3 billion in losses over 10 years. Considering those projections, she said the agency could run out of cash this fiscal year  or the end of September  without federal intervention. (Brennan announced her retirement in October 2019, after more than 30 years with the agency.) April 9, 2020 announced her retirement The former Postal Service leader made those comments shortly after federal leaders negotiated a $2.2 trillion COVID-19 economic relief package, called the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, which, initially, included a $13 billion one-time boost for the mail service. But, purportedly at the urging of Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and aides to Trump, congressional leaders removed that provision from the stimulus package, and instead included a $10 billion loan that the Trump administration could leverage in its favor. Then, on July 29, 2020, The Washington Post reported that under DeJoy's leadership, the postal agency gave Mnuchin's office's proprietary information about the Postal Service's most lucrative private-sector contracts, such as Amazon, FedEx and UPS, in exchange for the loan money. economic relief package Steven Mnuchin The Washington Post By that time, Congressional leaders and Trump were battling yet again over another emergency relief package; Democrats proposed a $25 billion boost for the Postal Service but then lowered that amount to $10 billion during talks with Republicans. On Aug. 13, 2020, during an interview on Fox Business Network, the president said frankly the tug-and-pull over Postal Service funding was part of his administration's plan to try to make it harder for the agency to handle the expected surge in mail-in ballots in the November election. If we dont make a deal, that means they dont get the money, Trump told host Maria Bartiromo, referring to the false claim that Democrats are are proposing a universal mail-in voting system. That means they cant have universal mail-in voting; they just cant have it. told Which brings us to DeJoy's assets, and the above-mentioned claim that he had ""$70 million invested in companies that compete with USPS."" For the basis of this analysis, we considered private companies that provide shipping or distribution services, such as DHL, the FedEx Corporation, and United Parcel Service, Inc. (UPS), business competitors with the post office. For more than 30 years, DeJoy was the CEO of New Breed Logistics, a supply chain business that contracted with a variety of public and private companies, including the Postal Service. In 2014, XPO Logistics acquired DeJoy's company, and he served on the company's executive team or board of directors until May 2018. According to internal documents, which we obtained using the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission's (SEC) database of company filings, XPO Logistics considered its competitors to include DHL, FedEx, UPS, and J.B. Hunt Transport Services.  XPO Logistics DHL FedEx UPS J.B. Hunt Transport Services Aside from that evidence, which proved DeJoy's former company competed for business with organizations that also competed with the Postal Service, Snopes uncovered a letter from his wife, Wos, to a White House legal advisor on January 3, 2020, that listed her family's financial assets, known as ""Attachment A."" According to that list, the family had stock in companies including UPS, J.B. Hunt Transport Services, Inc., and XPO Logistics, Inc. letter She wrote the letter in response to a nomination by the Trump administration to serve as U.S. ambassador to Canada, and she said she would divest from all holdings in the document within 90 days of her confirmation. However, as of this writing, Wos had not been sworn into the position. The letter, which was available via the Office of Government Ethics, read: nomination Office of Government Ethics   As of June 15, 2020, the day DeJoy assumed his role as postmaster general, The Washington Post reported the couple had between $30.1 million and $75.3 million in assets in Postal Service competitors or contractors. XPO Logistics represented the vast majority of those investments, and the couple's combined stake in UPS and trucking company J.B. Hunt, for examples, was roughly $265,000. The Washington Post reported On DeJoy's first day, the Senate's top Democrat, Charles Schumer of New York, said in letter to the Postal Service's board of governors' chairman: ""[DeJoy's] financial interests in companies that have business ties with the Postal Services, as well as his extensive campaign fundraising efforts, raise questions"" over his ethical conflicts of interest and partisan interests. letter By that point, a spokeswoman for DeJoy told journalists he had resigned as finance chair for the Republican National Convention, and would ""comply with any financial divestitures that are required"" for the new leadership position. told journalists In sum, reports proved the DeJoy family at one point had millions of dollars in assets in companies that compete or contract with the Postal Service, which lend credibility to the viral assertion. But the exact amount of such investments was unclear, and as of this writing, it was unknown if or to what extent the couple had divested any of the financial holdings. Not exactly  but there is some truth to the claim. Upon our analysis, the rumor seems to have stemmed from a series of directives DeJoy gave Postal Service employees since he took over the agency. On his first day, for example, he addressed the agency in a video that alluded to impending changes under his leadership that aimed to create a ""viable operating model,"" though he did not go into specifics. video Then, in mid-July, he issued several memos to employees, including a ""New [Postmaster General's] expectations and plan."" Those messages to all managers, clerks, and carriers nationwide appeared to be the source of the claim, and detailed changes to how and when the Postal Agency would deliver mail. A July 10, 2020, internal document to managers, which Snopes received from the American Postal Workers Union and refers to an ""operational pivot"" for the agency, said the following, for example: American Postal Workers Union The initial step in our pivot is targeted on transportation and the soaring costs we incur due to late trips and extra trips, which costs the organization somewhere around $200 million in added expenses. $200 million in added expenses The shifts are simple, but they will be challenging, as we seek to change our culture and move away from past practices previously used. But perhaps most relevant to the claim, the DeJoy-sponsored directives included instructions for employees to leave letters or packages at distribution centers if they delayed carriers from their routes  contradicting previous rules for deliveries  and said the Postal Service would no longer pay employees overtime to complete all mail deliveries. The July 10, 2020 memo said:  contradicting One aspect of these changes that may be difficult for employees is that  temporarily  we may see mail left behind or mail on the workroom floor or docks [in Processing and Distribution Centers], which is not typical. We will address root causes of these delays and adjust the very next day. Any mail left behind must be properly reported, and employees should ensure this action is taken with integrity and accuracy. As we adjust to the ongoing pivot, which will have a number of phases, we know that operations will begin to run more efficiently and that delayed mail volumes will soon shrink significantly. We also considered a separate message to employees in July 2020 that said, under a new initiative, carriers in certain regions would not sort any mail during the morning and instead clock in, retrieve sorted mail from the previous day and limit time in the office as much as possible. Then, when they returned from the streets, they would sort all available mail for the next day. July 2020 The agency said the extra spending on employees' overtime or delivery trips had not improved ""our performance scores,"" without going into detail on what that meant, and framed the changes as necessary steps to improve its financial position. A July 27, 2020, public statement from DeJoy said: said public statement Given our current situation, it is critical that the Postal Service take a fresh look at our operations and make necessary adjustments. We are highly focused on our public service mission to provide prompt, reliable, and efficient service to every person and business in this country, and to remain a part of the nations critical infrastructure. David Partenheimer, manager of media relations for the Postal Service, told Snopes that the postmaster general was not doing any media interviews regarding the initiatives, nor about the underlying claims of this report. In a roughly 760-word email to us, however, Partenheimer reemphasized what the agency viewed as the need for the adjustments, and said: ""We acknowledge that temporary service impacts can occur as we redouble our efforts to conform to the current operating plans, but any such impacts will be monitored and temporary ... and corrected as appropriate."" Soon after the directives, American Postal Workers Union President Mark Dimondstein told us in a phone interview that employees and customers across the country were noticing mail delays. In the Philadelphia region, for instance, the Philadelphia Inquirer reported situations where residents were going upwards of three weeks without receiving packages and letters, and postal union leaders and carriers said mail was piling up at offices, unscanned and unsorted. Mark Dimondstein employees Philadelphia Inquirer ""When you ... say this is what you have to do as workers, then that's what we have to do  [the change] runs counter to everything that the Postal Service is about, which is we treat the mail as our own; we get it to the customer as quickly as we can,"" Dimondstein said. ""They've never seen mail backed up like this  it's not being moved."" That meant, while DeJoy had not told carriers to ""slow the mail down"" verbatim, he initiated changes to how and when carriers go about doing their job that the Postal Agency said would cause temporary mail delays. However, it would be inaccurate to assume all slow deliveries under DeJoy's leadership were a result of the July 2020 directives specifically, when they could also be linked to reduced hours for some post offices or other circumstances. Roughly three months before the 2020 presidential election, voting rights groups and outspoken critics to the president believed the new directives by DeJoy occurred at a convenient time for Trump: when a record number of Americans were preparing to vote by mail and avoid potential exposure to the COVID-19 coronavirus by casting ballots at in-person polling places. Specifically, they worried the new requirements for post office carriers and clerks would lead to backlogs of mail-in ballots and thus create challenges for elections officials who, in the majority of states, must invalidate ballots that reach them after Election Day  even if they were postmarked before that date. Rep. Carolyn Maloney, a Democrat from New York, for example, led colleagues in writing a letter to DeJoy on July 20, 2020, that said: Rep. Carolyn Maloney ""While these changes [to mail service] in a normal year would be drastic, in a presidential election year when many states are relying heavily on absentee mail-in ballots, increases in mail delivery timing would impair the ability of ballots to be received and counted in a timely manner  an unacceptable outcome for a free and fair election."" We asked Dimondstein, APWU president, whether he believed the July directives by Postal Service leadership were somehow linked to a plan to cause mail service chaos before the November election and help Trump win reelection. He said: What we do know for truth is this administration is, in written record, proposing and planning to sell the post office to private corporations, i.e. privatizing...That was June 2018. We also know as a fact that ...that [there are] calls for reduced service, increased prices, and less workers' rights and benefits. So if you take those two things together, certainly if they're implemented, then they're going to cause delays in mail; they're going to cause service being undermined... written record This is a fact: [DeJoy is] what's considered a mega-donor of the Trump administration and the Republican party... Anything that undermines the Postal Service' [service to customers] ... has us concerned that it could be linked back to those who have an agenda to eliminate [the Postal Service]. But I can't sit here and tell you that that's a fact. Partenheimer said any notion that DeJoy made decisions for the Postal Service under directions from Trump (which include claims that he issued the July 2020 changes that resulted in delays to help Trump's re-election campaign) were ""wholly misplaced and off-base."" He said the Postal Service, typically an apolitical agency, remains committed to ""fulfilling our role in the electoral process"" in places where politicians allow voters to cast ballots by mail and ""to delivering Election Mail in a timely manner consistent with our operational standards."" He elaborated: ""[Despite] any assertions to the contrary, we are not slowing down Election Mail or any other mail. Instead, we continue to employ a robust and proven process to ensure proper handling of all Election Mail consistent with our standards."" Days later, he said in a statement to news media that certain deadlines concerning mail-in ballots, may be incompatible with the Postal Services delivery standards, especially if election officials dont pay more for first-class postage. To the extent that states choose to use the mail as part of their elections, they should do so in a manner that realistically reflects how the mail works, he said. news media Then, on Aug. 18, 2020, DeJoy issued a statement in which he said he would temporarily suspend initiatives ""that have been raised as areas of concern as the nation prepares to hold an election in the midst of a devastating pandemic,"" including the controversial July 2020 directives that eliminated overtime and some delivery trips. The statement read: statement To avoid even the appearance of any impact on election mail, I am suspending these initiatives until after the election is concluded. I want to assure all Americans of the following: In addition, effective Oct. 1, we will engage standby resources in all areas of our operations, including transportation, to satisfy any unforeseen demand. In sum, it was accurate to state that DeJoy, a political ally to Trump, ordered Postal Service workers to leave late-arriving mail at distribution centers for delivery the following day and eliminate extra trips in July 2020  a change the Postal Service was expecting to cause temporary mail delays  although no verifiable evidence proved those directives were part of a deliberate scheme to disenfranchise voters in the November 2020 election. Additionally, there was no proof to show the changes aimed to help Trump win reelection. For those reasons, we rate this claim ""Unproven."" Ye Hee Lee, Michelle and Bogage, Jacob. ""Postal Service Backlog Sparks Worries That Ballot Delivery Could Be Delayed In November"".
 The Washington Post. 30 July 2020. Naylor, Brian. ""Pending Postal Service Changes Could Delay Mail And Deliveries, Advocates War"".
 NPR. 29 July 2020. Naylor, Brian. ""Pending Postal Service Changes Could Delay Mail And Deliveries, Advocates War"".
 NPR. 29 July 2020. USPS Contributor. ""What Is The History Behind The Unofficial USPS Motto?""
 Postal Posts. 11 September 2015. USPS. ""Postmaster General Statement On Operational Excellence And Financial Stability"".
 27 July 2020. Office of Inspector General. ""U.S. Postal Service's Processing Network Optimization And Service Impacts"".
 USPS. 16 June 2020. Dawsey, Josh, et. al. ""Top Republican Fundraiser And Trump Ally Named Postmaster General, Giving President New Influence Over Postal Service"".
 The Washington Post. 6 May 2020. Bogage, Jacob. ""Postal Service Memos Detail 'Difficult' Changes, Including Slower Mail Delivery"".
 The Washington Post. 14 July 2020. Naylor, Brian. ""New Postmaster General Is Top GOP Fundraiser"".
 NPR. 7 May 2020. Hummel, Marta. ""New Breed CEO No One's 'Apprentice' Louis DeJoy Is A Big Supporter Of George W. Bush But Says The Clinton Era Was His Most Profitable"".
 News & Record. 7 January 2005. Heckman, Jory. ""USPS Board Names Logistics Executive As New Postmaster General"".
 Federal News Network. 6 May 2020. Gordon, Aaron. ""USPS Plans To Slash Hours At Many Post Offices, Hoping To Save A Buck"".
 Vice. 29 July 2020. Cohen, Rachel. ""USPS Workers Concerned New Policies Will Pave The Way To Privatization"".
 The Intercept. 29 July 2020. Derysh, Igor. ""With Trump Donor In Charge, Postal Service May Shut Locations And Cut Service Before Election Day"".
 Salon. 31 July 2020. Rushing, Ellie. ""Mail Delays Are Frustrating Philly Residents, And A Short-Staffed Postal Service Is Struggling To Keep Up"".
 The Philadelphia Inquirer. 2 August 2020. Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney. ""Maloney, King Lead Bipartisan NY Delegation Call For Immediate Help For The Postal Service"".
 28 April 2020. House Committee On Oversight And Reform. ""Senior Democrats Request Information On Postal Service's Operational Changes"".
 20 July 2020. Bogage, Jacob. ""Trump Ally Takes Over Crisis-Ridden Postal Service As Top Senate Democrat Demands Inquiry On Hiring"".
 The Washington Post. 15 June 2020. Murphy, Brian. ""NC Businessman, A Big-Time GOP Donor, Is Tapped To Lead US Postal Service"".
 The News & Observer. 7 May 2020. Shear, Michael. ""Mail Delays Fuel Concern Trump Is Undercutting Postal Service Ahead Of Voting"".
 The New York Times. 1 August 2020. Sargent, Greg. ""Trump Just Told Us How Mail Delays Could Help Him Corrupt The Election"".
 The Washington Post. 31 July 2020. Reichmann, Deb, and Izaguirre, Anthony. ""Trump Admits He's Blocking Postal Cash To Stop Mail-In Votes.""
 Associated Press. 14 August 2020. USPS. ""Postmaster General Louis DeJoy Statement.""
 18 August 2020. This report was updated to include an interview by Trump with Fox Business Network on Aug. 13, 2020, where he acknowledged that he was intentionally blocking Postal Service funding in an attempt to make it harder for the agency to process mail-in ballots in the November presidential election. This report was updated to include a statement by DeJoy on Aug. 18, 2020, in which he announced the suspension of certain initiatives ""to avoid even the appearance of any impact on election mail.""",['investment'],NEI,"As U.S. President Donald Trump accelerated unsubstantiated attacks on the legitimacy of mail-in voting during the summer of 2020, numerous Snopes readers asked us to investigate whether the leader of the U.S. Postal Service was carrying out a nefarious scheme to help Trump win another presidential term.In late July and early August, various rumors surfaced regarding Louis DeJoy, a North Carolina businessman whom the Postal Service's governing board selected to run the agency in May 2020. For example, a viral tweet thread alleged:The claim's underlying notions were these: DeJoy was a political ally to the Republican president, and the new postmaster general had used his new authority to order Postal Service carriers and clerks to slow deliveries to help Trump win the 2020 November election. A backlog of ballots in the weeks or days before Election Day, critics of the president worried, could lead to votes going uncounted or deemed invalid due to state laws governing mail-in election deadlines.Yes. DeJoy, who lives in Greensboro, donated more than $1.2 million to the Trump campaign between August 2016 and February 2020, according to campaign finance reports compiled by the Federal Elections Commission (FEC).It's unclear when or how DeJoy developed a relationship with Trump, and why he decided to support the billionaire's political pursuits. In a 2005 interview with Greensboro's local newspaper, DeJoy  then-CEO of New Breed Logistics, a distribution and warehousing company  appeared less supportive of Trump, saying his self-important attitude on the reality-TV show ""The Apprentice"" was destructive.Nonetheless, by early 2017, DeJoy was among his state's top donors to Trump (see below for The Charlotte Observer's list that ranks DeJoy at No. 3 with a total contribution of $111,000). And by October of that year, DeJoy had become close enough to the president to host him and other donors for fundraiser at his Greensboro house.Also, by that time, DeJoy's wife, Aldona Wos, had been appointed by the president to serve as vice chair of a White House commission that oversees paid fellowships in federal offices, according to the couple's foundation website.The Postal Service's governing board, a group appointed by the president with confirmation from the Senate, selected DeJoy as Postmaster General on May 6, 2020, after what it described as an extensive nationwide search for qualified candidates. At the time of that decision, Trump had appointed all six board members  Chairman Robert Duncan, John Barger, Ron Bloom, Roman Martinez IV, Donald Moak, and William Zollars  since the early days of his presidency.In sum, considering DeJoy's record of donations, as well as evidence of him hosting a Trump fundraiser at his Greensboro home in fall 2017, it is accurate to claim that the new postmaster general is a political ally to the Republican president.In summer 2020, the viral claim about DeJoy  that he had directed carriers to delay mail to benefit Trump's reelection campaign (which we unpack below)  took on another layer: that DeJoy had also allegedly invested $70 million of his own money in delivery companies that compete with the Postal Service.That allegation, which we deemed true (see the explanation below), was particularly worrisome for critics of Trump and DeJoy, who believed the alleged holdings were more proof of the two leaders conspiring together  this time in an attempt to privatize the Postal Service.Here's some context before we dive into DeJoy's personal assets: Conservative Republicans have long pushed to remove government from mail services that they believe should be left to the private commercial market. Since Trump took office, he has called the Postal Service ""a joke"" or Amazon's ""delivery boy,"" considering its package rates, and has floated the idea of eventually privatizing the agency.At the same time, the Postal Service  which does not receive tax dollars for its operating expenses  faces a worsening financial situation due to a 2006 congressional mandate that required the agency to prepay health care benefits of retirees, as well as a decline in first-class mail customers. The coronavirus pandemic exacerbated those long-standing problems, forcing several post offices nationwide to completely close or scale back hours.For instance, on April 9, 2020, roughly one month before DeJoy was selected to lead the Postal Service, then-Postmaster General Megan Brennan said the agency was preparing for a $13 billion revenue shortfall due directly to COVID-19 and an additional $54.3 billion in losses over 10 years. Considering those projections, she said the agency could run out of cash this fiscal year  or the end of September  without federal intervention. (Brennan announced her retirement in October 2019, after more than 30 years with the agency.)The former Postal Service leader made those comments shortly after federal leaders negotiated a $2.2 trillion COVID-19 economic relief package, called the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, which, initially, included a $13 billion one-time boost for the mail service. But, purportedly at the urging of Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and aides to Trump, congressional leaders removed that provision from the stimulus package, and instead included a $10 billion loan that the Trump administration could leverage in its favor. Then, on July 29, 2020, The Washington Post reported that under DeJoy's leadership, the postal agency gave Mnuchin's office's proprietary information about the Postal Service's most lucrative private-sector contracts, such as Amazon, FedEx and UPS, in exchange for the loan money.On Aug. 13, 2020, during an interview on Fox Business Network, the president said frankly the tug-and-pull over Postal Service funding was part of his administration's plan to try to make it harder for the agency to handle the expected surge in mail-in ballots in the November election. If we dont make a deal, that means they dont get the money, Trump told host Maria Bartiromo, referring to the false claim that Democrats are are proposing a universal mail-in voting system. That means they cant have universal mail-in voting; they just cant have it.For more than 30 years, DeJoy was the CEO of New Breed Logistics, a supply chain business that contracted with a variety of public and private companies, including the Postal Service. In 2014, XPO Logistics acquired DeJoy's company, and he served on the company's executive team or board of directors until May 2018. According to internal documents, which we obtained using the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission's (SEC) database of company filings, XPO Logistics considered its competitors to include DHL, FedEx, UPS, and J.B. Hunt Transport Services. Aside from that evidence, which proved DeJoy's former company competed for business with organizations that also competed with the Postal Service, Snopes uncovered a letter from his wife, Wos, to a White House legal advisor on January 3, 2020, that listed her family's financial assets, known as ""Attachment A."" According to that list, the family had stock in companies including UPS, J.B. Hunt Transport Services, Inc., and XPO Logistics, Inc.She wrote the letter in response to a nomination by the Trump administration to serve as U.S. ambassador to Canada, and she said she would divest from all holdings in the document within 90 days of her confirmation. However, as of this writing, Wos had not been sworn into the position. The letter, which was available via the Office of Government Ethics, read:As of June 15, 2020, the day DeJoy assumed his role as postmaster general, The Washington Post reported the couple had between $30.1 million and $75.3 million in assets in Postal Service competitors or contractors. XPO Logistics represented the vast majority of those investments, and the couple's combined stake in UPS and trucking company J.B. Hunt, for examples, was roughly $265,000.On DeJoy's first day, the Senate's top Democrat, Charles Schumer of New York, said in letter to the Postal Service's board of governors' chairman: ""[DeJoy's] financial interests in companies that have business ties with the Postal Services, as well as his extensive campaign fundraising efforts, raise questions"" over his ethical conflicts of interest and partisan interests.By that point, a spokeswoman for DeJoy told journalists he had resigned as finance chair for the Republican National Convention, and would ""comply with any financial divestitures that are required"" for the new leadership position.Upon our analysis, the rumor seems to have stemmed from a series of directives DeJoy gave Postal Service employees since he took over the agency. On his first day, for example, he addressed the agency in a video that alluded to impending changes under his leadership that aimed to create a ""viable operating model,"" though he did not go into specifics.A July 10, 2020, internal document to managers, which Snopes received from the American Postal Workers Union and refers to an ""operational pivot"" for the agency, said the following, for example:The initial step in our pivot is targeted on transportation and the soaring costs we incur due to late trips and extra trips, which costs the organization somewhere around $200 million in added expenses.But perhaps most relevant to the claim, the DeJoy-sponsored directives included instructions for employees to leave letters or packages at distribution centers if they delayed carriers from their routes  contradicting previous rules for deliveries  and said the Postal Service would no longer pay employees overtime to complete all mail deliveries. The July 10, 2020 memo said:We also considered a separate message to employees in July 2020 that said, under a new initiative, carriers in certain regions would not sort any mail during the morning and instead clock in, retrieve sorted mail from the previous day and limit time in the office as much as possible. Then, when they returned from the streets, they would sort all available mail for the next day.The agency said the extra spending on employees' overtime or delivery trips had not improved ""our performance scores,"" without going into detail on what that meant, and framed the changes as necessary steps to improve its financial position. A July 27, 2020, public statement from DeJoy said:Soon after the directives, American Postal Workers Union President Mark Dimondstein told us in a phone interview that employees and customers across the country were noticing mail delays. In the Philadelphia region, for instance, the Philadelphia Inquirer reported situations where residents were going upwards of three weeks without receiving packages and letters, and postal union leaders and carriers said mail was piling up at offices, unscanned and unsorted.Specifically, they worried the new requirements for post office carriers and clerks would lead to backlogs of mail-in ballots and thus create challenges for elections officials who, in the majority of states, must invalidate ballots that reach them after Election Day  even if they were postmarked before that date. Rep. Carolyn Maloney, a Democrat from New York, for example, led colleagues in writing a letter to DeJoy on July 20, 2020, that said:What we do know for truth is this administration is, in written record, proposing and planning to sell the post office to private corporations, i.e. privatizing...That was June 2018. We also know as a fact that ...that [there are] calls for reduced service, increased prices, and less workers' rights and benefits. So if you take those two things together, certainly if they're implemented, then they're going to cause delays in mail; they're going to cause service being undermined...Days later, he said in a statement to news media that certain deadlines concerning mail-in ballots, may be incompatible with the Postal Services delivery standards, especially if election officials dont pay more for first-class postage. To the extent that states choose to use the mail as part of their elections, they should do so in a manner that realistically reflects how the mail works, he said.Then, on Aug. 18, 2020, DeJoy issued a statement in which he said he would temporarily suspend initiatives ""that have been raised as areas of concern as the nation prepares to hold an election in the midst of a devastating pandemic,"" including the controversial July 2020 directives that eliminated overtime and some delivery trips. The statement read:"
Was Kevin's Ticket Thrown Away in 'Home Alone'?,"['Eagle-eyed viewers spotted an American Airlines ticket in the trash in the 1990 Christmas movie ""Home Alone.""']","It's been more than three decades since the original ""Home Alone"" film was released. However, fans of the 1990 movie are still noticing details they may have missed in past viewings, such as the fate of Kevin's airline ticket. We previously reported that the black-and-white gangster films depicted in ""Home Alone"" and ""Home Alone 2: Lost in New York"" were not real classics. We also published a story about the fact that Catherine O'Hara was the same actress who played both Kate McCallister (Kevin's mother in ""Home Alone"") and Moira Rose on the TV series ""Schitt's Creek."" While this news may not have shocked some of O'Hara's fans, the number of likes, comments, and shares on various TikTok videos showed that not everyone realized she played both characters. Speaking of the McCallisters, we decided to take another closer look at ""Home Alone"" after a TikTok video purported to shine a light on an obscure detail: the fate of Kevin's airline ticket. In the plot of ""Home Alone,"" the young Kevin McCallister is accidentally left at home while the rest of his family flies to Paris for a Christmas vacation. A series of events allows this mishap to occur, one of which is the loss of his airplane ticket. The TikTok video was posted by @scouseblu on Dec. 17, 2020. The Twitter account @FilmEasterEggs considered the moment to be an Easter egg. Some responded, saying they already knew about the ticket being thrown into the garbage, while others expressed surprise. One Twitter user claimed that the airplane ticket going into the trash was an ""integral plot point,"" which was potentially questionable. In ""Home Alone,"" the McCallister family runs through the airport and hands their stack of tickets to a gate agent. However, the gate agent does not appear to look at the tickets; she conducts a headcount as they walk to the airplane. While the videos from TikTok and Twitter showed the ticket going in the trash, preceding shots displayed a row of cups in front of the tickets and passports. After Kevin attacks his older brother Buzz for eating all of the cheese pizza, the stack of tickets and passports is briefly visible for a split second before several cups of milk come crashing down. Milk was mentioned in the scene by Kate and was likely chosen by the writers because its white color obscured the ticket during cleanup. The stack of tickets and passports all got soaked, but only Kevin's ticket ended up in the trash. Freeform aired double features of ""Home Alone"" and ""Home Alone 2: Lost in New York"" multiple times in December 2020. Some of the showings included interesting tidbits about the films, in what the Disney-owned channel called its ""Pop'n Knowledge Edition."" One of those tidbits appeared onscreen the moment that Kevin's ticket was thrown in the trash. Freeform also partially edited a scene out of the sequel ""Home Alone 2: Lost in New York.""",['loss'],True,"It's been more than three decades since the original ""Home Alone"" film was released. However, fans of the 1990 movie were still noticing details they may have missed in past viewings, like the fate of Kevin's airline ticket.We previously reported that the black-and-white gangster films depicted in ""Home Alone"" and ""Home Alone 2: Lost in New York"" were not real classics. We also published a story about the fact that Catherine O'Hara was the same actress who played both Kate McCallister (Kevin's mother in ""Home Alone"") as well as Moira Rose on the TV series ""Schitt's Creek."" The news may not have shocked some of O'Hara's fans, but the number of likes, comments, and shares on various TikTok videos showed that not everyone realized she played both characters.Speaking of the McCallisters, we decided to take another closer look at ""Home Alone"" after a TikTok video purported to shine a light on an obscure detail: the fate of Kevin's airline ticket.The TikTok video was posted by @scouseblu on Dec. 17, 2020. The Twitter account @FilmEasterEggs considered the moment to be an Easter egg: Courtesy: 20th Century Fox Courtesy: 20th Century FoxFreeform also partially edited a sceneout of the sequel ""Home Alone 2: Lost in New York."""
Where Did Obama's Money Come From?,"[""Were Barack Obama's education and house paid for with money obtained from questionable sources?""]","Claim:  Barack Obama's education and house were paid for with money obtained from questionable sources.  Example:  [Collected via e-mail, October 2008] Written by a female Obama supporter who voted for him for president. Legitimate Questions To All My Friends, this is every important, please take the time to read it. This election has me very worried. So many things to consider. About a year ago I would have voted for Obama. I have changed my mind three times since than. I watch all the news channels, jumping from one to another. I must say this drives my husband crazy. But, I feel if you view MSNBC, CNN, and Fox News, you might get some middle ground to work with. About six months ago, I started thinking 'where did the money come from for Obama'. I have four daughters who went to College, and we were middle class, and money was tight. We (including my girls) worked hard and there were lots of student loans. I started looking into Obama's life. Around 1979 Obama started college at Occidental in California. He is very open about his two years at Occidental, he tried all kinds of drugs and was wasting his time but, even though he had a brilliant mind, did not apply himself to his studies. 'Barry' (that was the name he used all his life) during this time had two roommates, Muhammad Hasan Chandoo and Wahid Hamid, both from Pakistan. During the summer of 1981, after his second year in college, he made a 'round the world' trip. Stopping to see his mother in Indonesia, next Hyderabad in India, three weeks in Karachi, Pakistan where he stayed with his roommate's family, then off to Africa to visit his father's family. My question - Where did he get the money for this trip? Nether I, nor any one of my children would have had money for a trip like this when they where in college. When he came back he started school at Columbia University in New York. It is at this time he wants everyone to call him Barack  not Barry. Do you know what the tuition is at Columbia? It's not cheap! to say the least. Where did he get money for tuition? Student Loans? Maybe. After Columbia, he went to Chicago to work as a Community Organizer for $12,000 a year. Why Chicago? Why not New York? He was already living in New York. By 'chance' he met Antoin 'Tony' Rezko, born in Aleppo Syria, and a real estate developer in Chicago. Rezko has been convicted of fraud and bribery this year. Rezko, was named 'Entrepreneur of the Decade' by the Arab-American Business and Professional Association'. About two years later, Obama entered Harvard Law School. Do you have any idea what tuition is for Harvard Law School? Where did he get the money for Law School? More student loans? After Law school, he went back to Chicago. Rezko offered him a job, which he turned down. But, he did take a job with Davis, Miner, Barnhill & Galland. Guess what? They represented 'Rezar' which Rezko's firm. Rezko was one of Obama's first major financial contributors when he ran for office in Chicago. In 2003, Rezko threw an early fundraiser for Obama which Chicago Tribune reporter David Mendelland claims was instrumental in providing Obama with 'seed money' for his U.S. Senate race. In 2005, Obama purchased a new home in Kenwoood District of Chicago for $1.65 million (less than asking price). With ALL those Student Loans - Where did he get the money for the property? On the same day Rezko's wife, Rita, purchased the adjoining empty lot for full price. The London Times reported that Nadhmi Auchi, an Iraqi-born Billionaire loaned Rezko $3.5 million three weeks before Obama's new home was purchased. Obama met Nadhmi Auchi many times with Rezko. All of the above information I got on line. If you would like to check it - Wikipedia, encyclopedia, Barack Obama; Tony Rezko; Valerie Jarrett: Daily Times - Obama visited Pakistan in 1981; The Washington Times - September 7, 2008; The Times May 10, 2008. Now the BIG question - If I found out all this information on my own, Why haven't all of our 'intelligent' members of the press been reporting this? A phrase that keeps ringing in my ear - 'Beware of the enemy from within'!!!   Variations:  Versions of this item circulated in 2012 were prefaced with an added line stating that it was ""written by a female Obama supporter who voted for him for president.""  That statement is inaccurate, as this item originally appeared prior to the 2008 presidential election.  Origins:   The above-quoted piece combines a good deal of supposition and some elaborate conspiracy theory to question exactly where Senator Barack Obama obtained the money for his education and the purchase of a house in Chicago in 2005.  The answers are fairly straightforward. As both Barack Obama and his wife, Michelle, have noted many times, they paid for their educations via scholarships and student loans, in the process (like many people) incurring debts which were not fully paid off until many years later.  (In the Obamas' case, it was largely the revenue derived from Barack's pair of best-selling books that finally allowed them to retire their student loan debts.) student loans Likewise, the Obamas' financing of their house in Chicago was no mystery.  The couple experienced a significant jump in income from 2000 onwards (largely from royalties on book sales), and they purchased their Chicago home in 2005, a year in which their combined income was $1.6 million: income The Obamas' best financial year came in 2005, when their total combined income was $1.6 million. That included $1.2 million in author fees for Obama's best-selling books. Michelle Obama's salary that year [as vice president for community and external affairs at the University of Chicago Hospitals] was $316,962 plus another $45,000 from TreeHouse Foods [for whom she served a member of the board of directors]. vice president The copies of the Obamas' federal tax returns tax returns During the summer of 1981, Barack Obama traveled to Indonesia to see his mother and half-sister and went on to visit Pakistan with a college friend.  (There is no evidence that, as claimed above, he also went ""off to Africa to visit his father's family"" on that same trip.)  Since Obama had relatives and friends to stay with during that time, his only major expense would have been airplane fare, and it's not much of a stretch to believe that cost could have been covered by contributions from relatives and earnings from various summer jobs he held before and during his time at Occidental College. As for why Barack Obama went to work as a community organizer in Chicago rather than New York (where he was currently living), he stated quite plainly in Dreams from My Father that he had made multiple efforts to find employment in that field without success and ""had all but given up on organizing"" when he received a job offer from Chicago-based social activist Jerry Kellman after responding to a help wanted ad in the New York Times. It is true that Tony Rezko's wife, Rita Rezko, bought an undeveloped lot adjacent to the Obamas' home (at a time when Tony Rezko was under investigation by U.S. attorneys) and subsequently sold the Obamas a small portion of that lot, but (as noted above) the house was well within the Obamas' price range given their current income level and they would have required no help from the Rezkos (or anyone else) to afford it:  In June 2005, Obama and Rezko purchased adjoining parcels in Kenwood. The state's junior senator paid $1.65 million for a Georgian revival mansion, while Rezko paid $625,000 for the adjacent, undeveloped lot. Both closed on their properties on the same day. In January [2006], aiming to increase the size of his sideyard, Obama paid Rezko $104,500 for a strip of his land. As Senator Obama explained to the Chicago Sun-Times, the timing of the real estate purchases was dictated by the seller, and the prices were based on current market conditions and competing offers for the properties: Q: Have you or your wife ever done any legal work ever for Rezko or his companies? A: No. Q: How do you explain the fact your family purchased your home the same day as Rita Rezko bought the property adjacent to yours? Was this a coordinated purchase? A: The sellers required the closing of both properties at the same time. As they were moving out of town, they wished to conclude the sale of both properties simultaneously. The lot was purchased first; with the purchase of the house on the adjacent lot, the closings could proceed and did, on the same day, pursuant to the condition set by the sellers. Q: Why is it that you were able to buy your parcel for $300,000 less than the asking price, and Rita Rezko paid full price? Who negotiated this end of the deal? Did whoever negotiated it have any contact with Rita and Tony Rezko or their Realtor or lawyer? A: Our agent negotiated only with the seller's agent. As we understood it, the house had been listed for some time, for months, and our offer was one of two and, as we understood it, it was the best offer. The original listed price was too high for the market at the time, and we understood that the sellers, who were anxious to move, were prepared to sell the house for what they paid for it, which is what they did. We were not involved in the Rezko negotiation of the price for the adjacent lot. It was our understanding that the owners had received, from another buyer, an offer for $625,000 and that therefore the Rezkos could not have offered or purchased that lot for less. Last updated:  1 May 2012    McKinney, Dave and Chris Fusco.  ""Obama on Rezko Deal: It Was a Mistake.""   Chicago Sun-Times.  5 November 2006.    Popkin, Jim.  ""Obama's Tax Returns Show Leap in Income.""   MSNBC.com.  25 March 2008.    Sweet, Lynn.  ""Michelle Obama's Ties to Wal-Mart Cut.""   Chicago Sun-Times.  23 May 2007.    Thanawala, Sudhin.  ""Obama Worked to Fit in at Elite School.""   The Boston Globe.  26 March 2008.    Walsh, Kenneth T.  ""On the Streets of Chicago, a Candidate Comes of Age.""   U.S. News & World Report.  26 August 2007.    Wills, Christopher.  ""Fact Check: Camps Highlight Foes' Old Associates.""   Associated Press.  12 October 2008.    Associated Press.  ""Michelle Obama: Barack's Book Sales Paid Off Our Student Loans.""   FoxNews.com.  14 August 2008.",['income'],False,"Variations:  Versions of this item circulated in 2012 were prefaced with an added line stating that it was ""written by a female Obama supporter who voted for him for president.""  That statement is inaccurate, as this item originally appeared prior to the 2008 presidential election.As both Barack Obama and his wife, Michelle, have noted many times, they paid for their educations via scholarships and student loans, in the process (like many people) incurring debts which were not fully paid off until many years later.  (In the Obamas' case, it was largely the revenue derived from Barack's pair of best-selling books that finally allowed them to retire their student loan debts.)Likewise, the Obamas' financing of their house in Chicago was no mystery.  The couple experienced a significant jump in income from 2000 onwards (largely from royalties on book sales), and they purchased their Chicago home in 2005, a year in which their combined income was $1.6 million:The Obamas' best financial year came in 2005, when their total combined income was $1.6 million. That included $1.2 million in author fees for Obama's best-selling books. Michelle Obama's salary that year [as vice president for community and external affairs at the University of Chicago Hospitals] was $316,962 plus another $45,000 from TreeHouse Foods [for whom she served a member of the board of directors].The copies of the Obamas' federal tax returns"
Berkshire Hathaway Pro-Choice?,"['Does Berkshire Hathaway, the new owner of Pampered Chef, support pro-choice causes?']","Claim:  Berkshire Hathaway, the legendary business concern headed by Warren Buffett and new owner of Pampered Chef, supports pro-choice causes.  Sort of. Example:  [Collected on the Internet, 2003] Dear Friend: I am a Pampered Chef consultant who has recently learned that, due to the sale of The Pampered Chef toBerkshire Hathaway (www.berkshirehathaway.com/news/oct3102.html), Pampered Chef profits are now supporting the population control and abortion industries. These industries trade in the death of countless pre-born children, endanger the health of women, and deny the human rights of women in third world countries through forced sterilizations and abortions. Not only does Berkshire Hathaway contribute to these industries, but Warren Buffett, chief shareholder of Berkshire Hathaway, has pledged to bequeath the majority of his personal fortune (28 billion) to The Buffett Foundation, positioning him to become the largest financier of abortion and population control in the history of the world. www.berkshirehathaway.com/news/oct3102.html As a result of this information, I have ceased to sell or recruit for The Pampered Chef. I have also launched an e-mail campaign to (1) educate Pampered Chef consultants, hosts and customers of the connection between The Pampered Chef and the population control and abortion industries; and (2) petition Warren Buffett to cease his personal and corporate financial support of these same industries. Origins:  In October 2002, Berkshire Hathaway acquired The Pampered Chef, a kitchen products company which vends items atin-home cooking demonstrations known as Kitchen Shows and is run by kitchen consultants (its name for the members of its sale force). More than one million of these events were held in the United States in 2002, and Pampered Chef has annual sales in excess of $700 million. Berkshire Hathaway The Pampered Chef kitchen consultants Besides Pampered Chef, Berkshire Hathaway owns a number of businesses outright (including Dairy Queen, Fruit of the Loom, Geico Insurance, and See's Candies) and also has significant holdings in some very large corporations, including  Coca-Cola. The motive force behind Berkshire Hathaway is its chairman and chief executive, Warren Buffett. Although Buffett is reckoned to be the second wealthiest man in the world, he still lives in the Omaha, Nebraska, home he purchased for $31,500 in 1958. His charitable organization, the Buffett Foundation, currently has $25.3 million in assets, and these holdings are expected to swell to $36 billion when Buffett and his wife die and their shares in Berkshire Hathaway go to the Buffett Foundation, which will make it the richest charitable foundation in the world. About 60 percent of the $33.4 million bestowed by the Buffett Foundation in fiscal year 2001 went toward family planning, reproductive rights, and population control programs operated by organizations such as Planned Parenthood, Johns Hopkins University, and the United Nations in accordance with Warren Buffett's beliefs that population growth must be checked before exceeding a level sustainable by the earth's resources. The Buffett Foundation also funds a number of college scholarships and awards in recognition of exemplary teachers. In July 2003 Berkshire Hathaway announced the end of its shareholder-designated contribution program, through which holders of A shares in Berkshire Hathaway could select the charities to which Berkshire Hathaway would donate funds.  It noted the shareholders' choices of certain charities (including some of Buffett's choices) had caused ""harmful criticism"" to be directed at Pampered Chef and cited that criticism as the reason for ending the donations program.  Berkshire said all its subsidiaries will continue to support local charities under direction of their local managers. What all this means is that Berkshire Hathaway itself no longer contributes money directly to various charities (controversial or otherwise) designated by its shareholders.  However, since Warren Buffett (as a private individual) holds shares in Berkshire Hathaway and is free to contribute the profit he derives from those holdings to The Buffett Foundation, the businesses owned by Berkshire Hathaway (such as The Pampered Chef) are indirectly providing money to the causes Buffett supports through his foundation. Barbara ""missed hathaway"" Mikkelson Additional Information:    Berkshire Hathaway holdings      Berkshire Hathaway press release  Last updated:  28 November 2007    Sources:   Jordon, Steve.  ""Introductory Lesson on Warren Buffett.""   Omaha World Herald.  3 May 2003  (p. D5).     Kawar, Mark.  ""Touched by a Billionaire.""   Omaha World Herald.  4 May 2003  (p. D1).     Shim, Grace.  ""Berkshire Pantry Adds Pampered Chef.""   Omaha World Herald.  24 September 2003  (p. D1).     Shim, Grace.  ""Lasting Legacy.""   Omaha World Herald.  27 April 2003  (p. D1).     The Associated Press.  ""Berkshire Hathaway Ends Charity Program Over Criticism.""   3 July 2003.",['asset'],True,"I am a Pampered Chef consultant who has recently learned that, due to the sale of The Pampered Chef toBerkshire Hathaway (www.berkshirehathaway.com/news/oct3102.html), Pampered Chef profits are now supporting the population control and abortion industries. These industries trade in the death of countless pre-born children, endanger the health of women, and deny the human rights of women in third world countries through forced sterilizations and abortions. Not only does Berkshire Hathaway contribute to these industries, but Warren Buffett, chief shareholder of Berkshire Hathaway, has pledged to bequeath the majority of his personal fortune (28 billion) to The Buffett Foundation, positioning him to become the largest financier of abortion and population control in the history of the world.Origins:  In October 2002, Berkshire Hathaway acquired The Pampered Chef, a kitchen products company which vends items atin-home cooking demonstrations known as Kitchen Shows and is run by kitchen consultants (its name for the members of its sale force). More than one million of these events were held in the United States in 2002, and Pampered Chef has annual sales in excess of $700 million.Additional Information:    Berkshire Hathaway holdings    Berkshire Hathaway press release"
Lunch Boxes and Lead,"[""Do children's vinyl lunch boxes contain dangerous amounts of lead?""]","Claim: Some children's vinyl lunch boxes contain unsafe levels of lead. Multiple tests have found that some children's soft vinyl lunch boxes contain lead. Children's lunch boxes contain levels of lead that are unsafe with ordinary exposure. Example: [Collected on the Internet, 2005] A Back to School Warning: Children's Vinyl Lunch Boxes Can Contain Dangerous Levels of Lead. Oakland, CA - The Center for Environmental Health (CEH) announced it is filing lawsuits today against makers and retailers of soft vinyl lunch boxes that can expose children to harmful levels of lead. The Center has also notified several other companies of violations under California's toxics law Proposition 65 (Prop 65) for lunch boxes with high lead levels. The lawsuits and violation notices against companies including Toys ""R"" Us, Warner Brothers, DC Comics, Time Warner, Walgreens, and others involve many lunch boxes featuring beloved children's characters, including Superman, Tweety Bird, Powerpuff Girls, and Hamtaro. The level of lead in one lunch box, an Angela Anaconda box made by Targus International, tested at 56,400 parts per million (ppm) of lead, more than 90 times the 600 ppm legal limit for lead in paint in children's products. ""Lead exposure should not be on the lunch menu when kids go back to school this fall,"" said Michael Green, CEH Executive Director. ""There is no reason to expose children to any lead from lunch boxes. We are calling on these companies to recall these products and take action to eliminate lead from their products in the future."" Initial independent laboratory testing commissioned by CEH has already found seventeen lunch boxes with high lead levels, and the group's investigation is ongoing. In addition to the testing on the Angela Anaconda lunch box, tests on other lunch boxes showed levels of lead between two and twenty-five times the legal limit for lead paint in children's products. In most cases, the highest lead levels were found in the lining of lunch boxes, where lead could come into direct contact with food. Lead is known to be harmful to children even in minute amounts, as it can impair brain development and cause other behavioral and developmental problems. Children may be exposed to lead from lunch boxes when they eat food that has been stored in them. Handling the lunch boxes just before eating could also pose an exposure risk. It is not possible to tell by appearance whether a vinyl lunch box may contain lead, so CEH is advising parents to avoid vinyl lunch boxes altogether. ""Parents may need to seek out alternatives, since many mass-produced lunch boxes are vinyl or vinyl-lined,"" said Green. ""A reusable cloth bag would be a good alternative."" Parents can find information on how to test for lead in their children's lunch boxes at home at www.cehca.org/lunchboxes. The CEH lawsuits were filed today against lunch box producers Igloo and InGear, and against retailers Toys ""R"" Us, Walgreens, Big Lots, and Ross Stores. Earlier this year, CEH sent notices of Prop 65 violations to Targus International, DC Comics, Time Warner, Warner Brothers, Binney & Smith (a division of Hallmark and the makers of Crayola-brand lunch boxes), Fast Forward LLC, and Holiday Fair Incorporated. Under Prop 65, companies have sixty days to respond to violation notices, after which lawsuits can be filed. CEH expects to file more notifications of lunch boxes that violate Prop 65 in the near future. Photos of the lunch boxes can be found at www.cehca.org/lunchboxes.htm. Test Your Child's Lunch Box Because it is not possible to tell by appearance whether a vinyl lunch box may contain lead, CEH is advising parents to avoid buying vinyl lunch boxes altogether, as we cannot guarantee they are lead-free. You can test vinyl lunch boxes you already own using a hand-held lead testing kit, often available at hardware stores. Two reliable and easy-to-use brands are PACE's Lead Alert and LeadCheck (also available online at www.leadcheck.com). If your child's lunch box tests positive, or you need assistance obtaining a testing kit, please call CEH at (510) 594-9864. We can help you interpret the results and can use your product as evidence in our ongoing work to eliminate lead from our children's lunch boxes. Commonly Asked Questions What products did CEH test? CEH has only tested soft plastic lunch boxes. We don't know whether lead may be present in hard plastic or metal boxes at this time. In most cases, the lead is in the plastic lining of the box, although some also have lead in the exterior plastic. At this time, we have not found any lunch boxes by Disney, Thermos, LL Bean, Hello Kitty, or California Innovations that have lead; however, we have by no means tested all lunch boxes by any of these makers. How dangerous are the lunch boxes with lead? The levels CEH found in the lunch boxes are not high enough to cause acute lead poisoning during normal use. However, if your child is exposed to lead from other sources, a leaded lunch box would add to their health risk. Because lead has been shown to cause developmental problems in young children at very low levels, CEH believes it is important to eliminate all controllable sources of lead exposure, including lunch boxes. Does my lunch box have lead? The majority of lunch boxes that CEH tested do not contain lead, so there is a good chance that your lunch box may be safe. However, because it is impossible to tell by looking, at this point the only way to know for sure is to test the lunch box yourself. How do I test my lunch box? You can test vinyl lunch boxes using a hand-held lead testing kit, available at most hardware stores. Two reliable and easy-to-use brands are PACE's Lead Alert and LeadCheck (also available online at www.leadcheck.com). They cost less than $5 each and come with instructions. Both of these brands will turn a bright pink color when they are rubbed on a surface containing lead. A clear or orange swab means there is no lead. What do I do if my lunch box has lead? If your child's lunch box tests positive, we recommend that you do not use it any longer. Please send CEH your positive lunch box so that we can add it to our investigation and notify other parents. What alternatives are there to vinyl lunch boxes? CEH does not have enough information at this time to recommend any brand of soft plastic lunch boxes. Because it is not possible to tell by appearance whether a box may contain lead, CEH is advising parents to avoid buying vinyl lunch boxes altogether and to test their lunch box if they are concerned it may contain lead. A reusable cloth bag or paper bag is a good alternative. Where is the lead from? CEH believes that the lead is intentionally added to the vinyl (PVC) plastic as either a stabilizing agent or pigment. Should my child be tested? Normal use of positive lunch boxes CEH has tested would not cause acute lead poisoning. However, if your child is also exposed to other environmental sources of lead, such as lead paint, the cumulative effect could be toxic. A blood test is the only definitive way to test for lead poisoning. A child with lead poisoning may not look sick but may experience stomachaches, poor appetite, hyperactivity, and headaches. Low-level chronic exposure to lead can cause hearing problems, brain and nerve damage, stunted growth, digestive problems, and reproductive problems (in adults). Origins: On 31 August 2005, the Center for Environmental Health, an Oakland-based environmental group that specializes in identifying hazardous sources of lead in the environment, announced that testing it had performed revealed the presence of that element in a variety of soft vinyl lunch boxes marketed to children. Subsequent to that discovery, this private non-profit group filed lawsuits against some of the producers and retailers involved. The CEHCA says the 27 lunch boxes that produced lead-positive results when examined with at-home lead detection kits contained anywhere from double to 90 times the legal limit for lead paint in children's products. It sent those 27 containers to an independent laboratory for more rigorous testing; that study found 17 of the lunch boxes contained lead in excess of federal safety standards. Lara Cushing, research director for the CEHCA, said the study revealed the lead was not contained within the vinyl material itself but rather was present on the surface of the lunch boxes. ""It's not bound up in the plastic,"" she said. ""It's sloughing off. It can come off on your hand. It can rub off on your food."" A reporter in Sacramento ran her own test on eight vinyl lunch boxes she collected; her examination with at-home lead testing kits showed two of the lunch boxes contained lead. How much lead was not noted. Officials for the Consumer Product Safety Commission said it was investigating the CEHCA's findings on lead in lunch boxes. In October 2005, it published a statement on the likelihood of lead found in such containers presenting a danger to children: Q: Recent news reports have indicated that there are dangerous levels of lead in kids' lunch boxes; is this correct? A: CPSC staff has tested samples of children's lunch boxes for accessible lead and found no instances of hazardous levels. The staff tested the inside and outside of each lunch box, and the preliminary results were consistently below one microgram (one millionth of a gram) of lead. This is an extremely low level of lead and would not present a health hazard to children. Q: How can you be sure that children are not being exposed to hazardous levels of lead in their lunch boxes? A: One way that children can be exposed to lead is from handling objects with accessible lead and then placing their hands in their mouths. Based on the low levels of lead found in our tests, in most cases, children would have to rub their lunch box and then lick their hands upwards of 100 times a day, for about 15-30 days, in order for the lunch box to present a health hazard. Q: What is CPSC doing to prevent issues like this from coming up in the future? A: CPSC staff encourages companies to use alternatives to lead in products intended for children. CPSC staff also recommends that manufacturers and importers of vinyl lunch boxes test their products for accessible lead using the CPSC staff's laboratory test procedure. Finding and preventing lead hazards in children's products is an important part of our mission, and CPSC has a proven record of working with companies to recall products that pose a lead hazard to children. While exposure to lead presents a hazard to all and poses an especial danger to children, the amounts of the element being uncovered in vinyl lunch boxes are not sufficient to cause acute lead poisoning. However, because long-term low-level lead exposure can result in serious harm to those subjected to it, lead should be avoided whenever and wherever possible. Lead poisoning can reportedly lower intelligence, cause mental retardation, memory problems, depression, fatigue, hyperactivity, aggression, hearing loss, liver or kidney damage, osteoporosis, high blood pressure, and anemia. Very high levels can damage the nervous system, kidneys, and major organs and even result in seizures or death. It can also lead to infertility in men and cause spontaneous abortion in women. In the final stages of lead poisoning, the victim experiences convulsions, paralysis, blindness, delusions, and then coma. People can and have died from lead poisoning. In times long past, lead was found in numerous everyday items, including cisterns and aqueducts, pottery, pans, hair dyes, cosmetics, and medical nostrums. Toy soldiers were cast in it. Port wine was protected by it. Church roofs were covered with it. The presence of lead in everyday life has since been considerably reduced, and our bodies are far less riddled with this deadly substance than those of our ancestors, but this element will likely always be part of our surroundings and of us. The two major sources of lead poisoning in the United States have been lead-based paint, which was restricted in 1978, and leaded gasoline, which was phased out in the early 1990s. However, lead is still found in paint manufactured before 1978, in soil and dust (particularly next to busy roads or factories), in some imported or handmade pottery and tableware, and in imported home remedies and cosmetics. Yet most of the lead we take in comes from our diet. ""The average daily diet probably contains more than 200 micrograms of lead, of which about 10 micrograms gets into the blood, where it is joined by about 5 micrograms of lead from our lungs (depending upon where we live), so that our daily intake probably comes to about 15 micrograms, and the body can easily rid itself of such an amount,"" says John Emsley. Lead finds its way into the food chain because all plants contain some lead, although not very much. Because lead is a naturally occurring element found in the soil, it does manage to get into things. Care, therefore, has to be taken by manufacturers to detect its presence in goods destined for consumer use. Various lead-laden gewgaws and foodstuffs do arrive on the market, however, especially among goods produced in other parts of the world and imported to the U.S. In 2004, California's attorney general sued dozens of companies that make or sell imported candies containing lead, and in 2005, the California Department of Health Services urged consumers to stay away from candy produced in Mexico that contained tamarind or chili powder after tests found possible lead contamination in those edibles. In 1994, an outbreak of lead poisoning in Hungary was traced to the use of that element by an unscrupulous or unknowing manufacturer as a colorant in paprika. Update: In September 2007, families were advised by the California Department of Public Health to rid themselves of CDPH lunch boxes because three of the ones it tested produced positive results for lead. The canvas lunch boxes that showed elevated levels of the element were green with a logo reading ""Eat fruits & vegetables and be active."" Approximately 56,000 of these lunch boxes have been distributed throughout California at health fairs and other events. Additional information: Lead (Centers for Disease Control) Make Your Home a Lead-Safe Zone (Virginia Commonwealth University) Lead Poisoning (Dr. Joseph F. Smith Medical Library) Last updated: 22 September 2007 Sources: Emsley, John. The Elements of Murder. New York; Oxford University Press, 2005. ISBN 0-19-280599-1 (pp. 261-283). Griffith, Dorsey. ""State Warns of Lead in Candy."" Sacramento Bee. 7 July 2005 (p. A5). Lundstrom, Marjie. ""Toxic Metal Found in Lunchboxes."" Sacramento Bee. 17 September 2005 (p. A3). Roan, Shari. ""An Unsavory Addition to Kids' Lunchboxes: Lead."" Los Angeles Times. 12 September 2005 (p. F3). KABC-TV [Los Angeles]. ""People Urged to Dispose of CDPH Lunch Boxes."" 20 September 2007. The [Raleigh] News & Observer. ""Toxic Lead Finds a New Avenue."" 15 September 2005 (p. B2). United Press International. ""Lead Reportedly Found in Lunchboxes."" 20 September 2005.",['profit'],False,"Origins:  On 31 August 2005, the Center for Environmental Health, an Oakland-based environmental group that specializes in identifying hazardous sources of lead in the environment, announced that testing it had performed revealed the presence of that element in a variety of soft vinyl lunchboxes marketed to children. Subsequent to that discovery, this private non-profit group filed lawsuits against some of the producers and retailersinvolved.Officials for the Consumer Product Safety Commission said it was investigating the CEHCA's findings on lead in lunchboxes. In October 2005, it published a statement on the likelihood of lead found in such containers presenting a danger to children:Update:  In September 2007, families were advised by the California Department of Public Health to rid themselves of CDPH lunchboxes because three of the ones it tested produced positive results for lead. The canvas lunch boxes that showed elevated levels of the element were green with a logo reading ""Eat fruits & vegetables and be active."" Approximately 56,000 of these lunch boxes have been distributed throughout California at health fairs and other events.         Lead   (Centers for Disease Control)       Make Your Home a Lead-Safe Zone   (Virginia Commonwealth University)       Lead Poisoning  (Dr. Joseph F. Smith Medical Library)   Sources:   Emsley, John.  The Elements of Murder.   New York; Oxford University Press, 2005.  ISBN 0-19-280599-1  (pp. 261-283)."
"Austin leads in Texas in startups, venture capital, and patents.",[],"Austins typically soft-spoken mayor recently popped a big-as-Texas boast. Theres a reason Austin is number one in Texas in startups and venture capital and patents, Steve Adler said. Adler, speaking outside City Hall, went on: Theres a reason that tech and transportation companies come to Austin to roll out their new initiatives. And thats because Austin is where good ideas become real. Claiming that Austin is anti-innovation has no basis in fact. Hear hear! Still, we wondered about the rankings Adler declared whilerevealing his plansto vote against a ballot proposition, later rejected by voters, affecting background checks of drivers for ride-hailing services. Startups Adler's office didn't immediately offer his backup. Meantime, our online search for information on startups led us to a June 2015 report from the Kansas City-based Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation stating that in the last year, the Austin metropolitan area ranked No. 1 nationally for the areas pace launching startups, which the foundation defined as firms less than one-year old employing at least one person besides the owner. Asked what last year means in the report, foundation researcher E.J. Reedy advised by phone the conclusion tied to data from 2012 and 2014. According to the foundation,which saysit focuses on improving lives through education and entrepreneurship, the nations top 10 metropolitan areas for startup activity among the 40 most-populous metropolitan areas were:Austin;Miami, Fla.;San Jose, Calif.;Los Angeles;Denver;San Francisco;New York;Houston;San Diego; andSan Antonio. Per Adlers Texas point, the Austin area had 180.8 startups per 100,000 residents, the foundation says, outpacing theDallas-Fort Worth-Arlington area(142.5 startups per 100,000 residents),Houston-Sugar Land-Baytown(136.9 startups per 100,000 residents) and the San Antonio-New Braunfels area (111.9 startups per 100,000 residents). By email, foundation spokeswoman Lacey Graverson told us the presented concentrations drew on the U.S. Census BureausBusiness Dynamics Statisticsto tally startups matched with population data from the Bureau of Economic Analysis. Reedy agreed by phone that among the big Texas cities, the Austin area had the greatest concentration of startups. But generally, Reedy indicated, counts of startups can vary, partly because theres no single accepted definition of startups, which inherently come and go at a rapid pace. The government has official measures, Reedy added, but each one captures an aspect -- for instance new employer businesses or newly self-employed individuals. Also, Reedy said, observers differ over what merits counting. Some stress large firms that employ many, he said, others urge a fix on technology firms and others say that any count should recognize small businesses (including one-person endeavors) that grow by an employee or two a year. A foundation chart presenting Austins startup density since the late 1970s indicates the area has had peppier times--including in 2008 (201.7 startups per 100,000 residents), 2006 (214.9), 1999 (217.9) and, the charts high point, 1981 (499.5), which was up a huge measure from 1980 (31.4):        SOURCE:Web page,Startup Activity, Austin Area, 2015,Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation, June 4, 2015 (viewed May 5, 2016) Venture capital Next, we turned to exploring Austins ranking for venture capital, which describes money invested in a business or project at considerable risk. A January 2016Austin American-Statesmannews story, citing a survey by PricewaterhouseCoopers and the National Venture Capital Association,  said Austin entities in 2015 were by far the states largest recipients of venture capital, with $740 million; Dallas firms placed second, fielding $214.4 million, ahead of Houston outfits, at $160 million. The Austin-connected investments added up to the largest annual dollar figure for Austin since 2001, the newspaper said, when 127 companies received $1.14 billion. By email, mayoral spokesman Jason Stanford pointed out another account of the survey results; a Silicon Hills Newsstorysaid the 99 Austin deals in 2015, mostly to develop software, were down from 114 in 2014. Also, the story said, Austins number one deal for the latest year was Civitas Learning, attracting $60 million in venture capital, followed by Aeglea Biotherapeautics with $44 million, Mirna Therapeutics with $41.8 million and SpareFoot with $30 million, the story said. Nationally in 2015, theStatesmanstory said, venture capital investments rose to $58.8 billion, up 22 percent from the year before. Silicon Valley, as usual, took in the most money, with the San Jose area receiving $27.3 billion in 1,333 deals, the story said. Patents Stanford said Adler made his claim about Austin leading Texas in patents based on a May 2010Forbes.com articleby Andy Greenberg stating that Austin and neighboring Round Rock had produced an impressive average 1.7 patents for every thousand residents over the last 12 months, the second-most per-capita of any metro area in the country, he wrote. Greenberg elaborated: Austins culture of innovation may be boosted by well-known tech credentials like the South by Southwest (SXSW) Web startup and music festival held annually in March, as well as the nearby headquarters of hardware industry giants Dell and Freescale Semiconductor. But they also have two secret weapons in the innovation race: the University of Texass Cockrell School of Engineering, and IBMs Austin research lab. IBM produces more patents than any other company in the world, and for the last seven years Austin has produced more of those patents than any other IBM office. In total the lab produced 880 patents in 2009. Thats just 30 less than all of Cisco, and 300 more than Sun Microsystems, Boeing, AT&T or Toyota. We were unable to confirm or duplicate Greenbergs Austin conclusion. To get our own sense of how Texas cities stand in patents originated, we reached out to the Dallas-basedregional officeof the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. By email, spokesman Ryan Elliott pointed outpatent counts posted by the officeindicating that in 2012-13 and from 2000 through 2013, the Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington area generated more patents than the Austin-Round Rock-San Marcos area. However, the regions raw counts were close, according to the agency, while the Austin area was responsible for more patents than any other Texas area from 2009, 2010 and 2011 through 2013, by our reckoning. Snapshot: The Austin area was responsible for 12,387 patents from 2009 through 2013, according to the office, with the Dallas area accounting for 11,546 patents -- which we took to mean that the less populous Austin area ran well ahead of the Dallas area in patents per 1,000 residents. Our search for relevant analyses led to a2013 reportby the Brookings Institution finding that from 1980 to 2012, most U.S. patents--63 percent--had been developed by people living in just 20 metro areas home to 34 percent of the U.S. population. Reflecting the advantages of large metropolitan economies, the report said, 92 percent of U.S. patents are concentrated in just 100 metro areas, with 59 percent of the population. For patents applied for from 2007 to 2011, the metro areas with the highest number per capita are San Jose; Burlington, VT; Rochester, MN; Corvallis, OR; and Boulder, CO. The authors wrote: From 1980 to 2011, a few large metros notably changed their share of U.S patents. At the top, San Jose moved up from ninth to first, and San Francisco moved from seventh to fourth, moving ahead of Chicago, Philadelphia, Detroit, and Boston. Seattle and San Diego moved up 15 and nine places, respectively, to become seventh and eighth. Meanwhile, Austin and Raleigh moved up 41 and 55 places, respectively, to become 11th and 20th. Cleveland fell 10 slots from 13th to 23rd, while Philadelphia fell from fourth to 13th. Not only did Austin surge in total patents, it lately achieved a high ranking in per-capita patents. From 2007 through 2011, a chart in the report indicates, the Austin metro area had 1,503 patents per million residents, tops in Texas and placing the area fourth nationally among high-patent areas behind San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, California (5,066 patents per million residents); Poughkeepsie-Newburgh-Middletown, New York (1,829); and San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont (1,638). In Texas, the Houston-Sugar Land-Baytown metro area had 379 patents per million residents and the Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington area had 310 per million, according to Brookings. Next, we heard back from Mark Muro of Brookings who shared a chart that he said was based on a different data source -- global PCT patents,meaningthe international patent system rather than the U.S. PTO. By that metric, the chart suggests that from 2008 through 2012, the Houston metropolitan area generated more cutting-edge technology patents per 1,000 residents (1,598) than the Austin area (1,294). An excerpt:             SOURCE:Chart ranking 100 U.S. Core Based Statistical Areas in tech patents invented per 1,000 population, 2008-2012 (received by email from Mark Muro, senior fellow and policy director, Metropolitan Policy Program, Brookings, May 5, 2016) Regardless of those results, Muro and a Brookings colleague, Nick Marchio, suggested we hew to the U.S. patent office counts as the best general way of assessing the mayors claim. Marchio even volunteered toadjust the patent offices raw counts for the population of each metropolitan area. Result: In 2013, the latest year of tabulated patents, the Austin area ranked No. 11 nationally with 1.55 patents per 1,000 residents, far outpacing the No. 2 Texas metro, Dallas, at 51st with 0.44 patents per 1,000 residents. Also, from 2009 through 2013, the Austin area ranked 10th nationally with 6.95 patents per 1,000 residents, far ahead of the No. 2 Texas metro, in this case the Houston area, which landed 52nd nationally with 1.81 patents per 1,000 residents. Our ruling Adler said: Austin is number one in Texas in startups, venture capital and patents. Houston has been running ahead in international technology patents, it looks to us, but Austin lately leads the state in overall patents, startups and venture capital. We rate the claim True. TRUE The statement is accurate and theres nothing significant missing. Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check.","['City Government', 'Economy', 'Small Business', 'Technology', 'Texas']",True,"Still, we wondered about the rankings Adler declared whilerevealing his plansto vote against a ballot proposition, later rejected by voters, affecting background checks of drivers for ride-hailing services.According to the foundation,which saysit focuses on improving lives through education and entrepreneurship, the nations top 10 metropolitan areas for startup activity among the 40 most-populous metropolitan areas were:Austin;Miami, Fla.;San Jose, Calif.;Los Angeles;Denver;San Francisco;New York;Houston;San Diego; andSan Antonio.Per Adlers Texas point, the Austin area had 180.8 startups per 100,000 residents, the foundation says, outpacing theDallas-Fort Worth-Arlington area(142.5 startups per 100,000 residents),Houston-Sugar Land-Baytown(136.9 startups per 100,000 residents) and the San Antonio-New Braunfels area (111.9 startups per 100,000 residents). By email, foundation spokeswoman Lacey Graverson told us the presented concentrations drew on the U.S. Census BureausBusiness Dynamics Statisticsto tally startups matched with population data from the Bureau of Economic Analysis.SOURCE:Web page,Startup Activity, Austin Area, 2015,Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation, June 4, 2015 (viewed May 5, 2016)Next, we turned to exploring Austins ranking for venture capital, which describes money invested in a business or project at considerable risk. A January 2016Austin American-Statesmannews story, citing a survey by PricewaterhouseCoopers and the National Venture Capital Association,  said Austin entities in 2015 were by far the states largest recipients of venture capital, with $740 million; Dallas firms placed second, fielding $214.4 million, ahead of Houston outfits, at $160 million.By email, mayoral spokesman Jason Stanford pointed out another account of the survey results; a Silicon Hills Newsstorysaid the 99 Austin deals in 2015, mostly to develop software, were down from 114 in 2014. Also, the story said, Austins number one deal for the latest year was Civitas Learning, attracting $60 million in venture capital, followed by Aeglea Biotherapeautics with $44 million, Mirna Therapeutics with $41.8 million and SpareFoot with $30 million, the story said.Stanford said Adler made his claim about Austin leading Texas in patents based on a May 2010Forbes.com articleby Andy Greenberg stating that Austin and neighboring Round Rock had produced an impressive average 1.7 patents for every thousand residents over the last 12 months, the second-most per-capita of any metro area in the country, he wrote.To get our own sense of how Texas cities stand in patents originated, we reached out to the Dallas-basedregional officeof the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. By email, spokesman Ryan Elliott pointed outpatent counts posted by the officeindicating that in 2012-13 and from 2000 through 2013, the Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington area generated more patents than the Austin-Round Rock-San Marcos area.Our search for relevant analyses led to a2013 reportby the Brookings Institution finding that from 1980 to 2012, most U.S. patents--63 percent--had been developed by people living in just 20 metro areas home to 34 percent of the U.S. population. Reflecting the advantages of large metropolitan economies, the report said, 92 percent of U.S. patents are concentrated in just 100 metro areas, with 59 percent of the population. For patents applied for from 2007 to 2011, the metro areas with the highest number per capita are San Jose; Burlington, VT; Rochester, MN; Corvallis, OR; and Boulder, CO.Next, we heard back from Mark Muro of Brookings who shared a chart that he said was based on a different data source -- global PCT patents,meaningthe international patent system rather than the U.S. PTO. By that metric, the chart suggests that from 2008 through 2012, the Houston metropolitan area generated more cutting-edge technology patents per 1,000 residents (1,598) than the Austin area (1,294).Marchio even volunteered toadjust the patent offices raw counts for the population of each metropolitan area. Result: In 2013, the latest year of tabulated patents, the Austin area ranked No. 11 nationally with 1.55 patents per 1,000 residents, far outpacing the No. 2 Texas metro, Dallas, at 51st with 0.44 patents per 1,000 residents. Also, from 2009 through 2013, the Austin area ranked 10th nationally with 6.95 patents per 1,000 residents, far ahead of the No. 2 Texas metro, in this case the Houston area, which landed 52nd nationally with 1.81 patents per 1,000 residents.TRUE The statement is accurate and theres nothing significant missing. Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check."
Is the Picture Depicting Stephen Hawking at a Conference in the Caribbean Organized by Jeffrey Epstein?,['Epstein had hosted numerous scientific luminaries at the island gathering.'],"On May 18, 2023, a Twitter user shared a photograph of the late physicist Stephen Hawking sitting with a group of people in what appeared to be a tropical setting. The user claimed that Hawking was on the Caribbean island owned by convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.  In a tweet, @dom_lucre asked, ""Serious question, why the hell was Stephen Hawking on Jeffrey Epstein's Island?"" asked  (@@dom_lucre/X)  This is a real photograph of Hawking that shows him either on one of Epstein's private islands or on nearby St. Thomas Island, at an Epstein-sponsored conference. It was taken in March 2006, a few months before Epstein was charged with multiple counts of unlawful sex with a minor.  March 2006 charged Epstein, a financier who was later charged with sex trafficking, died in his prison cell in 2021 while awaiting trial (he previously had been convicted of other sex offenses). But before his fall, he was known for his parties and his extensive connections with high-profile celebrities, politicians, and intellectuals. He owned two private islands, Great St. James and Little St. James, which were prominent features in the civil and criminal cases against him. Numerous young women said in court papers that they were taken via private jet to Little St. James, where they were ordered to perform sex acts with Epstein and other men.  died owned said Hawking was just one of many scientists and intellectuals invited to these islands for less-sinister reasons  a scientific conference Epstein paid for. So how was Hawking brought into Epstein's orbit? For years, Epstein financed the Edge Foundation, billed as a salon for elite thinkers, which hosted prominent gatherings of scientists and intellectuals, and gave Epstein access to such circles. According to a Buzzfeed News investigation, Epstein's donations helped Edge carry out most of its activities, including an annual ""billionaires dinner"" that ceased to take place after his last contribution in 2015.  financed billed investigation An archived page from Edge.org describing Epstein's involvement can be seen here, where he was described as ""a financier and science philanthropist."" The website stated, ""He is one of the largest supporters of individual scientists, including theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking and Nobel Laureates Gerard 't Hooft, David Gross and Frank Wilczek.""  Edge.org here In 2006, Epstein sponsored a conference at the neighboring St. Thomas Island. Per a March 2006 report in the St. Thomas Source, a local newspaper, prominent scientists gathered in a series of private meetings dubbed ""Confronting Gravity: A workshop to explore fundamental questions in physics and cosmology."" Among those scientists was Hawking.  March 2006 Epstein was also described by the local report as the ""driving force behind the conference."" He reportedly said to the paper that he brought the group to St. Thomas with hopes that the relaxed setting would free the physicists' minds to explore one of the 20th century's last unanswered physics questions: What is gravity? described ""There is no agenda except fun and physics, and that's fun with a capital 'F,'"" Epstein reportedly said. reportedly The New York Times also reported in 2019 on Hawking's trip to this island (emphasis, ours): reported It was a five-day gathering in the Caribbean of some of the world's top scientists, including Dr. Hawking, to share ideas about gravity and cosmology, with scuba and catamaran excursions on the side. One evening, the participants had dinner on the beach at Mr. Epstein's private island. Some of the scientists noticed that Mr. Epstein ""was always followed by a group of something like three or four young women,"" as Alan Guth, a physicist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, put it in an email to The Times, but they did not probe further. In another 2019 report, The New York Times described how, ""Once, the scientists  including Mr. Hawking  crowded on board a submarine that Mr. Epstein had chartered.""  2019 report But where did the photograph come from? In 2006, The Edge Foundation also published a blog post on the conference and interviewed an attendee and organizer, theoretical physicist Lawrence Krauss. Per the post (emphasis, ours): The Edge Foundation post The topic of the meeting was ""Confronting Gravity."" Krauss intended to have ""a meeting where people would look forward to the key issues facing fundamental physics and cosmology"". They could meet, discuss, relax on the beach, and take a trip to the nearby private island retreat of the science philanthropist Jeffrey Epstein, who funded the event. We scrolled to the bottom of the page and found photographs of Hawking and more from the gathering. The photograph in question showed Hawking seated alongside Nobel Prize winner David Gross, and physicists Kip Thorne and Lisa Randall. Yet another shows Hawking on what appears to be the interior of a boat, captioned, ""Lawrence Krauss and Stephen Hawking on the way to Atlantis Submarine.""  page (Screenshot via Edge.org) The New York Times described Epstein's allure for these scientists: The New York Times The lure for some of the scientists was Mr. Epstein's money. He dangled financing for their pet projects. Some of the scientists said that the prospect of financing blinded them to the seriousness of his sexual transgressions, and even led them to give credence to some of Mr. Epstein's half-baked scientific musings. The photograph of Hawking has been disseminated in the media, and is also publicly available on the website of the foundation once financed by Epstein, along with a description of the conference he attended, with the dates and details of the gathering matching up with reliable media reports. We thus rate this claim    ""A Timeline of the Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell Scandal."" AP NEWS, 28 June 2022, https://apnews.com/article/epstein-maxwell-timeline-b9f15710fabb72e8581c71e94acf513e. Accessed 19 May 2023. Aldhous, Peter. ""How Jeffrey Epstein Bankrolled An Exclusive Intellectual Boys Club And Reaped The Benefits."" BuzzFeed News, 26 Sept. 2019, https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/peteraldhous/jeffrey-epstein-john-brockman-edge-foundation.Accessed 19 May 2023. Chappell, Bill. ""Financier Buys Jeffrey Epstein's Private Islands, with Plans to Create a Resort."" NPR, 4 May 2023. NPR, https://www.npr.org/2023/05/04/1173956903/jeffrey-epstein-island-sold-st-james.Accessed 19 May 2023. ""Jeffrey Epstein."" Edge.Org. 5 Apr. 2019, https://web.archive.org/web/20190405211237/https:/www.edge.org/memberbio/jeffrey_epstein.Accessed 19 May 2023. Kantor, Jodi, et al. ""Jeffrey Epstein Was a Sex Offender. The Powerful Welcomed Him Anyway."" The New York Times, 13 July 2019. NYTimes.com, https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/13/nyregion/jeffrey-epstein-new-york-elite.html.Accessed 19 May 2023. ""Physicists Debate Gravity at St. Thomas Symposium."" St. Thomas Source, 17 Mar. 2006, https://stthomassource.com/content/2006/03/17/physicists-debate-gravity-st-thomas-symposium/.Accessed 19 May 2023. ""Pictured: Stephen Hawking on Jeffrey Epsteins 'Sex-Slave Island.'"" The Independent, 13 Jan. 2015, https://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/stephen-hawking-pictured-on-jeffrey-epstein-s-sex-slave-caribbean-island-9974955.html.Accessed 19 May 2023. ""Stephen Hawking Pictured on Jeffrey Epstein's ""Island of Sin."""" Telegraph, 12 Jan. 2015. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/stephen-hawking/11340494/Stephen-Hawking-pictured-on-Jeffrey-Epsteins-Island-of-Sin.html. Accessed 19 May 2023. Stewart, James B., et al. ""Jeffrey Epstein Hoped to Seed Human Race With His DNA."" The New York Times, 31 July 2019. NYTimes.com, https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/31/business/jeffrey-epstein-eugenics.html.Accessed 19 May 2023. ""THE ENERGY OF EMPTY SPACE THAT ISN'T ZERO."" Edge.Org. 6 Mar. 2023, https://web.archive.org/web/20230306164658/https://www.edge.org/conversation/lawrence_m_krauss-the-energy-of-empty-space-that-isnt-zero.Accessed 19 May 2023. ""Who Was Jeffrey Epstein? The Financier Charged with Sex Trafficking."" BBC News, 8 July 2019. www.bbc.com, https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-48913377.Accessed 19 May 2023.",['share'],True,"In a tweet, @dom_lucre asked, ""Serious question, why the hell was Stephen Hawking on Jeffrey Epstein's Island?""This is a real photograph of Hawking that shows him either on one of Epstein's private islands or on nearby St. Thomas Island, at an Epstein-sponsored conference. It was taken in March 2006, a few months before Epstein was charged with multiple counts of unlawful sex with a minor. Epstein, a financier who was later charged with sex trafficking, died in his prison cell in 2021 while awaiting trial (he previously had been convicted of other sex offenses). But before his fall, he was known for his parties and his extensive connections with high-profile celebrities, politicians, and intellectuals. He owned two private islands, Great St. James and Little St. James, which were prominent features in the civil and criminal cases against him. Numerous young women said in court papers that they were taken via private jet to Little St. James, where they were ordered to perform sex acts with Epstein and other men. For years, Epstein financed the Edge Foundation, billed as a salon for elite thinkers, which hosted prominent gatherings of scientists and intellectuals, and gave Epstein access to such circles. According to a Buzzfeed News investigation, Epstein's donations helped Edge carry out most of its activities, including an annual ""billionaires dinner"" that ceased to take place after his last contribution in 2015. An archived page from Edge.org describing Epstein's involvement can be seen here, where he was described as ""a financier and science philanthropist."" The website stated, ""He is one of the largest supporters of individual scientists, including theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking and Nobel Laureates Gerard 't Hooft, David Gross and Frank Wilczek."" In 2006, Epstein sponsored a conference at the neighboring St. Thomas Island. Per a March 2006 report in the St. Thomas Source, a local newspaper, prominent scientists gathered in a series of private meetings dubbed ""Confronting Gravity: A workshop to explore fundamental questions in physics and cosmology."" Among those scientists was Hawking. Epstein was also described by the local report as the ""driving force behind the conference."" He reportedly said to the paper that he brought the group to St. Thomas with hopes that the relaxed setting would free the physicists' minds to explore one of the 20th century's last unanswered physics questions: What is gravity?""There is no agenda except fun and physics, and that's fun with a capital 'F,'"" Epstein reportedly said.The New York Times also reported in 2019 on Hawking's trip to this island (emphasis, ours):In another 2019 report, The New York Times described how, ""Once, the scientists  including Mr. Hawking  crowded on board a submarine that Mr. Epstein had chartered."" But where did the photograph come from? In 2006, The Edge Foundation also published a blog post on the conference and interviewed an attendee and organizer, theoretical physicist Lawrence Krauss. Per the post (emphasis, ours):We scrolled to the bottom of the page and found photographs of Hawking and more from the gathering. The photograph in question showed Hawking seated alongside Nobel Prize winner David Gross, and physicists Kip Thorne and Lisa Randall. Yet another shows Hawking on what appears to be the interior of a boat, captioned, ""Lawrence Krauss and Stephen Hawking on the way to Atlantis Submarine."" The New York Times described Epstein's allure for these scientists:"
Did Melania Trump Plagiarize a Pamphlet for the 'Be Best' Campaign?,['The White House quickly corrected a statement on its web site claiming that a document written by the Federal Trade Commission in 2014 had been co-authored by First Lady Melania Trump.'],"Ever since Melania Trump delivered an oddly familiar speech at the Republican National Convention in 2016, the First Lady has been dogged by accusations of plagiarism, many of which were nothing more than fake news. A new batch of allegations surfaced in May 2018, as keen-eyed readers noticed that a pamphlet linked to Trump's new ""Be Best"" campaign was nearly identical to a document released by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in 2014. It is true that the ""Be Best"" campaign was linked to a pamphlet that closely resembled material published by the FTC in 2014. You can see the FTC's pamphlet, ""Net Cetera: Chatting with Kids About Being Online,"" here, and the ""Talking with Kids About Being Online"" from the White House here. These two documents are nearly identical, with the exception of an introduction from the First Lady, but it's disingenuous to say that Melania Trump ""plagiarized"" this material. The main piece of evidence supporting the ""plagiarism"" charge is that the pamphlet was originally presented on the White House website as a booklet ""by First Lady Melania Trump and the Federal Trade Commission,"" in reference to the First Lady's contribution of an introduction to the ""Talking with Kids About Being Online"" pamphlet. That wording was soon updated to describe ""Talking with Kids About Being Online"" as ""a Federal Trade Commission booklet, promoted by First Lady Melania Trump."" At no point did Melania Trump take credit for or claim she had written the entire pamphlet. Nearly every page of the ""Talking with Kids About Being Online"" pamphlet contains a link to the FTC's website about Internet safety, and the final page lists websites for both the Be Best campaign and the FTC's internet safety page. The White House released a contentious statement on May 8, 2018, regarding the plagiarism accusations: Mrs. Trump",['credit'],False,"Ever since Melania Trump delivered an oddly familiar speech at the Republican National Convention in 2016, the First Lady has been dogged by accusations of plagiarism (many of which were nothing more than fake news). A new batch of allegations surfaced in May 2018, as keen-eyed readers noticed that a pamphlet linked to Trump's new ""Be Best"" campaign was nearly identical to a document released by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in 2014:It is true that the ""Be Best"" campaign linked to a pamphlet that was nearly identical to material published by the FTC in 2014. You can see the FTC's pamphlet, ""Net Cetera. Chatting with Kids About Being Online,"" here, and the ""Talking with Kids About Being Online"" from the White House here. These two documents are nearly identical (with the exception of an introduction from the First Lady), but it's disingenuous to say that Melania Trump ""plagiarized"" this material. The main piece of evidence supporting the ""plagiarism"" charge is that the pamphlet was originally presented on the White House web site as a booklet ""by First Lady Melania Trump and the Federal Trade Commission,"" in reference to the First Lady's having contributed an introduction to the ""Talking with Kids About Being Online"" pamphlet.  That wording was soon updated to describe Talking with Kids about Being Online"" as ""a Federal Trade Commission booklet, promoted by First Lady Melania Trump.""  At no point did Melania Trump take credit for (or claim she had written) the entire pamphlet.Nearly every page of the ""Talking with Kids About Being Online"" pamphlet contains a link to the FTC's web site about Internet safety, and the final page lists web sites for both the Be Best campaign and the FTC's internet safety page:The White House released a contentious statement on 8 May 2018 about the plagiarism accusations:"
California is growing a hell of a lot faster than Texas.,[],"Stoking their long-running feud, California Gov. Jerry Brown recently jabbed at former Texas Gov. Rick Perry, saying that the Golden State is growing a lot faster than Texas. Brown made this claim during an impassioned defense of climate change science at the American Geophysical Union conference on Dec. 14, 2016, in San Francisco. ""We've proved in California that the economy grows. And it grows in part because of the climate rules that we've adopted,"" Brown said. Perry, a climate change skeptic, was recently selected as U.S. energy secretary by President-elect Trump. While he was governor of Texas, he repeatedly visited California in an attempt to lure jobs to the Lone Star State, promising less regulation and lower costs. In his speech, Brown stated that Perry's critiques about California's job-killing red tape do not hold up. ""Now remember our new secretary of energy, he was coming to California to say: Come to Texas because we have all the jobs in Texas. Well, Rick: I got some news for you, California is growing a lot faster than Texas, and we have more sun than you have oil!"" Gov. Jerry Brown makes his claim about California growing a lot faster than Texas at about the 13:00 minute mark in the video above. With Brown's reference to Perry, we interpreted his claim to mean faster economic growth with a focus on jobs. We decided to zero in on job growth rates in California and Texas while also weighing GDP and unemployment trends in the states. We'll leave the fun comparison of sunshine to oil for Brown and Perry to wrestle with another day. Our research acknowledges that there is no definitive measure for what constitutes a ""lot faster"" growth. Still, we will do our best to assess the governor's claim. Brown's spokeswoman pointed us to several news articles detailing California's recent economic improvements. Looking solely at 2015 job growth rates, Brown's claim appears to hold up. In that year, California added 483,000 jobs, posting a job growth rate of 3 percent, based on data we analyzed from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. That pace was twice as fast as Texas's 1.5 percent job growth rate. California's rapid employment gains have slowed somewhat to about 2 percent this year through November. While that may not qualify as a ""lot faster,"" it is still greater than Texas's roughly 1.6 percent job growth rate so far this year. The business website Kiplinger.com forecast that California would rank 10th in the nation among states for the fastest job growth in 2016, noting that Texas was not on its Top 10 list. Not long ago, however, Texas outpaced California. In 2014, Texas recorded a 3.7 percent job growth rate, ahead of California's 2.9 percent pace. Looking to the future, California's job gains may slow. The closely watched UCLA Anderson Forecast predicts jobs will grow by only 1.5 percent in the state during 2017 and just 0.8 percent in 2018. Because Brown used the phrase ""is growing,"" we will judge him based on the most recent figures, not future forecasts. Overall economy While the pace of job growth is important, it is not the only measurement of a state's economic health. Brown's claim could also be interpreted as California's overall economy, not just jobs, growing much faster than Texas's economy. In August, PolitiFact Texas took a deep look at the economies of both California and Texas to evaluate a June claim by Julián Castro, the U.S. Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, that ""Today, California is kicking our butt, creating more jobs and more economic growth than Texas."" It rated the claim True, citing greater jobs, per capita income, and GDP growth rates in California, while noting that Texas had a lower jobless rate. Building on that fact check, we examined the most recent economic figures for both states to see if the assessment still holds. We found that California's GDP grew faster than Texas's in the first two quarters of this year, at rates of 2 percent and most recently 2.2 percent, compared with Texas's 1.3 percent and its most recent quarter, a negative 0.8 percent, according to a news release in December by the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis. It was a different story in 2015 when Texas's GDP expanded by 4.8 percent (a figure that was recently revised upward) compared with California's 3.8 percent GDP expansion. Comparing unemployment rates, Texas, at 4.6 percent in November, has consistently fared better than California, where the rate was 5.3 percent in November and has hovered well above 5 percent this year. California had one more economic bright spot in 2015: per capita personal income grew at twice the rate of Texas, 5.4 percent to 2.6 percent, according to federal data. Our ruling Gov. Jerry Brown recently claimed California is growing a lot faster than Texas. We interpreted this to mean economic growth with a focus on the pace of job creation. California's 3 percent job growth rate in 2015, which doubled Texas's pace, definitely supports Brown's colorful claim. However, California's rate has slowed to about 2 percent so far this year, which is closer to Texas's 1.6 percent job growth rate. Other economic metrics show California performing better than Texas in several categories, though not all: California's GDP expanded faster than Texas's GDP in the first two quarters of this year, although Texas had a faster GDP growth rate in 2015. Additionally, per capita income grew twice as fast in California as in Texas in 2015, further supporting Brown's statement. Texas, however, has consistently maintained a lower jobless rate than California in recent years. Brown, like the state's economy in recent years, is on the right track. Although California has expanded jobs and its economy faster than Texas in many instances, there are a few cases where that growth has been strong but not necessarily a ""lot faster."" We rate Brown's statement Mostly True.","['Climate Change', 'Economy', 'Jobs', 'California']",True,"In that year, California added 483,000 jobs, posting a jobs growth rate of 3 percent, based ondatawe crunched from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. That pace was twice as fast as Texas 1.5 percent job growth rate.The business website Kiplinger.com forecast California would rank10th in the nationamong states for fastest job growth in 2016. It noted that Texas was not on its Top 10 list.Looking to the future, Californias job gains may slow. The closely watchedUCLA Anderson Forecastpredicts jobs to grow by only 1.5 percent in the state during 2017 and just 0.8 percent in 2018.In August, PolitiFact Texas took adeep lookat the economies of both California and Texas to evaluate a June claim by Julin Castro, the U.S. secretary of Housing and Urban Development, that Today, California is kicking our butt, creating more jobs and more economic growth than Texas.We found that Californias GDP grew faster than Texas in the first two quarters of this year, at rates of 2 percent and most recently 2.2 percent compared with Texas 1.3 percent and its most recent quarter, a negative 0.8 percent, according toa news release in Decemberby the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis.Comparingunemployment rates, Texas, at 4.6 percent in November, has consistently fared better than California, where the rate was 5.3 percent in November, and has hovered well above 5 percent this year.California had one more economic bright spot in 2015: Per capita personal income grew at twice the rate as in Texas,5.4 percentto2.6 percent, according to federal data.https://www.sharethefacts.co/share/158c502a-4b3e-463d-906f-529da13e2451"
Snowden was declared deceased by his partner in Russia.,"['A fake news web site\'s claim that Edward Snowden was ""pronounced dead by his girlfriend"" has been aggregated by other low-credibility sites but remains false.']","On 10 August 2016, the unreliable website Disclose.tv published an article reporting that former National Security Agency (NSA) employee and whistleblower Edward Snowden was ""pronounced dead by his girlfriend"" in Russia. Days after Snowden's rumored death was debunked by journalist Glenn Greenwald and a Russian lawyer, a report emerged claiming that his mistress and girlfriend had confirmed the leaker's demise. Quoting MKRU News of Russia, a conservative site called Get Off the BS stated that Snowden's mistress said he was killed Saturday by a drunken, knife-wielding Buryat man in the Republic of Buryatia. The article from which the claim was aggregated was presented in the style of fiction rather than reporting and was interspersed with salacious fabrications. Late Monday afternoon, the mistress of the infamous Edward Snowden announced his death, alleging that he was killed this past Saturday by a drunken, knife-wielding Buryat man in the Republic of Buryatia. MKRU News reported that a drunken man, who for some reason took exception to a man, presumably Snowden, saving his wife from drowning, attacked a woman by slicing her neck and stabbed her male companion in the thigh, who later died from severe blood loss in a local hospital. The injured were taken to a nearby hospital, where one of them died as a result of extensive blood loss. The unidentified man was allegedly 27 years old. (Snowden, who was born on June 21, 1983, would be 33 now.) That outlet connected the purported death of Snowden to a cryptic, since-deleted tweet issued by the exiled contractor on 5 August 2016. While it was true that the disappearing tweet was interpreted by many as an ominous signal, an insurance key, or a dead man's switch, journalist Glenn Greenwald, who works closely with Snowden to publish leaked material, quickly confirmed that Snowden is alive and well. Disclose.tv and Get Off the BS are sites known for publishing outlandish fabrications and fake news in order to attract readers. On 15 August 2016, Snowden reappeared on Twitter, putting concerns for his safety to rest.",['loss'],False,"On 10 August 2016, the unreliable web site Disclose.tv published an article reporting that former National Security Agency (NSA) employee and whistleblower Edward Snowden was ""pronounced dead by his girlfriend"" in Russia:The article from which the claim was aggregated was presented in the style of fiction rather than reporting and was interspersed with salacious fabrications:That outlet connected the purported death of Snowden to a cryptic, since-deleted tweet issued by the exiled contractor on 5 August 2016:While it was true the disappearing tweet was interpreted by many as an ominous signal, an insurance key, or a dead man's switch, journalist Glenn Greenwald (who works closely with Snowden to publish leaked material) quickly confirmed that Snowden is alive and well:@HannahhhBeth @Snowden He's fine Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) August 6, 2016Disclose.tv and Get Off the BS are sites known for publishing outlandish fabrications and fake news in order to attract readers. On 15 August 2016 Snowden reappeared on Twitter, putting concerns for his safety to rest:The world's first confirmed, publicly-ID'd victim of NSA's #PRISM: a pro-democracy activist. https://t.co/C7GPiojhHT pic.twitter.com/GDvTDhyBHg Edward Snowden (@Snowden) August 15, 2016"
"Financial conflict-of-interest laws don't apply to the president, right? So, the president doesn't have to have a blind trust.",[],"How President-elect Donald Trump will handle his extensive businesses and financial holdings  and the potential conflict of interest that comes with them  when he gets into the Oval Office remains an open question. Trump has said his children will manage his business dealings. Many presidents in the past have put their assets in ablind trust, which is when an independent trustee manages another persons assets without the persons input. But Trump doesnt actually have to do any of this because the financial conflict-of-interest laws dont apply to him as president, said former New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, who is reportedly on the short list for a seat on Trumps cabinet. Well, first of all, you realize that those laws don't apply to the president, right? Giuliani toldCNNs Jake Tapper Nov. 13. So, the president doesn't have to have a blind trust. For some reason, when the law was written, the president was exempt. Giuliani has the law pretty much right. Trump, as president, has no legal obligation to detach himself from his businesses and financial interests. The law at issue isTitle 18 Section 208of the U.S. code. Itsaysfederal executive branch employees cant participate in government matters in which they or their immediate family has a financial interest. Because of this law, some federal employees put their investments in a blind trust. This allows them to sidestep the regulation and participate in a matter that might otherwise pose a conflict of interest. But the president and the vice president, despite being executive branch employees, are exempt. According tothe laws definitions, Title 18 Section 208 does not apply to them, nor does it apply to members of Congress or federal judges. It appears that presidents have mostly escaped the normal web of ethics and conflict-of-interest laws, said Scott Amey, general counsel at the Project on Government Oversight, a nonpartisan government accountability watchdog. Amey added that presidents are allowed to accept gifts in many cases, too. Its been this way since at least 1974, when theJustice Department issued a lettersaying Title 18 Section 208 did not apply to the president. Congress expressly codified the exemptions in 1989. In the 1974 letter, the Justice Department said the legislative history of this conflict-of-interest provision indicated that it was never intended to apply to the president. Additionally, the Justice Department said placing conflict-of-interest laws on the president could constrain him in a potentially unconstitutional manner, though it did not give specific examples. As the head of the executive branch, the president may not be able to  and arguably under the Constitution it might not be possible to require the president to  recuse from government decisions, said Richard Briffault, a professor of legislation at Columbia Law School. While Title 18 Section 208 is the primary conflict-of-interest provision, there are other relevant rules, including a couple that dont exempt the president. Trump and Vice President Mike Pence will have to disclose their finances, which is required of all high-level federal employees, Briffault said. But the disclosures are not as detailed as federal tax returns, which Trump has not released. Then theres the Constitutions Emoluments Clause, which bans U.S. government employees from accepting presents or compensation from foreign governments, noted Kathleen Clark, an expert on legal ethics and a law professor at Washington University in St. Louis. The Trump Organization has numerous foreign ties, includingseveral overseasreal estate deals with possible foreign government connections.In 2012, for example, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan attended a ribbon cutting ceremony for Trump Towers Mall in Istanbul. If any of Trumps business arrangements involve the receipt of payments from foreign governments, I believe that he, or his entities from which he receives money, would have to forgo those payments, or he would have to detach from those entities, Clark said. But it's not fully clear that presidents are bound by the Emoluments Clause, and no court has weighed into answer this question. The way the clause is constructred   that it doesn't specify the president, unlike other provisions in the Constitution, for example  and the fact that President George Washington himself took gifts from the French government without asking Congress for permission, together make a good case that it doesn't apply to presidents, saidSeth Barrett Tillman, a professor at Maynooth University in Ireland who has studied the clause. Our ruling Giuliani said financial conflict-of-interest laws don't apply to the president, right? So, the president doesn't have to have a blind trust. The president is, in fact, exempt from the primary conflict-of-interest provision in the U.S. code. So presidents do not have any legal obligation to put their financial holdings in a blind trust or to detach themselves from their financial interests in any way. As president, Trump will have to comply with financial disclosure requirements, however, and it's possible he is constrained by a clause in the Constitution regarding income from foreign governments. We rate Giulianis claim True. Update Jan. 12, 2017: We have updated this story to add more information about the Emoluments Clause. Our rating remains unchanged.","['National', 'Campaign Finance', 'Corrections and Updates', 'Ethics']",True,"Trump has said his children will manage his business dealings. Many presidents in the past have put their assets in ablind trust, which is when an independent trustee manages another persons assets without the persons input.Well, first of all, you realize that those laws don't apply to the president, right? Giuliani toldCNNs Jake Tapper Nov. 13. So, the president doesn't have to have a blind trust. For some reason, when the law was written, the president was exempt.The law at issue isTitle 18 Section 208of the U.S. code. Itsaysfederal executive branch employees cant participate in government matters in which they or their immediate family has a financial interest.But the president and the vice president, despite being executive branch employees, are exempt. According tothe laws definitions, Title 18 Section 208 does not apply to them, nor does it apply to members of Congress or federal judges.Its been this way since at least 1974, when theJustice Department issued a lettersaying Title 18 Section 208 did not apply to the president. Congress expressly codified the exemptions in 1989.The Trump Organization has numerous foreign ties, includingseveral overseasreal estate deals with possible foreign government connections.In 2012, for example, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan attended a ribbon cutting ceremony for Trump Towers Mall in Istanbul.The way the clause is constructred   that it doesn't specify the president, unlike other provisions in the Constitution, for example  and the fact that President George Washington himself took gifts from the French government without asking Congress for permission, together make a good case that it doesn't apply to presidents, saidSeth Barrett Tillman, a professor at Maynooth University in Ireland who has studied the clause."
Was Fake Snow Made from Asbestos Marketed as Christmas Decor?,['Asbestos was widely used for a variety of purposes before it was recognized as a significant carcinogen.'],"As Christmas 2017 approached, social media users began circulating an image of a vintage-looking box labeled ""Asbestos: Pure White Fire Proof Snow"" and questioning if the packaging really contained artificial snow made out of what is now a widely-recognized carcinogen:   In the early half of the 20th Century, asbestos was widely used as Christmas decor because of its white, fluffy appearance -- but that was before the substance was recognized as a major risk factor for an aggressive form of cancer known as mesothelioma, as the Asbestos.com website reports: reports Asbestos was once marketed as artificial snow and sprinkled on trees and wreaths and ornaments. Although those products have not been produced for many years, the oldest decorations that were passed down from one generation to the next, may still have small amounts of asbestos. The most famous asbestos snow scene was used during the filming of ""The Wizard of Oz,"" the 1939 classic with Judy Garland that became the most watched film in history. There is a scene in the movie where snow, made from asbestos, falls on Dorothy and her friends, awakening them from a spell cast by the Wicked Witch of the West. The above displayed above depicts a real item sold to consumers in the mid-20th century. The picture was taken by Tony Rich, an industrial hygienist and amateur photographer who catalogs asbestos images on the photo-sharing platform Flickr using the moniker Asbestos Hunter. Rich, an anti-asbestos activist, originally shot the picture in 2009. Asbestos Hunter picture Rich told us he has the actual box in storage and directed us to another photograph that shows the product was manufactured by National Tinsel Manufacturing Company and sold in the late 1940s through the 1950s: photograph This brand actually contains amphibole asbestos ""amosite"", very toxic. Generally speaking, asbestos was used by the tens of millions of tons for nearly over a century and a half in modern history for a wide variety of applications, mostly due to its fire resistance, insulating properties, durability/strength, inertness, could be woven, and was cheap and abundant. Major asbestos manufacturers had large [research and development] programs constantly finding new ways to use asbestos. I believe the most tragic use was in cigarette filters. Rich told us many people are surprised to learn that, despite its significant link to cancer, asbestos isn't completely banned in the United States. Aside from raising awareness with his camera as ""Asbestos Hunter,"" Rich serves on the Prevention Advisory Board for the non-profit Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization (ADAO), on whose blog he wrote in 2015: wrote The United States has a very long history of asbestos usage, a tragic history that continues to be written to this day, to the ultimate detriment of its citizensour loved ones, neighbors, and future generations. During that time, tens of millions of tons of asbestos materials were put into our nation's buildings and infrastructure, most of which remains in place today. Eventually, laws and regulations were created in an attempt to help protect employees and the public from the toxic legacy left by asbestos. However, despite the volumes of asbestos standards, many still face ongoing problems related to regulatory under-enforcement, poor risk management or by simply failing to identify basic asbestos hazards. Compounding these issues, asbestos continues to be imported into our country, primarily due to the alarming fact that asbestos has not yet been completely banned. Further, asbestos has been repeatedly found in a wide variety of new consumer products as reported by recent independent studies. Some of these asbestos-containing products include children's toys and crayons, readily available from retail marketplace's shelves. Rich, Tony.  ""The United States of Asbestos?""   Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization.  28 August 2017. Smith, Ernie. ""The Slow Demise of Asbestos, The Carcinogen that Gave 'The Wizard of Oz' Snow.""   Atlas Obscura.  1 August 2016. Mauney, Matt.  ""CDC: Mesothelioma Deaths on the Rise.""   Asbestos.com.  10 March 2017. Povtak, Tim.  ""Christmas Decorations in the Attic Might Be Sprinkled with Asbestos.""   Asbestos.com.  1 December 2011.",['profit'],True,"In the early half of the 20th Century, asbestos was widely used as Christmas decor because of its white, fluffy appearance -- but that was before the substance was recognized as a major risk factor for an aggressive form of cancer known as mesothelioma, as the Asbestos.com website reports:The above displayed above depicts a real item sold to consumers in the mid-20th century. The picture was taken by Tony Rich, an industrial hygienist and amateur photographer who catalogs asbestos images on the photo-sharing platform Flickr using the moniker Asbestos Hunter. Rich, an anti-asbestos activist, originally shot the picture in 2009.Rich told us he has the actual box in storage and directed us to another photograph that shows the product was manufactured by National Tinsel Manufacturing Company and sold in the late 1940s through the 1950s:Rich told us many people are surprised to learn that, despite its significant link to cancer, asbestos isn't completely banned in the United States. Aside from raising awareness with his camera as ""Asbestos Hunter,"" Rich serves on the Prevention Advisory Board for the non-profit Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization (ADAO), on whose blog he wrote in 2015:"
Did Billy Graham Warn Against Mixing Religion and Politics?,"['The evangelical leader said in a 1981 profile that people in his position ""can\'t be closely identified with any particular party or person.""']","While evangelical leader Franklin Graham has been a staunch supporter of President Donald Trump, his father Rev. Billy Graham publicly warned against the prospect of religious figures becoming too attached to a political stance. Several readers contacted us in January 2018 seeking to confirm a statement attributed to the elder Graham: I don't want to see religious bigotry in any form. It would disturb me if there was a wedding between the religious fundamentalists and the political right. The hard right has no interest in religion except to manipulate it. The statement was also circulated online in meme form:   In this case, the quote is authentic, and taken from the 1 February 1981 cover story in Parade magazine; it was part of Billy Graham's account of conversations with fellow reverend Jerry Falwell, who helmed the conservative politcal group the Moral Majority. Graham said: I told him to preach the Gospel. That's our calling. I want to preserve the purity of the Gospel and the freedom of religion in America. I don't want to see religious bigotry in any form. Liberals organized in the '60s, and conservatives certainly have a right to organize in the '80s, but it would disturb me if there was a wedding between the religious fundamentalists and the political right. The hard right has no interest in religion except to manipulate it. The statement was featured early on in the story and was also highlighted below a picture of Falwell and then-President Ronald Reagan:     In the story, Graham admitted that he no longer thought of Communists as being ""disciples of Lucifer,"" contrary to his own rhetoric from earlier in his career. He also cast himself as having no part of Falwell's organization, which became a key conservative constituency before dissolving in 1989. He said: It would be unfortunate if people got the impression all evangelists belong to that group. The majority do not. I don't wish to be identified with them. I'm for morality. But morality goes beyond sex to human freedom and social justice. We as clergy know so very little to speak out with such authority on the Panama Canal or superiority of armaments. Evangelists can't be closely identified with any particular party or person. We have to stand in the middle to preach to all people, right and left. I haven't been faithful to my own advice in the past. I will be in the future. While the elder Graham has had relationships with several U.S. presidents spanning decades, he told Christianity Today in 2011 that, given the chance to do anything differently in his life, ""I also would have steered clear of politics."" told His son, on the other hand, has positioned himself as a Trump supporter since 2011, when he contributed to the debunked ""birther"" conspiracy theory that former President Barack Obama was not born in the United States. In October 2016, the younger Graham published a social media post (misattributed to his father) urging evangelical voters to vote for Trump. contributed misattributed More recently, Franklin Graham has refused to criticize the president for reportedly calling African countries ""shitholes"" or for alleged extramarital affairs -- drawing criticism from Graham's own niece -- and claimed that the U.S. was ""in a coup d'etat"" perpetrated by political enemies of Trump who were using the media against him. refused criticism claimed Bailey, Sarah Pulliam.  ""Q & A: Billy Graham on Aging, Regrets, and Evangelicals.""
  Christianity Today.  21 January 2011. YouTube.  ""Interview with the Rev. Franklin Graham,"" uploaded by ABC News.
  https://youtu.be/lx2E286GAcE  24 April 2011.  Vales, Leinz.  ""Evangelical Leader Franklin Graham Says Trump is a 'Changed Person.'""
    CNN.   24 January 2018. Allen, Bob.   ""Franklin Graham Asserts That Trump Could be Toppled in a Coup.""
    Baptist News.   30 January 2018. Delk, Josh.   ""Billy Graham's Granddaughter: Trump Needs to Ask for Forgiveness.""
    The Hill.   27 January 2018.",['interest'],True,"While the elder Graham has had relationships with several U.S. presidents spanning decades, he told Christianity Today in 2011 that, given the chance to do anything differently in his life, ""I also would have steered clear of politics.""His son, on the other hand, has positioned himself as a Trump supporter since 2011, when he contributed to the debunked ""birther"" conspiracy theory that former President Barack Obama was not born in the United States. In October 2016, the younger Graham published a social media post (misattributed to his father) urging evangelical voters to vote for Trump.More recently, Franklin Graham has refused to criticize the president for reportedly calling African countries ""shitholes"" or for alleged extramarital affairs -- drawing criticism from Graham's own niece -- and claimed that the U.S. was ""in a coup d'etat"" perpetrated by political enemies of Trump who were using the media against him."
Says Ohio law gives tax breaks to rich people who own private jets.,[],"Ohio law contains 128 tax breaks that cost the state about $7 billion per year in lost revenue that it would otherwise collect, according to the Department of Taxation. State Rep. Mike Foley, a Democrat from Cleveland, wants to close some of these loopholes so the state has more money for schools, safety forces, and other local government services. Foley co-sponsored a bill in February to establish a committee that would review the state's tax exemptions every two years. More recently, he tried to gain approval for his plan by adding it to a broadly supported general tax bill, House Bill 508, which was under consideration in the House of Representatives on April 25. Foley said during a floor speech that tax exemptions need to be reviewed because some of them are fairly silly, such as a sales tax exemption related to private jets. ""I don't think we need to be giving exemptions to rich people who own private jets,"" Foley said. ""We're giving tax breaks to guys that own private jets—that doesn't make any sense."" Foley's statement addresses individual tax burdens, a frequently discussed political topic that resonates with many voters. So PolitiFact Ohio decided to dig into Foley's claim. Foley's office provided us with a handful of documents to support his assertion, including a tax expenditure report presented in March 2011 by the Ohio Department of Taxation. But before we examine the report and whether it supports Foley's claim, let's look into how these tax breaks work. Here is the Taxation Department's explanation: ""Tax expenditures represent tax dollars that are foregone through deductions, exemptions, credits, and other provisions in tax laws,"" the tax expenditure report states. ""Tax expenditures result in a loss of tax revenue to state government, thereby reducing the funds available for other government programs. In essence, a tax expenditure has the same fiscal impact as a direct government expenditure."" Among the tax exemptions in the report is one for people who buy a share of a private jet, or what is called a fractionally owned aircraft. This particular tax break was passed in 2003 as part of the state budget. It does have some limitations. It was crafted to apply only to those who do business with qualified companies that provide fractional ownership of private jets. Qualified companies would operate at least 100 aircraft and meet other criteria. The tax break does not apply to individuals who buy their own private jet. Foley did mention fractional ownership at another point during his floor speech: ""If you own a fractional or some other sort of ownership of a private jet, then we're giving you an exemption on your taxes."" The tax loophole caps sales tax at $800 for the sum of shares of a fractionally owned jet. Fractional owners are charged a fraction of the $800 that corresponds with their ownership stake. So if someone owns one-eighth of the jet, they would pay $100 in sales tax. There are only two companies in Ohio that fit the requirements as a qualified company for this exemption, according to the Department of Taxation. That means only people who buy their fractional ownership from one of these two companies qualify for the tax break. The department, however, would not disclose those companies because the law prohibits the disclosure of almost all information on specific taxpayers, taxation department spokesman Gary Gudmundson said in an email. Although the state would not say which two companies qualify for the exemption, NetJets and Flight Options are two prominent fractionally owned aircraft companies based in Ohio. When lawmakers debated the merits of the tax break in 2003, a fractional-ownership company reported that its average share cost was $1.2 million, according to a Department of Taxation analysis of this tax expenditure produced in January 2011. The analysis did not name the company. The taxation department last year estimated in its tax expenditure report that the tax break for fractionally owned aircraft costs the state about $1 million a year. So what does all this mean for Foley's claim? There is no doubt that a tax loophole exists for people who buy a stake in a private jet. A listener hearing Foley's quip about tax breaks for rich people buying private jets could believe he was referring to anyone who buys a private plane. The tax break, however, only applies to fractional ownership programs. That's additional information that provides clarity. And to his credit, Foley did mention fractional ownership at a different point in his speech on the House floor. The average share price previously reported—$1.2 million—suggests the tax exemption would be available to wealthy people, just as Foley claimed. On the Truth-O-Meter, Foley's claim rates Mostly True.","['Ohio', 'State Budget', 'Taxes']",True,"Ohio law contains 128 tax breaks that cost the state about $7 billion per year in lost revenue it otherwise would collect, according to the Department of Taxation.State Rep. Mike Foley, a Democrat from Cleveland, wants to close some of these loopholes so the state has more money for schools, safety forces and other local government services.Foley co-sponsored a bill in February to establish a committee that would review the states tax exemptions every two years. More recently, he tried to get approval for his plan by adding it to a broadly supported general tax bill, House Bill 508, under consideration in the House of Representatives on April 25.Foley said during a floor speechthat tax exemptions need to be reviewed because some of them are fairly silly, such as a sales tax exemption related to private jets.I dont think we need to be giving exemptions to rich people who own private jets, Foley said. Were giving tax breaks to guys that own private jets  that doesnt make any sense.Foleys statement hits on individual tax burdens, a frequently discussed political topic that resonates with many voters. So PolitiFact Ohio decided dig into Foleys claim.Foleys office provided us with a handful of documents to back up his claim, includinga tax expenditure report presented in March 2011 by the Ohio Department of Taxation.But before we examine the report and whether it supports Foleys claim, lets look into how these tax breaks work.Here is the Taxation Departments explanation:Tax expenditures represent tax dollars that are foregone through deductions, exemptions, credits, and other provisions in tax laws, the tax expenditure report says. Tax expenditures result in a loss of tax revenue to state government, thereby reducing the funds available for other government programs. In essence, a tax expenditure has the same fiscal impact as a direct government expenditure.Among the tax exemptions in the report is one for people  who buy a share of a private jet, or what is called a fractionally-owned aircraft.This particular tax break was passed in 2003 as part of the state budget.It does have some limitations. It was crafted to apply only to those who do business with qualified companies that provide fractional ownership of private jets. Qualified companies would operate at least 100 aircraft and meet other criteria.The tax break does not apply to individuals who buy their own private jet.Foley did mention fractional ownership at another point during his floor speech: If you won a fractional or some other sort of ownership of a private jet, then were giving you an exemption on your taxes.The tax loophole caps sales tax at $800 for the sum of shares of a fractionally owned jet. Fractional owners are charged a fraction of the $800 that corresponds with their ownership stake. So if somebody owns one-eighth of the jet, he would pay $100 in sales tax.There are only two companies in Ohio that fit the requirements as a qualified company for this exemption, according to the Department of Taxation. That means only people who buy their fractional ownership from one of these two companies qualify for the tax break.The department, however, would not disclose those companies because the law prohibits disclosure of almost all information on specific taxpayers, taxation department spokesman Gary Gudmundson said in an e-mail.Although the state would not say which two companies qualify for the exemption, NetJets and Flight Options are two prominent fractionally owned aircraft companies based in Ohio.When lawmakers debated the merits of the tax break in 2003, a fractional-ownership company reported that its average share cost was $1.2 million, according to a Department of Taxation analysis of this tax expenditure produced in Jan. 2011. The analysis did not name the company.The taxation department last year estimated in its tax expenditure report that the tax break for fractionally owned aircraft costs the state about $1 million a year.So what does all this mean for Foleys claim?There is no doubt that a tax loophole exists for people who buy a stake in a private jet.A listener hearing Foleys quip about tax breaks for rich people buying private jets could believe he was referring to anyone who buys a private plane. The tax break, however, only applies to fractional ownership programs. Thats additional information that provides clarity. And to his credit, Foley did mention fractional ownership at a different point in his speech on the House floor.And the average share price previously reported -- $1.2 million  suggests the tax exemption would be available wealthy people, just as Foley claimed.On the Truth-O-Meter, Foleys claim rates Mostly True."
"Did ABC Cancel 'The View,' Removing the Show as of 2024?","['An online article was virally shared in June 2023 that said the long-running morning talk show\'s cancellation was ""bound to happen.""']","On May 28, 2023, thedunning-kruger-times.com website reported, ""Canceled: ABC Removes 'The View' From Its 2024 Roster: 'Nobody Watches Anymore.'"" However, this was not a true story. Dunning-kruger-times.com is associated with America's Last Line of Defense, a network of websites that publishes satirical articles. Historically, the apparent goal of this network was to attempt to get conservative-minded Americans to believe and share the made-up stories. The beginning of the satirical article claimed that ABC had canceled ""The View."" The featured picture included with the story showed left-leaning hosts Whoopi Goldberg and Joy Behar making facial expressions as if they had just found out their show was ending. article On June 6, the story appeared to be taking off on Twitter with more shares than on any day since it had been published.  Near the end of the story, it mentioned the word ""taters."" This term is what fans of America's Last Line of Defense use to refer to the website's conservative readers. The ""About Us"" pagefor dunning-kruger-times.com describes ""taters"" as follows: page ""Taters"" are the conservative fans of America's Last Line of Defense. They are fragile, frightened, mostly older caucasian Americans. They believe nearly anything. While we go out of our way to educate them that not everything they agree with is true, they are still old, typically ignorant, and again  very afraid of everything. Our mission is to do our best to show them the light, through shame if necessary, and to have a good time doing it, becauseold and afraid or not, these people are responsible for the patriarchy we're railing so hard against. They don't understand logic and they couldn't care less about reason. Facts are irrelevant. BUTthey do understand shame. In the past, the Washington Post, The Boston Globe,BBC, Politico, and others have all published articles about America's Last Line of Defense. Washington Post The Boston Globe BBC Politico We previously reported on a number of other rumors also about ""The View,"" all of which can be read here. all of which can be read here Baker, Billy. ""One of the Country's Biggest Publishers of Fake News Says He Did It for Our Own Good - The Boston Globe."" BostonGlobe.Com, 7 Apr. 2018, https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2018/04/07/one-country-biggest-publishers-fake-news-says-did-for-our-own-good/fzIDkkKZf7IbYA9oyGuzhI/story.html. Saslow, Eli. ""'Nothing on This Page Is Real': How Lies Become Truth in Online America."" Washington Post, 18 Nov. 2018, https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/nothing-on-this-page-is-real-how-lies-become-truth-in-online-america/2018/11/17/edd44cc8-e85a-11e8-bbdb-72fdbf9d4fed_story.html. Schwartz, Jason, and Shawn Musgrave. ""The Supreme Court and Sharia Law: How a Fake-News Story Spreads."" POLITICO, 14 May 2018, https://www.politico.com/story/2018/05/14/fake-news-story-spreads-576752. Subedar, Anisa. ""The Godfather of Fake News."" BBC, 27 Nov. 2018, https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-sh/the_godfather_of_fake_news.",['share'],False,"The beginning of the satirical article claimed that ABC had canceled ""The View."" The featured picture included with the story showed left-leaning hosts Whoopi Goldberg and Joy Behar making facial expressions as if they had just found out their show was ending.The ""About Us"" pagefor dunning-kruger-times.com describes ""taters"" as follows:In the past, the Washington Post, The Boston Globe,BBC, Politico, and others have all published articles about America's Last Line of Defense.We previously reported on a number of other rumors also about ""The View,"" all of which can be read here."
Do These Pictures Show a Dolphin Hunt in Denmark's Faroe Islands?,['Photographs showing a dolphin hunt in Denmark continue to provoke outrage and protest.'],"Denmark is a big shame The sea is stained in red and in the mean while it's not because of the climate effects of nature. It's because of the cruelty that the human beings (civilised human) kill hundreds of the famous and intelligent Calderon dolphins. This happens every year in Feroe iland in Denmark. In this slaughter the main participants are young teens. WHY? To show that they are adults and mature.... BULLLLsh In this big celebration, nothing is missing for the fun. Everyone is participating in one way or the other, killing or looking at the cruelty ""supporting like a spectator"" Is it necessary to mention that the dolphin calderon, like all the other species of dolphins, it's near instinction and they get near men to play and interact. In a way of PURE friendship They don't die instantly; they are cut 1, 2 or 3 times with thick hocks. And at that time the dolphins produce a grim extremely compatible with the cry of a new born child. But he suffers and there's no compassion till this sweet being slowly dies in its own blood Its enough! We will send this mail until this email arrives in any association defending the animals, we won't only read. That would make us accomplices, viewers. Take care of the world, it is your home!      The photographs displayed above were taken in 2005 and document a drive hunt (commonly known as a ""grind"") of long-finned pilot whales by residents of the Faroe Islands (which are an autonomous province of Denmark), an activity that has long been a subject of international controversy. document long-finned Faroe Islands The whale hunt has been a part of the Faroe Island culture for hundreds of years, but in recent decades the practice has increasingly become the subject of international protest and condemnation. Supporters of the hunt maintain that the killing of pilot whales is ""an age-old communal, noncommercial hunt aimed at meeting the community's need for whale meat and blubber,"" that the animals are dealt with so quickly that their pain is brief, and that whale meat accounts for a quarter of the Faroe islanders' annual meat consumption. Conservationists charge that the hunts, which may take hundreds of whales at a time, are barbaric and pointless, that ""the practice is outdated, cruel and unnecessary for a place with one of the highest standards of living in Europe,"" and that most of the whales go to waste (either being left on the beach to rot or thrown back to sea after they are killed. According to Russell Fielding, a geographer from the University of the South in Sewanee, Tennessee: The Faroese are opportunistic hunters who launch a grind only when specific conditions are met. The animals must be close to shore, near one of 23 beaches approved as a landing beach. The weather and currents have to be calm enough. And there have to be enough participants to crew the dozen or so powerboats required to drive the animals toward shore. In some years, such as in 2008, conditions weren't right and no whales were taken. But over the past three centuries, the Faroese have taken an average of 838 pilot whales and 75 dolphins each year, Fielding reported in a 2012 study. The Faroese usually target long-finned pilot whales, says Fielding, although they will also take bottlenose dolphins, white-sided dolphins, and Risso's dolphins. Risso's dolphins are sometimes landed even though they aren't on the Faroe government's list of species approved for hunting. None of the species are considered endangered, although the International Union for Conservation of Nature lists long-finned pilot whales as ""data deficient,"" meaning there isn't enough scientific evidence to judge the status of the North Atlantic population. A Faroe Islands whaling site page describes such hunts unfolding as follows: whaling site Whale drives only take place when a school of pilot whales is sighted close to land, which is most often from a local fishing boat or ferry, and when sea and weather conditions make it possible. This can take place at any time of the year, but catches are most common in July and August when the days are long and the weather is more stable. Notice of the school is sent to the elected whaling officials and to the district administrator (sslumaur) responsible for the whale drive, and is spread as widely and quickly as possible in the local community so that enough people and boats can join in the drive. Employers usually make allowances for members of their staff to take time off during whale drives. The boats gather in a wide semicircle behind the whales and slowly and quietly begin to drive themtowards the chosen authorised bay. On the whaling foremans signal, loose stones and stones attached to lines are thrown into the water behind the whales, helping to herd the whales towards the beach where they become stranded. According to the regulations, any group of whales which cannot be beached in this manner must be driven out to sea again. A crucial factor in ensuring an effective whale drive is the organisation of participants, both in boats and on shore, in addition to prevailing weather and tidal conditions during driving and beaching. The spontaneous nature of a whale drive requires swift mobilisation of manpower to drive and kill a group of large wild animals quickly. Whale drives are only initiated when whales are sighted by chance close to land. Faroese animal welfare legislation, which also applies to whaling, requires that animals are killed as quickly and with as little suffering as possible. Whales are killed on the shore and in the shallows of bays especially authorised for the purpose. A regulation spinal lance must be used to sever the spinal cord, which also severs the major blood supply to the brain, ensuring both loss of consciousness and death within seconds. This, in addition to the supplementary use of the traditional whaling knife, if necessary, is the most efficient and humane means of killing beached pilot whales safely, with many participants involved at the same time. In recent years, two new items of equipment have been developed and formally approved and required as standard equipment. The blow-hole hook used to secure the whales causes no injury prior to slaughter and is now widely used. The spinal lance has now also been introduced as the preferred standard equipment for killing pilot whales. It has been shown to reduce killing time to 1-2 seconds while also improving accuracy and safety (see also under Whaling and animal welfare). The Faroes participate actively in the work of the NAMMCO Committee on Hunting Methods, where veterinary experts and experienced hunters from different countries share information and work to develop best practices for the humane killing of marine mammals. In 1986 the International Whaling Commission (IWC) introduced ""zero catch limits for commercial whaling""; however, the IWC's rules still allow for subsistence hunting in some parts of the world, and the application of their regulations to long-finned pilot whales is somewhat ambiguous since (despite their name) those animals are not whales proper; they are (like dolphins) small cetaceans, and they belong to the same biological family (Delphinidae) as dolphins. IWC small cetaceans In late 2008, chief medical officers of the Faroe Islands advised that they no longer considered pilot whales to be fit for human consumption because the animals' meat and blubber had been found to contain too much mercury, PCBs and DDT derivatives. advised As noted above, the Faroe Islands are an autonomous province of Denmark and not a part of Denmark itself; essentially a self-governing country within the Kingdom of Denmark, with their own prime minister and legislature. MacKenzie, Debora.  ""Faroe Islanders Told to Stop Eating 'Toxic' Whales.""   New Scientist.  28 November 2008. Environmental News Network.  ""Conservation Groups Call for an End to Faroe Island Whale Hunts.""   CNN.com.  11 September 2000. Los Angeles Times.  ""Faroe Islands Reject Whale-Kill Protests.""   27 August 1985. Reuters.  ""Faroe Islands Fishermen Cited for Brutality in Whale Hunt.""   Toronto Star.  22 June 1987  (p. A24). Reuters.  ""Islands' Whale Hunt, Part of National Identity, Angers Activisits.""   Rocky Mountain News.  29 October 1994.",['share'],True,"The photographs displayed above were taken in 2005 and document a drive hunt (commonly known as a ""grind"") of long-finned pilot whales by residents of the Faroe Islands (which are an autonomous province of Denmark), an activity that has long been a subject of international controversy.A Faroe Islands whaling site page describes such hunts unfolding as follows:In 1986 the International Whaling Commission (IWC) introduced ""zero catch limits for commercial whaling""; however, the IWC's rules still allow for subsistence hunting in some parts of the world, and the application of their regulations to long-finned pilot whales is somewhat ambiguous since (despite their name) those animals are not whales proper; they are (like dolphins) small cetaceans, and they belong to the same biological family (Delphinidae) as dolphins.In late 2008, chief medical officers of the Faroe Islands advised that they no longer considered pilot whales to be fit for human consumption because the animals' meat and blubber had been found to contain too much mercury, PCBs and DDT derivatives."
"Ronald Reagan defeated Jimmy Carter by a significant margin, even though he was behind by 6% in the polls.",['The claim that Reagan won the 1980 presidential election in a landslide despite trailing well behind Carter in late public opinion polls is cited as a reason to get out and vote for Donald Trump.'],"Two and a half weeks before the 2016 presidential election, GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump trailed behind Democrat Hillary Clinton by an average of 6% in national polls, a statistic that buoyed Clinton supporters yet failed to rattle diehard supporters of Trump, who had managed, as The Guardian put it, to ""confound expectations"" all year. As the smoke clears from weeks of political bombardment, White House watchers are convinced the only questions now are how big Hillary Clinton's win will be and whether the Democrats can take Congress, too. Those Republicans still loyal to Trump cling to the hope that all the polls are wrong and that in barely two weeks' time, angry voters will again stun the world. Over and over, Donald Trump is saying one word: Brexit. ""We will win,"" he told a rally in Pennsylvania on Friday. ""We will shock the world. This is going to be Brexit-plus."" Hubris aside, some of his supporters remained worried about voter defections in the wake of the Trump ""groping"" scandal, prompting calls for an eleventh-hour get-out-the-vote drive, not to mention homebrew efforts to rally people to the polls, like the image macro below: groping drive. The Internet meme was accurate insofar as public opinion polls taken in October 1980 showed Democrat Jimmy Carter holding as much as an eight-point lead over Republican Ronald Reagan (a Gallup poll two weeks before the election had Carter at 47% and Reagan at 39%); yet Reagan won a landslide victory in the general election, beating Carter 489 to 49 in electoral votes and by almost 10% in the popular vote. (It should be noted that 6.6% of the popular vote also went to a third-party candidate, John Anderson.) To conclude from that single example that polls simply ought not to be believed is a stretch, however. The 1980 upset was anomalous, the polling organization Gallup says, and based on factors unique to that year's campaign. Reagan's late-breaking surge that year is generally attributed to the only presidential debate between Carter and Reagan, held one week before the election on Oct. 28, which seemed to move voter preferences in Reagan's direction, as well as the ongoing Iran hostage crisis, which reached its one-year anniversary on Election Day. After trailing Carter by 8 points among registered voters (and by 3 points among likely voters) right before their debate, Reagan moved into a 3-point lead among likely voters immediately afterward, and he won the Nov. 4 election by 10 points. By contrast, in 2016, the two major party candidates had already faced off in three head-to-head debates, all held well before Election Day, which resulted in little or no improvement in Trump's underdog position in the polls. Among the many issues and challenges facing America, none looms in the forefront the way the Iranian hostage crisis (and the Iranian Revolution in general) did throughout the final year of Jimmy Carter's presidency. As Jonathan Chait noted back in 2012 when Republican challenger Mitt Romney found himself in a similar underdog position against incumbent president Barack Obama in that year's campaign home stretch: ""In 1980, the economy cratered (nothing remotely comparable has occurred this year), and then the Iranian hostage crisis, after an initial rally-around-the-flag blip, steadily corroded Carter's popularity."" No equivalent of those factors can be seen yet today, and pinning your hopes on a scenario where your campaign suddenly picks up ten points in the final month seems to be either an act of self-delusion or a ploy to keep anxious conservatives at bay. John Sides similarly observed when commenting on the 2012 presidential race that the notion President Carter held a polling lead over Ronald Reagan in 1980 right up until the very end of the campaign is something of a misconception: ""1980 is a poor comparison with 2012 for many reasons. One is simply that the economy is not as bad in 2012 as it was in 1980. But there is another apparent misconception in the Romney campaign, which Nate Silver rightly picked up on: Carter didn't lead Reagan for much of the campaign. The [poll tracking] plot shows what Chait describes, which is the ebbing of Carter's poll standing throughout 1980. Indeed, Reagan didn't need his convention bump—which he certainly got—to put him in the lead. The Democratic convention helped erode Reagan's lead, but it never closed it altogether. At the end of the campaign, Reagan did surge, but this only increased his lead. His surge appears to have been brought on first by the debate, and then perhaps by several other events in the final week of the campaign: 'On Friday of that week, the final economic indicator of the campaign showed inflation still seriously on the rise. And on Sunday morning, November 1, the Iranian parliament announced their conditions for freeing the American hostages. Jimmy Carter immediately abandoned campaigning and appeared on national television in the early evening to repeat much of what the public had been hearing all day. It was a week, in effect, with much that could affect the choices made by voters.'"" Carter's pollster, Patrick Caddell, believed that Iran's rebuff doomed Carter, saying, ""It was all related to the hostages and events overseas."" Harry Enten of the statistical analysis website FiveThirtyEight confirmed that in ordinary circumstances, October public opinion polls are usually reliable and highly predictive of final election results: ""In most years, the early-October polls [since 1952] were pretty close to the mark, with a correlation of +0.96 between the polls and the final result. Ten of the 16 elections featured errors of 3 percentage points or less, and in all but three campaigns, the polls were within 5 percentage points of the final outcome. Even in 2012, when Mitt Romney closed his deficit against President Obama after the first debate, the polls at this point still showed Obama leading. At this point in the election cycle, the average error of polls for all elections is just 3.3 percentage points (much lower than the 4.7-point error we found for just after the conventions), and every candidate who's been ahead in the popular vote in mid-October went on to win the election."" Given the rarity of last-minute upsets, did Enten think Donald Trump still had a chance to stage a comeback and win the general election despite lagging 6% in the polls? ""It's possible,"" he wrote. ""But it would be basically unprecedented."" Is that an excuse for anyone, regardless of party affiliation, not to turn out to vote? No, it is not.",['economy'],NEI,"Two-and-a-half weeks before the 2016 presidential election, GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump trailed behind Democrat Hillary Clinton by an average of 6% in national polls, a statistic that buoyed Clinton supporters, yet failed to rattle diehard supporters of Trump, who had managed, as The Guardian put it, to ""confound expectations"" all year:Those Republicans still loyal to Trump cling to the hope that all the polls are wrong  that in barely two weeks time, angry voters will again stun the world. Over and over, Donald Trump is saying one word: Brexit.Hubris aside, some of his supporters remained worried about voter defections in the wake of the Trump ""groping"" scandal, prompting calls for an eleventh-hour get-out-the vote drive, not to mention homebrew efforts to rally people to the polls like the image macro below:The Internet meme was accurate insofar as public opinion polls taken in October 1980 showed Democrat Jimmy Carter holding as much as an eight-point lead over Republican Ronald Reagan (a Gallup poll two weeks before the election had Carter at 47% and Reagan at 39%), yet Reagan won a landslide victory in the general election, beating Carter 489 to 49 in electoral votes and by almost 10% in the popular vote. (It should be noted that 6.6% of the popular vote also went to a third-party candidate, John Anderson.)To conclude from that single example that polls simply ought not to be believed is a stretch, however. The 1980 upset was anomalous, the polling organization Gallup says, and based on factors unique to that year's campaign:John Sides similarly observed when commenting on the 2012 presidential race that the notion President Carter held a polling lead over Ronald Reagan in 1980 right up until the very end of the campaign is something of a misconception: Harry Enten of the statistical analysis web site FiveThirtyEight confirmed that in ordinary circumstances, October public opinion polls are usually reliable and highly predictive of final election results:Given the rarity of last-minute upsets, did Enten think Donald Trump still had a chance to stage a comeback and win the general election despite lagging 6% in the polls? "
"The labor force participation rate -- the share of the potential workforce that is actually working or looking for work-- currently stands below 63%, the lowest level since the 1970s.",[],"Rep. Dave Brat says the U.S. economy is stuck in the doldrums. The labor force participation rate - the share of the potential workforce that is actually working or looking for work - currently stands below 63%, the lowest level since the 1970s, Brat, R-7th, said in a May 24 Facebookpost. No doubt, the economy has had a choppy recovery from the Great Recession. But we wondered if its true that the percentage of potential workers who are employed or trying to find a job is at the lowest level in 40 years. Ivan Schwartz, spokesman for Brats re-election campaign, backed his statement by pointing to monthlytalliesby the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics. They show that in April, the latest month for which figures were available when Brat made his comment, 62.8 percent of people who were 16 or older either were employed or actively seeking work. We should start by noting that 62.8 percent was not the lowest proportion of people in the labor force during the past several decades. The bottom came in September 2015, when the rate was 62.4 percent. Youd have to go back to October 1977 to find a time when the rate sank to that level. Still, Brat has a point in that the share of potential workers has been hovering near its lowest point in several decades. From the late 1970s up until the Great Recession, the percentage of people in the labor force for the most part was on the upswing. But in 2007, the year the recession started, the proportion of people in the labor force started to fall from 66.3 percent and continued that decline after the official end of the recession in June 2009. The drop continued until the September 2015 low point. Daniel Culbertson, an economist at the Indeed.com hiring website, told us that the economic downturn and simple demographics are the commonly cited cause of the drop in the percentage of people who are in the labor force. Those that cite a deteriorating economy believe more workers are becoming discouraged and leaving the labor force altogether due to lack of opportunity, low wages, etc., Culbertson wrote in an email. Others opine that the majority of the decline can be explained by aging baby boomers leaving the labor force as they begin to retire en masse. How much of the LFPR (labor force participation rate) decline is attributable to each is a common topic of debate among economists. Gary Burtless, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, attributes at least half of the drop to baby boomer retirements. That would have happened even if the recession never had occurred and the economy kept growing at the pace it had been in 2007, Burtless told us in an interview. Other factors are at play, Burtless said. Younger people who could enter the workforce are staying in college longer, he said. Some of the dropoff, particularly among potential workers ages 25 to 54 not in the labor force, remains a mystery, Burtless said. As we noted above, theres been a bit of an uptick in the percentage of people who are in the workforce since last September - but not much. It rose from 62.4 percent to 63 percent in March. But then it fell to 62.6 percent in May - a figure that was not available when Brat made his statement. Even so, its still up a bit from the September 2015 low point. A final note, our colleagues at PolitiFact National have examined a similarclaimthat Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas hasmadeover the years that the percentage of people working is at its lowest level since the 1970s, a statement Cruz has made to argue that Obama shares blame for the trend. PolitiFact has rated the statement Mostly True, saying the trend is real, but at least some of the drop is due to demographics beyond the presidents control. Brat, in his post, did not assign political blame for the drop. He predicted, however, that the situation will get worse if people  buy into solutions being offered by Democrats. Our ruling Brat said the labor force participation rate currently stands below 63%, the lowest level since the 1970s. His percentage is right, and the congressman is correct that the rate of potential workers in the labor force has been hovering near a four-decade low since the start of 2014. Our one minor quibble is that the actual low point occurred in September 2015, when the labor participation rate fell to 62.4 percent. Its been slightly higher this year. Still, we rate Brats statement True.","['Economy', 'Jobs', 'Virginia']",True,"The labor force participation rate - the share of the potential workforce that is actually working or looking for work - currently stands below 63%, the lowest level since the 1970s, Brat, R-7th, said in a May 24 Facebookpost.Ivan Schwartz, spokesman for Brats re-election campaign, backed his statement by pointing to monthlytalliesby the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics. They show that in April, the latest month for which figures were available when Brat made his comment, 62.8 percent of people who were 16 or older either were employed or actively seeking work.A final note, our colleagues at PolitiFact National have examined a similarclaimthat Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas hasmadeover the years that the percentage of people working is at its lowest level since the 1970s, a statement Cruz has made to argue that Obama shares blame for the trend. PolitiFact has rated the statement Mostly True, saying the trend is real, but at least some of the drop is due to demographics beyond the presidents control."
Does Biden hail from the same Scranton that served as the setting for 'The Office'?,"[""And is the home of world's most famous fictional paper company real?""]","Voting in the 2020 U.S. Election may be over, but misinformation continues to spread. Never stop fact-checking. Follow our post-election coverage here. Throughout the 2020 presidential campaign, U.S. Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden frequently referred to his roots in Scranton, Pennsylvania. Some social media users questioned whether this was the same ""Scranton"" from the U.S. sitcom ""The Office"" and whether Scranton was indeed a real American city. Meanwhile, Biden's political rival, U.S. President Donald Trump, accused Biden of exaggerating his connections to the small Pennsylvania city. This topic arose once again during the final presidential debate of 2020. Twice during the debate, Biden mentioned his small-town roots while discussing middle-class families. Here are transcripts from these two moments: ""Where I come from, in Scranton and Claymont, the people don't live off the stock market. This isn't about me. There's a reason why he's bringing up all this malarkey. There's a reason for it. He doesn't want to talk about the substantive issues. It's not about his family and my family. It's about your family, and your family's hurting badly. If you're making less than, if you're a middle-class",['mortgage'],True,"Voting in the 2020 U.S. Election may be over, but the misinformation keeps on ticking. Never stop fact-checking. Follow our post-election coverage here.This topic came up once again during the final presidential debate of 2020. Twice during the debate, Biden mentioned his small-town roots while talking about middle-class families. Here are transcripts from these two moments:In the past, Trump has pushed an exaggerated version of this claim, saying that Biden ""wasn't born here"" in Scranton.For fans of ""The Office,"" this is the same Scranton that serves as the home of the fictional paper company Dunder Mifflin. The New York Times reported:While the Bidens moved out of Scranton when he was 10 years old, the family maintained some connections to his hometown. In 1987, Jean Finnegan Biden, the former vice president's mother, told the Scrantonian Tribune, ""Scranton's our hometown... we have fond memories of it."" In 2008, Delaware's The News Journal published an article about Biden's hometown friends and his authentic connection to the city: Mon, Sep 1, 2008  Page 10  The News Journal (Wilmington, Delaware)  Newspapers.comIn an interview with GQ, Biden talked about his childhood in Scranton and noted that his family spent most holidays and summers visiting friends in Scranton until he was about 16 years old. Biden also said that a few of his friends from Scranton were in his wedding:"
"John Lewis 'Avoided' Paying Property Taxes on Washington, D.C. Townhouse?","['We found no evidence supporting the claim that Georgia Rep. John Lewis is ""avoiding"" property tax payments.']","On 18 January 2017, web site GotNews posted an article reporting that U.S. Rep. John Lewis, a Georgia Democrat who is perhaps most famous for participating in the Civil Rights Movement at the side of Martin Luther King, Jr., didn't pay property taxes on a $1 million townhouse located in the Capitol Hill neighborhood of Washington, D.C.: article Trump-hating Democratic Georgia congressman John Lewis didnt pay property taxes on his nearly $1 million fancy Washington, D.C. townhouse on Capitol Hill, despite being in Congress for decades, where the salary for a Representative starts at $174,000 per year. Lewis was in the news recently for saying he doesnt see President-elect Donald J. Trump as a legitimate president because of the #RussianHackers Democratic conspiracy theory. The article displayed a table showing annual property tax payments for the home in question and a legal notice from 2010 alerting Lewis of a court action against him (the case was later dismissed). It's unclear how this table supposedly documents that Lewis ""didnt pay property taxes on his nearly $1 million fancy Washington, D.C. townhouse,"" given that it lists tax payments due on the property for each of the last several years and shows nothing owing other than the most recent payment (for the last half of 2016):  Moreover, a different view from the same D.C. Office of Tax and Revenue web site shows that the taxes on Lewis' property have indeed been collected, as due, for each of the last several years:  We contacted Lewis's spokeswoman, Brenda Jones, who told us that he bought the home years before property values soared, that he still owns it, and that he is not behind on his taxes: He pays property taxes annually, just as all homeowners in DC do, and his taxes are paid and up to date. Any report that he avoids paying taxes grasps at straws and is a desperate and unnecessary attempt to tarnish his credibility, instead of debating the substance of issues he has raised. Neither the home in question, nor any properties under Lewis' name, appearedon a database search of properties seized and placed on sale for failure to pay property taxes. database A second item of alleged proof offered by GotNews.com was a 2010 ""notice of pendency of action,"" a legal notice ofcourt actions relating to real property. The document appears to be a notice of a foreclosure hearing. That case, however, was dismissed on 11 February 2011: notice  According to current public records available as of 19 January 2017, Lewis still owns the property, confirming that the case was dropped. It was purchased in 1988 (for an unknown price) and is currently valued at $865,790. An explanation offered by Lewis's office states that in 2010 he nearly lost his home to foreclosure but was able to stop the process: explanation Rep. Lewiss Washington, DC property was purchased decades ago for a fraction of its current value today. As most Washingtonians and any real property expert know, property values in the city have risen exponentially in the last 10 to15 years. Rep. Lewis is delighted that he made a wise investment years ago, and that his propertys value has skyrocketed. He also realizes he likely could not afford to purchase his own home were he seeking to buy it today. In 2010, he was subjected to attempts to foreclose upon his home, like many Americans during that period. He is fortunate that he was able to stop that process, though many Americans, including many hundreds of his constituents, were not as successful. His property taxes are paid and currently up to date. GotNews.  ""Trump-Hating Democratic @RepJohnLewis DIDNT PAY TAXES On His Nearly $1 Million Fancy DC Townhouse.""
18 January 2017. Seipel, Brooke.""Rep. John Lewis: Trump Isn't a 'Legitimate President.'""
The Hill.13 January 2017. Wootson, Cleve R. ""In Feud With John Lewis, Donald Trump Attacked 'One of the Most Respected People in America.'""
The Washington Post.15 January 2017.",['taxes'],NEI,"On 18 January 2017, web site GotNews posted an article reporting that U.S. Rep. John Lewis, a Georgia Democrat who is perhaps most famous for participating in the Civil Rights Movement at the side of Martin Luther King, Jr., didn't pay property taxes on a $1 million townhouse located in the Capitol Hill neighborhood of Washington, D.C.:Neither the home in question, nor any properties under Lewis' name, appearedon a database search of properties seized and placed on sale for failure to pay property taxes.A second item of alleged proof offered by GotNews.com was a 2010 ""notice of pendency of action,"" a legal notice ofcourt actions relating to real property. The document appears to be a notice of a foreclosure hearing. That case, however, was dismissed on 11 February 2011:An explanation offered by Lewis's office states that in 2010 he nearly lost his home to foreclosure but was able to stop the process:"
"Did Deutsche Bank Fund Auschwitz, Trump, Jeffrey Epstein, and ISIS?","['The suggestion that working from home is a ""privilege"" led some on social media to dig into the bank\'s past.']","On Nov. 11, 2020, Bloomberg reported that strategists at Deutsche Bank, one of the largest financial institutions in the world, recommended levying a tax against people who plan to continue working from home, arguing that ""remote workers should pay a tax for the privilege. At least on Twitter, this was a poorly received take. One particularly viral response alleged that the bank ""funded Auschwitz, Donald Trump, Jeffrey Epstein and ISIS."" reported response     As we show below, the tweet is a largely accurate recounting of history, though the assertion that the bank funded ISIS overstates what is publicly known at this time. In 1999, during negotiations to merge with the New York-based Bankers Trust, the Germany-based Deutsche Bank disclosed that it had helped finance the construction of the Nazi death camp Auschwitz. As reported by Reuters at the time, Deutsche Bank's historian, Manfred Pohl, described the bank's loans to companies involved in multiple aspects of Auschwitz, including loans for construction of the camp and its incineration units, as well as to a company involved in the production of the deadly Zyklon-B gas, which the Nazis used to murder millions: reported Manfred Pohl, head of Deutsche Banks historical institute, said newly uncovered documents showed the bank had links with firms that built the camp in Poland. It also had credit links to one company that made incineration units and funded another whose subsidiary made the Zyklon-B gas used in the camp. On examination of credit records, we determined that branches . had credit links to local companies which were active at the construction site . in Auschwitz, Pohl said at a media briefing in Frankfurt. Pohl told reporters that the existence of these loans would have been known to high-ranking managers of the bank. ""It is clear that this was known as high up at the main office in Katowice. It is not certain whether it was known in Berlin,"" Pohl said, though he added these loans would have had to be approved in Berlin to go ahead. Deutsche Bank has had a relationship with U.S. President Donald Trump since 1998. As reported in The New York Times, ""Over the course of two decades, the bank lent him more than $2 billion  so much that by the time he was elected, Deutsche Bank was by far his biggest creditor."" Speaking to Reuters in November 2020, one bank official said that the Trump Organization currently has around $340 million in outstanding debt from the bank: reported Reuters Deutsche Bank has about $340 million in loans outstanding to the Trump Organization, the presidents umbrella group that is currently overseen by his two sons, according to filings made by Trump to the U.S. Office of Government Ethics in July and a senior source within the bank. The three loans, which are against Trump properties and start coming due in two years, are current on payments and personally guaranteed by the president, according to two bank officials. According to that Reuters report, the bank is looking to distance itself from the president moving forward. Their relationship with Trump ""cemented Deutsche Banks reputation as a reckless institution willing to do business with clients nobody else would touch,"" they wrote. ""It has made the company a magnet for prosecutors, regulators and lawmakers hoping to penetrate the presidents opaque financial affairs."" Regardless, Trump's history with Deutsche Bank is factual and well known. Reuters According to a 2019 report by the New York State Department of Financial Services, ""the relationship between Deutsche Bank and Mr. Epstein officially began on August 19, 2013"" and eventually involved his opening and funding ""more than 40 accounts at the Bank."" 2019 report Controversially, they entered into business with Epstein after his 2008 arrest for the solicitation of a minor and after other media revelations about Epstein's alleged trafficking of underage women for sex. Some of these Deutsche Bank accounts were involved in suspicious transactions including, according to The New York Times, ""suspiciously large cash withdrawals and 120 wire transfers totaling $2.65 million to women with Eastern European surnames and people who had been publicly identified as Mr. Epsteins co-conspirators."" according In July 2020, Deutsche Bank agreed to pay $150 million to the New York State Department of Financial Services ""to settle allegations that it maintained weak internal controls, including processing hundreds of transactions for Jeffrey Epstein despite the billionaires troubled history."" The bank has since apologized for its association with Epstein. apologized In the banking world, Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs) are notifications made by financial institutions to the United States government about potentially suspicious or illegal activity. A transaction labeled suspicious in these reports does not necessarily indicate illegal activity, however. SARs issued about transactions involving Deutsche Bank have been used to link them to ISIS in multiple investigations. made In December 2017, BuzzFeed News reported on SARs showing that Deutsche Bank had been engaged in business with a corrupt Cyprus bank named FBME that ""served as a major conduit to terrorism, organized crime, and chemical weapons."" The SARs revealed that ""Deutsche processed hundreds of millions of dollars of suspicious transactions for FBME clients  including a Kremlin-linked network of Russian slush funds funneling money to financiers of the Syrian regime and a businessman trading oil with ISIS."" The reports do not indicate, however, that Deutsche Bank knowingly participated in illegal activity. reported In September 2020, the existence of an even larger trove of SARs obtained by BuzzFeed News and shared with the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) was announced. The collaboration  a project named the FinCEN files  led to hundreds of stories in newsrooms across the world. One story, published by Arab Reporters for Investigative Journalism (ARIJ), identified further transactions that could point to a potential involvement of Deutsche Bank in the movement of funds to, from, and within ISIS held territory. FinCEN files story The files, ARIJ said, ""reveal suspicious money transfers of at least $4 billion flagged by Deutsche Banks US branches and Bank of America to a number of Iraqi banks between June 15, 2014 and June 30, 2015."" Though the files do not indicate which bank branches were used, they reported, ""the transactions were sent and received during the height of the Islamic States reign and its control over several Iraqi bank branches."" The report notes that ""many of the banks in northern Iraq were in areas of IS [Islamic State] influence, and such transfers could be the proceeds of the illicit oil and gas trade that the organisation largely relied on in its areas of control."" said While suggestive of an at least unwitting role for Deutsche Bank in ISIS related finances, these reports are not strong enough evidence to support the statement that Deutsche Bank ""funds"" ISIS. Because there is some truth to the ISIS claim, and because the other assertions are true, we rank the overall claim made in the viral tweet as ""true.""",['credit'],True,"On Nov. 11, 2020, Bloomberg reported that strategists at Deutsche Bank, one of the largest financial institutions in the world, recommended levying a tax against people who plan to continue working from home, arguing that ""remote workers should pay a tax for the privilege. At least on Twitter, this was a poorly received take. One particularly viral response alleged that the bank ""funded Auschwitz, Donald Trump, Jeffrey Epstein and ISIS.""In 1999, during negotiations to merge with the New York-based Bankers Trust, the Germany-based Deutsche Bank disclosed that it had helped finance the construction of the Nazi death camp Auschwitz. As reported by Reuters at the time, Deutsche Bank's historian, Manfred Pohl, described the bank's loans to companies involved in multiple aspects of Auschwitz, including loans for construction of the camp and its incineration units, as well as to a company involved in the production of the deadly Zyklon-B gas, which the Nazis used to murder millions:Deutsche Bank has had a relationship with U.S. President Donald Trump since 1998. As reported in The New York Times, ""Over the course of two decades, the bank lent him more than $2 billion  so much that by the time he was elected, Deutsche Bank was by far his biggest creditor."" Speaking to Reuters in November 2020, one bank official said that the Trump Organization currently has around $340 million in outstanding debt from the bank:According to that Reuters report, the bank is looking to distance itself from the president moving forward. Their relationship with Trump ""cemented Deutsche Banks reputation as a reckless institution willing to do business with clients nobody else would touch,"" they wrote. ""It has made the company a magnet for prosecutors, regulators and lawmakers hoping to penetrate the presidents opaque financial affairs."" Regardless, Trump's history with Deutsche Bank is factual and well known.According to a 2019 report by the New York State Department of Financial Services, ""the relationship between Deutsche Bank and Mr. Epstein officially began on August 19, 2013"" and eventually involved his opening and funding ""more than 40 accounts at the Bank.""Controversially, they entered into business with Epstein after his 2008 arrest for the solicitation of a minor and after other media revelations about Epstein's alleged trafficking of underage women for sex. Some of these Deutsche Bank accounts were involved in suspicious transactions including, according to The New York Times, ""suspiciously large cash withdrawals and 120 wire transfers totaling $2.65 million to women with Eastern European surnames and people who had been publicly identified as Mr. Epsteins co-conspirators.""In July 2020, Deutsche Bank agreed to pay $150 million to the New York State Department of Financial Services ""to settle allegations that it maintained weak internal controls, including processing hundreds of transactions for Jeffrey Epstein despite the billionaires troubled history."" The bank has since apologized for its association with Epstein.In the banking world, Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs) are notifications made by financial institutions to the United States government about potentially suspicious or illegal activity. A transaction labeled suspicious in these reports does not necessarily indicate illegal activity, however. SARs issued about transactions involving Deutsche Bank have been used to link them to ISIS in multiple investigations.In December 2017, BuzzFeed News reported on SARs showing that Deutsche Bank had been engaged in business with a corrupt Cyprus bank named FBME that ""served as a major conduit to terrorism, organized crime, and chemical weapons."" The SARs revealed that ""Deutsche processed hundreds of millions of dollars of suspicious transactions for FBME clients  including a Kremlin-linked network of Russian slush funds funneling money to financiers of the Syrian regime and a businessman trading oil with ISIS."" The reports do not indicate, however, that Deutsche Bank knowingly participated in illegal activity.In September 2020, the existence of an even larger trove of SARs obtained by BuzzFeed News and shared with the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) was announced. The collaboration  a project named the FinCEN files  led to hundreds of stories in newsrooms across the world. One story, published by Arab Reporters for Investigative Journalism (ARIJ), identified further transactions that could point to a potential involvement of Deutsche Bank in the movement of funds to, from, and within ISIS held territory.The files, ARIJ said, ""reveal suspicious money transfers of at least $4 billion flagged by Deutsche Banks US branches and Bank of America to a number of Iraqi banks between June 15, 2014 and June 30, 2015."" Though the files do not indicate which bank branches were used, they reported, ""the transactions were sent and received during the height of the Islamic States reign and its control over several Iraqi bank branches."" The report notes that ""many of the banks in northern Iraq were in areas of IS [Islamic State] influence, and such transfers could be the proceeds of the illicit oil and gas trade that the organisation largely relied on in its areas of control."""
Did President Trump Sign an Executive Order Giving Veterans Free Care at Any Hospital?,['A viral Facebook post exaggerated efforts to give military veterans affordable and accessible health care.'],"In March 2018, a Facebook post deriding ""Trump haters"" and touting one of the president's accomplishments  an executive order that grants veterans free health care at any hospital in the United States  started going viral: post   For all the Trump haters; today President Trump signed an executive order allowing our veterans to get 100% medical bills paid at hospitals other than a V.A. hospital. This will save the lives of many American service men and women who have been on V.A. waiting lists, some for years and many dying while waiting. Now they can go to ANY hospital they want... This is how our veterans SHOULD be treated!!! Thanks President Trump!!! There are a number of problems with this Facebook post, starting with the claim that President Donald Trump signed an executive order ""today"" (5 March 2018). A list of Presidential actions (including executive orders) available on the White House's web site shows that no executive order at all, whether for veteran's health care or anything else, was signed on this date.  list The language in this post seems to be referring to the Veterans Choice Act, which was signed into law by President Obama in August 2014. President Trump signed a bill to extend this program a few months before it was set to expire in August 2017: Veterans Choice Act signed signed President Donald Trump extended the Veterans Choice Act on Wednesday to set the stage for a push in Congress to expand the program and allow more access to private care for veterans. Flanked by veterans at an Oval Office ceremony, the president signed the bill to extend the Choice program, which was to expire on Aug. 7, and allow the expenditure of the remaining $950 million in the program. This was not an executive order; furthermore, the Veterans Access, Choice, and Accountability Act of 2014 did not accomplish all of the things set out in this Facebook post, such as grant free health care at any hospital. Veterans Access, Choice, and Accountability Act of 2014  The Veterans Choice Program expanded the ""availability of medical services for eligible Veterans with community providers,"" but it did not grant veterans the opportunity to receive completely free health care at any hospital of their choosing. A fact sheet provided by the Department of Veterans Affairs laid out the criteria for veterans to seek health care outside established providers: Veterans Choice Program fact sheet As directed by the Choice Act, VA will administer the Veterans Choice Fund to implement the Veterans Choice Program (the Program). The Program will operate for 3 years or until the Fund is exhausted. The Program will provide Veterans who were enrolled as of August 1, 2014 or eligible to enroll as a recently discharged combat Veteran with a Veterans Choice Card, and allow those Veterans who are unable to schedule an appointment within 30 days of their preferred date or the clinically appropriate date, or on the basis of their place of residence to elect to receive care from eligible non-VA health care entities or providers. This is separate from VAs existing program providing Veterans care outside of the VA system. Eligible non-VA entities or providers must enter into agreements with VA to furnish care, must maintain the same or similar credentials and licenses as VA providers, and must submit to VA a copy of any medical records related to care and services provided under the Program for inclusion in the Veterans VA electronic medical record. The VA elaborated on the criteria that veterans must meet in order to seek treatment at outside providers. Even then, the choice of hospitals is limited to the facilities that have agreed to participate in the program. Furthermore, this bill does not include a provision stating that it covered all of the health care provided at these facilities. Some veterans may be eligible for free health care services, but most are required to pay for a portion of their treatment: elaborated eligible While many Veterans qualify for free healthcare services based on a VA compensable service-connected condition or other special eligibilities, most Veterans are required to complete a financial assessment or means test at the time of enrollment to determine if they qualify for free health care services. Veterans whose income exceed VA income limits as well as those who choose not to complete the financial assessment at the time of enrollment, must agree to pay required copays for health care services to become eligible for VA healthcare services.  The future of the program is uncertain, however. Critics of the program say that it's too expensive, and that it could eventually lead to downsizing. Critics Hicks, Josh.  ""A Simple Summary of the New VA Bill.""
  The Washington Post.  29 July 2014. Jackson, David.  ""Obama Signs Veterans Health Care Bill.""
  USA Today.  7 August 2014. Rein, Lisa.  ""Its Killing the Agency: Ugly Power Struggle Paralyzes Trumps Plan to Fix Veterans Care.""
  The Washington Post.  9 March 2018. Sisk, Richard.  ""Trump Signs Bill to Extend Veterans Choice Program.""
  Military.com.  19 April 2017.",['income'],False,"In March 2018, a Facebook post deriding ""Trump haters"" and touting one of the president's accomplishments  an executive order that grants veterans free health care at any hospital in the United States  started going viral:There are a number of problems with this Facebook post, starting with the claim that President Donald Trump signed an executive order ""today"" (5 March 2018). A list of Presidential actions (including executive orders) available on the White House's web site shows that no executive order at all, whether for veteran's health care or anything else, was signed on this date. The language in this post seems to be referring to the Veterans Choice Act, which was signed into law by President Obama in August 2014. President Trump signed a bill to extend this program a few months before it was set to expire in August 2017:This was not an executive order; furthermore, the Veterans Access, Choice, and Accountability Act of 2014 did not accomplish all of the things set out in this Facebook post, such as grant free health care at any hospital.The Veterans Choice Program expanded the ""availability of medical services for eligible Veterans with community providers,"" but it did not grant veterans the opportunity to receive completely free health care at any hospital of their choosing. A fact sheet provided by the Department of Veterans Affairs laid out the criteria for veterans to seek health care outside established providers:The VA elaborated on the criteria that veterans must meet in order to seek treatment at outside providers. Even then, the choice of hospitals is limited to the facilities that have agreed to participate in the program. Furthermore, this bill does not include a provision stating that it covered all of the health care provided at these facilities. Some veterans may be eligible for free health care services, but most are required to pay for a portion of their treatment:The future of the program is uncertain, however. Critics of the program say that it's too expensive, and that it could eventually lead to downsizing."
Roof Despair Fund,[''],"FACT CHECK: HasCharleston shooting suspectDylann Roof's defense fund received more than $4 million in donations from supporters?  Claim: Charleston shooting suspect Dylann Roof's defense fund received more than $4 million in donations from supporters.   Example:   [Collected via e-mail and Twitter, June 2015] Is there any truth to this article at this time. Of course I am confident it is a matter of time before this happens.  Origins: On 25 June 2015, the websiteNewsWatch33 published an article titled ""Charleston Church Shooter Dylann Roof Receives $4 Million in Donations from Supporters."" According to that article, a group called Citizens For White Rights somehow managed to quietly drum up the exorbitant sum of $4 million in donations for an accused racially motivated mass shooter in just over a week, without any other media outlets taking notice: As he waits for his trial, supporters of Dylann Roof across America have banded together to fund raise for Roof's legal protection. According to the most recent information provided by the Citizens For White Rights, who is managing the account receiving the donations, they've raised a little over $4 Million for Roof's legal fees and possible bond money. Michael Lawson, attorney for Citizens For White Rights released this statement Our organization wants to ensure that Dylann Roof receives fair and equal treatment under the laws of our nation. With all of the publicity this recent incident is receiving along with the Black Organizations looking to make our client guilty, it's important that Dylann Roof is protected. The donations we are receiving will ensure his protection as we wait for trial as well as when the trial begins. The following screenshot was appended to the page, purportedly showing the balance of a fund raised for Roof's defense: However,this article is nothing but fiction; and its source, NewsWatch33, is a fake news site that coincidentally appeared on the scene just after the very similar NewsWatch28 fake news site apparently shut down  likely a switch intended to keep its operators one step ahead of Facebook's clampdown on purveyors of hoaxes. NewsWatch28 clampdown A Google search for ""Citizens for White Rights"" turns up no organization by that name. While it's possible (maybe even likely) that some donors have contributed money for Dylann Roof's defense, we've found no evidence of any extant campaign openly soliciting such funds. search Last updated:  25June 2015 Originally published:  25June 2015",['funds'],False,"However,this article is nothing but fiction; and its source, NewsWatch33, is a fake news site that coincidentally appeared on the scene just after the very similar NewsWatch28 fake news site apparently shut down  likely a switch intended to keep its operators one step ahead of Facebook's clampdown on purveyors of hoaxes.A Google search for ""Citizens for White Rights"" turns up no organization by that name. While it's possible (maybe even likely) that some donors have contributed money for Dylann Roof's defense, we've found no evidence of any extant campaign openly soliciting such funds."
Jay-Z and Beyonce Buy Confederate Flag?,[''],"FACT CHECK: Are musicians Jay-Z and Beyonce attempting to buy up the rights to the Confederate flag to prevent its further use?  Claim:  Musicians Jay-Z and Beyonce are attempting to buy the rights to the Confederate flag to prevent its further use.    Origins: On 7 July 2015 the web site Newswatch33 published an article titled ""Jay-Z and Beyonce Attempt to Buy Rights to Confederate Flag to Prevent Further Use,"" which reported that:  article According to Ralph Hammerstein, an attorney representing Shawn Jay-Z Carter and Beyonce Knowles-Carter, the couple is attempting to purchase rights to the Confederate flag to prevent further use of the flag on merchandise. According to Hammerstein, the couple is in the works of purchasing all resell rights to the confederate flag. My clients are adamant about purchasing the rights to the Rebel Confederate flag. They have expressed deep concern regarding the flag and how it is tearing apart our nation. Mr. and Mrs. Carter wants to assist in the abolishment of the flag by purchasing the resell rights to the Confederate flag. If my clients are successful, purchasing the rights would mean that anyone who wants to produce merchandise using the Confederate flag would have to get permission from Mr. and Mrs. Carter. My clients have expressed that they are not looking to profit from the use of the flag but rather prevent any further use of the flag on merchandise, according to Hammerstein. This story was nothing more than yet another bit of fake news from NewsWatch33, a web site that emerged on social media just after the very similar NewsWatch28 fake news site was shuttered (possibly as part of a plot to skirt Facebook's crackdown on fake news articles). Before publishing the above-linked article, the site agitated Facebook and Twitter users by fabricating tales about a white supremacist group that supposedly raised $4 million for the defense of Charleston shooting suspect Dylann Roof and about a girl who was supposedly electrocuted by iPhone ear buds. NewsWatch28 crackdown $4 million electrocuted This story echoed other (fictional) urban legends about prominent entertainment figures attempting to buy up the rights to cultural symbols associated with racism in order the keep them out of the public view, such as one about comedian Bill Cosby's supposedly having purchased the rights to the Our Gang/Little Rascals film shorts, or CNN founder Ted Turner's allegedly having snared the rights to The Dukes of Hazzard television series  both with the intent of withholding them from any future broadcasting airings. Our Gang/Little Rascals In this case, however, the rights to the symbol in question could not be bought up by any party, as no one holds a legitimate trademark to the design of the Confederate flag. trademark Last updated:  8July 2015 Originally published: 8July 2015",['profit'],False,"Origins: On 7 July 2015 the web site Newswatch33 published an article titled ""Jay-Z and Beyonce Attempt to Buy Rights to Confederate Flag to Prevent Further Use,"" which reported that: This story was nothing more than yet another bit of fake news from NewsWatch33, a web site that emerged on social media just after the very similar NewsWatch28 fake news site was shuttered (possibly as part of a plot to skirt Facebook's crackdown on fake news articles). Before publishing the above-linked article, the site agitated Facebook and Twitter users by fabricating tales about a white supremacist group that supposedly raised $4 million for the defense of Charleston shooting suspect Dylann Roof and about a girl who was supposedly electrocuted by iPhone ear buds.This story echoed other (fictional) urban legends about prominent entertainment figures attempting to buy up the rights to cultural symbols associated with racism in order the keep them out of the public view, such as one about comedian Bill Cosby's supposedly having purchased the rights to the Our Gang/Little Rascals film shorts, or CNN founder Ted Turner's allegedly having snared the rights to The Dukes of Hazzard television series  both with the intent of withholding them from any future broadcasting airings.In this case, however, the rights to the symbol in question could not be bought up by any party, as no one holds a legitimate trademark to the design of the Confederate flag."
Says state lawmakers have voted to spend virtually all of the Rainy Day Fund four times since the funds creation.,[],"Appealing unsuccessfully to spend more money from the states so-called Rainy Day Fund, state Sen. Rodney Ellis hearkened to legislative history, saying in floor debate May 16: Members, this legislature has voted to use virtually all of the Rainy Day Fund four times since its creation in the late 1980s. The sad truth is that Texans and the (fund) are being held hostage to politics.Back story: GOP Gov. Rick Perry has said hes agreeable with taking about $3.1 billion from the fund, formally called the Economic Stabilization Fund, to help cover the state budget that runs through August. But Perry and many Republicans oppose tapping the fund, which is fed by state oil and gas oil production taxes, for the 2012-13 budget. Perry contends it needs to be protected in case of natural disasters.Democrats, noting the projected multi-billion-dollar shortfall in state revenue needed to maintain current programs, say the current dire circumstances justify taking more from the fund.And is Ellis correct about past legislatures voting four times to virtually empty the fund?Jeremy Warren, Elliss spokesman, said the senator relied on a report by the Center for Public Policy Priorities, a liberal-leaning think tank that advocates for programs serving the poor. To help balance the 2012-13 budget, the center has urged lawmakers to use the fund, which is projected by State Comptroller Susan Combs to have a balance of $9.7 billion by the end of August 2013, or about $6.6 billion if lawmakers stick with applying $3.1 billion from the fund to this years deficit .The centers Feb. 21reportsays: In 1991, the Legislature spent the funds entire balance ($28.8million) on public schools, and in 1993, spent the entire balance ($197 million) for criminal justice.In 2003, to deal with the last economic downturn, the Legislature appropriated $1.3 billion from the Rainy Day Fundalmost every penny of the balance the (state) comptroller forecast through 2005, the report says. Again in 2005, the Legislature appropriated $1.9 billion in Rainy Day funds, using roughly half for 2005 shortfalls, and the other half for 2006-07, spending almost all the $2 billion that was forecast to be available.Next, we confirmed the amounts of rainy-day money that lawmakers could have spent in each of these instances by reviewing biennial revenue forecasts made by respective state comptrollers. Finally, the Legislative Reference Library guided us to a Feb. 3reportby the House Research Organization, a non-partisan arm of the Texas House, specifying how much money the 1991, 1993, 2003 and 2005 Legislatures appropriated from the fund.Punch line: The centers recap is accurate.We rate Elliss statement True.","['State Budget', 'Texas']",True,"Appealing unsuccessfully to spend more money from the states so-called Rainy Day Fund, state Sen. Rodney Ellis hearkened to legislative history, saying in floor debate May 16: Members, this legislature has voted to use virtually all of the Rainy Day Fund four times since its creation in the late 1980s. The sad truth is that Texans and the (fund) are being held hostage to politics.Back story: GOP Gov. Rick Perry has said hes agreeable with taking about $3.1 billion from the fund, formally called the Economic Stabilization Fund, to help cover the state budget that runs through August. But Perry and many Republicans oppose tapping the fund, which is fed by state oil and gas oil production taxes, for the 2012-13 budget. Perry contends it needs to be protected in case of natural disasters.Democrats, noting the projected multi-billion-dollar shortfall in state revenue needed to maintain current programs, say the current dire circumstances justify taking more from the fund.And is Ellis correct about past legislatures voting four times to virtually empty the fund?Jeremy Warren, Elliss spokesman, said the senator relied on a report by the Center for Public Policy Priorities, a liberal-leaning think tank that advocates for programs serving the poor. To help balance the 2012-13 budget, the center has urged lawmakers to use the fund, which is projected by State Comptroller Susan Combs to have a balance of $9.7 billion by the end of August 2013, or about $6.6 billion if lawmakers stick with applying $3.1 billion from the fund to this years deficit .The centers Feb. 21reportsays: In 1991, the Legislature spent the funds entire balance ($28.8million) on public schools, and in 1993, spent the entire balance ($197 million) for criminal justice.In 2003, to deal with the last economic downturn, the Legislature appropriated $1.3 billion from the Rainy Day Fundalmost every penny of the balance the (state) comptroller forecast through 2005, the report says. Again in 2005, the Legislature appropriated $1.9 billion in Rainy Day funds, using roughly half for 2005 shortfalls, and the other half for 2006-07, spending almost all the $2 billion that was forecast to be available.Next, we confirmed the amounts of rainy-day money that lawmakers could have spent in each of these instances by reviewing biennial revenue forecasts made by respective state comptrollers. Finally, the Legislative Reference Library guided us to a Feb. 3reportby the House Research Organization, a non-partisan arm of the Texas House, specifying how much money the 1991, 1993, 2003 and 2005 Legislatures appropriated from the fund.Punch line: The centers recap is accurate.We rate Elliss statement True."
Three Former Presidents Mocked Trump on Twitter?,"['A satire site published doctored images that appeared to show former presidents Obama, Bush, and Clinton mocking President Trump\'s tweet about winning the election on his ""first try.""']","In January 2018, shortly after the publication of the book *Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House*, which suggested that President Trump was unfit for office, the President took to Twitter to defend his mental stability: ""Actually, throughout my life, my two greatest assets have been mental stability and being, like, really smart. Crooked Hillary Clinton also played these cards very hard and, as everyone knows, went down in flames. I went from VERY successful businessman to top T.V. star... to President of the United States (on my first try). I think that would qualify as not smart, but genius... and a very stable genius at that!"" Trump's tweets sparked a flurry of political punditry and provided fodder for comedians. On January 8, 2018, the Facebook page ""Politicked"" published an image purportedly showing former presidents Obama, Bush, and Clinton mocking Trump's claim that he became President of the United States on his first try. Politicked describes itself as a ""left-wing political satire"" group that creates its own ""original and biting memes."" The images of these purported tweets are fake. We searched the Twitter timelines for Obama, Bush, and Clinton and did not find any of these messages. It is also unlikely that the three former presidents posted and subsequently deleted the tweets. Messages sent from President Obama and Clinton are routinely retweeted thousands of times (Bush hasn't used the service since 2010), yet we found no retweets linking back to the original messages. Furthermore, it would be highly unlikely for these three former presidents to coordinate a social media joke simply to mock President Trump, only to get cold feet and delete their posts without being detected by a mainstream media source. It is true that Obama, Clinton, and Bush all won presidential elections on their first attempts. Trump's claim that he won the presidency on his first try, however, is a matter of debate regarding how serious one considers his first attempt. He ran for the nomination of the Reform Party in 2000 and appeared on the primary ballot in two states, but Trump withdrew from the race before the election. Although the 2000 campaign was the only time Trump actually entered any primary races prior to 2016, the real estate mogul toyed with the idea so often that his political aspirations found their way onto the popular cartoon show *The Simpsons*.",['asset'],False," Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 6, 2018 Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 6, 2018Trump's tweets sparked a flurry of political punditry (and fodder for comedians). On 8 January 2018, the Facebook page ""Politicked"" published an image purportedly showing former presidents Obama, Bush, and Clinton mocking Trump's claim that he became President of the United States on his first try:We searched the Twitter timelines for Obama, Bush, and Clinton and didn't find any of these messages. It's also unlikely that the three former presidents posted and subsequently deleted the tweets. Messages sent from President Obama and Clinton are routinely retweeted thousands of times (Bush hasn't used the service since 2010) yet we found no retweets linking back to the original messages. It is true that Obama, Clinton, and Bush all won presidential elections on their first attempts. Trump's claim that he won the presidency on his first try, however, is a matter of debate (and of how serious one considers his first attempt). He ran for the nomination of the Reform Party in 2000 and appeared on the primary ballot in two states. Trump withdrew from the race before the election.Although the 2000 campaign was the only time Trump actually entered any primary races prior to 2016, the real estate mogul toyed with the idea so often that his political aspirations found their way onto the popular cartoon show The Simpsons. "
Did Hillary Clinton Utilize Hand Gestures to Manipulate the Debate?,['Conspiracy theory holds that Hillary Clinton and moderator Lester Holt rigged the first presidential debate by communicating via hand signals.'],"Just when we thought we'd had our fill of debate-related conspiracies, a new one came along, this one in the form of a video purportedly documenting that Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton and moderator Lester Holt had colluded to rig the first presidential debate through a system of secret hand signals: Scratching ones face is one of the oldest signals in the book. You can be sure if this was a blackjack table and the house noticed a player making similar signals to a dealer theyd be investigated.  When the alt-right web site True Pundit shared the video, they did so along with the additional claim that Clinton had never made similar gestures in previous debates, campaign appearances, or speeches: Before critics view this video and scream Conspiracy, True Pundit cross referenced Clintons speeches, campaign appearances and her 2008 debate performances against President Obama. According to that analysis, Clinton never previously used these hand motions to supposedly scratch her face. In fact, she rarely touches her face at all. (So, you haters can save the trouble of instructing people to remove their tin-foil hats.) The above-displayed video does not provide any evidence that Hillary Clinton and Lester Holt communicated via hand signals so that Clinton could indicate to Holt when she wanted him to call on her so she could get in a ""zinger."" The creator of the video simply strung together several unrelated events  Clinton scratching her face, Holt making a comment, Clinton replying to Trump  and then claimed that they were somehow connected to a furtive signaling plot without providing any proof. But before we dig deeper into the video, let's look at the accompanying claims about it from True Pundit and Infowars. Hillary Clinton has been in the public eye for decades. She was the First Lady of Arkansas in 1983, the First Lady of the United States in 1993, a U.S. Senator in 2001, a presidential candidate in 2008, Secretary of State in 2009, and and a presidential candidate again in 2016. It is simply ridiculous to claim that Clinton never once touched her face during a speech, campaign rally, or debate:  Clinton touched her face during speech   It should be noted that Hillary Clinton was not the only one making these gestures during the first presidential debate:   It should also be noted that (as shown in the image at the head of this page) the two candidates were physically separated on the stage, and therefore in order to catch the supposed ""signals"" from Hillary Clinton, moderator Lester Holt  who didn't have the advantage of the split-screen shot presented to television viewers  would had to have been rather obviously watching her even when she was not speaking. If Donald Trump truly ""dominated the early part of the debate"" but then lost his advantage, the more logical explanation is that his opponent's strategy to throw him off his game simply worked as expected: strategy The quiet Mr. Trump took the first shift, presenting a general-election version of his forceful campaign persona minus the bluster, insults and defenses of his anatomy. He pushed his case firmly, hitting his campaigns focal points on the economy and trade. defenses of his anatomy But it didnt take long for Mrs. Clinton to find the other Mr. Trump under that thin second skin. Her needling began immediately. She referred to her opponent as Donald, where he pointedly called her Secretary Clinton. (Yes, is that O.K.? he asked at his first reference to her.) She referred to his starting a business with a $14 million loan from his father, which Mr. Trump preferred to call a very small loan. The digs targeted Mr. Trumps status and founding mythos, triggering his image-protection reflex. He became combative and rattled, letting his opponent lead him down rhetorical detours (at one point he revived an old feud with Rosie ODonnell) knowing that he would follow his ingrained ABCs: always be counterpunching. It was Tony Soprano vs. Dr. Melfi, TVs biggest antihero blustering against the woman who had gotten inside his head. This conspiracy theory also doesn't account for the much more obvious approach that if Hillary Clinton really wanted to say something during the course of the debate when it wasn't her turn to speak, she could simply have interrupted her opponent rather than invoking secret hand signals and waiting to be called upon by the moderator  as she did in fact do multiple times ... while Donald Trump also did so, but three times as often. three times",['economy'],False,"Hillary Clinton has been in the public eye for decades. She was the First Lady of Arkansas in 1983, the First Lady of the United States in 1993, a U.S. Senator in 2001, a presidential candidate in 2008, Secretary of State in 2009, and and a presidential candidate again in 2016. It is simply ridiculous to claim that Clinton never once touched her face during a speech, campaign rally, or debate: If Donald Trump truly ""dominated the early part of the debate"" but then lost his advantage, the more logical explanation is that his opponent's strategy to throw him off his game simply worked as expected:The quiet Mr. Trump took the first shift, presenting a general-election version of his forceful campaign persona minus the bluster, insults and defenses of his anatomy. He pushed his case firmly, hitting his campaigns focal points on the economy and trade.This conspiracy theory also doesn't account for the much more obvious approach that if Hillary Clinton really wanted to say something during the course of the debate when it wasn't her turn to speak, she could simply have interrupted her opponent rather than invoking secret hand signals and waiting to be called upon by the moderator  as she did in fact do multiple times ... while Donald Trump also did so, but three times as often."
More astronauts have been to the moon than farmers who paid the inheritance tax in 2013.,[],"Liberal comedian Bill Maher made an out-of-this-world comparison to poke a hole in the Republican argument that the estate tax threatens the livelihoods of family farmers. Of 5,000 Americans who paid the estate tax in 2013, 20 farmers paid it, Maher said on his April 17, 2015, show. Twenty-four Americans have been to the moon. More astronauts have been to the moon than farmers who paid the inheritance tax in 2013. There obviously is no relation between the number of farmers paying the estate tax and the number of Americans who went to the moon, but as a point of trivia, Mahers claim is an intriguing one. A reader asked us to do the magic that you do, which is determining whether Mahers point is accurate. One small step for fact-checkers ... Caveat No 1: Maher is using the number of astronauts who have been to the vicinity of the moon, not just the number of moonwalkers. Twelve Americans have walked the moons surface over six Apollo missions, starting with Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin planting an American flag in 1969. (If youre not sure about whether the lunar landing really happened, you wont like this fact-check, but you may enjoy these bona fidemoon misconceptions.) Add another 12 American astronauts who orbited the moon but did not walk on it, and you get  24. NASA chief historian William Barry said the 24 Americans is a solid figure in that it doesnt double count Americans who made more than one lunar trip. There were several astronauts who flew to the Moon and orbited it on one mission and then were lucky enough to go back and land on it on a later mission, Barry said. Jim Lovell, for instance, made two trips to the moon in Apollo 8 and Apollo 13, but he never walked on it. (In this Smithsonian picture, Lovell and his crew emerge from the U.S.S. Iwo Jima after landing the spacecraftApollo 13in the South Pacific.) One giant leap for the truth What Maher calls the inheritance tax and what Republicans call the death tax is more accurately described as the estate tax. Some wealthy families face this tax when they pass on assets (cash, land, homes, stocks, etc.) to heirs after death. Most estates do not owe estate taxes. It affects about 5,500 Americans whose estates exceed the exemption limit of$5.43 million per person. If the estate is worth more than that, an heir could pay a tax rate up to 40 percent on the value of the estate above that limit. Even though it doesnt affect all that many people, it brings in big bucks for the government. Repealing it would cost about $270 billion over the next decade, according to the congressional Joint Committee on Taxation. In the week ahead of Mahers April 17 show, House Republicans approveda planto eliminate the estate tax, saying it can prove devastating to families  forcing them to sell land, lay off workers, and even shut down entirely. So did this tax really affect just 20 farmers in 2013, as Maher said? The number comes from an estimate by the Tax Policy Center, a joint venture of the Urban Institute and Brookings Institution. Tax Policy Center economists wanted to get an idea of how the tax would affect estates, including those with farm and business assets, in 2013. All of their numbers are estimates based on the centersestate tax model. They defined family farms and businesses as estates having farm or business assets less than $5 million and half of the estate. These farms and businesses had taxable returns and total assets between $5 million and up $10 million. Its a definition that hones in on small farms and business  the most relevant in responding to the myth that many small farms and small businesses must be liquidated to pay estate tax, said Brandon DeBot, a research assistant at the federal fiscal policy division of the liberal Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. Using the Tax Policy Centers model, an estimated 20 small farms and small businesses would have had to pay the estate tax in 2013, amounting to a total of $6.9 million of tax with an average tax rate of 4.9 percent. So thats not just small farms, its small farmsandsmall businesses, which might not be a farm. Caveat No. 2: The number of farms and businesses is probably not exactly 20, as it is an estimate rounded to the nearest multiple of 10. That means the number is anywhere from 16-24. Caveat No. 3: Maher talked about family farmers, addressing the Republican argument about the plight of farmers who could lose their livelihood because of the estate tax. But family farms can be big farms, and thats where things get more complicated. Maher set up his comparison by discussing the plight of family farmers, but then later dropped the word family. That one word is important. The Tax Policy Center broadened the scope to include all farm and business estates, regardless of size, with at least half of their value from farm business activity. By that method, 120 farm and business estates would have had to pay the estate tax in 2013, said Roberton Williams, a Tax Policy Center fellow who worked on the model. Alan D. Viard, a resident scholar at the conservative American Enterprise Institute who studies federal tax and budget policy, says the the estate tax has a lot of flaws, but the effect on farmers is just not the right grounds to criticize this tax. Mahers point was strong, he said. In 2001, House Republicans voted to repeal the death tax.New York TimesreporterDavid Cay Johnston scoured1999 IRS filings, phoned the American Farm Bureau Federation, and interviewed farmers in effort to find examples of working farmers who lost their farms because of estate taxes. He found none, writing that the reality of who is bitten by the estate tax is different from the mythology, as the overwhelming majority of beneficiaries are the heirs of people who made their fortunes through their businesses and investments in securities and real estate. And in 2001, the estate tax wasmore robust than it is now, with a lower exemption level of $675,000 and a higher top tax rate of 55 percent. It is a small number, bottom line, Williams said. Theyre going to be the exception rather than the rule. Our ruling Maher compared 24 American astronauts who have been to the moon to 20 farmers whom he said were the only ones to pay the estate tax. His count for astronauts who have been to the moon is reasonable, counting both American moonwalkers and those who have flown in its orbit during various Apollo missions. The larger point about only 20 farmers paying the estate tax is a little more complicated. A 2013nonpartisan study found 20 small farmsandsmall businesses faced the estate tax in 2013. Maher referred to family farms in setting up his claim. Saying small farms would have been better. And he dropped family in later references. Experts said Maher generally could have been more careful in his wording, but that his bit of trivia largely checks out, as does his point that the estate tax affectsvery few small farmers. We rate his claim Mostly True. https://www.sharethefacts.co/share/2edf78cd-008c-408e-ae35-939322661e70","['Taxes', 'PunditFact']",True,"Twelve Americans have walked the moons surface over six Apollo missions, starting with Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin planting an American flag in 1969. (If youre not sure about whether the lunar landing really happened, you wont like this fact-check, but you may enjoy these bona fidemoon misconceptions.)Jim Lovell, for instance, made two trips to the moon in Apollo 8 and Apollo 13, but he never walked on it. (In this Smithsonian picture, Lovell and his crew emerge from the U.S.S. Iwo Jima after landing the spacecraftApollo 13in the South Pacific.)Most estates do not owe estate taxes. It affects about 5,500 Americans whose estates exceed the exemption limit of$5.43 million per person. If the estate is worth more than that, an heir could pay a tax rate up to 40 percent on the value of the estate above that limit.In the week ahead of Mahers April 17 show, House Republicans approveda planto eliminate the estate tax, saying it can prove devastating to families  forcing them to sell land, lay off workers, and even shut down entirely.Tax Policy Center economists wanted to get an idea of how the tax would affect estates, including those with farm and business assets, in 2013. All of their numbers are estimates based on the centersestate tax model.In 2001, House Republicans voted to repeal the death tax.New York TimesreporterDavid Cay Johnston scoured1999 IRS filings, phoned the American Farm Bureau Federation, and interviewed farmers in effort to find examples of working farmers who lost their farms because of estate taxes. He found none, writing that the reality of who is bitten by the estate tax is different from the mythology, as the overwhelming majority of beneficiaries are the heirs of people who made their fortunes through their businesses and investments in securities and real estate.And in 2001, the estate tax wasmore robust than it is now, with a lower exemption level of $675,000 and a higher top tax rate of 55 percent.Experts said Maher generally could have been more careful in his wording, but that his bit of trivia largely checks out, as does his point that the estate tax affectsvery few small farmers. We rate his claim Mostly True.https://www.sharethefacts.co/share/2edf78cd-008c-408e-ae35-939322661e70"
Did Biden Set US 'Back 50 Years' on Energy Independence Progress?,['It is true that 2019 was the first year since 1957 in which the U.S. was energy independent. '],"The conservative group Turning Point USA created a meme that pushes a sophomoric and factually lacking political argument. The meme in question, watermarked with the logo of Turning Point USA's political action committee (Turning Point Action), makes two claims. First, it states that the year 2019 was the first year the United States achieved energy independence since 1957. Second, it argues that ""in only ten days"" Joe Biden ""sent us back 50 years,"" implying policies enacted in the first 10 days of his administration reversed American energy independence: political action committee   Turning Point Action's graphic, it bears highlighting, makes no reference to the year 2020, despite the fact that President Donald Trump was in office that year. The claim about 2019 being the first year in which the U.S. achieved energy independence since 1957 is true  so long as we understand what the term ""energy independence"" really means. It means that the U.S. produced more energy than it consumed. Most importantly, from an energy security perspective, energy independence does not mean that the U.S. doesn't import foreign oil or isn't fundamentally reliant on foreign sources of energy. is true In 2019, according to data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), the U.S. imported 9.1 million barrels per day (MMb/d) of oil from about 90 countries, though at the same time it also exported 8.5 MMb/d of oil to about 190 countries. By email, Zeke Hausfather, a climate scientist and energy systems analyst at the Breakthrough Institute, explained that ""our local production does not meaningfully insulate us from potential future global oil price shocks.""  according Zeke Hausfather The energy independence experienced by the U.S. in 2019 was driven by record levels of total fossil fuel exports from the U.S. That record was set as part of a long-term trend dating back to 2006 and 2008, according to the EIA: according Domestic crude oil production has increased since 2008 and natural gas production has increased since 2006. The increases in crude oil production and the easing of restrictions on crude oil exports in December 2015 have contributed to increases in crude oil exports. Increases in natural gas production along with increases in liquefied natural gas (LNG) export capacity have contributed to increases in natural gas exports in recent years. In 2011, the United States became a net exporter of petroleum products for the first time since at least 1949. In 2017, the United States became a net exporter of natural gas for the first time since the late 1950s. In 2019, U.S. total annual energy exports exceeded total annual energy imports for the first time in 67 years, and the United States became a net total energy exporter.   The Turning Point meme disregards entirely the existence of the year 2020. The omission of 2020 masks not only a decline in U.S. fossil fuel production that occurred, it also conceals a larger truth about U.S. presidents and the global energy market: Neither they nor their policies have a significant effect on the market compared to other global factors. a decline A significant factor in allowing the U.S. to increase its energy exports has been the rising cost of crude oil globally. Technological innovations like fracking and horizontal drilling have, in recent years, allowed the U.S. to exploit fossil fuel reserves that were previously inaccessible, but these technologies add cost. A high-cost, high-demand energy economy  like the one present during the record-setting year of 2019  benefits the U.S. energy sector because it makes American fossil fuel exports financially viable. The flip side is that the viability of U.S. exports depends in large measure on the going rate for a barrel of oil. If the cost is too low, U.S. drilling operations become financially uncompetitive and exports drop off. The year 2020 saw a historic drop in the price of oil. add cost historic drop ""In 2020, U.S. oil production fell by around 8% relative to 2019,"" Hausfather told Snopes. ""This was primarily due to falling global oil prices making relatively high-cost US shale oil production uncompetitive."" The drop in demand, and then price, was not the result of any policy decision; it was the result of a massive global pandemic. In a Feb. 3, 2021, news release, Acting EIA Director Stephen Nalley explained that 'the pandemic triggered an historic energy demand shock that led to ... decreases in energy production, and sometimes volatile commodity prices in 2020.'"" news release Indeed, this volatility resulted in times during 2020  a year in which Joe Biden was not president  when the U.S. dipped into consuming more energy that it produced. In July and August 2020, the U.S. was not energy independent, at least on monthly terms. By Turning Point USA's logic, this would mean that two months of Trump ""sent us back 50 years"" in terms of energy policy. In reality, the actions of any U.S. president cannot affect rapid change in the global energy market, and the effect of any domestic policy changes are dwarfed by global factors outside any one president's control. July and August As previously discussed, the U.S. had already experienced at least a brief period of energy ""dependence"" before Biden took office. While the most recent month for which we have data  October 2020  indicates the U.S. was producing slightly more energy than it consumed toward the end of Trump's presidency, U.S. oil production has been dropping off and global demand remains depressed. These trends, which predate the Biden administration, are unlikely to change anytime soon. October 2020 It will take a while for the energy sector to get to its new normal, said the EIA's Nalley in February 2021. In its 2021 ""Global Outlooks"" annual report, the EIA argued that ""total U.S. energy consumption will return to 2019 levels by 2029, though that is highly dependent on the pace of U.S. economic recovery."" In terms of energy production, ""EIA projects that the United States will continue to export more petroleum and other liquids than it imports, but the balance of imports to exports will be highly sensitive to supply, demand, and price factors."" said argued The bottom line, according to the Breakthrough Institutes' Hausfather, is that ""oil production changes in 2020 and 2021 are driven by larger changes in global demand and oil prices, rather than anything that either the Trump or Biden administration has done."" Because the meme correctly states that 2019 was the first year the U.S. achieved energy independence in decades, but because it falsely implies a connection between the Biden administration and post-2019 trends in the global energy market that predate his time in office and are independent of the actions of either Trump or Biden, we rank its claims ""false.""",['economy'],False,"The conservative group Turning Point USA created a meme that pushes a sophomoric and factually lacking political argument. The meme in question, watermarked with the logo of Turning Point USA's political action committee (Turning Point Action), makes two claims. First, it states that the year 2019 was the first year the United States achieved energy independence since 1957. Second, it argues that ""in only ten days"" Joe Biden ""sent us back 50 years,"" implying policies enacted in the first 10 days of his administration reversed American energy independence:The claim about 2019 being the first year in which the U.S. achieved energy independence since 1957 is true  so long as we understand what the term ""energy independence"" really means. It means that the U.S. produced more energy than it consumed. Most importantly, from an energy security perspective, energy independence does not mean that the U.S. doesn't import foreign oil or isn't fundamentally reliant on foreign sources of energy.In 2019, according to data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), the U.S. imported 9.1 million barrels per day (MMb/d) of oil from about 90 countries, though at the same time it also exported 8.5 MMb/d of oil to about 190 countries. By email, Zeke Hausfather, a climate scientist and energy systems analyst at the Breakthrough Institute, explained that ""our local production does not meaningfully insulate us from potential future global oil price shocks."" The energy independence experienced by the U.S. in 2019 was driven by record levels of total fossil fuel exports from the U.S. That record was set as part of a long-term trend dating back to 2006 and 2008, according to the EIA:The Turning Point meme disregards entirely the existence of the year 2020. The omission of 2020 masks not only a decline in U.S. fossil fuel production that occurred, it also conceals a larger truth about U.S. presidents and the global energy market: Neither they nor their policies have a significant effect on the market compared to other global factors.A significant factor in allowing the U.S. to increase its energy exports has been the rising cost of crude oil globally. Technological innovations like fracking and horizontal drilling have, in recent years, allowed the U.S. to exploit fossil fuel reserves that were previously inaccessible, but these technologies add cost. A high-cost, high-demand energy economy  like the one present during the record-setting year of 2019  benefits the U.S. energy sector because it makes American fossil fuel exports financially viable. The flip side is that the viability of U.S. exports depends in large measure on the going rate for a barrel of oil. If the cost is too low, U.S. drilling operations become financially uncompetitive and exports drop off. The year 2020 saw a historic drop in the price of oil.""In 2020, U.S. oil production fell by around 8% relative to 2019,"" Hausfather told Snopes. ""This was primarily due to falling global oil prices making relatively high-cost US shale oil production uncompetitive."" The drop in demand, and then price, was not the result of any policy decision; it was the result of a massive global pandemic. In a Feb. 3, 2021, news release, Acting EIA Director Stephen Nalley explained that 'the pandemic triggered an historic energy demand shock that led to ... decreases in energy production, and sometimes volatile commodity prices in 2020.'""Indeed, this volatility resulted in times during 2020  a year in which Joe Biden was not president  when the U.S. dipped into consuming more energy that it produced. In July and August 2020, the U.S. was not energy independent, at least on monthly terms. By Turning Point USA's logic, this would mean that two months of Trump ""sent us back 50 years"" in terms of energy policy. In reality, the actions of any U.S. president cannot affect rapid change in the global energy market, and the effect of any domestic policy changes are dwarfed by global factors outside any one president's control.As previously discussed, the U.S. had already experienced at least a brief period of energy ""dependence"" before Biden took office. While the most recent month for which we have data  October 2020  indicates the U.S. was producing slightly more energy than it consumed toward the end of Trump's presidency, U.S. oil production has been dropping off and global demand remains depressed. These trends, which predate the Biden administration, are unlikely to change anytime soon.It will take a while for the energy sector to get to its new normal, said the EIA's Nalley in February 2021. In its 2021 ""Global Outlooks"" annual report, the EIA argued that ""total U.S. energy consumption will return to 2019 levels by 2029, though that is highly dependent on the pace of U.S. economic recovery."" In terms of energy production, ""EIA projects that the United States will continue to export more petroleum and other liquids than it imports, but the balance of imports to exports will be highly sensitive to supply, demand, and price factors."""
Did Pat Sajak 'Leave Behind' a Net Worth That Made His Family Cry?,"['Pat Sajak\'s net worth was the subject of misleading online advertisements that made it appear that the ""Wheel of Fortune"" game show host had died.']","In February 2021, Pat Sajak's net worth became the subject of a misleading online advertisement. Sajak is, of course, well known as the host of the game show ""Wheel of Fortune"" since the early 1980s. The ad claimed, ""Pat Sajak's Net Worth Left His Family in Tears,"" and the accompanying picture was of Sajak captured at a Los Angeles Lakers basketball game in 2018. Another ad displayed on the same page reported similar claims about former ""Family Matters"" actor Jaleel White, who portrayed the nosy neighbor Steve Urkel on the sitcom. A second, similar ad stated, ""At Age 73, Pat Sajak Leaves Behind a Net Worth That Will Boggle Your Mind,"" accompanied by a picture taken in 2007. However, there is no indication that Pat Sajak's net worth has left anyone in tears or with a ""boggled"" mind. Furthermore, the ""Wheel of Fortune"" game show host was still alive at the time these advertisements appeared. Pat Sajak was not the first celebrity to be the subject of a misleading net worth advertisement. In fact, he wasn't even the first game show host featured in one of the ""net worth left his family in tears"" ads. We previously reported on a similar story for the late ""Jeopardy"" game show host Alex Trebek. Other celebrities whose names and likenesses have been used in such misleading ads include Pierce Brosnan, Chuck Norris, Richard Gere, Clint Eastwood, and Sean Connery. Trebek and Connery both died in 2020, but the claims about their net worths leaving their families ""in tears"" were nothing more than a ploy by advertisers. Readers who clicked on the net worth ads for Pat Sajak were led to a 233-page slideshow article in which Sajak didn't appear until page 94. Pat Sajak, EST. $65 MILLION Television personality and talk show host Pat Sajak was born on October 26, 1946, in Chicago. While serving in the U.S. Army, he also hosted a musical show on American Forces Radio during the Vietnam War. After the war, Sajak anchored a five-minute newscast and served as a substitute weatherman at NBC. Many know him now as the host of the long-running television game show ""Wheel of Fortune."" Pat Sajak is reportedly worth $65 million. Interestingly enough, Sajak shared that he grew up practically dirt poor, with his parents, who eventually separated when he was young, being unable to afford even the most trivial items. He started as a DJ and soon became a weatherman for KNBC-TV. In 1981, he was invited to host the television game show ""Wheel of Fortune,"" and Sajak has been hosting it ever since. There has been no shortage of these strange net worth advertisements online. It's likely that misleading ads will continue to be displayed for other celebrities in the future, dead or alive. Snopes debunks a wide range of content, and online advertisements are no exception. Misleading ads often lead to obscure websites that host lengthy slideshow articles with many pages. This practice is called advertising ""arbitrage."" The advertiser's goal is to make more money on ads displayed on the slideshow's pages than it costs to show the initial ad that lured viewers to it. Feel free to submit ads to us, and be sure to include a screenshot of the ad and the link to where the ad leads.",['credit'],False,"The ad claimed ""Pat Sajak's Net Worth Left His Family in Tears,"" and the accompanying picture was one of Sajak captured at a Los Angeles Lakers basketball game in 2018. Another ad display on the same page reported the same about former ""Family Matters"" actor Jaleel White, who portrayed nosy neighbor Steve Urkel on the sitcom:A second, similar ad stated, ""At Age 73, Pat Sajak Leaves Behind a Net Worth That Will Boggle Your Mind,"" with an accompanying picture that was taken in 2007:Pat Sajak was not the first celebrity to be the subject of a misleading net worth advertisement. In fact, he wasn't even the first game show host to be featured in one of the ""net worth left his family in tears"" ads. We previously reported on a similar story for the late ""Jeopardy"" game show host Alex Trebek.Other celebrities whose names and likenesses have been used in such misleading ads include Pierce Brosnan, Chuck Norris, Richard Gere, Clint Eastwood, and Sean Connery. Trebek and Connery both died in 2020, but the claims about their net worths leaving their families ""in tears"" was nothing more than a ploy by advertisers.Readers who clicked the net worth ads for Pat Sajak were led to a 233-page slideshow article in which Sajak didn't appear until page 94:Snopes debunks a wide range of content, and online advertisements are no exception. Misleading ads often lead to obscure websites that host lengthy slideshow articles with lots of pages. It's called advertising ""arbitrage."" The advertiser's goal is to make more money on ads displayed on the slideshow's pages than it cost to show the initial ad that lured them to it. Feel free to submit ads to us, and be sure to include a screenshot of the ad and the link to where the ad leads."
"New Jersey has the highest property taxes in the nation and not by a little. They are the highest property taxes in the nation, more than double the national average.",[],"New Jersey often ranks high on lists in categories ranging from beach quality to education.Unfortunately, according to Assembly Majority Leader Lou Greenwald, the state tops another list  one with a particularly dubious ranking.New Jersey has the highest property taxes in the nation and not by a little, Greenwald (D-Camden) said in an April 1 interview with Michael Aron on NJTVs On The Record. They are the highest property taxes in the nation, more than double the national average.New Jersey having high property taxes isnt new. But are they more than double the national average? Greenwalds statement is largely on the money, PolitiFact New Jersey found.Lets first explain the source of Greenwalds data and how tax rankings are reviewed.Greenwald got his data from a 2009 list compiled by the business-backed Tax Foundation in Washington, DC. The 2009 data shows that New Jersey ranked number one in three key tax metrics: median property taxes paid on homes; taxes as a percentage of home value; and taxes as a percentage of income.Nick Kasprak, a Tax Foundation analyst and programmer, said taxes as a percentage of home value is the most relevant statistic of the three because it can apply to most people, ranging from those who own condominiums to those in McMansions.Its a good way of comparing apples to apples across the states, Kasprak said of the metric, adding that the Tax Foundations numbers are estimates and come from the U.S. Census Bureaus American Community Survey.So how long has New Jersey worn the highest property taxes banner?That depends on the metric. We found that New Jersey property taxes have topped the rest of the nations at least back to 2004 when looking at median property taxes paid on homes and taxes paid as a percentage of income.When looking at all three Tax Foundation metrics for years 2004 through 2009, New Jerseys median property taxes paid on homes was more than triple the national average; more than double the national average for taxes paid as a percentage of income; and at least one and-a-half times the national average for taxes paid as a percentage of home value.Brigid Callahan Harrison, a professor of political science and law at Montclair State University, said comparing states by property taxes alone is disingenuous because states fund certain needs differently. For example, some states use property taxes to fund education, others do not.In reality, we need to look in total at the entire tax burden, Harrison said. The implication is that New Jerseyans pay the highest taxes in the country, right? Thats what people think. What Im saying is that New Jersey pays a very high tax burden. What we need to do is look at the total tax burden: gas tax, sales tax, security, user fees, certainly property taxes and sales taxes as well.Jon Bramnick, leader of the Assembly Republicans, agreed property taxes are high but credited a slowing of their growth to Gov. Chris Christies implementation of a 2-percent property tax cap, changing arbitration procedures for police and firefighters, and other measures.We obviously have to have mergers, shared services and consolidations across New Jersey, Bramnick said, adding that a bipartisan effort is key. These are the factors that you have to have to continue down that road. If you do, you will see a slowing of property taxes.Our rulingGreenwald said in a TV interview that New Jersey has the highest property taxes in the nation, more than double the national average. He was referring to 2009 statistics from the Tax Foundation. Statistics from 2004 through 2008 show the state leads the nation in two of three key metrics, according to the Tax Foundation. New Jersey led in all three metrics in 2009. Greenwalds overall point is clear: when it comes to property taxes, New Jersey is king. We rate this statement True. To comment on this story, go toNJ.com.","['New Jersey', 'Taxes']",True,"To comment on this story, go toNJ.com."
Did Clarence Thomas Say 'God Only Knows Where I Would Be' Without Affirmative Action?,['A quote from a January 1983 speech by the then-chairman of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has been stripped of context for decades.'],"On June 29, 2023, the Supreme Court ""severely limited, if not effectively ended, the use of affirmative action in college admissions,"" as described by Amy Howe at SCOTUS Blog: described By a vote of 6-3, the justices ruled that the admissions programs used by the University of North Carolina and Harvard College violate the Constitution's equal protection clause, which bars racial discrimination by government entities. [...] Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts explained that college admissions programs can consider race merely to allow an applicant to explain how their race influenced their character in a way that would have a concrete effect on the university. But a student ""must be treated based on his or her experiences as an individual  not on the basis of race,"" Roberts wrote. [...] Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett joined the Roberts opinion. Clarence Thomas' concurrence with the majority opinion led several media outlets to rehash an assertion that, at least for a period of time in the 1980s when he was chairman of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), Thomas's views on affirmative action programs were ambivalent  if not opportunist. This claim has been in recirculation since the Supreme Court announced that they had added cases challenging affirmative action to their docket: media outlets This claim recirculation  (@tonywolfness/Twitter) That claim appears to have first been raised following Thomas' nomination to the Supreme Court  in a July 14, 1991 New York Times article titled ""On Thomas's Climb, Ambivalence About Issue of Affirmative Action."" That article cited a line from a January 1983 speech given by Thomas to employees of the EEOC: article In a 1983 speech to staff members at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which he then headed, he said that affirmative action laws were of ""paramount importance"" to him. ""But for them, God only knows where I would be today,"" he said. ""These laws and their proper application are all that stand between the first 17 years of my life and the second 17 years."" Though repeated in this way by several media outlets both during Thomas' Supreme Court nomination process in the 1990s and again in 2023, this is an incorrect paraphrase of Thomas's statements. Thomas's full remarks were published as a law article in the Journal of Labor Law in April 1983. repeated published When read with the full context of this speech, it is clear that the ""them"" used in the phrase ""but for them"" referred not to affirmative action laws in particular, but to equal employment opportunity laws  as articulated in the Civil Rights Act of 1964  more generally. The speech, broadly, was a defense of the EEOC's work during the Reagan administration, which faced criticism over a massive reduction in discrimination claims pursued under its leadership. faced criticism Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act  a landmark bill signed during the Lyndon Johnson Administration  prohibits discrimination by employers on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. The EEOC, which first began operations in 1965, was created as part of the 1964 Act as the agency tasked with investigating and enforcing Title VII violations. Title VII in 1965 Over the years, the EEOC has expanded to investigate and enforce violations of other Federal anti-discrimination laws including those against discrimination against pregnant women, age discrimination, and disability discrimination. By the end of the Carter administration, the EEOC had expanded considerably under chairwoman Eleanor Norton's tenure, as described in a March 1981 report: report Thanks in part to Ms Norton's streamlined methods, which enabled EEOC to process 50,000 cases per year during her tenure, she views the equal-employment field as ""very stable now. We have had 10 years of extraordinary and deep court cases to build the law."" ""Even if they disbanded EEOC tomorrow,"" she said, ""and there is no way they could, there would still be thousands of court cases presented each year based on precedent."" Norton, here, was referencing an unpublished report commissioned by the Reagan transition team that was extremely critical of the EEOC, as reported by The Washington Post in January 1981: reported A Reagan administration advisory panel has urged that equal employment opportunity law and procedures to be changed so that much more evidence would be required to find a business guilty of discrimination and no business could be forced to adopt an ""affirmative action"" plan against its will. The advisory unit attacked the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission for having created a new racism in America in which every individual is judged by race."" The group was led by J.A. Parker, a black and head of the Lincoln Institute, a conservative think tank that deals with black issues. Its unpublished report was sent to the then-president-elect last month. Following Reagan's inauguration, the chairmanship of the EEOC office was vacant until early 1982, when Thomas was tapped to lead the EEOC. Democrats, at the time, were skeptical of Thomas' commitment to alleviating discrimination. These concerns were not helped by a massive decline in cases pursued under Thomas, or by the massive reduction in the EEOC budget under Reagan, as reported in a 1983 article: was tapped skeptical 1983 article In Fiscal Year 1982, there was upwards of 70 percent fewer cases filed in court than in 1981 on behalf of grieved workers. EEOC employees report that, because of a lack of staff and resources, cases often receive perfunctory investigation and in many instances, charges have been dismissed or ""no caused"" because they would prove too difficult or time-consuming to process. The speech in question, delivered to employees of the EEOC, was a response to these criticisms and an attempt to clarify to his staff what Thomas felt the role of the EEOC should  and should not  be. In his remarks, Thomas cited ""the changing nature of discrimination,"" and heralded inroads his EEOC had made in fighting age and gender discrimination: speech It should not be surprising that many of our most prominent cases involve allegations of age and sex discrimination, many resulting from reductions in force and forced retirement. This does not mean that charges of race, national origin, or religious discrimination are not filed with the EEOC and that the EEOC does not bring suit in such cases. It only means that there is now a special public and judicial sensitivity to cases involving age and women. Importantly, the speech is explicitly critical of the discourse surrounding affirmative action, and the policies Thomas advocated represented, at best, a muted skepticism toward the concepts' then-present use: represented No one in his right mind seriously questions the legal and moral bankruptcy of discrimination. The same unanimity of opinion does not exist for affirmative action. Affirmative action has been and will continue to be a subject of hot debate because mere mention of the term divides interest groups into two warring camps: one hotly in favor and one hotly opposed. [...] In their haste to condemn each other, the camps lose sight of the nature and purpose of equal employment opportunity laws. [...] This divisive debate results in general confusion and misunderstanding about affirmative action which, in turn, tends to undermine the effectiveness and legitimacy of the enforcement of civil rights laws. As the lead agency in the enforcement of federal equal employment opportunity laws, the EEOC cannot stand by and allow confusion about affirmative action to undermine our enforcement efforts. We must attempt to bring out and clarify the issues obscured by this debate. [...] Much of the heated debate and public confusion over affirmative action, in fact, stems from the confusion between flexible goals and inflexible quotas, and the use of these two distinct terms interchangeably. Thomas, in his speech, expressed the view that ""too much posturing"" had taken place over the debate about affirmative action, but he also affirmed that affirmative action programs had been ""critical to minorities and women in this society."" The section of the speech paraphrased to claim that Thomas was once amenable to affirmative action followed the above remarks: followed It is my view that too much posturing has taken place on issues such as affirmative action, which are critical to minorities and women in this society. The problems which we face in the area of equal employment opportunity must be solved. For the most part, they must be solved by applying legal principles of paramount importance to me. But for them, God only knows where I would be today. [...] These laws and their proper application are all that stand between the first 17 years of my life and the second. The reference to the ""first 17 years"" of his life is an allusion to statements Thomas made in the opening of this speech, when Thomas referenced ""the fact that the Chairman of the EEOC spent 17 years of his life (one-half) under strict segregation."" This connection, along with the broader context of the speech, makes it clear that ""these laws"" are those contained in the 1964 Civil Rights Act. opening The 1964 Civil Rights Act ended segregation when Thomas was a few months shy of 17. It also created the ""equal employment opportunity laws"" at issue under Title VII that provide the EEOC the audience of his speech  with its legal authority. At the end of his speech, during this second allusion to the end of segregation, Thomas warned against the improper use of those laws, even when used with good intention: shy of 17 I abhor any effort to twist, bend, or distort them [legal principles] for any reasons, whether such distortions are said to help or hurt minorities or women. No one should be permitted to turn these laws on their heads just because they have good intentions. These laws and their proper application are all that stand between the first 17 years of my life and the second. In sum, Thomas did not present anything more than a muted acknowledgement of the EEOC's role in some forms of affirmative action, and the laws or principles he was referring to in remarks that have since gone viral did not concern affirmative action specifically, but the principles contained within the 1964 Civil Rights Act more broadly. 1964 Civil Rights Act That Thomas, who recently ruled against the use of racial quotas in college admissions, would have described affirmative action as ""critical to minorities and women in this society"" has been painted as an example of Thomas' hypocrisy on affirmative action. The portion of the speech often cited to make this point is mischaracterized, even if that point has validity. Specifically, the 1991 reporting in The New York Times reported, as its primary scoop, that Yale Law School had a 10 percent minority goal the year in which Thomas applied to and was accepted into the program: 1991 reporting Judge Clarence Thomas, who came to prominence as a fierce black critic of racial preference programs, was admitted to Yale Law School under an explicit affirmative action plan with the goal of having blacks and other minority members make up about 10 percent of the entering class, university officials said. Under the program, which was adopted in 1971, the year Judge Thomas applied, blacks and some Hispanic applicants were evaluated differently from whites, the officials said. Nonetheless, they were not admitted unless they met standards devised to predict they could succeed at the highly competitive school. [...] ""We did adopt an affirmative action program and it was pretty clearly stated,"" said Prof. Abraham S. Goldstein, who was dean of the Law School from 1970 to 1975. Thomas has also acknowledged this part of his history, as reported in 1980 by The Washington Post. ""The worst experience of his life,"" he reportedly explained at the time, ""was attending college and law school with whites who believed he was there only because of racial quotas for the admission of blacks."" as reported Frank Washington, a Yale friend interviewed by Newsweek in 1991, said that Thomas had, in private, ""recognized that affirmative action helped to get him into law school, but on the basis of economic deprivation rather than race."" interviewed While there are separate arguments to be made of the notion that Thomas' views on affirmative action are hypocritical due to his personal benefit from such programs, removing context from a speech to make it sound like that alleged hypocrisy was more overtly stated is misleading. Because the laws and principles Thomas was referring to were those contained in the 1964 Civil Rights Act and not any specific affirmative action legislation, the claim is False. Bella, Timothy. ""The Time Clarence Thomas Said Affirmative Action Was 'Critical' for Society."" Washington Post, 1 July 2023. www.washingtonpost.com, https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2023/06/30/clarence-thomas-affirmative-action/. ""Black Conservatives, Center Stage."" Washington Post. www.washingtonpost.com, https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1980/12/16/black-conservatives-center-stage/c5b44552-ad84-4a40-9b3c-3e88fdfa3589/. Accessed 5 July 2023. Clarence Thomas in 1983: ""God Only Knows Where"" I Would Be If Not for Affirmative Action - Alternet.Org. https://www.alternet.org/clarence-thomas-1983-affirmative-action/. Accessed 5 July 2023. Current Litigation Trends and Goals at the EEOC - ProQuest. https://www.proquest.com/openview/1a991116c071ffe6a6547f7505c13f63/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=1816463. Accessed 5 July 2023. ""Eagleton Backs EEOC Nominee With Reluctance."" Newspapers.Com, 1 Apr. 1982, https://www.newspapers.com/article/st-louis-post-dispatch-eagleton-backs-e/127670235/. ""Federal Agency Reformer Leaves with No Misgivings."" Newspapers.Com, 10 Mar. 1981, https://www.newspapers.com/article/arizona-republic-federal-agency-reformer/127564899/. ""New EEOC Nomination."" Newspapers.Com, 1 Mar. 1982, https://www.newspapers.com/article/athol-daily-news-new-eeoc-nomination/127670013/. ""Regan Undermines EEOC Enforcement."" Newspapers.Com, 5 Feb. 1983, https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-atlanta-voice-regan-undermines-eeoc/127667015/. Rich, Spencer. ""Reagan Panel, Citing 'New Racism,' Urges Easing of EEOC Rules."" Washington Post, 30 Jan. 1981. www.washingtonpost.com, https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1981/01/30/reagan-panel-citing-new-racism-urges-easing-of-eeoc-rules/dfd79721-7bbc-4ef0-91a3-ee5425904abe/. ""Supreme Court Strikes down Affirmative Action Programs in College Admissions."" SCOTUSblog, 29 June 2023, https://www.scotusblog.com/2023/06/supreme-court-strikes-down-affirmative-action-programs-in-college-admissions/. ""Timeline of Important EEOC Events."" US EEOC, https://www.eeoc.gov/youth/timeline-important-eeoc-events. Accessed 5 July 2023. ""Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964."" US EEOC, https://www.eeoc.gov/statutes/title-vii-civil-rights-act-1964. Accessed 5 July 2023.",['budget'],False,"On June 29, 2023, the Supreme Court ""severely limited, if not effectively ended, the use of affirmative action in college admissions,"" as described by Amy Howe at SCOTUS Blog:Clarence Thomas' concurrence with the majority opinion led several media outlets to rehash an assertion that, at least for a period of time in the 1980s when he was chairman of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), Thomas's views on affirmative action programs were ambivalent  if not opportunist. This claim has been in recirculation since the Supreme Court announced that they had added cases challenging affirmative action to their docket:That claim appears to have first been raised following Thomas' nomination to the Supreme Court  in a July 14, 1991 New York Times article titled ""On Thomas's Climb, Ambivalence About Issue of Affirmative Action."" That article cited a line from a January 1983 speech given by Thomas to employees of the EEOC:Though repeated in this way by several media outlets both during Thomas' Supreme Court nomination process in the 1990s and again in 2023, this is an incorrect paraphrase of Thomas's statements. Thomas's full remarks were published as a law article in the Journal of Labor Law in April 1983.The speech, broadly, was a defense of the EEOC's work during the Reagan administration, which faced criticism over a massive reduction in discrimination claims pursued under its leadership.Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act  a landmark bill signed during the Lyndon Johnson Administration  prohibits discrimination by employers on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. The EEOC, which first began operations in 1965, was created as part of the 1964 Act as the agency tasked with investigating and enforcing Title VII violations.Over the years, the EEOC has expanded to investigate and enforce violations of other Federal anti-discrimination laws including those against discrimination against pregnant women, age discrimination, and disability discrimination. By the end of the Carter administration, the EEOC had expanded considerably under chairwoman Eleanor Norton's tenure, as described in a March 1981 report:Norton, here, was referencing an unpublished report commissioned by the Reagan transition team that was extremely critical of the EEOC, as reported by The Washington Post in January 1981:Following Reagan's inauguration, the chairmanship of the EEOC office was vacant until early 1982, when Thomas was tapped to lead the EEOC. Democrats, at the time, were skeptical of Thomas' commitment to alleviating discrimination. These concerns were not helped by a massive decline in cases pursued under Thomas, or by the massive reduction in the EEOC budget under Reagan, as reported in a 1983 article:The speech in question, delivered to employees of the EEOC, was a response to these criticisms and an attempt to clarify to his staff what Thomas felt the role of the EEOC should  and should not  be. In his remarks, Thomas cited ""the changing nature of discrimination,"" and heralded inroads his EEOC had made in fighting age and gender discrimination:Importantly, the speech is explicitly critical of the discourse surrounding affirmative action, and the policies Thomas advocated represented, at best, a muted skepticism toward the concepts' then-present use:The section of the speech paraphrased to claim that Thomas was once amenable to affirmative action followed the above remarks:The reference to the ""first 17 years"" of his life is an allusion to statements Thomas made in the opening of this speech, when Thomas referenced ""the fact that the Chairman of the EEOC spent 17 years of his life (one-half) under strict segregation."" This connection, along with the broader context of the speech, makes it clear that ""these laws"" are those contained in the 1964 Civil Rights Act.The 1964 Civil Rights Act ended segregation when Thomas was a few months shy of 17. It also created the ""equal employment opportunity laws"" at issue under Title VII that provide the EEOC the audience of his speech  with its legal authority. At the end of his speech, during this second allusion to the end of segregation, Thomas warned against the improper use of those laws, even when used with good intention:In sum, Thomas did not present anything more than a muted acknowledgement of the EEOC's role in some forms of affirmative action, and the laws or principles he was referring to in remarks that have since gone viral did not concern affirmative action specifically, but the principles contained within the 1964 Civil Rights Act more broadly.The portion of the speech often cited to make this point is mischaracterized, even if that point has validity. Specifically, the 1991 reporting in The New York Times reported, as its primary scoop, that Yale Law School had a 10 percent minority goal the year in which Thomas applied to and was accepted into the program:Thomas has also acknowledged this part of his history, as reported in 1980 by The Washington Post. ""The worst experience of his life,"" he reportedly explained at the time, ""was attending college and law school with whites who believed he was there only because of racial quotas for the admission of blacks.""Frank Washington, a Yale friend interviewed by Newsweek in 1991, said that Thomas had, in private, ""recognized that affirmative action helped to get him into law school, but on the basis of economic deprivation rather than race."""
Jews Ordered to Register in East Ukraine?,['Have Jews in eastern Ukraine been ordered to register with the government?'],"A small group of people in the Ukrainian city of Donetsk distributed leaflets ordering local Jews to register with the government. Examples include a flyer demanding, ""Jews must register or face deportation,"" which was signed by Donetsk's pro-Russian interim government and handed out on Passover evening in the eastern Ukrainian city. On April 16, 2014, English-language news media began reporting that Jews in Donetsk had received leaflets instructing them to ""register"" with the (unrecognized) Donetsk government, declare their assets, and pay a registration fee or face severe penalties, including loss of citizenship and deportation. Some of the leaflets were posted near a local synagogue, while others were reportedly distributed outside a Jewish center by ""three unidentified men wearing balaclavas and carrying the flag of the Russian Federation."" Jews in Donetsk, where pro-Russian militants have taken over government buildings, were told they must ""register"" with those attempting to make the city part of Russia, according to Israeli media. Jews emerging from a synagogue reported being handed leaflets that ordered them to provide a list of their property and pay a registration fee ""or else have their citizenship revoked, face deportation, and see their assets confiscated,"" as reported by Ynet News, Israel's largest news website. Donetsk is the site of an ""anti-terrorist"" operation by the Ukrainian government, which has moved military columns into the region to force out militants demanding a referendum on joining Russia. The identity of those who distributed the leaflets and their motives remain unclear. The material purportedly bore the signature of Denis Pushilin, supposedly the self-proclaimed leader of the pro-Russian separatist group, but he has claimed that his group had nothing to do with the leaflets and that they were issued by someone else to discredit the separatists as anti-Semitic. Novosti Donbassa reported that the leaflet was distributed by ""three unidentified men wearing balaclavas and carrying the flag of the Russian Federation"" with the aim of inciting conflict and then blaming the attack on separatists. The authenticity of the leaflet could not be independently verified. The purported anti-Semitic leaflet follows a UN investigation that found ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine intentionally exaggerated reports of attacks by Ukrainian nationalists to justify Russian involvement in the region. The report also dismissed fears regarding the far-right Pravy Sektor (Right Sector), which has been at the forefront of the Ukrainian revolution and accused of violence against ethnic Russians, as ""disproportionate."" Pushilin has denied Novosti Donbassa's report and assured reporters that the flyer is not from his organization. It appears that whoever distributed the leaflets fabricated the alarming documents to provoke fear, generate negative publicity, and/or make money, without having the means or intent to enforce the provisions outlined therein. Even if it resembled the start of a racist purge, the flyer was more likely part of an ill-conceived extortion plot or a propaganda ploy against the separatists. For one thing, the sign-off at the bottom of the flyer, ""Yours, the People's Governor of Donetsk, Denis Pushilin,"" seemed off. This referred to the so-called Donetsk People's Republic, formed a week and a half earlier by armed separatists who seized the regional government headquarters. Their territory is confined to that one building and a small area around it. Since April 7, they have barricaded themselves inside with a cache of weapons and demanded a referendum on secession from Ukraine. The bottom of the flyer included a reproduction of the stamp these separatists use on press badges issued to journalists. However, Denis Pushilin is not the individual who calls himself the ""People's Governor"" of this pseudo-state; that title belongs to Pavel Gubarev, who claimed it in early March during a separatist rally in Donetsk. Three days later, he was arrested on charges of separatism and taken to jail in Kiev, where he remains. The alleged author of the anti-Semitic flyer, Pushilin, is Gubarev's ally and comrade-in-arms, but he has never used the title ""People's Governor."" His preferred title is ""co-chairman of the temporary coalition government"" that he and his allies declared inside that building. Pushilin denied any involvement with the flyers, stating, ""In reality, this is a fake, and a pretty unsuccessful one. It was all done with Photoshop."" Suspicion fell on their political opponents as soon as the flyers began circulating online. Dmitro Tkachenko, who helped organize a large rally in Donetsk to support Ukrainian unity, called the flyer ""a brilliant piece of disinformation"" against the separatists. When asked if one of his fellow activists for Ukrainian unity could have staged it, Tkachenko acknowledged the possibility but expressed doubt, saying, ""But this is a sophisticated trick, and to be honest, I don't think any of our folks are that smart."" More likely, Tkachenko suggested, the flyers were the work of an opportunistic splinter group of separatists looking to profit from their newfound impunity. Over the past week, they have seized numerous government buildings in Donetsk, most recently the city hall, without any resistance from the police. ""But their movement is very divided,"" Tkachenko noted. It includes various groups of armed thugs who answer to no single leader, making it plausible that some of the more entrepreneurial individuals among them sought to make a bit of extortion money on the side.",['asset'],True,"Exactly who distributed the leaflets, and why, is still unclear.  The material purportedly bore the signature of Denis Pushilin, supposedly the self-proclaimed leader of the pro-Russian separatist group, but he has maintained that his group had nothing to do with the leaflets and that they were put out by someone else to discredit the separatists as being anti-Semitic:"
Deceptive scheme on Facebook involving fraudulent ALDI coupons.,['An offer on Facebook for free ALDI grocery coupons is not legitimate.'],"In July 2019, an $80 coupon began circulating on Facebook for the ALDI grocery store chain. These shared posts were the latest iteration of the common ""free coupon"" or ""free gift card"" scams that frequently plague social media and have also targeted shoppers of chains such as Kroger and Target. A different scam coupon offer also circulated with the ALDI logo in December 2015, advertising a ""get 40% off all purchases in store"" promise. Another displayed what appeared to be a free coupon for ""$60 off a minimum $70 purchase,"" and even one for $75 off: ""Aldi has a coupon for $60 off a minimum $70 purchase. Aldi has verified this is a scam, but people are sharing it all over Facebook."" These coupons are not legitimate, as ALDI noted on their Facebook page. These coupon offers are a form of survey scams that direct victims to either a survey on a website not owned by ALDI or what looks like a Facebook page for ALDI. The survey pages and the Facebook page have no affiliation with the company, despite being adorned with the ALDI logo. Both instruct people to share the bogus ALDI coupon offer on their Facebook timelines and submit comments about it. This page instructs shoppers to follow these ""two simple steps"" in order to get their coupons. Once the steps are completed, however, users are not greeted with information explaining how to claim their coupons. Instead, they're asked to take a brief survey that entails providing personal information such as home address, telephone number, email address, and date of birth, and are required to sign up for credit cards or enroll in a number of subscription programs to obtain their ""free"" gift cards. A version of the scam also surfaced in May 2016, and another later in 2018. ALDI responded to frustrated consumers on Facebook. In June 2017, a version of the scam touting discounts in honor of ALDI's purported anniversary also appeared on Facebook: ""HEY FRIENDS CHECK THIS OUT!!!!! Aldi is giving Free $75 Coupon to Everyone to celebrate 103rd Anniversary! Each Person (1)- Go & get yours! ALDI-COM.COM."" However, attempting to visit the linked domain (ALDI-COM.com) led to a ""deceptive site ahead"" warning and not to ALDI's official website. If you frequently use Facebook, there is a good chance that you'll encounter one of these survey scams again. A July 2014 article from the Better Business Bureau lists key factors for identifying fraudulent Facebook posts: """,['banking'],False,"In July 2019, an $80 coupon began making the rounds on Facebook for the ALDI grocery store chain. These shared posts were the latest iteration of the common ""free coupon"" or ""free gift card"" scams that frequently plague social media and have also preyed on shoppers of chains such as Kroger and Target:If you frequently use Facebook, there is a good chance that you'll run into one of these survey scams again. A July 2014 article from the Better Business Bureau lists key factors for identifying fraudulent Facebook posts:"
War Between the States,['Maps show similarity between 2004 U.S. presidential election and pattern of free vs. slave states in pre-Civil War America.'],"Claim:  Maps show similarity between 2004 U.S. presidential election results and pattern of free vs. slave states in pre-Civil War America.   Multiple  see below. Example:  [Collected on the Internet, 2004]  2004 U.S. Presidential Election Results Pre-Civil War Free vs. Slave States  Origins:  This is another example for which it is difficult to assign a value of """" or """"  there is a basic (and somewhat superficial) underlying fact which is true, but interpretations of that fact's significance are subjective and can be widely varied. It is true that a map showing the locations of free and slave states (and territories) in the pre-Civil War U.S. bears a rough resemblance to a map showing the electoral vote results for the 2004 U.S. presidential election. Senator John Kerry won most of the states in the northeast, the Great Lakes, and the Pacific coast regions, while President George W. Bush captured all of the south plus most of the midwestern, western, and plains states.  However, the similarities between these maps mask some very significant differences. On the eve of the Civil War (which began in April 1861), the United States was very sharply divided along regional lines.  Going into the 1860 campaign, the two major parties both essentially  split in two, each creating a northern and a southern wing.  In the subsequent presidential election the northern Whig/Republican party (represented by Abraham Lincoln of Illinois) didn't even appear on the ballot in most southern states, and while the Southern Democratic party (represented by John C. Breckinridge of Kentucky) did make the ballot throughout most of the north, they rarely drew more than a relative handful of votes in those states.  All four candidates captured at least one state's electoral votes, a rarity in U.S. election history. election captured The electorate in 2004 was not nearly so sharply divided along regional lines, however  an electoral map just makes it appear that way because of the ""winner take all"" nature of the U.S. electoral system.  Both the popular and electoral vote totals in 2004 were quite close (President Bush won the popular vote by a 51%-48% margin, and a single strongly-contested state such as Ohio could have tipped the electoral vote balance in the other direction), and although the states won by each candidate were largely clumped into regional clusters, both candidates generally ran very strongly even in the states they did not win.  An election map with finer gradation (i.e., displaying results on a county-by-county basis rather than a state-by-state one, and providing color shading to reflect the closeness of the vote in each area) produces a better picture of how strongly both candidates in the 2004 election ran even in states which they lost: 2004  (Click here for a larger version of this map.) here According to exit polls and analysis of county-by-county election returns, the sharpest geographic distinction between the two candidates did not primarily correspond to region but to size of community: Senator John Kerry had a substantial 60%-39% edge in large cities (representing roughly 13% of the total U.S. population), while the reverse was true in rural areas (representing roughly 16% of the total U.S. population), where President Bush garnered a 59%-40% majority.  What we saw in the 2004 election was more of an urban vs. rural division, regardless of state. exit polls Last updated:  11 November 2004    Sources:   Alexander, Kate.  ""Election Officials Urge Voters to Check Ballots for Errors.""   Austin American-Statesman.  23 October 2004  (p. B1).",['returns'],NEI,"split in two, each creating a northern and a southern wing.  In the subsequent presidential election the northern Whig/Republican party (represented by Abraham Lincoln of Illinois) didn't even appear on the ballot in most southern states, and while the Southern Democratic party (represented by John C. Breckinridge of Kentucky) did make the ballot throughout most of the north, they rarely drew more than a relative handful of votes in those states.  All four candidates captured at least one state's electoral votes, a rarity in U.S. election history.The electorate in 2004 was not nearly so sharply divided along regional lines, however  an electoral map just makes it appear that way because of the ""winner take all"" nature of the U.S. electoral system.  Both the popular and electoral vote totals in 2004 were quite close (President Bush won the popular vote by a 51%-48% margin, and a single strongly-contested state such as Ohio could have tipped the electoral vote balance in the other direction), and although the states won by each candidate were largely clumped into regional clusters, both candidates generally ran very strongly even in the states they did not win.  An election map with finer gradation (i.e., displaying results on a county-by-county basis rather than a state-by-state one, and providing color shading to reflect the closeness of the vote in each area) produces a better picture of how strongly both candidates in the 2004 election ran even in states which they lost:(Click here for a larger version of this map.)According to exit polls and analysis of county-by-county election returns, the sharpest geographic distinction between the two candidates did not primarily correspond to region but to size of community: Senator John Kerry had a substantial 60%-39% edge in large cities (representing roughly 13% of the total U.S. population), while the reverse was true in rural areas (representing roughly 16% of the total U.S. population), where President Bush garnered a 59%-40% majority.  What we saw in the 2004 election was more of an urban vs. rural division, regardless of state."
Seventy-seven of the top 300 cities with the highest poverty rate nationwide are in California.,[],"When asked to list his top three priorities for California at a recent forum, Democratic candidate for governorAntonio Villaraigosaresponded: I think weve got to start with the economy, the economy, the economy. The former mayor of Los Angeles acknowledged strong economic growth in some places, but made it clear that not all of California is growing together. Villaraigosa went on to make an eye-opening claim about how many California cities rank among the poorest in the nation. Seventy-seven of the top 300 cities with the highest poverty rate are in our state, Villaraigosa said at theforum, hosted on June 6, 2017 in San Francisco by the Public Policy Institute of California. Villaraigosa makes his claim at about the 6:45 minute mark in this video by the Public Policy Institute of California. We know the state has struggled mightily with poverty. As an example, we ratedTruea claim by Republican Assembly Leader Chad Mayes in January that California has the highest poverty rate in the nation when comparing states and considering cost-of-living. At 20.6 percent, Californias poverty rate in 2015 was well above the national average of 15.1 percent, according to a U.S. Census Bureau report called theSupplemental Poverty Measure. Floridas 19 percent poverty rate ranked second. For a two-adult, two-child family in California, the poverty threshold was an average of $30,000, depending on the region in the state, according to a2014 analysisby Public Policy Institute of California. With this in mind, we decided to fact-check Villaraigosas assertion that California is also home to one-quarter of the nations poorest cities. Governors race Villaraigosa is amongseveral prominent Democratscompeting to succeed Jerry Brown as governor. Others include California TreasurerJohn Chiang; Delaine Eastin, the states former superintendent for public instruction; andGavin Newsom, the states current lieutenant governor. Republican candidates include John Cox, a venture capitalist from San Diego County and Rosie Grier, a former professional football player. PolitiFact California is fact-checking claims in this race. See our Tracking The Truth governors race fact-checkshere. Tracking the Truth: Hear a claim you want fact-checked? Email us at[email protected], tweet us@CAPolitiFactor contact us onFacebook. Our research Villaraigosas spokeswoman said his poverty claim draws on a 2015 report by the National Resource Network calledHidden in Plain Sight: Why California's Economically Challenged Cities Matter. The network was created by the Obama Administration to develop innovative solutions to American cities to help them address their toughest economic challenges. Its study listed 77 economically challenged cities in California, ranging from big metros such as Los Angeles, Sacramento and Oakland to small ones like Lodi, Delano and Watsonville. It defines economically challenged as having at least one of the following characteristics: -- More than 9 percent of residents remained unemployed as of 2013 -- More than 20 percent of adults are living in poverty -- Population decline between 2000 and 2010 reached 5 percent Nationwide, it found nearly 300 such cities. Californias count equals about one-quarter of those. We wondered, however, whether cities listed as economically challenged (due at least partly to a 2013 jobless rate) could also be considered as currently having the highest poverty rate, as Villaraigosa described them this week. Had Villaraigosa stretched the truth or perhaps conflated two separate descriptions of economic hardship? Staff at the National Resource Network, including the studys lead author, did not immediately return requests for comment. Experts weigh in Ann Stevens director of the Center for Poverty Research and a professor of economics at the University of California at Davis, reviewed the study and Villaraigosas claim at our request His statement is not accurate in terms of the poverty rate, Stevens told us. Thats because the study labeled many of these cities as economically challenged because of their 2013 jobless rate, which is different than the poverty rate in 2013 or the poverty rate on average today. We found nearly half of the 77 cities described as economically challenged qualified for that label not because their poverty rate was above 20 percent, but because of their high jobless rate in 2013. In fact, the poverty level for at least some of these cities was closer to or below the national average. At that time, many cities in California were still struggling with high unemployment due to the Great Recession, Stevens added. But thats a temporary measure of economic hardship, not a permanent one. Caroline Danielson, who researches poverty at the Public Policy Institute of California, said many of those cities are no longer struggling with unemployment. Los Angeles, for example, now has a jobless rate of 3.9 percent down from 9.7 percent in 2013, she said. Danielson said theres no comparable ranking of every American city, large and small, by poverty rate. If there was, she said: I dont believe that California would be quite so overrepresented as we found in this report. Thats not to say that California has no high poverty cities. Along with pointing to the study, Villaraigosas spokeswoman said the candidate would still consider the 77 cities in the study to be among those nationally with the highest poverty rate - certainly well above the average - and that is what makes them economically challenged. Thats not the same as Villaraigosas original statement that all 77 rank nationally among cities with the highest poverty rate. Our ruling Candidate for California governor Antonio Villaraigosa recently claimed: Seventy-seven of the top 300 cities with the highest poverty rate are in our state. He relied on a study that grouped  77 economically challenged cities in California among nearly 300 such cities in the nation. But it used data from four years ago, when many cities were still recovering from the Great Recession. Villaraigosa made it sound as if these cities are still experiencing the same level of hardship. Also, experts on poverty said the economically challenged label isnt the same as Villaraigosas description of these cities as among the poorest in the nation. Nearly half the cities on the studys list qualified for that label not because of their poverty level. Many, in fact, had poverty rates below the state average. Instead, they qualified because they had a high unemployment rate in 2013. The jobless rate in many of those cities has improved considerably since then. Villaraigosa touched on a real problem in California: Poverty remains widespread and entrenched. But he mischaracterized the results of a study and painted a darker picture of economic hardship in California than the facts bear out. We rate Villaraigosas claim False. FALSEThe statement is not accurate. Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check.","['Economy', 'Poverty', ""The 2018 California Governor's Race"", 'California']",False,"When asked to list his top three priorities for California at a recent forum, Democratic candidate for governorAntonio Villaraigosaresponded: I think weve got to start with the economy, the economy, the economy.Seventy-seven of the top 300 cities with the highest poverty rate are in our state, Villaraigosa said at theforum, hosted on June 6, 2017 in San Francisco by the Public Policy Institute of California.We know the state has struggled mightily with poverty. As an example, we ratedTruea claim by Republican Assembly Leader Chad Mayes in January that California has the highest poverty rate in the nation when comparing states and considering cost-of-living.At 20.6 percent, Californias poverty rate in 2015 was well above the national average of 15.1 percent, according to a U.S. Census Bureau report called theSupplemental Poverty Measure. Floridas 19 percent poverty rate ranked second.For a two-adult, two-child family in California, the poverty threshold was an average of $30,000, depending on the region in the state, according to a2014 analysisby Public Policy Institute of California.Villaraigosa is amongseveral prominent Democratscompeting to succeed Jerry Brown as governor. Others include California TreasurerJohn Chiang; Delaine Eastin, the states former superintendent for public instruction; andGavin Newsom, the states current lieutenant governor.PolitiFact California is fact-checking claims in this race. See our Tracking The Truth governors race fact-checkshere.Tracking the Truth: Hear a claim you want fact-checked? Email us at[email protected], tweet us@CAPolitiFactor contact us onFacebook.Villaraigosas spokeswoman said his poverty claim draws on a 2015 report by the National Resource Network calledHidden in Plain Sight: Why California's Economically Challenged Cities Matter. The network was created by the Obama Administration to develop innovative solutions to American cities to help them address their toughest economic challenges.Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check."
"The Senate bill hands enormous tax cuts to the rich and to the drug and insurance industries, paid for by cutting health care for everybody else.",[],"Former President Barack Obama has maintained a low profile since leaving the White House, but recently he took to Facebook to blast a Senate health care bill that threatens to dismantle much of the Affordable Care Act, his signature legislative achievement. The Senate bill hands enormous tax cuts to the rich and to the drug and insurance industries, paid for by cutting health care for everybody else, Obama wrote in a Facebookpost. We decided to look into the former presidents claim about the budgetary effects of the Senate Republican plan that repeals or reworks much of the ACA, also known as Obamacare. Obama is right that the Senate bill contains a tax cut for wealthy Americans and medical-related businesses. The Congressional Budget Office has yet to put a number on the Senate bills tax cut. But the amount will likely be in the same ballpark as its scoring of the House bill, which cut taxes by about $1 trillion over 10 years, with high-income households and the health care industry gaining most of those benefits, according to the Tax Policy Center. The Senate bill repeals Affordable Care Act taxes that levy a 3.8 percent fee on investment income, as well as a tax on individuals making $200,000 or more ($250,000 for couples). The bill also eliminates ACA taxes that target health insurers, and makers of prescription drugs and medical devices. We should also note that middle- and lower-income consumers would likely see benefits from tax cuts in the form of lower prices and reduced fees on health savings accounts, as we pointed out inan earlier check of a House version of the bill. Obama is correct that tax cuts would be offset by cutting spending on health care. But its a stretch to sayeverybodyshealth care would suffer, when whats on the chopping block is federal funding for lower-income Americans. In the individual market, the Senate bill changes the formula for calculating how much help the federal government gives lower-income Americans to buy insurance. Compared with the Obamacare formula, the Senate GOP version would amount to a15 percent across-the-board cutin premium subsidies, andresult inlow-income people paying higher premiums for bigger deductibles, according to Larry Levitt, senior vice president of the Kaiser Family Foundation, a nonpartisan health care think tank. Starting in 2020, the Senate bill also repeals Obamacares cost-sharing subsidies that help lower-income Americans defray the cost of deductibles and out-of-pocket expenses. But the biggest cut in federal spending comes out of Medicaid, by changing the share carried by the federal government, relative to states. The Senate bill converts federal Medicaid funding to a per capita cap starting in 2020, placing a ceiling on the amount of funding a state gets per enrollee. Alternatively, states could opt for a block grant, a fixed amount of federal funds. Under either approach, the federal government would provide less to states than under Obamacare. Separately, starting in 2021, the Senate bill begins a three-year phase out of enhanced funding given to the 31 states (plus Washington, D.C.) that expanded Medicaid under Obamacare. As we noted in aprevious check of the House bill, reducing this funding would likely cause states to end expansion. This graphic from the liberal Center on Budget and Policy Priorities is a side-by-side illustration of Obamas claim that Republicans are rewarding wealthy Americans through a health care cut. The yellow bar shows $33 billion going to the top 400 highest-income households as a result of repealing the Obamacare tax cuts. The red bar shows how removing $33 billion in revenue translates to cutting off funding for Medicaid expansion population of four statesAlaska, Arkansas, West Virginia and Nevada. (Note: This graphic is based on the CBOs earlier score of the House version, which will likely differ from its score of the Senate). Obama said that the Senate bill hands enormous tax cuts to the rich and to the drug and insurance industries, paid for by cutting health care for everybody else. The Senate bill does give a tax cut to wealthy Americans and medical-related industry. Assuming a budget analysis of the Senate bill is similar to that of the House version, the tax cut will be to the tune of $1 trillion. Its a bit hyperbolic to say everybodys health care would be cut to finance the tax cut; its mostly lower-income people who lose out as a direct result of the bill. Hes right that the Senate bill would deliver a tax cut as it reduces the amount of federal funding lower-income Americans would get to help buy insurance. The bill would also repeal funding to defray deductibles and out-of-pocket costs for those eligible. It also lessens the share of Medicaid funding carried by the federal government, relative to states. We rate Obamas statement Mostly True.","['National', 'Health Care', 'Taxes']",True,"The Senate bill hands enormous tax cuts to the rich and to the drug and insurance industries, paid for by cutting health care for everybody else, Obama wrote in a Facebookpost.We should also note that middle- and lower-income consumers would likely see benefits from tax cuts in the form of lower prices and reduced fees on health savings accounts, as we pointed out inan earlier check of a House version of the bill.Compared with the Obamacare formula, the Senate GOP version would amount to a15 percent across-the-board cutin premium subsidies, andresult inlow-income people paying higher premiums for bigger deductibles, according to Larry Levitt, senior vice president of the Kaiser Family Foundation, a nonpartisan health care think tank.Separately, starting in 2021, the Senate bill begins a three-year phase out of enhanced funding given to the 31 states (plus Washington, D.C.) that expanded Medicaid under Obamacare. As we noted in aprevious check of the House bill, reducing this funding would likely cause states to end expansion."
Will banks be required to disclose all transactions exceeding $600 to the IRS as part of the Biden administration's proposal?,['The American Families Plan has a reporting requirement for banks that has infuriated some.'],"Announced in April 2021, U.S. President Joe Biden's American Families Plan is an ambitious proposal that aims to expand Americans' access to childcare and education and increase the number of women in the workforce. The plan intends to fund all of this through higher taxes on income earners and increased reporting requirements for banks that could potentially yield more tax revenue. These reporting requirements have drawn the ire of several banks that took issue with this less widely known section of the plan. A Facebook post by FNB Community Bank claimed: ""The Biden administration has proposed requiring all community banks and other financial institutions to report to the IRS on all deposits and withdrawals through business and personal accounts worth more than $600, regardless of tax liability. This indiscriminate, comprehensive bank account reporting to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) could soon be enacted in Congress and will create an unacceptable invasion of privacy for our customers."" Another screenshot shared by our readers expressed similar concerns: ""The Independent Community Bankers of America (ICBA) even began a campaign, calling on communities to send a letter to Biden to prevent this so-called intrusive proposal: 'Tell Congress: Don't Let IRS Invade My Privacy.' The Biden administration is proposing requiring financial institutions to report to the IRS all transactions of all business and personal accounts worth more than $600. This is an unprecedented invasion of privacy. In order to oppose this intrusive proposal, please send this letter to your representative and senators immediately."" We looked up the proposal itself, and it does require more robust reporting of transactions across business and personal accounts. The proposal, which aims to go into effect after December 31, 2022, states: ""This proposal would create a comprehensive financial account information reporting regime. Financial institutions would report data on financial accounts in an information return. The annual return will report gross inflows and outflows with a breakdown for physical cash, transactions with a foreign account, and transfers to and from another account with the same owner."" This requirement would apply to all business and personal accounts from financial institutions, including bank, loan, and investment accounts, with the exception of accounts below a low de minimis gross flow threshold of $600 or fair market value of $600. We begin by explaining some of the more technical terms in this proposal. A ""de minimis threshold"" is broadly defined as the amount of a transaction that has such a small value that accounting for it would be unreasonable. We spoke to Visiting Assistant Professor of Tax Law at New York University, Nyamagaga Gondwe, who explained, ""It is the amount below which the IRS would argue isn't worth investigating. It's the difference between your company giving you a $5 card to Subway versus traveling on a private jet on your company's dime. The latter is worth reporting."" In this case, ""gross flow"" refers to the aggregate inflows and outflows of cash from bank accounts. In sum, the current proposal stipulates that an aggregate amount of less than $600 worth of cash flowing into and out of accounts is not worth reporting. The ""fair market value"" refers to the amount people are willing to pay for an asset in the open market. In this case, Gondwe argued, the use of the term could possibly refer to the changing market value of transactions more than $600 that may occur in foreign currency transactions. The ICBA claims that the proposal will make banks report ""all transactions"" above the limit, but this is misleading. While it is true that the IRS will have more information on cash flows above $600, that doesn't mean they will have all the information pertaining to all transactions. The Center for American Progress (CAP) points out that banks will only be providing aggregate numbers to the IRS after each year—gross inflow and gross outflow—and not individualized transaction information. This reporting requirement would also extend to peer-to-peer payment services like Venmo, but wouldn't require people to report any additional information to the government. According to The Wall Street Journal, financial institutions must already report interest, dividends, and investment incomes to the IRS, and the IRS can obtain other information through audits. According to Marie Sapirie of Tax Notes, a publication focused on tax news, a parenthetical to the proposal indicates that there is some flexibility in raising the minimum account balance/inflow/outflow above $600. The Tax Notes report also states that the Treasury Department estimated this form of reporting would raise $463 billion over the 10-year budget window, making it the third-largest revenue raiser proposed in the budget. The aim is to target businesses outside of large corporations that carry out gross underreporting of their income in the amount of $166 billion per year. According to the proposal: ""Requiring comprehensive information reporting on the inflows and outflows of financial accounts will increase the visibility of gross receipts and deductible expenses to the IRS. Increased visibility of business income will enhance the effectiveness of IRS enforcement measures and encourage voluntary compliance."" Banks claim this would be an invasion of consumer privacy, with the ICBA saying it would allow the government to monitor account information. However, CAP analysts Seth Hanlon and Galen Hendricks argue, ""Only the prior year's total inflow and total outflow would be reported on annual forms. No one would say that the IRS monitors you on your job because it receives a W-2 from your employer with your total wages every January."" Another challenge not mentioned in the ICBA's consumer alert is the higher costs this reporting proposal may impose on banks. In May 2021, a coalition of banking associations wrote a letter to the U.S. Senate Committee on Finance, arguing that they already provide a lot of data to the IRS, and that this would impose additional costs on their systems. The costs and other burdens imposed to collect and report account flow information would surpass the potential benefits from such a reporting scheme. New reporting would appear to require material development costs and process additions for financial institutions, as well as significant reconciliation and compliance burdens on impacted taxpayers. For example, reporting total gross receipts and disbursements would require a new reporting paradigm for depository institutions, which necessitates system changes to collect the information. On the flipside, Sapirie wrote for Tax Notes, the benefits of such a reporting proposal may be difficult to realize: ""Increasing the amount of information flowing into the IRS would not in itself lead to increased enforcement, and it might come with added challenges."" Former IRS Commissioner Charles O. Rossotti acknowledged that the IRS today cannot use all the information it already receives, and significant areas of noncompliance are barely addressed, so more reporting alone will not solve the problem. It would almost certainly have a deterrent effect for taxpayers contemplating evasion, but the extent of that effect is unclear, and it might be insufficient to justify the costs to financial institutions and the federal government of implementing such a large new reporting regime. But CAP's analysis argues that this will help prevent tax evasion while also providing more funding to enhance data security for consumers: ""Additional funding would go to enhancing data security. Even at present, the IRS's data security is already much better than the financial industry, with only very rare and limited breaches compared to the exponentially larger data breaches from financial institutions. Second, the reporting of information flows only from financial institutions to the IRS and not in the other direction, as some earlier proposals had called for."" The Biden administration's bank reporting proposal is a critical element of the Build Back Better agenda. It gives the IRS some visibility into opaque forms of income that disproportionately accrue to high-income individuals. Despite fearmongering from bank lobbies, the proposal protects taxpayers' privacy while simply requiring banks to provide basic, aggregated information about flows. That enables the IRS to select audits in a more efficient and equitable way so that the vast majority of taxpayers will be less likely to be audited. And by deterring and helping catch tax cheats, the proposal raises substantial revenue for the Build Back Better agenda, which provides critical investments to increase economic opportunities for American families and communities. On October 12, 2021, Speaker Nancy Pelosi defended the proposal in response to a question from a reporter, who said, ""[Banks] are concerned about the tracking of transactions that are greater than $600; Americans are starting to get worried about this. Do you think [this] is going to stay in the Reconciliation Bill?"" ""With all due respect, the plural of anecdote is not data,"" Pelosi said. ""Yes, there are concerns that some people have. But if people are breaking the law and not paying their taxes, one way to track them is through the banking measure. I think $600—that's a negotiation that will go on as to what the amount is. But yes."" Whatever the impact of this proposal is, it does require additional reporting of certain bank transactions, just not in the way the banks are portraying it.",['economy'],NEI,"Announced in April 2021, U.S. President Joe Bidens American Families Plan is an ambitious proposal that aims to expand Americans' access to childcare and education and increase the number of women in the workforce. The plan is to fund all of this through more taxes on higher-income earners and increased reporting requirements of banks that could potentially yield more tax revenue. These reporting requirements have caught the ire of a number of banks that took issue with this less widely known section of the plan.A Facebook post by FNB Community Bank claimed: The Biden administration has proposed requiring all community banks and other financial institutions to report to the IRS on all deposits and withdrawals through business and personal accounts worth more than $600 regardless of tax liability. This indiscriminate, comprehensive bank account reporting to the [Internal Revenue Service (IRS)] can soon be enacted in Congress and will create an unacceptable invasion of privacy for our customers.The Independent Community Bankers of America (ICBA) even began a campaign, calling on communities to send a letter to Biden to prevent this so-called intrusive proposal"":We looked up the proposal itself, and it does require more robust reporting of transactions across business and personal accounts. The proposal, which aims to go into effect after Dec. 31, 2022, states:We begin by explaining some of the more technical terms in this proposal. A ""de minimis threshold"" is broadly defined as the amount of a transaction that has such a small value that accounting for it would be unreasonable. We spoke to Visiting Assistant Professor of Tax Law at New York University, Nyamagaga Gondwe, who explained, ""It is the amount below which the [IRS] would argue isn't worth investigating. It's the difference between your company giving you a $5 card to Subway, versus traveling on a private jet on your company's dime. [The latter] is worth reporting."" In this case, ""gross flow"" refers to the aggregate inflows and outflows of cash from bank accounts. In sum, the current proposal stipulates that an aggregate amount of less than $600 worth of cash flowing into and out of accounts is not worth reporting. The ""fair market value"" refers to the amount people are willing to pay for an asset in the open market. In this case, Gondwe argued, the use of the term could possibly refer to the changing market value of transactions more than $600 that may occur in foreign currency transactions. The ICBA claims that the proposal will make banks report ""all transactions"" above the limit, but this is misleading. While it is true that the IRS will have more information on cashflows above $600, that doesnt mean they will have all the information pertaining to all transactions. The Center for American Progress (CAP) points out that banks will only be providing aggregate numbers to the IRS after each year  gross inflow and gross outflow  and not individualized transaction information. This reporting requirement would also extend to peer-to-peer payment services like Venmo, but wouldnt require people to report any additional information to the government. According to The Wall Street Journal, financial institutions must already report interest, dividends, and investment incomes to the IRS, and the IRS can get other information through audits.According to Marie Sapirie of Tax Notes, a publication focused on tax news, a parenthetical to the proposal indicates that there is some flexibility on raising the minimum account balance/inflow/outflow above $600.The Tax Notes report also states that the treasury department estimated this form of reporting would raise $463 billion over the 10-year budget window, making it the third largest revenue raiser proposed in the budget. The aim is to target businesses outside of large corporations that carry out gross underreporting of their income in the amount of $166 billion per year. According to the proposal: Requiring comprehensive information reporting on the inflows and outflows of financial accounts will increase the visibility of gross receipts and deductible expenses to the IRS. Increased visibility of business income will enhance the effectiveness of IRS enforcement measures and encourage voluntary compliance.Banks claim this would be an invasion of consumer privacy, with the ICBA saying it would allow the government to monitor account information. However, CAP analysts Seth Hanlon and Galen Hendricks argue, Only the prior years total inflow and total outflow would be reported on annual forms. No one would say that the IRS monitors you on your job because it receives a W-2 from your employer with your total wages every January.Another challenge not mentioned in the ICBAs consumer alert is the higher costs this reporting proposal may place on banks. In May 2021, a coalition of banking associations wrote a letter to the U.S. Senate Committee on Finance, arguing that they already give a lot of data to the IRS, and that this would impose additional costs on their systems:On the flipside, Sapirie wrote for Tax Notes, the benefits of such a reporting proposal may be difficult to come by:But CAPs analysis argues that this will help prevent tax evasion, while also providing more funding to enhance data security for consumers:On Oct. 12, 2021, Speaker Nancy Pelosi defended the proposal in response to a question from a reporter, who said, ""[Banks] are concerned about the tracking of transactions that are greater than $600, Americans are starting to get worried about this. Do you think [this] is going to stay in the Reconciliation Bill?"" "
Does a Video Show the Effects of Drinking 24 Cans of Red Bull?,"['A viral video captures a patient suffering from blunt force trauma flail chest, not from the deleterious effects of consuming two dozen cans of Red Bull energy drink.']","In mid-July 2015 a video began making the online rounds, accompanied by claims that it depicted a man who had consumed 24 cans of Red Bull energy drink in a short period of time. (One 250ml can of Red Bull contains about 80mg of caffeine, while a typical cup of brewed coffee has about 95 to 200 mg of caffeine.) video coffee WARNING The outcome of drinking 24 cans of RED BULL quickly   The ""24 cans of Red Bull"" was a familiar trope in mid-2015 due to recent reports in the UK press that a 31-year-old British woman had managed, through the help of hypnosis, to kick a 24-can-a-day Red Bull habit that was having profound effects on her health (and finances): reports   A mother-of-four whose addiction to Red Bull saw her drinking 24 cans of a day claims she has been cured of her habit by hypnosis. Sarah Weatherill, 31, became so dependent on the energy drink she was told if she cut down too quickly she could suffer a seizure as her body was so used to the caffeine. The law student spent a staggering 5,460 every year on the popular energy drink since she became hooked in 2009. Her habit was at its worst the following year when she was studying for a law degree and wanted to stay awake to revise for exams. She soon became dependent on the drink and couldn't get out of bed unless she knew she had some in the fridge. She also became lethargic, depressed, had heart palpitations and was constantly feeling anxious as her 105-a-week habit spiralled out of control. She finally decided to do something about the problem after she realised the constant need for the Red Bull was severely damaging her health.   However, the video shown above has nothing to do with the effects of consuming large quantities of caffeine or energy drinks.  What it depicts is a flail chest, a condition usually seen after automobile accidents or other forms of blunt trauma, when a segment of the rib cage breaks and becomes detached from the rest of the chest wall.  In flail chest patients, pressure changes associated with respiration that the rib cage normally resists produce the motion seen in the video above, as demonstrated here: flail chest   During normal expiration, the diaphragm and intercostal muscles relax increasing internal pressure, allowing the abdominal organs to push air upwards and out of the thorax. However, a flail segment will also be pushed out while the rest of the rib cage contracts.   Although we haven't identified the precise source of this video, it's said to have captured the victim of an automobile accident being treated by emergency medical personnel shortly before his death.",['finance'],False,"In mid-July 2015 a video began making the online rounds, accompanied by claims that it depicted a man who had consumed 24 cans of Red Bull energy drink in a short period of time. (One 250ml can of Red Bull contains about 80mg of caffeine, while a typical cup of brewed coffee has about 95 to 200 mg of caffeine.)The ""24 cans of Red Bull"" was a familiar trope in mid-2015 due to recent reports in the UK press that a 31-year-old British woman had managed, through the help of hypnosis, to kick a 24-can-a-day Red Bull habit that was having profound effects on her health (and finances):However, the video shown above has nothing to do with the effects of consuming large quantities of caffeine or energy drinks.  What it depicts is a flail chest, a condition usually seen after automobile accidents or other forms of blunt trauma, when a segment of the rib cage breaks and becomes detached from the rest of the chest wall.  In flail chest patients, pressure changes associated with respiration that the rib cage normally resists produce the motion seen in the video above, as demonstrated here:"
Facebook Appeal for Boy with Massive Tumor,['Rumor: CNN and Facebook are donating $1 per share to fund surgery for a boy with a massive tumor.'],"Claim:  CNN and Facebook are donating $1 per like to fund surgery for a boy with a massive tumor.  Example:  [Collected via Facebook, August 2015]   Please Dont Ignore! His parents can't afford surgery so facebook and CNN are paying half of the expenses1 Like - $11 Comment - 10$1 Share - 20$ Origins:  In August 2015, the above-displayed image urging viewers to share a photograph of a boy with a massive tumor in order raise funds for his medical care was circulated widely via Facebook. But neither the image nor its claim was new; the tandem was simply a reiteration of a hoax that had circulated more than a year earlier involving the same photograph and plea. This ""raise money for a child's medical care by sharing this photo on Facebook"" format of hoax is common: Previous variations include a child purportedly shot  by a family member, a toddler who needed shot a heart transplant, a little girl from Poland in desperate need of money for burn treatment, a girl with a distended abdomen, and a baby born with its heart outside its body. heart transplant burn treatment abdomen heart As is often the case with these popular social media hoaxes, the image used was one of a real child suffering a real medical condition, and that image was deliberately selected with the intent of tugging at the heartstrings of Facebook users for purposes unconnected to the depicted child's recovery or well-being. The photograph used in this case is one that was widely reproduced in conjunction with 2012 news coverage about the case of a 9-year-old boy with a massive tumor who was brought to the U.S. from Ciudad Juarez in Mexico for medical treatment: news coverage A 9-year-old boy with a massive tumor was whisked from a dangerous neighborhood in Mexico in an armored vehicle by U.S. agents and taken across the border for treatment in New Mexico, his family said. The boy and his parents were snatched Thursday from the gang-infested neighborhood in Ciudad Juarez  one of the deadliest cities in the world  after members of a New Mexico Baptist church saw him near an orphanage and sought help. The parents of the child, identified by officials only as Jose to protect his family, said the tumor on his shoulder and neck has grown so large that it affects his eyesight and could move into his heart. With no money for medical care, the family sought treatment in Juarez and El Paso, but did not receive any help removing the tumor, which has afflicted Jose since birth.  In November 2014, doctors in New Mexico successfully removed Jose's tumor: removed An 11-year-old Mexican boy who had been suffering from a massive tumor and came to New Mexico for treatment has had the growth removed. Kristean Alcocer of the First Baptist Church of Rio Rancho said the boy underwent surgery at the University of New Mexico Children's Hospital to remove the tumor from his neck, shoulder and torso area. Alcocer says the surgery lasted a more than 12 hours and involved 25 medical professionals. Images such as this one are carefully selected by Facebook scammers preying on the sympathies of social media users. Many folks believe that sharing the image is harmless: If the claim is true, the child is helped; and if it's false, only a small amount of their time was wasted. But these types of hoaxes are typically lures for the distribution of malware as well as clickjacking, clickbaiting, and like-farming activities, made all the more reprehensible for their dishonest and unauthorized use of such photographs. In any case, Facebook does not directly donate money based upon likes or shares generated for any purpose. Facebook's advice for charitable giving on the social network can be found here. here ",['share'],False,"This ""raise money for a child's medical care by sharing this photo on Facebook"" format of hoax is common: Previous variations include a child purportedly shot  by a family member, a toddler who neededa heart transplant, a little girl from Poland in desperate need of money for burn treatment, a girl with a distended abdomen, and a baby born with its heart outside its body.The photograph used in this case is one that was widely reproduced in conjunction with 2012 news coverage about the case of a 9-year-old boy with a massive tumor who was brought to the U.S. from Ciudad Juarez in Mexico for medical treatment:In November 2014, doctors in New Mexico successfully removed Jose's tumor:In any case, Facebook does not directly donate money based upon likes or shares generated for any purpose. Facebook's advice for charitable giving on the social network can be found here."
Clint Eastwood - Halftime in America,"[""Clint Eastwood narrated an anti-Obama 'Halftime in America' spot?""]","Claim:  Actor Clint Eastwood narrated an anti-Obama ""Halftime in America"" spot.  Examples:  [Collected via e-mail, June 2012] A second Halftime by Clint Eastwood was sent to me and it was not the same commercial message as the original by Clint Eastwood in the end he refers to Obama as your skinny ass Question is the second one a fake.  Half time in america is on you tube and claims to be by clint eastwood.  can you check the validity.  Looks like they cut and pasted abit...  I saw a video of Clint Eastwood talking about it being halftime in America and I wanted to know if it was a real video or a reworkedvideo.  It was supposedly on youtube.   Origins:  One of the most talked-about commercials to air during Super Bowl XLVI in February 2012 was Chrysler's controversial two-minute long ""Halftime in America"" spot, narrated by actor Clint Eastwood:  The commercial prompted a good deal of debate about whether it was more a promotion for Chrysler's products or an endorsement of President Obama and the federal government's bailouts of the automobile industry: People rarely pick a fight with Dirty Harry. But Chrysler's ""Halftime in America"" ad featuring quintessential tough guy Clint Eastwood has generated fierce debate about whether it accurately portrays the country's most economically distressed city or amounts to a campaign ad for President Barack Obama and the auto bailouts. The 2-minute ad holds up Detroit as a model for American recovery while idealistic images of families, middle class workers and factories  scroll across the screen. ""People are out of work and they're hurting,"" the 81-year-old Eastwood says in his trademark gravelly voice. ""And they're all wondering what they're gonna do to make a comeback. And we're all scared because this isn't a game. The people of Detroit know a little something about this. They almost lost everything. But we all pulled together. Now, Motor City is fighting again."" Conservatives, including GOP strategist Karl Rove, criticized the ad as a not-so-thinly veiled endorsement of the federal government's auto industry bailouts. Others questioned basing a story of economic resurgence in a city that remains in fiscal disarray, with a $200 million budget deficit and cash flow concerns that have it fending off a state takeover. Within days of the Super Bowl a number of parodies of the ""Halftime in America"" spot began to appear on the Internet, including the one displayed in the Example box above, which edited the original and replaced Eastwood's narration with a sound-alike voicing anti-Obama sentiments, ending with the invocation ""all that matters now is that we come together as one great nation and kick his skinny butt back to Chicago."" parodies Eastwood himself indicated in a November 2011 interview with the Los Angeles Times When I push back at his criticism of the auto company bailout, he flashes one of his trademark Eastwood squints, the kind of squint that has made hundreds of bad guys quake in their boots. ""Look at me,"" he said evenly. ""Ive had to make films for less money or go out and find my own money. On 'Mystic River,' I had to cut my salary and everyone elses to get it made. I know the score. If I start to grind out two or three turkeys, Ill be unemployed, just like anyone else."" Last updated:  11 June 2012    Goldstein, Patrick.  ""Clint Eastwood Talks Politics: Who's the Democrat He Voted For?""   Los Angeles Times.  7 November 2011.    Associated Press.  ""'Halftime in America' Ad Creates Political Debate.""   FOXNews.com.  6 February 2012.",['budget'],NEI,"Within days of the Super Bowl a number of parodies of the ""Halftime in America"" spot began to appear on the Internet, including the one displayed in the Example box above, which edited the original and replaced Eastwood's narration with a sound-alike voicing anti-Obama sentiments, ending with the invocation ""all that matters now is that we come together as one great nation and kick his skinny butt back to Chicago."""
Did a Trump Campaign Ad Use a Photo from Ukraine of Protesters Hitting Police?,['The United States is not the only country that has seen violent clashes between police and protesters. '],"In July 2020, an advertisement for U.S. President Donald Trump's 2020 reelection campaign started appearing on Trump's official Facebook page showing a comparison of two images entitled ""Public Safety"" and ""Chaos and Violence."" The ""Public Safety"" image showed Trump surrounded presumably by various members of law enforcement, while the ""Chaos and Violence"" image supposedly showed protesters beating up an American police officer: started appearing Shortly after this ad started running, media outlets such as the BBC noticed that the image on the right was not taken in 2020, and that it didn't show an incident from the United States. This image was actually taken in 2014, and shows a clash between police and protesters in Ukraine.   BBC The BBC reported: A post by Donald Trump's official Facebook account purports to show violence in the US but is in fact of an event in another country. The advert shows one image of Mr Trump in a calm setting talking to police officers beside another of a security official being surrounded by protesters, saying: ""Public safety vs chaos and violence"". However, the image is a photo from a pro-democracy protest in Ukraine in 2014. This photograph was taken by photographer Mstyslav Chernov in February 2014 during a protest in Kyiv, Ukraine. The image is available via Wikipedia under a ""Creative Commons"" license. The terms for this photograph state that it is free to use  as long as the photographer is given proper credit. But the advertisement on Trump's Facebook page offered no mention of the photographer.  Wikipedia Creative Commons Here's an uncropped version of Chernov's photograph:   Chernov confirmed to Business Insider that the Trump ad did indeed use his photograph from Ukraine in 2014. Chernov went on to say that the only way to combat this sort of deception is through ""education and media literacy."" Business Insider Chernov said: ""Photography has always been used to manipulate public opinion. And with the rise of social media and the rise of populism, this is happening even more,"" he said. ""The only way to combat this is through education and media literacy. When people learn to independently distinguish truth from lies, then the number of manipulations will decrease."" Giles, Christopher.  ""Facebook: Trump Posts Misleading Ad Using Ukraine Photo.""
  BBC.  22 July 2020. Jankowicz, Mia.  ""A New Trump Campaign Ad Depicting a Police Officer Being Attacked by Protesters is Actually a 2014 Photo of Pro-Democracy Protests in Ukraine.""
  Business Insider.  22 July 2020.",['credit'],True,"In July 2020, an advertisement for U.S. President Donald Trump's 2020 reelection campaign started appearing on Trump's official Facebook page showing a comparison of two images entitled ""Public Safety"" and ""Chaos and Violence."" The ""Public Safety"" image showed Trump surrounded presumably by various members of law enforcement, while the ""Chaos and Violence"" image supposedly showed protesters beating up an American police officer:Shortly after this ad started running, media outlets such as the BBC noticed that the image on the right was not taken in 2020, and that it didn't show an incident from the United States. This image was actually taken in 2014, and shows a clash between police and protesters in Ukraine. This photograph was taken by photographer Mstyslav Chernov in February 2014 during a protest in Kyiv, Ukraine. The image is available via Wikipedia under a ""Creative Commons"" license. The terms for this photograph state that it is free to use  as long as the photographer is given proper credit. But the advertisement on Trump's Facebook page offered no mention of the photographer. Chernov confirmed to Business Insider that the Trump ad did indeed use his photograph from Ukraine in 2014. Chernov went on to say that the only way to combat this sort of deception is through ""education and media literacy."""
McMoose,"[""Fauxtography: Photograph shows a moose poking its snout into a McDonald's drive-through window in Madawaska, Maine.""]","Claim:  Photograph shows a moose poking its snout into a McDonald's drive-through window in Madawaska, Maine. REAL PHOTOGRAPH;  INACCURATE DESCRIPTION Example:  [Collected on the Internet, 2005] MEET McMOOSE,  PHOTOGRAPHED OUTSIDE MADAWASKA, (AROOSTOOK COUNTY), MAINE,  ACROSS THE ST. JOHN RIVER FROM EDMUNSTON, NEW BRUNSWICK, CANADA  Origins:  The town of Madawaska, Maine, has at least one McDonald's restaurant, and moose are known to inhabit the area, but the critter pictured above poking his snout into a drive-through window actually hails from an area  Madawaska several thousand miles away. This photograph appeared in the 2004 pictorial wildlife book Moose Views, where it was credited to Steve Kaufman and said to capture a curious moose at a McDonald's in the city of Homer, Alaska, not Madawaska, Maine. Moose Views Homer Coincidentally, Homer, Alaska, was the setting for a series of McDonald's commercials aired in conjunction with the 1990 Super Bowl, based on the conceit that folks so far away from the rest of us couldn't care less who won a match-up between football teams from San Francisco and Denver.  Unless, of course, McDonald's piqued their interest by offering different low-priced specials depending upon who won the game:   Last updated:  9 May 2015 Moose Views",['interest'],NEI,"Origins:  The town of Madawaska, Maine, has at least one McDonald's restaurant, and moose are known to inhabit the area, but the critter pictured above poking his snout into a drive-through window actually hails from an area This photograph appeared in the 2004 pictorial wildlife book Moose Views, where it was credited to Steve Kaufman and said to capture a curious moose at a McDonald's in the city of Homer, Alaska, not Madawaska, Maine."
"Death Row Inmate Asks for a Child As His Last Meal, Texas DOC Plan to Grant Request?",['Has the Texas DOC decided to allow a death row inmate to request a child as his last meal?']," Claim: The Texas Department of Corrections granted a cannibal inmate's request of a child for his last meal.   Example:  [Collected via email, October 2014] I just saw on face book about A Death Row Inmate Asks For A Child As His Last Meal, Texas DOC Plan To (Grant Request) The article I am hoping is false. Here is the beginning of the article on FACEBOOK.   Origins:  On or around 16 October 2014, the website Hip-Hop Hangover published an article claiming Texas death row inmate Steven K. Walker was granted an unusual last meal request: a little boy. article According to the article, Texas DOC officials decided to grant Walker's macabre wish after learning a small child could be purchased for a sum within the department's budget for final meal requests. Additionally, the site claims, Walker was originally tried, convicted, and sentenced to death for an act of cannibalism: Stephen K. Walker, French M. Robertson Unit inmate in Abilene, Texas, is on death row for murder and cannibalism of the 2006 case that sentenced him to death. When asked what he would want his final meal to be, he said with no hesitation, ""A little boy."" The Department of Corrections are supposed to accept all the demands of any kind. So it was initially thought that they were buying a corpse in a morgue to satisfy the desires of Stephen Walker. But tables turned when it was said that they were trying to find a toddler from a third world country and buy him/her alive within a budget of $25,000. The site quotes a purported Texas DOC official on how a child might be deemed fit for Walker's final meal: ""We live in a country where we have laws in place and morals, and we will look to grant Mr. Walker his request under certain circumstances that we have yet to agree to."" He stated. As far as the 'circumstances,' it is rumored that the child would have to suffer from some type of degenerative disease, with a few years to live. And by honoring Walkers request it saves the child from years of suffering. The article relies on a common misconception: that last meal requests, no matter how difficult or implausible they may be, must be honored. As we note in a similar article, this is simply not the case. Not only is there no law mandating last meal requests be honored by prison officials, the practice is a rapidly-dying courtesy that is not always extended to condemned prisoners (and has already been eliminated in the state of Texas). last meal It's also worth noting the mugshot circulating with later iterations of the rumor is neither of a man named Steven K. Walker, nor of a prisoner on Texas' death row. The man pictured is Kyle Walker of Florida, who was arrested on a moving violation charge in the Sunshine State in July 2014. Walker was accused not of cannibalism, but of ""tailgating, flashing his lights, and honking his horn excessively."" arrested Plausibility aside, Hip-Hop Hangover is one of a growing number of satire or ""fake news"" sites. Among the page's other stories are ""Chicago Ebola Outbreak Kills Three,"" ""Cellphone Meme Guy, Martin Baker, Killed in Car Accident Talking on His Phone?"" and ""Beyonce Announces She Never Carried Blue Ivy, Reveals Surrogate."" Chicago Ebola Outbreak Kills Three   Last updated:  30 October 2014 ",['budget'],NEI,"Origins:  On or around 16 October 2014, the website Hip-Hop Hangover published an article claiming Texas death row inmate Steven K. Walker was granted an unusual last meal request: a little boy.The article relies on a common misconception: that last meal requests, no matter how difficult or implausible they may be, must be honored. As we note in a similar article, this is simply not the case. Not only is there no law mandating last meal requests be honored by prison officials, the practice is a rapidly-dying courtesy that is not always extended to condemned prisoners (and has already been eliminated in the state of Texas).It's also worth noting the mugshot circulating with later iterations of the rumor is neither of a man named Steven K. Walker, nor of a prisoner on Texas' death row. The man pictured is Kyle Walker of Florida, who was arrested on a moving violation charge in the Sunshine State in July 2014. Walker was accused not of cannibalism, but of ""tailgating, flashing his lights, and honking his horn excessively.""Plausibility aside, Hip-Hop Hangover is one of a growing number of satire or ""fake news"" sites. Among the page's other stories are ""Chicago Ebola Outbreak Kills Three,"" ""Cellphone Meme Guy, Martin Baker, Killed in Car Accident Talking on His Phone?"" and ""Beyonce Announces She Never Carried Blue Ivy, Reveals Surrogate."""
Did AT&T Have a Contract to Audit Dominion Voting Systems?,"['The motive behind an explosion that rocked Nashville on Christmas morning is murky, but no evidence suggests it was election-related.']","On Christmas morning of 2020, a recreational vehicle   exploded on the streets of Nashville near a building owned by AT&T that lies one block from the companys office tower.  Shortly afterwards, social media users began circulating variants of a conspiracy theory holding that AT&T had been engaged to undertake a ""forensic audit of Dominion voting machines,"" the latter of which were frequent targets of false election fraud claims made by President Donald Trump and his supports after Trump lost his re-election bid in November 2020: exploded election fraud   The implication of the conspiracy theory was that the explosion had been intended to destroy the machines before they were audited in order to cover up evidence of massive voting fraud. However, both AT&T and Dominion have disclaimed the notion that the former company was engaged in audit of the latter, or that any Dominion-related systems were being moved to Nashville in preparation for a ""forensic audit"" (by anyone).  No available external evidence suggests AT&T was involved in any such audit, either. As of now, the person of interest identified by the FBI in connection with the explosion, Anthony Quinn Warner, is believed to have been ""paranoid about 5G technology"" (another frequent subject of conspiracy theories) rather than possessing any election-related motive. Anthony Quinn Warner 5G technology conspiracy theories",['interest'],False,"On Christmas morning of 2020, a recreational vehicle   exploded on the streets of Nashville near a building owned by AT&T that lies one block from the companys office tower.  Shortly afterwards, social media users began circulating variants of a conspiracy theory holding that AT&T had been engaged to undertake a ""forensic audit of Dominion voting machines,"" the latter of which were frequent targets of false election fraud claims made by President Donald Trump and his supports after Trump lost his re-election bid in November 2020:As of now, the person of interest identified by the FBI in connection with the explosion, Anthony Quinn Warner, is believed to have been ""paranoid about 5G technology"" (another frequent subject of conspiracy theories) rather than possessing any election-related motive."
"Says with the ongoing economic downturn, child abuse is on the rise.",[],"Sen. Jeff Merkley appeared at the new Childrens Center in Clackamas County to raise awareness about an increase in child abuse and, according to his news release, to highlight the correlation to the economic downturn.Even one case of child abuse or neglect is too many, and with the ongoing economic downturn, the numbers of Oregon children suffering from abuse is on the rise, said Merkley. We must do everything in our power to reduce the number of children being abused and help provide sanctuary to those in need.The Childrens Center received some federal money last year. And the visit was a good photo op for a freshman senator during a congressional break.But at Politifact Oregon, we wondered if child abuse really is on the rise and if there is actually a cause-and-effect connection between child abuse and dismal economic times.Merkley is correct about the increase: More Oregon children are suffering abuse and neglect.The Oregon Department of Human Servicesreportsthat 11,090 children were victims of abuse or neglect last year, a 6.4 percent increase from 2008.Population growth isnt the only culprit behind the higher numbers. The state reports that the rate of abuse increased from 11.8 victims per 1,000 children to 12.5 per 1,000.A check with the agencys number-crunchers indicates the trend holds this year, with abuse reports up between 6 percent and 7 percent between July 2009 and July 2010. Though reports dont always turn out to be confirmed cases, officials say they expect the number of child victims will rise again for 2010.But is the increase because of high unemployment?Merkleys spokeswoman, Courtney Warner Crowell, said she hadnt seen any research linking a rise in abuse to an economic downturn. But she said several people shed talked to blamed the increase in child abuse on the economy.But there isnt any statistical evidence drawing a direct link between increased child abuse and a bad economy.We cant say that factually and we cant prove it, says Katharine Cahn, executive director of the Child Welfare Partnership at Portland State University.The number of child abuse victims can rise, even in good times, Cahn says, simply because more people are reporting the abuse.State stats do show alcohol and drug abuse, domestic violence and parental run-ins with police among the common stress factors that contribute to child abuse.Cahn concedes that people do feel stressed and depressed when the economy goes bust and may drink or use drugs in an attempt to cope. And that, she says, may be the indirect tie to Oregons rising numbers.So, it appears that while Oregons junior senator was right about the numbers of kids abused, the sour economy may not be deserve all the blame. We find the claim Mostly True. Comment on this item.","['Oregon', 'Children', 'Economy', 'Families']",True,"Sen. Jeff Merkley appeared at the new Childrens Center in Clackamas County to raise awareness about an increase in child abuse and, according to his news release, to highlight the correlation to the economic downturn.Even one case of child abuse or neglect is too many, and with the ongoing economic downturn, the numbers of Oregon children suffering from abuse is on the rise, said Merkley. We must do everything in our power to reduce the number of children being abused and help provide sanctuary to those in need.The Childrens Center received some federal money last year. And the visit was a good photo op for a freshman senator during a congressional break.But at Politifact Oregon, we wondered if child abuse really is on the rise and if there is actually a cause-and-effect connection between child abuse and dismal economic times.Merkley is correct about the increase: More Oregon children are suffering abuse and neglect.The Oregon Department of Human Servicesreportsthat 11,090 children were victims of abuse or neglect last year, a 6.4 percent increase from 2008.Population growth isnt the only culprit behind the higher numbers. The state reports that the rate of abuse increased from 11.8 victims per 1,000 children to 12.5 per 1,000.A check with the agencys number-crunchers indicates the trend holds this year, with abuse reports up between 6 percent and 7 percent between July 2009 and July 2010. Though reports dont always turn out to be confirmed cases, officials say they expect the number of child victims will rise again for 2010.But is the increase because of high unemployment?Merkleys spokeswoman, Courtney Warner Crowell, said she hadnt seen any research linking a rise in abuse to an economic downturn. But she said several people shed talked to blamed the increase in child abuse on the economy.But there isnt any statistical evidence drawing a direct link between increased child abuse and a bad economy.We cant say that factually and we cant prove it, says Katharine Cahn, executive director of the Child Welfare Partnership at Portland State University.The number of child abuse victims can rise, even in good times, Cahn says, simply because more people are reporting the abuse.State stats do show alcohol and drug abuse, domestic violence and parental run-ins with police among the common stress factors that contribute to child abuse.Cahn concedes that people do feel stressed and depressed when the economy goes bust and may drink or use drugs in an attempt to cope. And that, she says, may be the indirect tie to Oregons rising numbers.So, it appears that while Oregons junior senator was right about the numbers of kids abused, the sour economy may not be deserve all the blame. We find the claim Mostly True.Comment on this item."
Federal authorities have granted China the power of eminent domain.,"[""The U.S. government has agreed to allow China to exercise 'eminent domain' as collateral for American debt.?""]","The United States of America has tendered to China a written agreement that grants the People's Republic of China an option to exercise eminent domain within the USA as collateral for China's continued purchase of US Treasury Notes and existing US currency reserves. On February 11, Bloomberg Business News reported that China was seeking ""guarantees"" for its US government debt, and it now appears they got it. Well-placed senior sources at the US Embassy in Beijing confirm that the formal written agreement was delivered by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton during her recent trip to China. This means that in the event the US government defaults on its financial obligations to China, the Communist government of China would be permitted to physically take land, buildings, factories, and perhaps even entire cities inside the USA to satisfy the financial obligations of the US government. 

The large amount of U.S. debt held by foreign countries such as China has long concerned many Americans, especially in the current climate of economic turmoil. As the Washington Post noted, China is the biggest foreign holder of U.S. debt, which helped finance the spending binge the United States undertook before the current economic crisis. Some experts have expressed concern that China's substantial holding of U.S. debt gives it increased leverage in dealings with Washington because any halt in Chinese purchases would make it more difficult to finance government bailouts and stimulus packages. Likewise, as Bloomberg News reported, some Chinese officials have opined that China should ask the U.S. for some economic guarantees as a prerequisite for additional purchases of U.S. securities. ""China will ask for a guarantee that the U.S. will support the dollar's exchange rate and ensure that China's dollar-denominated assets are safe,"" said He Zhicheng, an economist at the Agricultural Bank of China. 

However, the notion that the U.S. has agreed to guarantee its foreign debt by granting China permission to enact ""eminent domain"" and ""physically take land, buildings, factories, perhaps even entire cities"" from the U.S. is not a sensible claim. The concept of ""eminent domain"" in the United States refers to the right of the government to seize private property for public use in exchange for payment of fair market value. The Fifth Amendment to the Constitution mandates that ""private property [shall not] be taken for public use, without just compensation."" Thus, the idea of enacting eminent domain as a form of debt repayment or guarantee is illogical: It's akin to a debtor offering to settle a $5,000 debt by agreeing to sell his creditor $5,000 worth of jewelry for $5,000. At the end of the day, the debtor hasn't given up anything, and his creditor still hasn't collected anything on the original loan amount. 

Moreover, Executive Order 13406 (""Protecting the Property Rights of the American People"") states that the federal government must limit its use of the taking of private property ""to situations in which the taking is for public use, with just compensation"" and ""not merely for the purpose of advancing the economic interest of private parties to be given ownership or use of the property taken."" Aside from functional arguments, the common-sense test applies: If the U.S. government had actually guaranteed, in writing, that China could seize private property within the U.S. to satisfy the financial obligations of the U.S. government, that information would be the biggest news story of the day. So who is reporting this news? Not any legitimate news outlet; the story appears only in the blog of former radio host Hal Turner, who has previously presented fictitious tales of politically outrageous subjects as actual occurrences, such as proffering fake Amero coins as proof of a secret conspiracy to merge the U.S., Mexico, and Canada into a single entity.",['loan'],NEI,"[Rest of article here.]The concept of ""eminent domain"" in the United States refers to the right of the government to seize private property for public use in exchange for payment of fair market value.  (The Fifth Amendment to the Constitution mandates that ""private property [shall not] be taken for public use, without just compensation."")  Thus the idea of enacting eminent domain as a form of debt repayment or guarantee isn't logical: It's akin to a debtor's offering to settle a $5,000 debt by agreeing to sell his creditor $5,000 worth of jewelry for $5,000  at the end of the day, the debtor hasn't given up anything, and his creditor still hasn't collected anything on his original loan amount.Moreover, Executive Order 13406 (""Protecting the Property Rights of the American People"") states that the the federal government must limit its use of the taking of private property ""to situations in which the taking is for public use, with just compensation"" and ""not merely for the purpose of advancing the economic interest of private parties to be given ownership or use of the property taken.""Aside from functional arguments, the common sense test applies: If the U.S. government had actually guaranteed, in writing, that China could seize private property within the U.S. to satisfy the financial obligations of the U.S. government, that information would be the biggest new story of the day.  So who is reporting this news?  Not any legitimate news outlet  the story appears only in the blog of former radio host Hal Turner (who has previously presented fictitious tales of politically outrageous subjects as actual occurrences, such as proffering fake Amero coins as proof of a secret conspiracy to merge the U.S., Mexico, and Canada into a single entity) and in hundreds of identical Internet replications."
Debunking Trump Tweets: Biden's 143K Vote 'Dump' in Wisconsin,"['Voting spikes did occur in Wisconsin and other states as ballots were being counted, but for ordinary and predictable reasons.']","In the continuous stream of tweets alleging election fraud issued from the Twitter account of President Donald Trump in mid-November 2020, one tweet posted in the evening of Nov. 18 claimed that victorious Democratic presidential candidate had received an ""unbelievable"" ""dump of 143,379 votes at 3:42AM, when they learned he was losing badly"":  It is true that Biden picked up about 149,000 votes in Wisconsin around 3:30 AM in the early morning hours following the election, thereby erasing a lead Trump had held in the in-progress vote tally up to that point:  However, no fraudulent activity of furtive ""dump"" of ballots was behind this phenomenon. By law, Wisconsin was not allowed to begin tabulating absentee ballots (no matter how early they were sent in) until 7:00 AM on Election Day.  Biden's vote count took a big jump (while Trump's increased much more modestly) around the time in question because that was when Milwaukee County finished and reported the tabulation of its approximately 170,000 absentee ballots.  That occurrence was doubly favorable for Biden, both because Democrats were far more likely to vote via absentee ballots, and because Milwaukee County is the most populous county in Wisconsin and is an overwhelmingly Democratic area: far more likely  The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported on the bulge in Biden votes, and the reasons behind it, at the time it took place: reported Biden overtook Trump in the early morning hours when Milwaukee reported its roughly 170,000 absentee votes, which were overwhelmingly Democratic. Then early morning returns from Green Bay and Kenosha on Wednesday added to his slender lead. Trump had nurtured a lead of more than 100,000 votes before those returns came in. By the morning after the election, even Trump had recognized (if not accepted) the phenomenon of mail-in ballots in most states being heavily Democratic, in large part because he discouraged his supporters from using that method of voting:  In fact, more than two months before the election, NPR had observed that ""President Trump's campaign to discourage the use of mail-in voting this fall is raising concerns among Republicans, particularly in the key swing state of Wisconsin, that his efforts could hinder their party on election night."" observed As of this writing, Biden has won Wisconsin (and its 10 electoral votes) by just over 20,000 votes out of more than 3.2M ballots cast: ",['returns'],False,"However, no fraudulent activity of furtive ""dump"" of ballots was behind this phenomenon. By law, Wisconsin was not allowed to begin tabulating absentee ballots (no matter how early they were sent in) until 7:00 AM on Election Day.  Biden's vote count took a big jump (while Trump's increased much more modestly) around the time in question because that was when Milwaukee County finished and reported the tabulation of its approximately 170,000 absentee ballots.  That occurrence was doubly favorable for Biden, both because Democrats were far more likely to vote via absentee ballots, and because Milwaukee County is the most populous county in Wisconsin and is an overwhelmingly Democratic area:The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported on the bulge in Biden votes, and the reasons behind it, at the time it took place:In fact, more than two months before the election, NPR had observed that ""President Trump's campaign to discourage the use of mail-in voting this fall is raising concerns among Republicans, particularly in the key swing state of Wisconsin, that his efforts could hinder their party on election night."""
All the money the Department of Citrus has is paid for by the citrus growers. You don't save dollars by eliminating the Department of Citrus.,[],"At an Associated Press meeting Jan. 19, 2011, about the state's upcoming legislative session, Florida Commissioner of Agriculture and Consumer Services Adam Putnam was asked about an idea floated by Gov. Rick Scott to merge two state departments: Citrus and Agriculture.Putnam wasn't sweet on the idea.All the money the Department of Citrus has is paid for by the citrus growers, Putnam said. You don't save dollars by eliminating the Department of Citrus.Government departments usually are funded, at least in part, with taxpayer dollars. So we wondered, is that not the case with the Department of Citrus? Is the entire department's budget paid for by the growers?Putnam spokesman Sterling Ivey explained via e-mail on Feb. 1: Although it's a state agency, the FDOC is unique in that its operations are not funded through the state's general tax revenue fund. Florida's citrus industry pays its own way in the form of an excise tax placed on each box of citrus that moves through commercial channels.The department is well-known in the citrus-growing areas of Central Florida, but less so in other parts of the state. So Ivey sent us some background from the department'swebsite.It was established in 1935 by legislative approval of the Florida Citrus Code. It's not affiliated with the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. The 12-member Florida Citrus Commission, appointed by the governor, sets the annual tax rate that growers pay. The department regulates every aspect of the industry, including research, production, fertilizing, maturity standards, harvesting, licensing, transportation, labeling, packing and processing.Ivey also sent us a link to thedepartment's 2010-11 budget.We contacted Comptroller Debra Funkhouser, who has been with the department for 16 years, and she broke down the budget. The total is about $58 million this year. About 85 percent comes from the box tax, 9 percent from the federal government, and the remainder from interest and carryover dollars, she said in an interview Feb. 2. That breakdown does not fluctuate much, and the department has been funded that way for decades, Funkhouser said.Approximately 57 employees work for the department now, and none of its expenses -- including overhead and salaries  are paid from state tax dollars, Funkhouser said. She did confirm that the department has received only $10 million from state general revenues in its 76-year history, a one-time occurrence after crops were devastated by hurricanes in 2004-05.The box tax is assessed to growers, collected by the processors and remitted to the citrus department, she said. The tax for oranges, for example, is currently 25 cents for a 90-pound box.Does that mean the box tax is passed on to customers buying citrus?I would have to say there is a correlation, just like the cost of farmers' fertilizer, just like the cost of harvesting that fruit. It's not a direct association, she said.An article in theLakeland Ledgeron Jan. 18, 2011, described a meeting about a month earlier between Ken Keck, the citrus department's executive director, and two officials from Scott's budget office. Keck said the officials discussed possible changes that included a merger with the Agriculture Department or another marketing agency, such as tourism, as well as privatization.Citrus officials argued any proposed Citrus Department reform would not advance Scott's stated agenda of cutting taxes for Florida businesses and residents because none of their taxes go to the department, theLedgersaid. To the extent this is a general-revenue issue, this does zero for the state budget, Keck was quoted in thearticle. It's unclear whether the governor is aware of that.The article noted that the department contributes about $2 million annually to the state's general fund through a service charge levied on every state agency, (Florida Citrus Commissioner Jay) Clark said.We also looked at thesunset review-- routinely done of state departments to determine whether they should be retained, modified or abolished. The Senate Committee on Agriculture was the primary sunset review committee for the 2008 review. The sunset review recommended keeping the citrus department as a free-standing department because a merger would make it inefficient at a time when the citrus industry was facing challenges, including recovering from hurricanes.Putnam claimed: All the money the Department of Citrus has is paid for by the citrus growers. You don't save dollars by eliminating the Department of Citrus. In fact, about 85 percent is paid for by the growers -- of the rest, about 9 percent comes from the federal government. So Putnam is correct that Florida won't save state taxpayer dollars by eliminating the department, but he's missing the context of the additional federal dollars. We rate this statement Mostly True.","['Agriculture', 'State Budget', 'Florida']",True,"At an Associated Press meeting Jan. 19, 2011, about the state's upcoming legislative session, Florida Commissioner of Agriculture and Consumer Services Adam Putnam was asked about an idea floated by Gov. Rick Scott to merge two state departments: Citrus and Agriculture.Putnam wasn't sweet on the idea.All the money the Department of Citrus has is paid for by the citrus growers, Putnam said. You don't save dollars by eliminating the Department of Citrus.Government departments usually are funded, at least in part, with taxpayer dollars. So we wondered, is that not the case with the Department of Citrus? Is the entire department's budget paid for by the growers?Putnam spokesman Sterling Ivey explained via e-mail on Feb. 1: Although it's a state agency, the FDOC is unique in that its operations are not funded through the state's general tax revenue fund. Florida's citrus industry pays its own way in the form of an excise tax placed on each box of citrus that moves through commercial channels.The department is well-known in the citrus-growing areas of Central Florida, but less so in other parts of the state. So Ivey sent us some background from the department'swebsite.It was established in 1935 by legislative approval of the Florida Citrus Code. It's not affiliated with the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. The 12-member Florida Citrus Commission, appointed by the governor, sets the annual tax rate that growers pay. The department regulates every aspect of the industry, including research, production, fertilizing, maturity standards, harvesting, licensing, transportation, labeling, packing and processing.Ivey also sent us a link to thedepartment's 2010-11 budget.We contacted Comptroller Debra Funkhouser, who has been with the department for 16 years, and she broke down the budget. The total is about $58 million this year. About 85 percent comes from the box tax, 9 percent from the federal government, and the remainder from interest and carryover dollars, she said in an interview Feb. 2. That breakdown does not fluctuate much, and the department has been funded that way for decades, Funkhouser said.Approximately 57 employees work for the department now, and none of its expenses -- including overhead and salaries  are paid from state tax dollars, Funkhouser said. She did confirm that the department has received only $10 million from state general revenues in its 76-year history, a one-time occurrence after crops were devastated by hurricanes in 2004-05.The box tax is assessed to growers, collected by the processors and remitted to the citrus department, she said. The tax for oranges, for example, is currently 25 cents for a 90-pound box.Does that mean the box tax is passed on to customers buying citrus?I would have to say there is a correlation, just like the cost of farmers' fertilizer, just like the cost of harvesting that fruit. It's not a direct association, she said.An article in theLakeland Ledgeron Jan. 18, 2011, described a meeting about a month earlier between Ken Keck, the citrus department's executive director, and two officials from Scott's budget office. Keck said the officials discussed possible changes that included a merger with the Agriculture Department or another marketing agency, such as tourism, as well as privatization.Citrus officials argued any proposed Citrus Department reform would not advance Scott's stated agenda of cutting taxes for Florida businesses and residents because none of their taxes go to the department, theLedgersaid. To the extent this is a general-revenue issue, this does zero for the state budget, Keck was quoted in thearticle. It's unclear whether the governor is aware of that.The article noted that the department contributes about $2 million annually to the state's general fund through a service charge levied on every state agency, (Florida Citrus Commissioner Jay) Clark said.We also looked at thesunset review-- routinely done of state departments to determine whether they should be retained, modified or abolished. The Senate Committee on Agriculture was the primary sunset review committee for the 2008 review. The sunset review recommended keeping the citrus department as a free-standing department because a merger would make it inefficient at a time when the citrus industry was facing challenges, including recovering from hurricanes.Putnam claimed: All the money the Department of Citrus has is paid for by the citrus growers. You don't save dollars by eliminating the Department of Citrus. In fact, about 85 percent is paid for by the growers -- of the rest, about 9 percent comes from the federal government. So Putnam is correct that Florida won't save state taxpayer dollars by eliminating the department, but he's missing the context of the additional federal dollars. We rate this statement Mostly True."
Was Arnold Schwarzenegger Forced to Sleep Outside a Hotel He Had Helped Open?,"[""That's gratitude for you!""]","Social media users love to share words of inspiration and wisdom  if you can pair a profound (or at least vague) life lesson with a striking photo of a celebrity, all the better.  That was the case in early 2018, when a photograph of California's former governor Arnold Schwarzenegger appeared along with an elaborate, but false, back story. A photograph of Schwarzenegger in a sleeping bag in front of a statue of himself bore the following caption: caption Famed actor Arnold Schwarzenegger posted a photo of himself sleeping on the street under his famous bronze statue, and sadly wrote ""How times have changed""... The reason he wrote the phrase was not only because he was old, but because when he was governor of California he inaugurated a hotel with his statue. Hotel staff told Arnold, ""at any moment you can come and have a room reserved for you."" when Arnold stepped down as governor and went to the hotel, the administration refused to give him a room arguing that he should pay for it, since they were in great demand. He brought a sleeping bag and stood underneath the statue and explained what he wanted to convey: ""When I was in an important position, they always complimented me, and when I lost this position, they forgot about me and did not keep their promise. Do not trust your position or the amount of money you have, nor your power, nor your intelligence, it will not last. "" Trying to teach everyone that when you're ""Important"" in the people's eyes , everyone is your ""Friend "" But once you don't benefit their interests , you won't matter. "" You are not always who you think you will always be, nothing lasts forever.""    The story is riddled with falsehoods, and its primary claim  that Schwarzenegger slept outside a hotel after being refused a free room is a fabrication.  In reality, the photograph (which is legitimate) was taken in January 2016, while the Hollywood star was shooting a film in Columbus, Ohio. Schwarzenegger posted it to his Instagram account on 15 January 2016, apparently as a joke: shooting account   The statue is located outside the city's convention center and has never been situated in front of a hotel, despite the false claims in the Facebook post.  located Schwarzenegger first helped unveil the statue in 2012, outside the Franklin County Veterans Memorial, and then took part in its rededication in 2014, after it was moved to its current location. The former bodybuilder has longstanding ties to Columbus, which is host to an annual bodybuilding competition called the Arnold Sports Festival.  2012 competition Finn, Natalie.  ""Here Is Arnold Schwarzenegger Sleeping Next to a Statue of His Bodybuilder Self in Ohio.""
  E! Online.  15 January 2016. Associated Press.  ""Arnold Schwarzenegger Statue Rededicated in Downtown Columbus.""
  WBNS-TV.  6 October 2014. Audi, Tamara.  ""Hello, Columbus: Arnold Schwarzenegger Is Back, Bigger Than Ever in Ohio.""
  The Wall Street Journal.  2 March 2012.",['share'],False,"That was the case in early 2018, when a photograph of California's former governor Arnold Schwarzenegger appeared along with an elaborate, but false, back story. A photograph of Schwarzenegger in a sleeping bag in front of a statue of himself bore the following caption: In reality, the photograph (which is legitimate) was taken in January 2016, while the Hollywood star was shooting a film in Columbus, Ohio. Schwarzenegger posted it to his Instagram account on 15 January 2016, apparently as a joke:The statue is located outside the city's convention center and has never been situated in front of a hotel, despite the false claims in the Facebook post. Schwarzenegger first helped unveil the statue in 2012, outside the Franklin County Veterans Memorial, and then took part in its rededication in 2014, after it was moved to its current location. The former bodybuilder has longstanding ties to Columbus, which is host to an annual bodybuilding competition called the Arnold Sports Festival. "
Candy Crush Saga,"['Brouhaha involving King Digital Entertainment, maker of Candy Crush Saga, over trademarks and similarities to the CandySwipe game.']"," Claim:  King Digital Entertainment, maker of Candy Crush Saga, copied their game from CandySwipe and is attempting to cancel the latter's trademark. OUTDATED Example:  [Collected via e-mail, February 2014] There is an ""open letter"" being circulated that is supposed to have been written by an Albert Ransom from Runsome Apps, Inc, that states that he trademarked a game called CandySwipe prior to King.com creating CandyCrush and that King.com is trying to take over his trademark.  Is this true?   Synopsis:  As of 16 April 2014, the parties in the dispute discussed below have announced the withdrawal of their claims against each other, so this item is no longer current: announced I am happy to announce that I have amicably resolved my dispute with King over my CandySwipe trademark and that I am withdrawing my opposition to their mark and they are withdrawing their counterclaim against mine. I have learned that they picked the CANDY CRUSH name before I released my game and that they were never trying to take my game away. Both our games can continue to coexist without confusing players. Origins:  In February 2014, King Digital Entertainment, the company behind the massively popular Candy Crush Saga game, announced they had filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to issue an Initial Public Offering (IPO) of stock.  King said they expected to raise $500 million in capital, with some analysts predicting that the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) could value the company as high as $5.5 billion based largely on the strength of Candy Crush Saga: filed The game, which involves matching brightly coloured sweets on a grid to solve various puzzles, was played over 1 billion times a day in December [2013], according to the filing. Candy Crush is free but players pay for options within the game. It has proved a lucrative combination. King's profits grew over 7,000% last year, according to the filing. In 2012 the company's revenues were $164.4 million and its net profit $7.8 million, in 2013 those figures rose to $1.88 billion and $567.6 million respectively. But the filing also reveals that King's fortunes are currently closely tied to the continued success of Candy Crush. The game accounts for 78% of King's total gross bookings, according to the filing. Its second most popular game, Pet Rescue Saga, had 15 million daily active users in December, a fraction of Candy Crush's 93 million. King noted in its filing that ""a small number of games currently generate a substantial majority of our revenue."" However, King has been the subject of controversy due to similarities between Candy Crush Saga and CandySwipe, the latter being an earlier iteration of a comparable game concept and visual design which its creator, independent developer Albert Ransom, maintains King copied from him.  Ransom posted an open letter to King on the CandySwipe web site, criticizing the company for attempting to wrest theCandySwipe trademark away from him: CandySwipe open letter Dear King, Congratulations! You win! I created my game CandySwipe in memory of my late mother who passed away at an early age of 62 of leukemia. I released CandySwipe in 2010 five months after she passed and I made it because she always liked these sorts of games. In fact, if you beat the full version of the android game, you will still get the message saying ""... the game was made in memory of my mother, Layla ..."" I created this game for warmhearted people like her and to help support my family, wife and two boys 10 and 4. Two years after I released CandySwipe, you released Candy Crush Saga on mobile; the app icon, candy pieces, and even the rewarding, ""Sweet!"" are nearly identical. So much so, that I have hundreds of instances of actual confusion from users who think CandySwipe is Candy Crush Saga, or that CandySwipe is a Candy Crush Saga knockoff. So when you attempted to register your trademark in 2012, I opposed it for ""likelihood of confusion"" (which is within my legal right) given I filed for my registered trademark back in 2010 (two years before Candy Crush Saga existed). Now, after quietly battling this trademark opposition for a year, I have learned that you now want to cancel my CandySwipe trademark so that I don't have the right to use my own game's name. You are able to do this because only within the last month you purchased the rights to a game named Candy Crusher (which is nothing like CandySwipe or even Candy Crush Saga). Good for you, you win. I hope you're happy taking the food out of my family's mouth when CandySwipe clearly existed well before Candy Crush Saga. I have spent over three years working on this game as an independent app developer. I learned how to code on my own after my mother passed and CandySwipe was my first and most successful game; it's my livelihood, and you are now attempting to take that away from me. You have taken away the possibility of CandySwipe blossoming into what it has the potential of becoming. I have been quiet, not to exploit the situation, hoping that both sides could agree on a peaceful resolution. However, your move to buy a trademark for the sole purpose of getting away with infringing on the CandySwipe trademark and goodwill just sickens me. This also contradicts your recent quote by Riccardo in ""An open letter on intellectual property"" posted on your website which states, ""We believe in a thriving game development community, and believe that good game developers  both small and large  have every right to protect the hard work they do and the games they create."" I myself was only trying to protect my hard work. I wanted to take this moment to write you this letter so that you know who I am. Because I now know exactly what you are. Congratulations on your success! Ransom's statement was penned in response to King's own open letter on the trademark issue, in which the company maintained that they were simply acquiring ""Candy""-related trademarks in order to ensure that their ""hard work is not simply copied elsewhere"" and to defend their product against ""games with similar sounding titles and similar looking graphics"" (without commenting on the claim that the similar CandySwipe game antedated Candy Crush Saga by about two years and therefore could not have been copied from the latter): open letter There has been a vigorous debate both inside and outside King about how we protect our intellectual property. I want to set the record straight about where we stand on these issues, and clarify our philosophy on intellectual property. At its simplest, our policy is to protect our IP and to also respect the IP of others. We believe in a thriving game development community, and believe that good game developers  both small and large  have every right to protect the hard work they  do and the games they create. Like any responsible company, we take appropriate steps to protect our IP, including our look-and-feel and trademarks. Our goals are simple: to ensure that our employees' hard work is not simply copied elsewhere, that we avoid player confusion and that the integrity of our brands remains. Lets talk about trademarks, and the use of the words ""Candy"" and ""Saga"" in casual gaming. Let's start with the fact that Candy Crush Saga has become one of the most successful casual games in history. Millions of people play the game every day. Not surprisingly, some developers have seen an opportunity to take advantage of the game's popularity, and have published games with similar sounding titles and similar looking graphics. We believe it is right and reasonable to defend ourselves from such copycats. To protect our IP, last year we acquired the trademark in the EU for ""Candy"" from a company that was in bankruptcy  and we have filed for a similar trademark in the U.S. We've been the subject of no little scorn for our actions on this front, but the truth is that there is nothing very unusual about trademarking a common word for specific uses. Think of ""Time"", ""Money"" ""Fortune"", ""Apple"", and ""Sun"", to name a few. We are not trying to control the world's use of the word ""Candy""; having a trade mark doesn't allow us to do that anyway. We're just trying to prevent others from creating games that unfairly capitalise on our success. As Metro chimed in, however, even though King may appear to be the villain in this story, neither side may be correct in claiming the high ground since both CandySwipe and Candy Crush Saga are notably similar to other games dating from the mid-1990s, and what is being disputed is merely the name that each side is using for their version of the game rather than a claim to the original idea itself (i.e., this is a tussle over trademarks, not copyright): Part legal drama, part time travel story, this one has it all. Candy Crush developer King have been in the headlines for all the wrong reasons lately, as they continue their attempts to trademark the words 'candy' and 'saga'  which led to them threatening to sue Viking game 'The Banner Saga.' For an encore it later transpired that King had purposefully cloned somebody else's game when a publishing deal fell through. Which was sadly ironic considering how paranoid they are about other people copying them. And now they're responding with legal action of their own, against the makers of CandySwipe, by claiming that it's a clone. Despite the fact that Candy Swipe came out two years before Candy Crush. In fact it's worse than that, as Kings attempts to have CandySwipe's trademark cancelled revolves around them buying the rights to an even earlier game called Candy Crusher. This, they hope, will allow them to claim that they are the original trademark holders of everything video game and candy-related. Although it's hard not to side with Ransom in all this, the idea of all these developers suing each other over who cloned who seems slightly absurd considering they're all just copies of Bejeweled anyway. Indeed, the modern match-three style puzzler has barely changed at all since the days of Nintendo's Panel De Pon/Tetris Attack in 1995. Although the true originator of the concept is little known PC title Shariki, from a year earlier. Shariki  Metro also reported an attempt by developers to challenge King's trademark maneuvering by creating ""as many games with the word candy in them as possible"": Indie developers have fought back against developer King's increasingly bizarre legal actions with a game jam called 'Candy Jam'. To the uninitiated it may look like just another Bejeweled clone, but Candy Crush Saga is currently one of the most popular video games in the world. This means British developer King suddenly has a lot of power and influence, which naturally it's already started to abuse. It's the slightly unhinged nature of the abuse which is unexpected though, with the company currently trying to trademark the word 'candy' so that nobody else can use it. But King's plans don't stop there, as they're also suing Kickstarter game 'The Banner Saga' because it has the word 'saga' in its name. Ignoring the fact that most people omit the word Saga when saying Candy Crush's name, 'The Banner Saga' is an adult-themed tactical role-playing game with a notably morose atmosphere. Although it does contain lots of angry vikings, at no point in the game are you invited to match together three-similarly coloured sweets. Even so Kings legal filing insists that: ""The use and registration by Applicant of the mark The Banner Saga for Applicant's goods is likely to cause confusion or to cause mistake or deception in the trade, and among purchasers and potential purchasers, with Opposer's Saga Marks, again resulting in damage to Opposer."" We're trying to keep upbeat but frankly the whole business is deeply depressing in its unbridled corporate greed.  The only positive element to the story is that indie developers have organised an event called Candy Jam to protest King's actions and to make as many games with the word candy in them as possible. The International Game Developers Association (IGDA) has also weighed in on the issue, describing King's trademark efforts as ""overreaching"" and ""predatory"": weighed As an advocacy organization for game developers, the IGDA diligently monitors issues that may restrict a developer's ability to create and distribute his or her work. After reviewing the Trademark filing and subsequent conduct by King Inc. in relation to its popular game, 'Candy Crush Saga,' we feel we should comment. While we understand and respect the appropriate exercise of Trademark rights, King's overreaching filing in its application for the Trademark for its game ""Candy Crush Saga,"" and its predatory efforts to apply that mark to each separate word contained in that name, are in opposition to the values of openness and cooperation we support industry wide, and directly contradict the statement King's CEO, Riccardo Zacconi, made on 27 January. Our Business and Legal Special Interest Group will be providing a more comprehensive analysis of this issue from its perspective soon. Last updated:  17 April 2014    Rushe, Dominic and Stuart Dredge.  ""Candy Crush Game Maker Aims to Raise $500M in IPO.""   The Guardian.  18 February 2014.    Agence France-Presse.  ""Candy Crush Developer Defends Trademarking 'Candy' After Backlash.""   28 January 2014.    Metro.  ""Candy Crush Makers Sue The Banner Saga, Trademark the Word 'Candy'.""   22 January 2014.    Metro.  ""Candy Crush Saga Makers to Sue Game They Copied.""   13 February 2014.    Reuters.  ""Candy Crush Saga Developer King Trademarks the Word ""Candy.'""   22 January 2014.",['profit'],True,"Synopsis:  As of 16 April 2014, the parties in the dispute discussed below have announced the withdrawal of their claims against each other, so this item is no longer current:Origins:  In February 2014, King Digital Entertainment, the company behind the massively popular Candy Crush Saga game, announced they had filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to issue an Initial Public Offering (IPO) of stock.  King said they expected to raise $500 million in capital, with some analysts predicting that the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) could value the company as high as $5.5 billion based largely on the strength of Candy Crush Saga:However, King has been the subject of controversy due to similarities between Candy Crush Saga and CandySwipe, the latter being an earlier iteration of a comparable game concept and visual design which its creator, independent developer Albert Ransom, maintains King copied from him.  Ransom posted an open letter to King on the CandySwipe web site, criticizing the company for attempting to wrest theCandySwipe trademark away from him:Ransom's statement was penned in response to King's own open letter on the trademark issue, in which the company maintained that they were simply acquiring ""Candy""-related trademarks in order to ensure that their ""hard work is not simply copied elsewhere"" and to defend their product against ""games with similar sounding titles and similar looking graphics"" (without commenting on the claim that the similar CandySwipe game antedated Candy Crush Saga by about two years and therefore could not have been copied from the latter):Indeed, the modern match-three style puzzler has barely changed at all since the days of Nintendo's Panel De Pon/Tetris Attack in 1995. Although the true originator of the concept is little known PC title Shariki, from a year earlier.The International Game Developers Association (IGDA) has also weighed in on the issue, describing King's trademark efforts as ""overreaching"" and ""predatory"":"
Is Biden and the Democrats considering monitoring bank and Cash App accounts?,['Social media posts mischaracterized how the American Rescue Plan will affect users of cash apps like Venmo.'],"Various social media posts circulating in late December 2021 claimed that thanks to coronavirus stimulus legislation known as the American Rescue Plan, U.S. President Joe Biden's administration and Democratic legislators would begin ""spying"" or ""snooping"" on users of cash apps like PayPal and Venmo. Here is an example of one such post: example   The truth is, unsurprisingly, more nuanced, but the bottom line is that, contrary to what the above Twitter posts state, the effect of the legislation in question isn't that the Biden administration or Democrats will be ""tapping into"" or ""spying on"" bank or cash app accounts. This is a misleading characterization. What the legislation does is significantly lower the threshold for reporting taxable transactions made using cash apps like Venmo, PayPal, or Zelle for goods and services to the IRS. And when you reach that threshold, the app companies will then be required to send a tax form called a 1099-K to both you and the IRS. A 1099-K is, according to PayPal, an ""informational tax form that is used to report goods and services payments received by a business or individual in the calendar year."" PayPal As of this writing, the current threshold for such reporting is $20,000 and 200 payments in goods and services. Come Jan. 1, 2022, that reporting threshold will drop down to $600. threshold This could have a significant impact on platform users' tax returns. Here's how Bloomberg Tax described how users might experience the change: Bloomberg Tax For example, a model train collector may have paid $5,000 for model train pieces over several years that they now sell for $8,000, and the marketplace that introduced the seller to the buyer and through which the sale took place may charge the seller a total fee of $800. It may cost the model train seller $200 in postage to send the pieces to its buyers. The Form 1099-K that the seller will receive from the TPSO will report $8,000 in gross proceeds paid. However, the sellers taxable gain from that sale would only be $2,000. As a result, collectors and other online sellers will need to keep extensive records of their expenses going forward to avoid over-reporting of income and overpayment of tax. Also, consider the alternativea teenager who walks dogs to earn extra money. If their income in 2022 exceeds $600, their expenses may be limited to the fees charged by the website that connects them to pet owners, but they will owe income taxand possibly self-employment taxon the income they earn. According to PayPal, which owns Venmo, the change doesn't affect people who use the apps for personal transactions, like paying a friend back for your share of dinner, gifts, or chipping in for trips. PayPal also states that its app allows users to categorize their own transactions as personal versus rendering payment for ""goods and services."" PayPal Business Users on Cash Apps Will Begin Receiving Tax Forms. Heres What You Need to Know. WJHL | Tri-Cities News & Weather, 14 Oct. 2021, https://www.wjhl.com/news/business-users-on-cash-apps-to-begin-receiving-tax-forms-what-you-need-to-know/. Pflieger, Deborah. ""New Form 1099 Reporting Coming in 2022,"" Bloomberg Tax, 15 Dec. 2021, https://news.bloombergtax.com/tax-insights-and-commentary/new-form-1099-reporting-coming-in-2022. New U.S. Tax Reporting Requirements: Your Questions Answered. PayPal Newsroom, 4 Nov. 2021, https://newsroom.paypal-corp.com/2021-11-04-New-US-Tax-Reporting-Requirements-Your-Questions-Answered. ""PayPal and Venmo Taxes: What You Need to Know About P2P Platforms."" TurboTax, 27 Nov. 2021, https://turbotax.intuit.com/tax-tips/self-employment-taxes/paypal-and-venmo-taxes-what-you-need-to-know-about-p2p-platforms/L5DNjOUM1.",['income'],False,"Various social media posts circulating in late December 2021 claimed that thanks to coronavirus stimulus legislation known as the American Rescue Plan, U.S. President Joe Biden's administration and Democratic legislators would begin ""spying"" or ""snooping"" on users of cash apps like PayPal and Venmo. Here is an example of one such post:A 1099-K is, according to PayPal, an ""informational tax form that is used to report goods and services payments received by a business or individual in the calendar year.""As of this writing, the current threshold for such reporting is $20,000 and 200 payments in goods and services. Come Jan. 1, 2022, that reporting threshold will drop down to $600.This could have a significant impact on platform users' tax returns. Here's how Bloomberg Tax described how users might experience the change:According to PayPal, which owns Venmo, the change doesn't affect people who use the apps for personal transactions, like paying a friend back for your share of dinner, gifts, or chipping in for trips. PayPal also states that its app allows users to categorize their own transactions as personal versus rendering payment for ""goods and services."""
Do these pictures depict a protester who was compensated to cause disruption during the Kavanaugh confirmation hearings?,['Viral images shared with misleading information about protesters resulted in harassment and death threats.'],"False accusations alleging protesters at confirmation hearings for U.S. Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh were paid as part of a nefarious liberal conspiracy to block his confirmation resulted in intense harassment for two people whose images were posted online along with misleading information. Internet trolls widely shared a photograph of demonstrator Vickie Lampron being handed cash by an organizer while she waited to enter the U.S. Capitol, where she would be one of the first persons to be arrested protesting at the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing for Kavanaugh on 4 September 2018. Although she was merely given a small amount of cash so she could pay post and forfeit fines, conspiracy theorists falsely claimed a photograph of her was evidence that protesters were paid for personal gain in exchange for disrupting the hearings.The picture was originally posted by self-described international conference speaker Adam Schindler to his eponymous website and to Twitter. He also made a YouTube video in which three of his friends claimed to have witnessed ""paid political operatives"" in action:Proof the protestors were paid off in line. #Kavanaugh #ConfirmKavanaugh #ActivismInAction pic.twitter.com/hMLpP4zWPn Adam W. Schindler (@AdamSchindler) September 4, 2018Theyre back at it today. Exercising free speech. pic.twitter.com/K7GPFCeusM Adam W. Schindler (@AdamSchindler) September 5, 2018The first image was also widely shared on Facebook with the following caption: ""This woman disrupted the Kavanaugh hearing held on September 4 and was thrown out. A few minutes later someone got a photo of her being paid.""While it's true the photograph indeed shows Lampron being given money, she wasn't being paid a fee in exchange for protesting. The man wearing a backpack in the photograph is Vinay Krishnan, a consultant who helps organize legal support for the progressive activist organization Center for Popular Democracy (an organization that has been heavily involved in organizing protests against Kavanaugh's confirmation).Krishnan told us the money was raised via small donations from around the country, and protesters were given about $35 to pay related fees in the event they were arrested; if they weren't arrested, the money was to be returned.""These protesters are coming from across the country believing they are fighting for their very right to exist in this country,"" he told us. ""Thats why theyre there. Not for $35 which they returned immediately if they didn't give it to D.C. Capitol Police.""Both Lampron and Krishnan faced online harassment as a result of the misinformation spread online about them. Krishnan received racially-tinged death threats, forcing him to close down his social media accounts, and a laundromat that had offered Lampron a job reportedly rescinded the offer as a result of the controversy.Vickie Lampron declined to be interviewed for this story, so we spoke instead to Shay Totten, spokesman for the Vermont activist organization Rights and Democracy, of which Lampron is a member. Totten told us:Vickie is not a paid protester. She felt very strongly that she wanted to go to D.C. on behalf of herself and her granddaughters because she feared she was seeing women's rights on the line when it came to this Supreme Court nomination. We fundraised to send our members down so they dont have to pay out of pocket. But they dont make any money.Adam Schindler's tweets and video were picked up and widely shared by a large number of social media users and junk news sites, including the Gateway Pundit (which incorrectly referred to Schindler as a ""reporter""), Your News Wire, and conspiracy trolling site Infowars.RealClearPolitics meanwhile ran with the headline ""Three Texas Doctors: We Saw Protesters Paid in Cash to Disrupt Brett Kavanaugh Hearing on Line to Enter."" (We reached out to both Schindler and RealClearPolitics publisher Tom Bevan about their posts but received no response.)The images of a ""paid protester"" have popped up repeatedly since the 4 September hearing in the service of false claims that Kavanaugh's confirmation process was being picketed for profit instead of principle.A detail that many junk sites failed to pick up on was that the same day Schindler published his posts claiming to have witnessed the paying of protesters, he began walking those same claims back:Spoke to the protest organizer. She confirmed handing out cash, but said they intend cash to be used to pay fines they know come when protestors break the law. A small price to pay to be heard I suppose. #KavanaughConfirmation Adam W. Schindler (@AdamSchindler) September 5, 2018On 6 September 2018, Schindler authored a blog post recounting his discussion with organizers from the activist group:I went back to the public ticket line mid-afternoon and approached the gentleman from the photos. I greeted him and the moment he saw me he hurried away. A woman sitting on the bench saw this and stepped in. She identified herself as Jennifer (Flynn Walker), the protest organizer from a group called Center for Popular Democracy. We had a very civil discussion about what they were doing and why.I made an audio recording of this conversation and it is posted in its entirety below. I have also transcribed some key moments in the conversation and posted them below.During our 12 minute discussion, a half dozen protestors gathered around and some participated. The gentleman in the photos did not. The protest leader confirmed her group was providing cash to protestors. She took issue with my use of the term payment, saying the provided cash was only to be used to pay the fines. I was unclear how she was able to enforce this vital distinction for her. But nonetheless, she, and the half dozen members surrounding us, all confirmed her group was giving cash to protestors.She then asked if I was interested in knowing the source of her cash. She had good instincts! I didnt even have to ask. I could sense her pride as she told an emotional story about how it was crowdsourced from donors across the nation. I asked if that was the only source of funding for this protest. I had no reason to doubt the truthfulness of her story. But I did doubt it was the only source of funds. She was quick to ask a clarifying question before answering, as her organization is funded with tens of millions of dollars from George Soros. A fact Im sure she was familiar with. But she said very precisely, Thats how we pay for the fines, yes. And that was that.Billionaire philanthropist George Soros contributes large sums of money toward progressive causes (the Center for Popular Democracy does receive funding from Soros, for example). He is also the boogeyman in many right-wing conspiracy theories that often veer into anti-Semitism, in which he is typically portrayed as a puppet master orchestrating a vague world take-over.We found no evidence, however, to support the claim that Soros was directly paying out money to Kavanaugh hearing protesters, nor did we find evidence to support accusations that persons demonstrating at the hearings were there because they were being paid to protest.  Internet trolls widely shared a photograph of demonstrator Vickie Lampron being handed cash by an organizer while she waited to enter the U.S. Capitol, where she would be one of the first persons to be arrested protesting at the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing for Kavanaugh on 4 September 2018. Although she was merely given a small amount of cash so she could pay post and forfeit fines, conspiracy theorists falsely claimed a photograph of her was evidence that protesters were paid for personal gain in exchange for disrupting the hearings. first post and forfeit The picture was originally posted by self-described international conference speaker Adam Schindler to his eponymous website and to Twitter. He also made a YouTube video in which three of his friends claimed to have witnessed ""paid political operatives"" in action: website video Proof the protestors were paid off in line. #Kavanaugh #ConfirmKavanaugh #ActivismInAction pic.twitter.com/hMLpP4zWPn #Kavanaugh #ConfirmKavanaugh #ActivismInAction pic.twitter.com/hMLpP4zWPn  Adam W. Schindler (@AdamSchindler) September 4, 2018 September 4, 2018  Theyre back at it today. Exercising free speech. pic.twitter.com/K7GPFCeusM pic.twitter.com/K7GPFCeusM  Adam W. Schindler (@AdamSchindler) September 5, 2018 September 5, 2018 The first image was also widely shared on Facebook with the following caption: ""This woman disrupted the Kavanaugh hearing held on September 4 and was thrown out. A few minutes later someone got a photo of her being paid.""   While it's true the photograph indeed shows Lampron being given money, she wasn't being paid a fee in exchange for protesting. The man wearing a backpack in the photograph is Vinay Krishnan, a consultant who helps organize legal support for the progressive activist organization Center for Popular Democracy (an organization that has been heavily involved in organizing protests against Kavanaugh's confirmation). Krishnan told us the money was raised via small donations from around the country, and protesters were given about $35 to pay related fees in the event they were arrested; if they weren't arrested, the money was to be returned. ""These protesters are coming from across the country believing they are fighting for their very right to exist in this country,"" he told us. ""Thats why theyre there. Not for $35 which they returned immediately if they didn't give it to D.C. Capitol Police."" Both Lampron and Krishnan faced online harassment as a result of the misinformation spread online about them. Krishnan received racially-tinged death threats, forcing him to close down his social media accounts, and a laundromat that had offered Lampron a job reportedly rescinded the offer as a result of the controversy. Vickie Lampron declined to be interviewed for this story, so we spoke instead to Shay Totten, spokesman for the Vermont activist organization Rights and Democracy, of which Lampron is a member. Totten told us: Vickie is not a paid protester. She felt very strongly that she wanted to go to D.C. on behalf of herself and her granddaughters because she feared she was seeing women's rights on the line when it came to this Supreme Court nomination. We fundraised to send our members down so they dont have to pay out of pocket. But they dont make any money. Adam Schindler's tweets and video were picked up and widely shared by a large number of social media users and junk news sites, including the Gateway Pundit (which incorrectly referred to Schindler as a ""reporter""), Your News Wire, and conspiracy trolling site Infowars. users Gateway Pundit Your News Wire Infowars RealClearPolitics meanwhile ran with the headline ""Three Texas Doctors: We Saw Protesters Paid in Cash to Disrupt Brett Kavanaugh Hearing on Line to Enter."" (We reached out to both Schindler and RealClearPolitics publisher Tom Bevan about their posts but received no response.) RealClearPolitics The images of a ""paid protester"" have popped up repeatedly since the 4 September hearing in the service of false claims that Kavanaugh's confirmation process was being picketed for profit instead of principle. popped up repeatedly A detail that many junk sites failed to pick up on was that the same day Schindler published his posts claiming to have witnessed the paying of protesters, he began walking those same claims back: Spoke to the protest organizer. She confirmed handing out cash, but said they intend cash to be used to pay fines they know come when protestors break the law. A small price to pay to be heard I suppose. #KavanaughConfirmation #KavanaughConfirmation  Adam W. Schindler (@AdamSchindler) September 5, 2018 September 5, 2018  On 6 September 2018, Schindler authored a blog post recounting his discussion with organizers from the activist group: authored I went back to the public ticket line mid-afternoon and approached the gentleman from the photos. I greeted him and the moment he saw me he hurried away. A woman sitting on the bench saw this and stepped in. She identified herself as Jennifer (Flynn Walker), the protest organizer from a group called Center for Popular Democracy. We had a very civil discussion about what they were doing and why. I made an audio recording of this conversation and it is posted in its entirety below. I have also transcribed some key moments in the conversation and posted them below. During our 12 minute discussion, a half dozen protestors gathered around and some participated. The gentleman in the photos did not. The protest leader confirmed her group was providing cash to protestors. She took issue with my use of the term payment, saying the provided cash was only to be used to pay the fines. I was unclear how she was able to enforce this vital distinction for her. But nonetheless, she, and the half dozen members surrounding us, all confirmed her group was giving cash to protestors. She then asked if I was interested in knowing the source of her cash. She had good instincts! I didnt even have to ask. I could sense her pride as she told an emotional story about how it was crowdsourced from donors across the nation. I asked if that was the only source of funding for this protest. I had no reason to doubt the truthfulness of her story. But I did doubt it was the only source of funds. She was quick to ask a clarifying question before answering, as her organization is funded with tens of millions of dollars from George Soros. A fact Im sure she was familiar with. But she said very precisely, Thats how we pay for the fines, yes. And that was that. Billionaire philanthropist George Soros contributes large sums of money toward progressive causes (the Center for Popular Democracy does receive funding from Soros, for example). He is also the boogeyman in many right-wing conspiracy theories that often veer into anti-Semitism, in which he is typically portrayed as a puppet master orchestrating a vague world take-over. boogeyman We found no evidence, however, to support the claim that Soros was directly paying out money to Kavanaugh hearing protesters, nor did we find evidence to support accusations that persons demonstrating at the hearings were there because they were being paid to protest. Schindler, Adam.  ""Story Behind Kavanaugh 'Paid Protesters.'
  AdamSchindler.com.  6 September 2018. Hulse, Carl.  ""A New Reality for Court Confirmations: Pandemonium, Protesters and Partisanship.""
  The New York Times.  4 September 2018. Brown, Emma. ""California Professor, Writer of Confidential Brett Kavanaugh Letter, Speaks Out About Her Allegation of Sexual Assault.""
  The Washington Post  16 September 2018.",['profit'],False,"Internet trolls widely shared a photograph of demonstrator Vickie Lampron being handed cash by an organizer while she waited to enter the U.S. Capitol, where she would be one of the first persons to be arrested protesting at the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing for Kavanaugh on 4 September 2018. Although she was merely given a small amount of cash so she could pay post and forfeit fines, conspiracy theorists falsely claimed a photograph of her was evidence that protesters were paid for personal gain in exchange for disrupting the hearings.The picture was originally posted by self-described international conference speaker Adam Schindler to his eponymous website and to Twitter. He also made a YouTube video in which three of his friends claimed to have witnessed ""paid political operatives"" in action:Proof the protestors were paid off in line. #Kavanaugh #ConfirmKavanaugh #ActivismInAction pic.twitter.com/hMLpP4zWPn Adam W. Schindler (@AdamSchindler) September 4, 2018Theyre back at it today. Exercising free speech. pic.twitter.com/K7GPFCeusM Adam W. Schindler (@AdamSchindler) September 5, 2018The first image was also widely shared on Facebook with the following caption: ""This woman disrupted the Kavanaugh hearing held on September 4 and was thrown out. A few minutes later someone got a photo of her being paid.""While it's true the photograph indeed shows Lampron being given money, she wasn't being paid a fee in exchange for protesting. The man wearing a backpack in the photograph is Vinay Krishnan, a consultant who helps organize legal support for the progressive activist organization Center for Popular Democracy (an organization that has been heavily involved in organizing protests against Kavanaugh's confirmation).Krishnan told us the money was raised via small donations from around the country, and protesters were given about $35 to pay related fees in the event they were arrested; if they weren't arrested, the money was to be returned.""These protesters are coming from across the country believing they are fighting for their very right to exist in this country,"" he told us. ""Thats why theyre there. Not for $35 which they returned immediately if they didn't give it to D.C. Capitol Police.""Both Lampron and Krishnan faced online harassment as a result of the misinformation spread online about them. Krishnan received racially-tinged death threats, forcing him to close down his social media accounts, and a laundromat that had offered Lampron a job reportedly rescinded the offer as a result of the controversy.Vickie Lampron declined to be interviewed for this story, so we spoke instead to Shay Totten, spokesman for the Vermont activist organization Rights and Democracy, of which Lampron is a member. Totten told us:Vickie is not a paid protester. She felt very strongly that she wanted to go to D.C. on behalf of herself and her granddaughters because she feared she was seeing women's rights on the line when it came to this Supreme Court nomination. We fundraised to send our members down so they dont have to pay out of pocket. But they dont make any money.Adam Schindler's tweets and video were picked up and widely shared by a large number of social media users and junk news sites, including the Gateway Pundit (which incorrectly referred to Schindler as a ""reporter""), Your News Wire, and conspiracy trolling site Infowars.RealClearPolitics meanwhile ran with the headline ""Three Texas Doctors: We Saw Protesters Paid in Cash to Disrupt Brett Kavanaugh Hearing on Line to Enter."" (We reached out to both Schindler and RealClearPolitics publisher Tom Bevan about their posts but received no response.)The images of a ""paid protester"" have popped up repeatedly since the 4 September hearing in the service of false claims that Kavanaugh's confirmation process was being picketed for profit instead of principle.A detail that many junk sites failed to pick up on was that the same day Schindler published his posts claiming to have witnessed the paying of protesters, he began walking those same claims back:Spoke to the protest organizer. She confirmed handing out cash, but said they intend cash to be used to pay fines they know come when protestors break the law. A small price to pay to be heard I suppose. #KavanaughConfirmation Adam W. Schindler (@AdamSchindler) September 5, 2018On 6 September 2018, Schindler authored a blog post recounting his discussion with organizers from the activist group:I went back to the public ticket line mid-afternoon and approached the gentleman from the photos. I greeted him and the moment he saw me he hurried away. A woman sitting on the bench saw this and stepped in. She identified herself as Jennifer (Flynn Walker), the protest organizer from a group called Center for Popular Democracy. We had a very civil discussion about what they were doing and why.I made an audio recording of this conversation and it is posted in its entirety below. I have also transcribed some key moments in the conversation and posted them below.During our 12 minute discussion, a half dozen protestors gathered around and some participated. The gentleman in the photos did not. The protest leader confirmed her group was providing cash to protestors. She took issue with my use of the term payment, saying the provided cash was only to be used to pay the fines. I was unclear how she was able to enforce this vital distinction for her. But nonetheless, she, and the half dozen members surrounding us, all confirmed her group was giving cash to protestors.She then asked if I was interested in knowing the source of her cash. She had good instincts! I didnt even have to ask. I could sense her pride as she told an emotional story about how it was crowdsourced from donors across the nation. I asked if that was the only source of funding for this protest. I had no reason to doubt the truthfulness of her story. But I did doubt it was the only source of funds. She was quick to ask a clarifying question before answering, as her organization is funded with tens of millions of dollars from George Soros. A fact Im sure she was familiar with. But she said very precisely, Thats how we pay for the fines, yes. And that was that.Billionaire philanthropist George Soros contributes large sums of money toward progressive causes (the Center for Popular Democracy does receive funding from Soros, for example). He is also the boogeyman in many right-wing conspiracy theories that often veer into anti-Semitism, in which he is typically portrayed as a puppet master orchestrating a vague world take-over.We found no evidence, however, to support the claim that Soros was directly paying out money to Kavanaugh hearing protesters, nor did we find evidence to support accusations that persons demonstrating at the hearings were there because they were being paid to protest.Internet trolls widely shared a photograph of demonstrator Vickie Lampron being handed cash by an organizer while she waited to enter the U.S. Capitol, where she would be one of the first persons to be arrested protesting at the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing for Kavanaugh on 4 September 2018. Although she was merely given a small amount of cash so she could pay post and forfeit fines, conspiracy theorists falsely claimed a photograph of her was evidence that protesters were paid for personal gain in exchange for disrupting the hearings.The picture was originally posted by self-described international conference speaker Adam Schindler to his eponymous website and to Twitter. He also made a YouTube video in which three of his friends claimed to have witnessed ""paid political operatives"" in action:Proof the protestors were paid off in line. #Kavanaugh #ConfirmKavanaugh #ActivismInAction pic.twitter.com/hMLpP4zWPn Adam W. Schindler (@AdamSchindler) September 4, 2018Theyre back at it today. Exercising free speech. pic.twitter.com/K7GPFCeusM Adam W. Schindler (@AdamSchindler) September 5, 2018Adam Schindler's tweets and video were picked up and widely shared by a large number of social media users and junk news sites, including the Gateway Pundit (which incorrectly referred to Schindler as a ""reporter""), Your News Wire, and conspiracy trolling site Infowars.RealClearPolitics meanwhile ran with the headline ""Three Texas Doctors: We Saw Protesters Paid in Cash to Disrupt Brett Kavanaugh Hearing on Line to Enter."" (We reached out to both Schindler and RealClearPolitics publisher Tom Bevan about their posts but received no response.)The images of a ""paid protester"" have popped up repeatedly since the 4 September hearing in the service of false claims that Kavanaugh's confirmation process was being picketed for profit instead of principle.Spoke to the protest organizer. She confirmed handing out cash, but said they intend cash to be used to pay fines they know come when protestors break the law. A small price to pay to be heard I suppose. #KavanaughConfirmation Adam W. Schindler (@AdamSchindler) September 5, 2018On 6 September 2018, Schindler authored a blog post recounting his discussion with organizers from the activist group:Billionaire philanthropist George Soros contributes large sums of money toward progressive causes (the Center for Popular Democracy does receive funding from Soros, for example). He is also the boogeyman in many right-wing conspiracy theories that often veer into anti-Semitism, in which he is typically portrayed as a puppet master orchestrating a vague world take-over."
Theres nothing in the [RhodeMap RI] plan that takes away local government control and local zoning control.,[],"The RhodeMap RI long-term economic development plan continues to spark controversy throughout Rhode Island. This week, Republican legislators announced they would submit legislation to free municipalities from having to incorporate it into their local planning. This follows comments made by House Speaker Nicholas Mattiello in December to radio station WPRO-AM, where he stated that the plan is never going to come before the House or the Senate in its totality and that they were never going to vote on it. The controversy began in mid-September with the release of a 200-page draft of the plan, which is intended to guide efforts to improve the state's economy. During meetings that sometimes devolved into shouting matches, critics argued that if RhodeMap RI were implemented, local cities and towns would be relinquishing control to the federal government on affordable housing and land-use issues because the plan was funded, in part, by a $1.9 million U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development grant. Supporters contended that there is nothing in the plan that would infringe on individual property rights or local control over zoning. As the debate is likely to continue in the coming months, we decided to examine a statement made late last year by Kevin M. Flynn, associate director for planning for the state Division of Planning, who oversaw the plan's development. Addressing concerns about ceding municipal control, Flynn told EcoRI News that there is nothing in the plan that takes away local government control and local zoning control. We asked Flynn how he backed up his statement. While we awaited a response, we read through the RhodeMap RI plan and found nothing to indicate a threat to local control, suggesting Flynn's statement was accurate. However, things became more complicated when we examined other documents, including the Planning Division's grant application, the grant agreement, and HUD's description of the Sustainable Regional Planning Grant Program, the source of the $1.9 million. According to HUD, the program is intended to support planning efforts that integrate land use, economic and workforce development, transportation, and infrastructure investments. It also aims to enable local and state planners to consider issues such as energy use, climate change, public health, and social equity in economic planning. Agencies that apply for such grants must agree to generate plans aimed at producing, among other objectives, equitable land use planning that furthers the federal Fair Housing Act and complies with other civil rights laws. Additionally, those agencies must agree to analyze and overcome barriers to housing discrimination—in HUD's words, to affirmatively further fair housing. Critics view those provisions with alarm, arguing that they essentially give the federal government license to override state and local government control. They point to a long-running legal dispute involving New York's Westchester County as Exhibit A. When Flynn got back to us, he referred us to Article XIII of the Rhode Island Constitution, which empowers cities and towns to adopt and amend their charters and enact and amend local land use laws. He also cited state zoning enabling legislation, which delegates zoning authority to cities and towns. ""A plan is simply that. A plan,"" Flynn said. ""A plan has no power to modify constitutional or statutory law. The economic development plan could never supersede state law,"" he asserted. Looking for more impartial views, we reached out to more than ten national housing law experts. The four who responded agreed that communities do not cede zoning control when they accept HUD grants, but they had some caveats. For example, Brian Gilmore, an associate professor and director of the Housing Clinic at Michigan State University College of Law, stated, ""I wouldn't say they've ceded total control. I would say they have obligations."" Robert G. Schwemm, a professor at the University of Kentucky College of Law, echoed this sentiment, noting that it is illegal to use local zoning power to maintain segregation. However, Schwemm added that HUD has no direct power over local zoning authority. ""HUD could deny the grant or take back money, but that's a remote possibility,"" he said. The idea of a fund cutoff is virtually unheard of, as historically, the Fair Housing Act has been enforced weakly. ""They're doing more than has been done in the past,"" he said of the Obama administration. HUD's Annual Report on Fair Housing 2012-2013 indicated that the agency received 495 analyses by cities and towns examining fair housing choice, but took enforcement action in only five instances. Here's why Westchester County is significant. In 2006, a housing advocacy group sued the county in federal court, arguing that it had defrauded taxpayers by accepting $50 million in HUD grant money while failing to remove barriers to fair housing as required by its agreement with HUD. HUD later became a plaintiff in the suit. A judge ultimately agreed with the plaintiffs, and a landmark settlement was reached requiring the county to spend $50 million to build or acquire 750 affordable housing units in communities that were more than 90 percent white. Now, the county and HUD are disputing whether the county has complied with the settlement and whether it must amend its zoning ordinances to do so. The county has lost at least $20 million in HUD grants so far. We contacted the county for its perspective on HUD grants and local control. ""The experience in Westchester has been caveat emptor,"" said Ned McCormack, Westchester communications director and senior adviser to County Executive Robert P. Astorino, using the Latin phrase for ""buyer beware."" ""Once you take any money from HUD, your interpretation of what is expected in return and their interpretation vary widely."" Our ruling: Kevin M. Flynn stated that nothing in the RhodeMap RI plan takes away local government control and local zoning control. Technically, there is nothing in the plan's language that appears to compromise local zoning law or control. However, his statement does not acknowledge the strings attached to the HUD grant. In accepting the $1.9 million from HUD to develop the plan, the state agreed to, among other things, expand housing opportunities for underserved populations based on race, ethnicity, or economic status, and is thus obligated to do so. In fact, HUD has taken legal action against grant recipients such as Westchester County that, in its view, failed to live up to their agreements. While rare, it has happened. For the record, in December, 26 Rhode Island cities and towns were awarded nearly $5.3 million in HUD grants through the Community Development Block Grant program. On balance, we rate Flynn's claim as partially accurate but lacking important details or context, which aligns with our definition of ""Half True."" (Correction: Article XIII of the Rhode Island Constitution spells out home rule for cities and towns. The article number was incorrect in the original version of this item.)","['Rhode Island', 'City Government', 'Economy', 'Government Regulation', 'Regulation', 'States']",NEI,"This week, Republican legislators saidthey would submit legislationto free municipalities from having to incorporate it in their local planning.That follows comments House Speaker Nicholas Mattiellomade in December to radio station WPRO-AM. Mattiello said, the plan is never going to come before the House or the Senate in its totality and were never going to vote on it.Addressing concerns about ceding municipal control,Flynn told EcoRI News,theres nothing in the plan that takes away local government control and local zoning control."
Is Olive Garden Funding Trump's Re-Election?,['One tweet can cause a storm of sharing ... and massive headaches for companies unfairly targeted for boycotts.'],"A single tweet posted on Aug. 25, 2019 caused a significant social media headache for the Olive Garden chain of casual dining Italian-themed restaurants by positing that the business was ""funding Trump's re-election in 2020"" and suggesting that viewers share the message and promote a boycott:  That Tweet prompted the creation and use of the #BoycottOliveGarden hashtag, as numerous social media users advocated boycotting the restaurant chain over its alleged part in financing of President Trump's re-election campaign: Olive Garden is supporting Trump's bigotry, climate change denial, deregulation, tax cuts for the top 1%. Its okay for rich & corporations to get Gov assistance, meanwhile the average worker never had help from the Gov cuz of this corruption. This must stop. #BoycottOliveGarden pic.twitter.com/1HNT9tryMd #BoycottOliveGarden pic.twitter.com/1HNT9tryMd  Joe Negan (@mynameisNegan) August 26, 2019 August 26, 2019  Olive Garden responded to complaints on social media by quickly and repeatedly disclaiming having made any donations to presidential candidates: We dont know where this information came from, but it is incorrect. Our company does not donate to presidential candidates.  Olive Garden (@olivegarden) August 26, 2019 August 26, 2019  Corporations are prohibited from making contributions to candidates and their committees, so corporate-related donations typically come from a ""[company's] PACs, their individual members or employees or owners, and those individuals' immediate family members."" prohibited Olive Garden's parent company is Darden, a corporation that also owns several other chain restaurant brands, including LongHorn Steakhouse, Cheddar's Scratch Kitchen, Yard House, The Capital Grille, Seasons 52, Bahama Breeze, and Eddie V's. Darden Open Secrets, a website operated by the Center for Responsive Politics that tracks ""money in U.S. politics and its effect on elections and public policy"" bears out Olive Garden's claim, showing no Darden-related donations to President Trump's campaign for the 2020 election cycle to date. donations For the previous election cycle, as Open Secrets observed, ""all contributions to candidates from Darden Restaurants came from individuals,"" and contributions to Donald Trump from those individuals totaled a paltry $886 in 2016 and $250 in 2018, hardly enough to merit a claim that the company was ""funding"" Trump's election or re-election. (Hillary Clinton received nearly ten times as much in Darden-related campaign contributions in 2016 than Donald Trump did.) 2016 2018 Darden does not appear to be operating any political action committees (PACs), and all in all, Darden-related political contributions in 2018 were about evenly divided between Republicans and Democrats. The top three donation recipients were GOPAC, (a Republican state and local political training organization), Republican Senator Rick Scott of Florida, and the Democratic Lieutenant Governors Association. 2018 O'Kane, Caitlin.  ""Olive Garden Disputes Claim That It Donated to Trump's Reelection Campaign.""
  CBS News.  26 August 2019. Goforth, Claire.  ""A Made-Up Tweet About Olive Garden Supporting Trump Sparked a Boycott.""
  The Daily Dot.  26 August 2019. Carman, Tim.  ""Olive Garden: Unlimited Breadsticks, Yes. Trump Campaign Donations, No.""
  The Washington Post.  26 August 2019.",['share'],False,"Its okay for rich & corporations to get Gov assistance, meanwhile the average worker never had help from the Gov cuz of this corruption. This must stop. #BoycottOliveGarden pic.twitter.com/1HNT9tryMd Joe Negan (@mynameisNegan) August 26, 2019 Olive Garden (@olivegarden) August 26, 2019Corporations are prohibited from making contributions to candidates and their committees, so corporate-related donations typically come from a ""[company's] PACs, their individual members or employees or owners, and those individuals' immediate family members.""Olive Garden's parent company is Darden, a corporation that also owns several other chain restaurant brands, including LongHorn Steakhouse, Cheddar's Scratch Kitchen, Yard House, The Capital Grille, Seasons 52, Bahama Breeze, and Eddie V's.Open Secrets, a website operated by the Center for Responsive Politics that tracks ""money in U.S. politics and its effect on elections and public policy"" bears out Olive Garden's claim, showing no Darden-related donations to President Trump's campaign for the 2020 election cycle to date.For the previous election cycle, as Open Secrets observed, ""all contributions to candidates from Darden Restaurants came from individuals,"" and contributions to Donald Trump from those individuals totaled a paltry $886 in 2016 and $250 in 2018, hardly enough to merit a claim that the company was ""funding"" Trump's election or re-election. (Hillary Clinton received nearly ten times as much in Darden-related campaign contributions in 2016 than Donald Trump did.)Darden does not appear to be operating any political action committees (PACs), and all in all, Darden-related political contributions in 2018 were about evenly divided between Republicans and Democrats. The top three donation recipients were GOPAC, (a Republican state and local political training organization), Republican Senator Rick Scott of Florida, and the Democratic Lieutenant Governors Association."
Wedding Dress Guy,"[""Did a man lists his ex-wife's wedding dress on eBay with a hilarious offer of sale?""]","Claim:  A man listed a wedding gown on eBay via a hilarious offer of sale that included photos of him posing in the dress.  Example:  [Collected on the Internet, 2004] For Sale: One Slightly Used Size 12 Wedding Gown. Only worn twice: Once at the wedding and once for these pictures. Make: Victoria Style: 611 Size: 12 Divorce forces sale I found my ex-wife's wedding dress in the attic when I moved.  She took the $4000 engagement ring but left the dress.  I was actually going to have a dress burning party when the divorce became final, but my sister talked me out of it.  She said, ""Thats such a gorgeous dress.  Some lucky girl would be glad to have it. You should sell it on EBay. At least get something back for it.""  So, this is what Im doing.  Im selling it hoping to get enough money for maybe a couple of Mariners tickets and some beer.  This dress cost me $1200 that my drunken sot of an ex-father-in-law swore up and down he would pay for but didnt so I got stuck with the bill.  Luckily I only got stuck with his daughter for 5 years. Thank the Lord we didn't have kids. If they would have turned out like her or her family I would have slit my wrists. Anyway, its a really nice dress as you can see in the pictures.  Personally, I think it looks like a $1200 shower curtain, but what do I know about this.  We tried taking pictures of this lovely white garment but it didnt look right on the hanger as you can see, so my sister says, ""You need a model.""  Well, quite frankly my sister isnt exactly small, (like a size 12 is?) so she wouldnt pose for the picture. Seeing as I have sworn off women for the time being and I aint friends with any, it left me holding the bag.  I took the liberty of blacking out my face - not to protect the ex-wife but to protect me from my bar buddies and co-workers finding out about it.  I would never live it down.  Actually I didnt think my head would fit in the neck hole, but then I figured she got her Texas cheerleader hair through there I could get my head in it.  Though, after looking at the pictures, I thought it made me look fat.  How do you women wear this crap? I only had to walk 3 feet and I tripped twice. Dont worry ladies - I am wearing clothes on underneath it.  I gotta say it did make me feel very pretty.  So if it can make me feel pretty, it can make you feel pretty, especially on the most important day of your life, right?  Anyway, I was told to say it has a train and a veil and all kinds of shiny beady things.  I think it's funny that one picture makes it look like the chest plate off an Imperial Storm Trooper.  Did I mention that all I want is a ball game and beer?  Cheap at twice the price.  Ladies, you wont regret this.  You may regret the dude you marry but not the dress. Just a little side note - As I was putting this ad in EBay, it asked me for a color.  Is a wedding dress any other freaking color than white or ivory??!!  If it is it wouldn't be a wedding dress, now would it??  I suppose black would work...  On Apr-26-04 at 10:38:31 PDT, seller added the following information: Well, the auction is a little over half over and I am just amazed.  This thing has taken more hits than that pothead that lives in the next building.  Man, oh man, if hits were bucks Id be getting a suite at Safeco.  I also have received TONS of email.  I dont have the time to reply to all of them but I just want to let everyone know that I appreciate the well wishes.  Of the email I received:  Five or so were invitations to ball games in other states.  Two of those were for little league games.  Do they have those cushy executive boxes with the free chicken wings at those?  One email was from Scotland.  Its a good thing he wrote it because I wouldnt be able to understand a word he said.  Never did get through Braveheart.  Most were thanking me for the laugh. Youre entirely welcome.  Five years of misery was well worth the hearty guffaw that was my pleasure to give you. Oh, yeah.  I also got three marriage proposals.  Yes, you read it right - three marriage proposals.  I feel like one of those mass murderers on death row.  I never understood how the hell they got more chicks than I did.  Now I know.  They sold crap on eBay.  On Apr-26-04 at 23:45:56 PDT, seller added the following information: Holy Moly!  The hit counter is starting to look like the odometer in my truck! Not the new shiny black full-size 4-wheel-drive American pick-up that I had to part with, but the somewhat older, multicolored, lumpy, tiny, 2-wheel-drive foreign pick-up that belches smoke. A little something about that vehicle, though: its absolutely amazing! When I get inside it to go to the store, I am all depressed. But when I arrive at the store, Im so freaking loopy from inhaling the fumes, I forget why I went there in the first place. Im saving buckets of money. Of course, I will probably have to spend it all on the tuberculosis I will acquire, but hey, you cant have everything. I felt compelled to update this ad once more due to all of your emails. The first thing I have to say is thank you all for your support in my time of need. It was a truly harrowing experience. Some of you men know exactly what I mean. Seeing as this has turned into my little public forum, I just want to address a few of the emails that kind of left me scratching my head. I now have five marriage proposals. You would think my speaking of the ones I already got yesterday would have put a damper on it, but you women sure are persistent. One woman actually said she doesnt want to marry me, but wouldnt mind being my ex-wife. Hmmm. Let me think about that. Nope. No thanks, already got one. (Pssst. Didnt I mention I had one? Who wants an ex-wife that cant read? Now, I know what you guys are thinking - ""If she cant read, then the divorce would be smooth sailing."" Well, that would be all well and good but I didnt say her ATTORNEY couldnt read. You following me on this?) Other emails are serious buyers asking about the dress. ""How long is the train?"" and ""Does the gown come with the headdress and veil?"" Yes, headdress and veil are included, but the do-rag stays with me. And if the train was long enough for my exs caboose, its long enough for yours. You will have to supply your own baggage, though. I gave mine to Goodwill. There was this one woman who wrote, ""You should have covered your tattoos. People will be able to recognize you, like on Americas Most Wanted."" HELLO!!! Im a guy selling a dress. Im not wanted for war crimes. Some of your emails made me laugh. Like the bitter woman that wished she had her exs testicles to sell on eBay. Im not too sure theres a market for that, though. Then there was the guy that gave his wifes wedding dress to the Salvation Army by mistake, thinking it was a Christmas tree. Guess he didnt have any Christmas balls that year. This has also been a learning experience for me. I got a lot of messages correcting me about the color of wedding dresses. For Russian Orthodox, they are blue. For Chinese they are red. Mexico has multi-colored ones. All I know is, for my next wedding I will be wearing a hairy, flesh-toned ensemble because I will be buck naked with a toe tag lying on a slab in the morgue because I would have killed myself. A lot of folks were asking me if I wear womens dresses a lot. I can honestly say that this is the first time I have ever donned female attire. Its also the first time Ive been inside something feminine that didnt nag me to take out the garbage. It seems a few people have taken offense to my inferring a size 12 is big. One male even pointed out that Marilyn Monroe was a size 14. Now, I would agree with you that size 12/14 is small if I lived elsewhere. But I live right here in the good old 48 Contiguous, where binging and purging is a way of life. American women do not want to be double digits in size. Just ask any woman what size they want to be. Invariably they will say five or seven. Wealthy will be the person that opens a store for Lane Bryant-sized women but sews size 7 tags on all the clothes.  On the flip side of that, I have taken offense to some of the people that told me Im ugly and a loser. All I have to say is youd be ugly too if you had a huge white blotch on your face. And as far as being a loser, I think you have it all wrong. I am such the winner. It isnt every day an average guy can make 50,000 people laugh. Thanks to each and every one of you from the heart of my bottom. Origins:  The online auction powerhouse eBay has been the setting of many strange come-ons, some seriously meant and some far less so. In addition to a throng of earnest sellers and determined bargain hunters that frequent this popular online bazaar, it is also populated by its share of crazies intent upon sneaking   their hoax listings into the marketplace. Consequently, one can't always tell fish from fowl at first glance. Over the years, our readers have queried us about various eBay auctions because they harbored suspicions about particular listings, either due to the nature of the goods being tendered or because something about the pitch struck them as not quite right (e.g.; an offer of a tea kettle, which displayed additional wares of the seller). Yet few of the auctions so doubted have been asked about as often as the April 2004 proffering of a size 12 Victoria wedding gown, an item that isn't in and of itself all that unusual. But it wasn't the dress that set people to wondering; it was the seller's comments, which appeared to afford a hilarious look into one man's private hell. The seller wasn't so much advertising a dress as he was proclaiming from a public soapbox how awful his wife had been. The auction listing was just as much about getting even as it was about unloading an item he had no particular use for. tea kettle Or was it?  Had a gal with ""Texas cheerleader hair"" really so turned a man against marriage that he swore that ""for my next wedding I will be wearing a hairy, flesh-toned ensemble because I will be buck naked with a toe tag lying on a slab in the morgue because I would have killed myself""? Herein rested the listing's appeal: The story was entertaining, but was it real? The solicitation was on the up and up, at least in regard to the nature of the merchandise being vended  there was such a dress, and the offer of sale was genuine. However, some (if not all) of the gown's backstory was the stuff of fairy tales. The original eBay listing posted by 42-year-old Larry Star wasn't provoking much interest among those shopping for a wedding dress, so he rewrote it to make it amusing  resulting in the posting that has served to make him famous. The tale of marital woe posted by this Brooklyn native both contained invented details and omitted key bits of information. Though he has a sister, she didn't talk him out of the dress burning party he had his heart set upon by suggesting he list the  gown on eBay and so get something out of it. He also had an ex-wife prior to the one whose dress he supposedly was selling. (Star and his first missus were married in 1994, separated in 1996, and were divorced in 1998.) And contrary to his statement, ""Thank the Lord we didn't have kids. If they would have turned out like her or her family I would have slit my wrists,"" he and his second wife did indeed have a son together during their short-lived marriage. The unhappy couple wed in 2000, separated in 2001 after a domestic kafuffle (which reportedly resulted in Star's being charged with domestic violence assault in the fourth degree and interfering with the reporting of domestic violence), and divorced in 2003. Though ""five years of misery"" might well have been worth the hearty guffaw he says was his pleasure to give the online community, those years weren't spent ""stuck"" with the ""drunken sot's"" daughter; his time cohabitating with Wife #2 amounted to just a bit more than a year. It's not known if the gown in question even belonged to his ex-wife, as she hasn't surfaced to speak publicly about the matter. Also, according to the Houston Chronicle, when asked if the dress had really been hers, Mr. Star sidestepped the question, instead replying, ""I got the wedding dress, I wanted to get rid of it. I was going to burn it and had the idea of selling it on eBay. I needed to sell it on eBay with all the other dresses on there, and I needed to make it stand out."" And stand out it did. The auction of the fabled wedding gown ended 28 April 2004 with a buyer using the online handle of ""absolutsth"" placing the winning bid of $3,850. Yet all is not coming up roses for the intrepid seller who one would assume to be realizing a profit of $2,650 on the gown he says cost originally $1,200, as the sale has fallen through. According to Star, the buyer has backed out, claiming ""I left my computer on and somebody made the bid for me."" The folks at eBay have told Star he can either accept the second-highest bid or re-list the dress and hold the sale again. As of 7 May 2004, he had not decided whether he would accept the next highest legitimate bid (if there even was a legitimate bid). By the time the auction ended, Star's listing on eBay had been viewed more than 5.8 million times. Some of those visitors, possibly caught up in the frenzy of it all, placed bids they did not intend to honor. (Officials at eBay had to weed out many phonies  at one point the bidding reached $99 million.) How many of the remaining bids were legitimate is not known. And, even if all those bids were meant seriously at the time they were placed, some of those prospective buyers may now be having second thoughts, particularly those who offered more than $1,000 for a used, stained dress that was only worth $1,200 when it first came off the hanger.  The ultimate fate of the frock may take it in a far different direction than down the aisle on the back of a budget-conscious bride. Its listing (which has now been viewed 11 million times) has brought recognition to its owner and has possibly opened the way to a new career for this software test designer and part-time musician. Thanks to the dress, Larry Star has twice been a guest on both MSNBC's Countdown and NBC's Today Show, each time wearing the unsold gown. Also thanks to the dress, he has made his debut as a stand-up comedian at the Punchline Comedy Club in Atlanta. He has said he would like to pursue a comedy writing career, and all this attention might well work to get that going.  Though there are many stand-up comedians on the circuit, we know of none that perform their schtick outfitted in wedding regalia. Could this gown do for Star what a sledgehammer and a watermelon did for Gallagher? Barbara ""smash hit"" Mikkelson Additional Information:   Weddingdressguy.com  (Larry Star)  Last updated:  3 July 2007    Sources:   Brodeur, Nicole.  ""Fact Is, There's Some Fiction to Man's Pitch to Sell His Ex-wife's Wedding Dress on eBay.""   The Seattle Times.  29 April 2004  (p. B1).     Curry, Ann, Matt Lauer and Katie, Couric.  ""Today.""   NBC.  30 April 2004.     Eldredge, Richard.  ""Wedding Dress Guy Jilted by eBay Bidder.""   The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.  7 May 2004  (p. E2).     Kelso, John.  ""Best of eBay: A Wedding Dress Tale.""   Cox News Service.  2 May 2004.     Olbermann, Keith.  ""Countdown.""   MSNBC.  30 April 2004.     Olbermann, Keith.  ""Countdown.""   MSNBC.  28 April 2004.     Parks, Louis.  ""On eBay, Wedding Dress for Success.""   The Houston Chronicle.  30 April 2004  (Houston; p. 1).     Weiss, Tara.  ""A Star is Born, Selling Wedding Dress on eBay.""   Hartford Courant.  30 April 2004  (p. D2).     Associated Press.  ""Man Who Sold Ex's Wedding Dress on eBay Earns Instant Fame.""   30 April 2004.     The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.  ""15 Minutes Still Ticking for Wedding Dress Guy.""   4 May 2004  (p. E2).",['budget'],True,"Over the years, our readers have queried us about various eBay auctions because they harbored suspicions about particular listings, either due to the nature of the goods being tendered or because something about the pitch struck them as not quite right (e.g.; an offer of a tea kettle, which displayed additional wares of the seller). Yet few of the auctions so doubted have been asked about as often as the April 2004 proffering of a size 12 Victoria wedding gown, an item that isn't in and of itself all that unusual. But it wasn't the dress that set people to wondering; it was the seller's comments, which appeared to afford a hilarious look into one man's private hell. The seller wasn't so much advertising a dress as he was proclaiming from a public soapbox how awful his wife had been. The auction listing was just as much about getting even as it was about unloading an item he had no particular use for.Additional Information:   Weddingdressguy.com  (Larry Star)"
"Is Oakland Offering ""Guaranteed Income"" Only to People of Color?","['The experimental program originally described itself as solely for families who are Black, indigenous, and people of color, but that has since changed. ']","On March 23, 2021, The Associated Press reported on an initiative in Oakland, California, named Oakland Resilient Families, ""that will give low-income families of color $500 per month with no rules on how they can spend it."" This ""demonstration project,"" as Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf described it, is a test of what is known as a ""guaranteed income."" Projects like this one are part of a larger effort by a coalition of mayors to convince Congress to pass a national guaranteed income program. The Oakland program is not taxpayer-funded; all of the funding comes from charitable donations, most of which are from a philanthropic nonprofit group named Blue Meridian Partners, according to San Francisco-based NPR station KQED. Half of the program's 600 participants will be families earning below 50% of the city's median income, while the other half will come from families earning below 138% of the federal poverty level. These cut-offs were selected based on data provided by Oakland's Equality Index, which is an effort ""to develop a baseline quantitative framework that can be used by City staff and community members alike to better understand the impacts of race, measure inequities, and track changes in the disparities for different groups over time."" In their coverage, The Associated Press described the project as ""the first program to limit participation strictly to Black, Indigenous, and people of color communities."" At the time of the reporting, this was a fair representation of Oakland Resilient Families' goals, as the program's website, as well as the mayor, explicitly stated that the program was intended for ""Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) families."" That reporting led to tabloid headlines and angry tweets. Following this latter coverage, Oakland Resilient Families changed its website's answer to the ""Who is this for?"" question to ""families with the greatest wealth disparities per the Oakland Equity Index, with low incomes and at least one child under 18, regardless of documentation status."" Explaining the change to KQED, Rae Oglesby, the vice president of membership and communications at the Family Independence Initiative, a partner with the Oakland Resilient Families program, said the program is targeting racial groups experiencing the largest disparities, but that ""it is open to all residents."" Justin Berton, the communications director for Mayor Schaaf, told KQED, ""We have not changed the program. We have had to clarify that while no family is prohibited from applying, this pilot is intentionally designed to serve and support BIPOC families, who evidence shows suffer the greatest and most disproportionate impacts of poverty."" According to Oakland's Equality Index, the median income for white households in Oakland was almost three times the median income of African American households. The median income for white households was highest ($110,000), while the median income for African American households was lowest ($37,500). The median income for Asian households ($76,000) was similar to the citywide median income ($73,200), while Latino households fell below the citywide median with a median income of $65,000. The program is still in its earliest phases. At the moment, sign-ups for the program are not yet available. ""The goal,"" Oakland Resilient Families' website states, ""is to begin payments to families this spring after incorporating more community feedback and to have the entire program up and running this summer."" Because the program is ""targeted"" toward BIPOC families, but at least after some clarification on the part of Oakland Resilient Families, any family meeting the financial requirements can apply, we rate this claim a ""Mixture"" of truth.",['profit'],NEI,"On March 23, 2021, The Associated Press reported on an Oakland, California, initiative named Oakland Resilient Families ""that will give low-income families of color $500 per month with no rules on how they can spend it."" This ""demonstration project,"" as Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf described it, is a test of what is known as a ""guaranteed income.""Projects like this one are part of a larger effort by a coalition of mayors to convince Congress to pass a national guaranteed income program. The Oakland program is not tax-payer funded, however. All of the funding comes from charitable donations, most of it from a philanthropic non-profit group named Blue Meridian Partners,"" according to San Francisco-based NPR station KQED.Half of the program's 600 participants will be families earning below 50% of the city's median income, and the other half will come from families earning below 138% of the federal poverty level. These cut-offs were selected based on data provided by Oakland's Equality Index, which is an effort ""to develop a baseline quantitative framework that can be used by City staff and community members alike to better understand the impacts of race, measure inequities, and track changes in the disparities for different groups over time.""In their coverage, The Associated Press described the project as ""the first program to limit participation strictly to Black, Indigenous and people of color communities."" At the time of the reporting, this was a fair representation of Oakland Resilient Families goals, as the program's website  as well as the mayor  explicitly stated the program was intended for ""Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) families.""That reporting led to tabloid headlines and angry tweets:Following this latter coverage, Oakland Resilient Families changed its website's answer to the ""Who is this for?"" question to ""families with the greatest wealth disparities per the Oakland Equity Index, with low-incomes and at least 1 child under 18, regardless of documentation status.""Explaining the change to KQED, Rae Oglesby, the vice president of membership and communications at the Family Independence Initiative  a partner with the Oakland Resilient Families program  said the program is targeting racial groups experiencing the largest disparities,"" but that ""it is open to all residents.""Justin Berton, the communications director for Mayor Schaaf, told KQED that, We have not changed the program. We have had to clarify that while no family is prohibited from applying, this pilot is intentionally designed to serve and support BIPOC families, who evidence shows suffer the greatest and most disproportionate impacts of poverty.""According to Oakland's Equality Index, the median income for white households in Oakland was almost three times the median income of African American households:The program is still in its earliest phases. At the moment, sign-ups for the program are not yet available. ""The goal,"" Oakland Resilient Families' website states, ""is to begin payments to families this spring after incorporating more community feedback and to have the entire program up and running this summer."" "
"Under Donald Trump's tax plan, the top 0.1 percent of taxpayers -- people earning multiple millions of dollars a year, on average -- would get more tax relief than the bottom 60 percent of taxpayers combined.",[],"For being Hillary Clinton's surrogates, two Wisconsin lawmakers sounded rather like Bernie Sanders when they spoke with reporters to denounce Donald Trump's tax plan. ""For the billionaires, by the billionaires,"" state Rep. Cory Mason of Racine declared in the May 11, 2016 teleconference, which was arranged by Clinton's Wisconsin campaign. Mason was joined by fellow Democrat Jennifer Shilling of La Crosse, the Senate minority leader. Her attack was more specific. Shilling stated that with Trump's plan, the top 0.1 percent of taxpayers—people earning multiple millions of dollars a year, on average—would receive more tax relief than the bottom 60 percent of taxpayers combined. Economic inequality has been a signature issue for Sanders, whose presidential campaign has kept Clinton from claiming the presumptive nominee title Trump has on the Republican side. When Sanders said in Madison that the top one-tenth of 1 percent of Americans own almost as much wealth as the bottom 90 percent, we rated his claim Mostly True. Let's take a look at Shilling's one-tenth of 1 percenters claim—which, as we’ll see, was made at something of a moving target. The figures Standing in the lobby of Trump Tower in midtown Manhattan in September 2015, Trump rolled out his tax reform plan—which some analysts immediately saw as a boon for the wealthy. He proposed significant cuts across the board, PolitiFact National found, but the wealthiest would receive the most in tax cuts. For the highest income earners, the top income tax rate would drop from 39.6 percent to 25 percent. When we asked about Shilling's claim, Clinton's Wisconsin campaign cited an analysis by the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, a joint venture of two Washington, D.C. think tanks: the Urban Institute and the Brookings Institution. The analysis found that on average, under Trump's plan, households at all income levels would receive tax cuts—but the highest-income households would receive the largest cuts, both in dollars and as a percentage of income. More specific to Shilling's claim: The highest-income 0.1 percent of taxpayers—those who had an income of over $3.7 million in 2015—would get an average tax cut of more than $1.3 million in 2017. That same group would receive 18 percent of the tax reduction, while the bottom 60 percent of taxpayers would receive 16.4 percent of the reduction. At our request, the liberal Citizens for Tax Justice also did calculations, which came out nearly the same: The top 0.1 percent would get 17 percent of Trump's proposed tax cuts, and the bottom 60 percent would get 13 percent of the cuts. To some extent, this isn’t a surprise, in that the wealthiest pay the lion's share of income taxes. In a June 2015 report, the Tax Policy Center said the top 0.1 percent pay 21.1 percent of all individual income taxes, while the bottom 60 percent pays 1.5 percent. Alan Cole, an economist with the Tax Foundation, also ran the numbers and told us Shilling's claim is accurate. But Cole noted that under Trump's plan: -- People in the 40th to 60th percentiles have about 99 percent of their income tax liability removed. -- People in the 0 to 40th percentiles who paid positive income taxes have about 100 percent of their income tax liability removed. ""So the reason Trump's plan doesn't cut middle-class income taxes by more than that is, well, you can't cut middle-class income taxes by more than that,"" Cole said. So, the figures back Shilling. The thing is, shortly before she made her claim, Trump's tax proposal was changing. Sort of. Maybe. Or was it? Trump's equivocation In the three days prior, Trump said he might raise, not lower, taxes on the wealthy. Then he indicated the wealthy would get tax cuts, but the cuts might be less than what is in his plan. And then Politico reported that Trump's campaign had enlisted conservative economists to revise his plan, and that they were advising a top tax rate of 28 percent—higher than the 25 percent in Trump's proposal. All of which has caused some confusion as to what Trump would do with taxes. Nevertheless, by the time Shilling made her statement, Trump had not changed his tax proposal, which remained on his campaign website. (Indeed, for what it's worth, the day after Shilling's claim, a Trump spokeswoman told the New York Times: ""There are no changes being made to the plan."") Our rating Shilling said that under Trump's tax plan, the top 0.1 percent of taxpayers—people earning multiple millions of dollars a year, on average—would get more tax relief than the bottom 60 percent of taxpayers combined. A report from a respected nonpartisan research group calculates that the 0.1 percent—those making more than $3.7 million per year—would receive 18 percent of the tax cuts under Trump's proposal. The bottom 60 percent of taxpayers, meanwhile, would enjoy only 16.4 percent of the cuts. Another tax group found similar figures. Trump has indicated he might alter his tax proposal, but he hadn't as of when Shilling made her statement—so we rate the statement True. Watch the WTMJ-TV PolitiFact segment on this fact check. PolitiFact segments air during the 6 p.m. newscasts Wednesdays and Fridays.","['Income', 'Wealth', 'Taxes', 'Wisconsin']",True,"For beingHillary Clintonsurrogates, two Wisconsin lawmakers sounded rather likeBernie Sanderswhen they got on the phone with reporters to denounce Donald Trumps tax plan.Forthe billionaires,bythe billionaires, state Rep.Cory Masonof Racine declared in the May 11, 2016 teleconference, which was arranged by Clintons Wisconsin campaign.Mason was joined by fellow DemocratJennifer Shillingof La Crosse, the Senate minority leader. Her attack was more specific.Economic inequality has been a signature issue for Sanders, whose presidential campaign has kept Clinton from claiming the presumptive nominee titleTrumphas on the Republican side.When Sanders said in Madison that the top one-tenth of 1 percent of Americans own almost as much wealth as the bottom 90 percent, we rated his claimMostly True.Standing in the lobby of Trump Tower in midtown Manhattan in September 2015, Trumprolled outhistax reform plan-- which some analysts immediately saw as a boon for the wealthy.He proposed significant cuts across the board,PolitiFact National found, but the wealthiest would get the most in tax cuts. For the highest income earners, the top income tax rate would drop from 39.6 percent to 25 percent.When we asked about Shillings claim, Clintons Wisconsin campaign citedan analysisby the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, a joint venture of two Washington, D.C. think tanks: the Urban Institute and the Brookings Institution.To some extent, this isnt a surprise, in that the wealthiest pay the lions share of income taxes. In aJune 2015 report, the Tax Policy Center said the top 0.1 percent pay 21.1 percent of all individual income taxes and the bottom 60 percent pays 1.5 percent.The thing is, shortly before she made her claim, Trumps tax proposalwas changing. Sort of. Maybe. Or was it?In the three days prior,Trump saidhe might raise, not lower, taxes on the wealthy. Thenhe indicatedthe wealthy would get tax cuts, but the cuts might be less than what is in his plan. And thenPolitico reportedthat Trumps campaign had enlisted conservative economists to revise his plan, and that they were advising a top tax rate of 28 percent -- higher than the 25 percent in Trumps proposal.Nevertheless, by the time Shilling made her statement, Trump had not changed histax proposal, which remained on his campaign website.(Indeed, for what it's worth, the day after Shillings claim, a Trump spokeswomantold the New York Times: There are no changes being made to the plan.)Watch the WTMJ-TV PolitiFact segment on this fact check. PolitiFact segments air during the 6 p.m. newscasts Wednesdays and Fridays."
"Barack Obama will somehow manage to add more than $8 trillion to the national debt, which is more debt than the 43 presidents who held office before him compiled together.",[],"Compared to immigration and terrorism, the growth of the federal debt may not be as significant a topic for Republicans running for president this year. However, it has not disappeared entirely. In a February 5, 2016, Medium post about his approach to Social Security, former Florida Governor Jeb Bush reiterated a talking point that many Republicans have used before. Barack Obama will somehow manage to add more than $8 trillion to the national debt, which is more debt than the 43 presidents who held office before him compiled together, Bush wrote. It has been a while since we last checked a claim of this sort, so we decided to take a closer look. Bush phrased his claim carefully, and it largely holds up by the numbers. It is also important to note that Obama is not the only one responsible for the growth of the federal debt. 

Running the numbers, we first turned to the U.S. Treasury Department's Debt to the Penny calculator, which allows you to track the federal debt on a daily basis. The website lists two kinds of debt: publicly held debt and gross federal debt. The difference is that federal debt is calculated by taking the amount of publicly held debt and adding to it the debt that is held by the government. These are typically IOUs between one governmental entity and another, such as the money owed by the general treasury to the Social Security trust fund. On January 20, 2009, the day Obama was inaugurated, the public debt stood at about $6.31 trillion. By the day Bush's column ran, it stood at about $13.67 trillion. That is an increase of $7.36 trillion, which is short of the $8 trillion Bush mentioned. However, remember that Bush said Obama will add that much on his watch, which can be reasonably interpreted to mean the amount by the end of Obama's second term. If the debt continues to rise at the same pace it has increased over the past seven-plus years, it will end up at nearly $8.4 trillion when Obama leaves office. Using this measurement, then, Bush is correct that Obama will see the debt increase by more than $8 trillion on his watch, and that this amount will exceed the total accumulated by the previous 43 presidents ($6.31 trillion). 

Bush is not correct, however, when using gross federal debt. Using the same method of estimating, Obama should see an increase of $9.51 trillion in gross federal debt by the end of his second term. That is less than the $10.63 trillion he inherited from his 43 predecessors. Experts say that either publicly held debt or gross federal debt could be used to define the term national debt that Bush uses. Still, economists told us that publicly held debt is often the most popular measurement among specialists, so we will not quibble with Bush's decision to focus on publicly held debt. 

The size of debt production under Obama is reinforced by looking at debt as a percentage of gross domestic product. At the end of fiscal year 2008, publicly held debt accounted for 39 percent of gross domestic product. By the end of fiscal year 2016, it is expected to be almost 77 percent. Even if bad timing has exaggerated this increase—fiscal 2008 ended four months before Obama took office, right as the economy was collapsing—it is certainly a significant percentage jump over eight years. 

All this said, we will note a few things that are important to keep in mind. How much blame does Obama deserve? Bush makes it sound as if Obama simply flipped a switch and debt started pouring out. Obviously, it is a lot more complicated than that. It is not as if we were projecting balanced budgets and Barack Obama came into office and signed legislation increasing spending and cutting taxes, said Marc Goldwein, a budget analyst at the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. In fact, Goldwein said, the January 2009 estimate from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office projected that the debt would be around $9 trillion today. So Obama could, at most, be assigned the blame for adding an additional $4.5 trillion to the debt, and that is only if you absolve Congress (which has been controlled by Republicans for most of his tenure) of any responsibility, and if you blame Obama for all of the long-lasting effects of the recession that he inherited. 

Also, a lot of the debt comes from entitlements such as Social Security and Medicare, which are increasing largely on autopilot due to demographic trends that are out of any president's control. So while Obama does bear some responsibility for the debt accumulation on his watch, he certainly does not deserve sole responsibility. Bush's own party played a role, too, as did the inevitable grind of demographic trends. Any president today would be in much the same situation. 

Another type of inevitable grind—inflation—is worth factoring in as well. Every year, inflation puts upward pressure on the scale of the debt. Inflation erodes the numbers and makes them a bit meaningless, Goldwein said. For a comparison, let us take a look at Obama's predecessor in the White House, George W. Bush—a Republican and Jeb Bush's brother. The Debt to the Penny calculator does not offer daily tallies for publicly held debt around the time of Bush's inauguration, but it does offer daily data for gross federal debt, so we will use that. When Bush came into office on January 20, 2001, the gross federal debt stood at $5.73 trillion. At the end of Bush's term eight years later, the debt had risen to $10.63 trillion—an increase on Bush's watch of $4.9 trillion. That is not quite equal to what his 42 presidential predecessors accumulated, but it is 86 percent of the way there. That increase under Bush is a little smaller than the expected increase during Obama's full tenure—89 percent—but it is not off by much. 

Our ruling: Bush said that Obama will somehow manage to add more than $8 trillion to the national debt, which is more debt than the 43 presidents who held office before him compiled together. On the numbers, Bush is right, as long as you measure the nation's publicly held debt, the most commonly cited statistic, and as long as you project forward to the end of Obama's tenure. However, Bush leaves out some important context when he focuses the blame solely on Obama and ignores that the percentage increase in the debt under George W. Bush was similar. The statement is accurate but needs clarification, so we rate it Mostly True.","['National', 'Debt', 'Deficit', 'Federal Budget']",True,"In a Feb. 5, 2016,Medium postabout his approach to Social Security, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush reiterated a talking point that many Republicans have used before.We first turned to the U.S. Treasury Departments Debt to the Penny calculator, which allows you to track the federal debt on a daily basis."
Did Target experience a significant drop in their stock value as a result of their transgender bathroom policy?,"[""The big box retailer gave investors lower-than-expected forecasts due to increasing online sales, news that affected the company's stock price.""]","On 28 February 2017, Breitbart.com reported that big box retailer Target's stock had ""crashed,"" losing a combined total of $15 billion in investor wealth due to the chain's announcement in 2016 that it would allow transgender customers and employees to use bathrooms corresponding to their gender identity. Reported Target's stock value is now down by 30 percent since it sparked a consumer boycott by embracing the transgender political agenda. That 30 percent drop has slashed investors' wealth by roughly $15 billion. On Tuesday, the stock fell to $58.78, down from its April 19 high of $83.98. In contrast, Walmart is up 3 percent since April, and Kohl's is down less than one percent. Company officials indirectly acknowledged the consumer boycott. ""Our fourth-quarter results reflect the impact of rapidly changing consumer behavior, which drove very strong digital growth but unexpected softness in our stores,"" Target CEO Brian Cornell said in a company statement. The company also admitted that it would likely continue to experience losses throughout the year. On 19 April 2016, Target announced that transgender customers and employees were free to use the restroom that corresponded to their gender identity amid a national debate on the subject during the 2016 election cycle. The announcement came after North Carolina enacted the controversial HB 2 in March 2016, a law that became colloquially known as the ""bathroom bill,"" requiring public single-sex restrooms to be used only by people of the corresponding biological sex. The controversy and Target's definitive stance prompted conservative groups like the American Family Association (AFA) to launch a boycott. Nearly 1.5 million people had signed the AFA's petition as of 1 March 2017. Target shares did plunge on 28 February 2017, but it wasn't due to its nearly year-old bathroom policy. The drop was due to 2017 guidance announced during an investor day event. Projections were far lower than expected by Wall Street analysts (the term ""guidance"" refers to projected earnings). The drop in Target's stock corresponds to the announcement made at their investor event. According to Edward Jones analyst Brian Yarbough, Wall Street was expecting Target to project earnings of $5.30 per share, but the company instead provided guidance of $3.80 to $4.20 per share, which was ""well below"" expectations, prompting the drop in share value. According to Reuters, Target's decline dragged others down with it: Target's plunge prompted declines across the retail sector. Walmart Stores Inc was down 2.0 percent, with Kroger Co down 1.2 percent and Macy's Inc off 1.7 percent. Dollar General Corp fell 4.2 percent. What is affecting Target and other retailers has been competition with all-online retailers like Amazon, which do not have the overhead costs of brick-and-mortar locations. Target, for example, has 1,803 stores. ""Online players don't have a huge network of stores, and since they don't have that cost, they can offer lower prices,"" Yarbough said. Customers also have the immediate ability to do price comparisons with smartphones. These changing patterns are reflected in a statement given by Target CEO Brian Cornell: ""Our fourth-quarter results reflect the impact of rapidly changing consumer behavior, which drove very strong digital growth but unexpected softness in our stores. At our meeting with the financial community this morning, we will provide details on the meaningful investments we're making in our business and financial model, which will position Target for long-term, sustainable growth in this new era of retail. We will accelerate our investments in a smart network of physical and digital assets, as well as our exclusive and differentiated assortment, including the launch of more than 12 new brands, representing more than $10 billion of our sales over the next two years. In addition, we will invest in lower gross margins to ensure we are clearly and competitively priced every day. While the transition to this new model will present headwinds to our sales and profit performance in the short term, we are confident that these changes will best position Target for continued success over the long term."" Although Target offers online shopping, profits there tend to be lower due to associated costs like shipping and price competition from the likes of Amazon. Retailers are struggling to survive, with more profitable in-store sales lagging and lower profit margins due to a growing number of online shoppers. Although its e-commerce operation is growing quickly, Target reported its third straight quarter of lower sales from existing stores, citing ""unexpected softness"" and raising new questions about the health of large national retailers in the United States. Target also forecast first-quarter profit well below Wall Street estimates. Shares sank 13 percent, on track for their biggest one-day percentage drop in more than 18 years. Target's stock has lost a quarter of its value since the 2016 holiday season started in November and is now trading at its lowest level since August 2014. Target maintains that the bathroom policy has had no effects on its business, with company spokeswoman Erika Winkels telling us in an email, ""We have made it clear over time that we've seen no material impact on the business based on the bathroom policy. We don't have anything new or different to share."" A poor performance in the 2016 holiday season was also attributed to online sales outpacing foot traffic, but Target is, again, not the only chain feeling the effects: Department stores across the country are paying the price for underestimating Amazon this holiday season. Macy's and Kohl's both reported lower-than-expected sales during the all-important end-of-year retail period and announced a spate of store closures that will lead to thousands of lost jobs. Sears has even been reduced to selling off one of its iconic brands after a double-digit sales slide. Industry observers blame online competition, as well as department store brands' own shortfalls in adapting to a fundamental shift in consumer behavior. Nevertheless, Neil Saunders, managing director of GlobalData Retail, told us that Target could be worse off than it is: ""It's in a much better position than some retailers because its balance sheet is still robust, whereas Sears and Macy's are in a very difficult position. With Target, it's much more about tweaking and reinvention at the edges. [The guidance] wasn't great, but not as bad as other people."" Saunders told Reuters that while Walmart has been buoyed by successfully offering groceries, Target has not been able to keep up on that front, calling its grocery offerings ""confusing."" ""Target is neither a full-line grocer nor a player with lots of niche specialty products; it is neither a high-end player nor a price-focused discounter,"" he said. It is difficult to say with certainty whether Target's commerce overall has been negatively affected by its policy on transgender people. Although company representatives have maintained it has not, shortly after Cornell made the announcement, USA Today reported a study that showed the percentage of people who would consider shopping there the next time they needed something dropped from 42 to 38 percent. But the retail industry as a whole is facing a dramatic shift in consumer behavior, and retailers have struggled to keep pace with it. Target's late February 2017 stock drop, however, was the result of announcements made during an investor day event and cannot be attributed to their policy on bathroom use.",['investment'],False,"On 28 February 2017, Breitbart.com reported that big box retailer Target's stock had ""crashed,"" losing a combined total of $15 billion in investor wealth, because of the chain's announcement in 2016 that it would allow transgender customers and employees to use bathrooms corresponding to their gender identity:On 19 April 2016, Target announced that transgender customers and employees were free to use the restroom that corresponded to their gender identity amid a national row on the subject during the 2016 election cycle. The announcement came after North Carolina enacted the controversial HB 2 in March 2016, a law that came to be colloquially termed the ""bathroom bill,"" and required public single-sex restrooms only be used by people of the corresponding biological sex. The controversy, and Target's definitive stance, prompted conservative groups like the American Family Association (AFA) to launch a boycott. Nearly 1.5 million people have signed the AFA's petition as of 1 March 2017.Target shares did plunge on 28 February 2017, but it wasn't due to its nearly year-old bathroom policy. The drop was due to 2017 guidance announced during an investor day event. Projections were far lower than expected by Wall Street analysts (the term ""guidance"" means projected earnings). The drop in Target stock corresponds to the announcement made at their investor event: Source: Yahoo! FinanceThese changing patterns are reflected in a statement given by Target CEO Brian Cornell:Saunders told Reuters that while Wal-Mart has been buoyed by successfully offering groceries, Target has not been able to keep up on that front, calling its grocery offerings ""confusing.""It is difficult to say with certainty whether the Target's commerce overall has been negatively affected by its policy on transgender people. Although company representatives have maintained it has not, shortly after Cornell made the announcement, USA Today reported a study that showed the percentage of people who would consider shopping there the next time they needed something dropped from 42 to 38 percent. But the retail industry as a whole is facing a dramatic shift in consumer behavior, and retailers have struggled to keep pace with it."
Did Google Remove Photos of Bill Clinton with Jeffrey Epstein from Search Results?,"['Did Google also ""scrub"" these photos from Bing, Yahoo, Yandex, and Duck Duck Go?']","In July 2019, registered sex offender and hedge fund manager Jeffrey Epstein was arrested on charges related to the sex trafficking of minors. In addition to the severity of the alleged crimes, Epstein's arrest made headlines due to his connections to well-known public figures and politicians, including President Donald Trump and former President Bill Clinton. The news of Epstein's arrest sent political partisans into overdrive as they attempted to demonstrate that politicians on their side were less involved with Epstein than those on the other side. When images of President Trump with Epstein were published by news outlets and circulated on social media, his defenders were upset that similar images of Bill Clinton with Epstein were not given equal prominence. This led to a rumor that Google was ""scrubbing,"" ""removing,"" or ""deindexing"" images of Clinton and Epstein together from search results as part of a cover-up to protect the Clintons. Twitter users Paul Sperry, Jack Murphy, and BNL News all claimed, without evidence, that images of Epstein and Clinton together had been removed from Google's search results, and their tweets were collectively shared thousands of times. These claims are without merit. The tweets provided no evidence that images of Clinton with Epstein could be found on Google prior to the latter's arrest in July 2019, nor any proof that Google had removed these alleged images from their search results in the aftermath of Epstein's incarceration. In fact, they provided no evidence that photographs of Clinton with Epstein even existed at all. Twitter user Robert Barnes inflated this rumor by claiming that while Google wouldn't show photographs of Epstein and Clinton together, such images were findable using other search engines, such as DuckDuckGo. This simply wasn't the case. We searched for images of Clinton together with Epstein on Google, Yahoo, Bing, DuckDuckGo, and Yandex. The results for all five of these search engines were similar, with none of them turning up a genuine photograph of Epstein together with Clinton. A spokesperson for Google told us that no images of Epstein or Clinton were removed from their search results and that the company did not make any manual changes to its algorithm to alter which images would be displayed for related searches. We also checked right-leaning websites such as Breitbart, the National Review, and the Daily Caller to see if they had published any pictures of this pair together, but yet again we came up empty-handed. Of course, the lack of pictures doesn't mean that Bill Clinton didn't have a friendly relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. The former president reportedly took several trips on Epstein's private jet, and in 1995, Clinton and Epstein were both on the guest list for a ""small dinner party"" hosted by Revlon mogul Ron Perelman to raise funds for the Democratic National Convention. At the time this article was originally written, images of Clinton and Epstein together didn't turn up in searches on Google, Bing, Yahoo, Yandex, or DuckDuckGo. That changed, however, after Snopes uncovered a photograph of Epstein and Clinton that was published in a 2003 print edition of Vanity Fair magazine. The claim that Google is censoring these images can further be debunked by examining the company's search results in the days following the publication of our article. On July 23, 2019, shortly after we published an image of Clinton with Epstein, it appeared on the front page of Google's search results.",['funds'],False,"In July 2019, registered sex offender and hedge fund manager Jeffrey Epstein was arrested on charges relating to the sex trafficking of minors. In addition to the severity of the alleged crimes, Epstein's arrest made headlines due to his connections to well-known public figures and politicians, including President Donald Trump and former President Bill Clinton.The news of Epstein's arrest sent political partisans into overdrive as they attempted to show that politicians on their side were less involved with Epstein than politicians on the other side. So when images of President Trump with Epstein were published by news outlets and circulated on social media, his defenders were upset not to see similar images of Bill Clinton with Epstein being given equal prominence. This led to a rumor that Google was ""scrubbing,"" ""removing,"" or ""deindexing"" images of Clinton and Epstein together from search results as part of a cover-up to protect the Clintons.Twitter users Paul Sperry, Jack Murphy, and BNL News all claimed, without evidence, that images of Epstein and Clinton together had been removed from Google's search results, and their tweets were collectively shared thousands of times over:Twitter user Robert Barnes inflated this rumor by claiming that while Google wouldn't show photographs of Epstein and Clinton together, such images were findable using other search engines, such as DuckDuckGo:Google: Yahoo: Bing: DuckDuckGo: Yandex: Of course, the lack of pictures doesn't mean that Bill Clinton didn't have a friendly relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. The former president reportedly took several trips on Epstein's private jet, and in 1995 Clinton and Epstein were both on the guest list for a ""small dinner party"" hosted by Revlon mogul Ron Perelman to raise funds for the Democratic National Convention:At the time this article was originally written, images of Clinton and Epstein together didn't turn up in searches on Google, Bing, Yahoo, Yandex, or Duck Duck Go. That changed, however, after Snopes uncovered a photograph of Epstein and Clinton that was published in a 2003 print edition of Vanity Fair magazine. The claim that Google is censoring these images can further be debunked by examining the company's search results in the days following the publication of our article. On July 23, 2019, shortly after we published an image of Clinton with Epstein, it appeared on the front page of Google's search results:"
"Says that under Rick Perrys plan, Texas has cut funding for public schools by 25%.",[],"Fix Austin Schools, a group advocating voter approval of four bond propositions benefiting the Austin school district, slammed Gov. Rick Perrys education plan in a leaflet fielded by local voters in early May 2013.Under the word cut in capital letters, one side of the leaflet says: Under Rick Perry, Texas has CUT funding for public schools by 25%, a conclusion attributed to PolitiFact.Lynda Rife, a consultant to the group, told us the claim echoed our January 2013 review of Perrys statement to reporters at the time that Texas public school funding grew at three times the rate of enrollment from 2002 to 2012.In raw terms, there was a basis for Perrys claim. However, after adjusting for inflation and the effect of an annual tax swap put in motion by lawmakers and Perry in 2006, we concluded that Texas schools in 2012 were fielding 25 percent less in state aid than what they reaped in 2002. Perrys claim drew arating of False.At the time, we looked at enrollment changes and at both overall school spending, counting dollars from state, federal and local sources, and state education aid alone.EnrollmentEnrollment increased about 20 percent from 2001-02 to 2011-12, from more than 4.1 million to nearly 5 million students, according to a December 2012 report by the Texas Education Agency. By email, agency spokeswoman Debbie Ratcliffe told us 2012-13 enrollment was expected to exceed 5 million, a figure subsequently confirmed, Ratcliffe told us recently by email.Overall spendingOverall school expenditures totaled $27.9 billion in 2002 and $44.2 billion in 2012, according to a chart from the Legislative Budget Board, which tracks fiscal issues for lawmakers.That makes for a difference of 58 percent, though thats also before adjusting for inflation, which the boards staff did by converting figures to 2004 dollars using an inflation adjuster devised by the federal government, the Implicit Price Deflator for State and Local Government.In 2004 dollars, Texas public school spending in 2002 totaled $30.1 billion. In 2012, the total was $33.3 billion--11 percent greater than in 2002.By this measure, then, it looks like school enrollment went up faster than spending. Then again, we learned, these figures were not behind Perrys statement.State spending alonePerrys then-spokeswoman, Catherine Frazier, told us by email that Perry was referring to the difference in state education spending alone as those are the funds the state has control over.The budget boards chart shows $10.9 billion in state spending on the schools in 2002 and $18.9 billion in 2012, for a 73 percent difference, or a little more than Perrys declared 70 percent.Adjusting for inflation, though, reduces the increase to 20 percent, which was still outpacing enrollment growth. In 2004 dollars, such spending was $14.2 billion in 2012, compared with $11.8 billion in 2002.Another crucial factorAnalyst Eva DeLuna Castro of the liberal Center for Public Policy Priorities and school lobbyist Lynn Moak, a former Texas Education Agency official, each pointed out another wrinkle, suggesting that any consideration of state education spending should take into account changes in law approved in 2006 resulting in the state picking up about $7 billion more in annual costs in return for school districts cutting local maintenance and operation property tax rates.Castro said by email: The property tax cut was $14.2 billion a biennium, or $7.1 billion every year. That means the state had to put in that amount of money a year to offset local property taxes falling by the same amount.The shift in funding sources did not, in itself, step up aid received by the schools, Castro said.Moak said by phone: This was simply a source-of-funds transfer.To adjust for the annual cost shift, we subtracted $7.1 billion from the state spending in 2012, suggesting a $0.9 billion difference from the 2002 spending. However, adjusting for inflation makes the 2012 state spending equal $8.2 billion in 2002 dollars--25 percent less than the $10.9 billion spent in 2002, which also would mean that spending trailed enrollment growth.For this article, finally, we weighed the message that the reduced spending was Perrys education plan. Perry was governor through all the spending decisions, but the reality is that Republican majorities of the 150-member House and 31-member Senate were needed to pass the decisions into law. Perry was key, but he didn't dictate actions. No governor can.Our rulingThe pro-bonds group said that under Perrys education plan, Texas has cut funding for public schools by 25 percent.State education spending in 2012 was 25 percent lower than it was in 2002, adjusting for inflation and the real effects of the 2006 law giving the state more responsibility for education revenues.Yet Perry didnt cause the reduction by himself; lawmakers acted, too. This clarification is missing from the groups statement, which we rate as Mostly True.","['Children', 'Education', 'State Budget', 'Texas']",True,"Fix Austin Schools, a group advocating voter approval of four bond propositions benefiting the Austin school district, slammed Gov. Rick Perrys education plan in a leaflet fielded by local voters in early May 2013.Under the word cut in capital letters, one side of the leaflet says: Under Rick Perry, Texas has CUT funding for public schools by 25%, a conclusion attributed to PolitiFact.Lynda Rife, a consultant to the group, told us the claim echoed our January 2013 review of Perrys statement to reporters at the time that Texas public school funding grew at three times the rate of enrollment from 2002 to 2012.In raw terms, there was a basis for Perrys claim. However, after adjusting for inflation and the effect of an annual tax swap put in motion by lawmakers and Perry in 2006, we concluded that Texas schools in 2012 were fielding 25 percent less in state aid than what they reaped in 2002. Perrys claim drew arating of False.At the time, we looked at enrollment changes and at both overall school spending, counting dollars from state, federal and local sources, and state education aid alone.EnrollmentEnrollment increased about 20 percent from 2001-02 to 2011-12, from more than 4.1 million to nearly 5 million students, according to a December 2012 report by the Texas Education Agency. By email, agency spokeswoman Debbie Ratcliffe told us 2012-13 enrollment was expected to exceed 5 million, a figure subsequently confirmed, Ratcliffe told us recently by email.Overall spendingOverall school expenditures totaled $27.9 billion in 2002 and $44.2 billion in 2012, according to a chart from the Legislative Budget Board, which tracks fiscal issues for lawmakers.That makes for a difference of 58 percent, though thats also before adjusting for inflation, which the boards staff did by converting figures to 2004 dollars using an inflation adjuster devised by the federal government, the Implicit Price Deflator for State and Local Government.In 2004 dollars, Texas public school spending in 2002 totaled $30.1 billion. In 2012, the total was $33.3 billion--11 percent greater than in 2002.By this measure, then, it looks like school enrollment went up faster than spending. Then again, we learned, these figures were not behind Perrys statement.State spending alonePerrys then-spokeswoman, Catherine Frazier, told us by email that Perry was referring to the difference in state education spending alone as those are the funds the state has control over.The budget boards chart shows $10.9 billion in state spending on the schools in 2002 and $18.9 billion in 2012, for a 73 percent difference, or a little more than Perrys declared 70 percent.Adjusting for inflation, though, reduces the increase to 20 percent, which was still outpacing enrollment growth. In 2004 dollars, such spending was $14.2 billion in 2012, compared with $11.8 billion in 2002.Another crucial factorAnalyst Eva DeLuna Castro of the liberal Center for Public Policy Priorities and school lobbyist Lynn Moak, a former Texas Education Agency official, each pointed out another wrinkle, suggesting that any consideration of state education spending should take into account changes in law approved in 2006 resulting in the state picking up about $7 billion more in annual costs in return for school districts cutting local maintenance and operation property tax rates.Castro said by email: The property tax cut was $14.2 billion a biennium, or $7.1 billion every year. That means the state had to put in that amount of money a year to offset local property taxes falling by the same amount.The shift in funding sources did not, in itself, step up aid received by the schools, Castro said.Moak said by phone: This was simply a source-of-funds transfer.To adjust for the annual cost shift, we subtracted $7.1 billion from the state spending in 2012, suggesting a $0.9 billion difference from the 2002 spending. However, adjusting for inflation makes the 2012 state spending equal $8.2 billion in 2002 dollars--25 percent less than the $10.9 billion spent in 2002, which also would mean that spending trailed enrollment growth.For this article, finally, we weighed the message that the reduced spending was Perrys education plan. Perry was governor through all the spending decisions, but the reality is that Republican majorities of the 150-member House and 31-member Senate were needed to pass the decisions into law. Perry was key, but he didn't dictate actions. No governor can.Our rulingThe pro-bonds group said that under Perrys education plan, Texas has cut funding for public schools by 25 percent.State education spending in 2012 was 25 percent lower than it was in 2002, adjusting for inflation and the real effects of the 2006 law giving the state more responsibility for education revenues.Yet Perry didnt cause the reduction by himself; lawmakers acted, too. This clarification is missing from the groups statement, which we rate as Mostly True."
A Canadian's View of U.S. Elections,['E-mail reproduces an editorial from a Canadian newspaper about U.S. presidential candidates.'],"Claim: E-mail reproduces an editorial from a Canadian newspaper about U.S. presidential candidates. Example: [Caldwell, December 2007] I received this as an email. Is this real? A Canadian's view of US Elections Theo Caldwell, National Post (Canada) Wednesday, December 26, 2007 An obvious choice can be unnerving. When the apparent perfection of one option or the unspeakable awfulness of another makes a decision seem too easy, it is human nature to become suspicious. This instinct intensifies as the stakes of the given choice are raised. American voters know no greater responsibility to their country and to the world than to select their president wisely. While we do not yet know who the Democratic and Republican nominees will be, any combination of the leading candidates from either party will present the most obvious choice put to American voters in a generation. To wit, none of the Democrats has any business being president. This pronouncement has less to do with any apparent perfection among the Republican candidates than with the intellectual and experiential paucity evinced by the Democratic field. ""Not ready for prime time,"" goes the vernacular, but this does not suffice to describe how bad things are. Alongside Hillary Clinton, add Barack Obama's kindergarten essays to an already confused conversation about Dennis Kucinich's UFO sightings, dueling celebrity endorsements, and who can be quickest to retreat from America's global conflict and raise taxes on the American people, and it becomes clear that these are profoundly unserious individuals. [Rest of article here.] Origins: We've received many forwarded copies of the above-linked article, accompanied by inquiries from readers wanting to know whether it's ""real"" or ""true."" The article is ""real"" in the sense that it is indeed an editorial by Theo Caldwell, which was published in the December 26, 2007 edition of Canada's National Post newspaper (and reproduced in that publication's online version), offering the writer's assessment of the candidates vying for the nominations of the two major parties in the upcoming U.S. presidential election. Theo Caldwell online Aside from the issue of its origins, the article is not classifiable as ""true"" nor ""false""—it is an editorial that reflects its author's opinions. Last updated: January 14, 2008 Sources: Caldwell, Theo. ""Democrat or Republican? The Question Is Shockingly Easy."" National Post. December 26, 2007 (p. A27).",['taxes'],True,"[Rest of article here.]The article is ""real"" in the sense that it is indeed an editorial by Theo Caldwell which was published in the 26 December 2007 edition of Canada's National Post newspaper (and reproduced in that publication's online version), offering the writer's assessment of the candidates vying for the nominations of the two major parties in the upcoming U.S. presidential election."
Is Snapchat creating a database that uses facial recognition technology for government agencies?,"['Online conspiracy theorists claim Snapchat\'s image filter feature called ""Lenses"" is covertly amassing a database of users\' faces to share with law enforcement agencies.']","One of the more whimsical messaging options offered by Snapchat  a social media app for mobile devices introduced in 2011  is the ability to personalize selfies in real time and share them instantly with other users, a feature that has at once contributed to the app's immense popularity (Snapchat boasts an estimated 166 million users daily) and raised privacy concerns among some of its customers.  Snapchat's rotating toolbox of image filters, called Lenses, enables users to manipulate photos and videos to humorous effect, as seen in these examples shared publicly on Instagram by celebrity Snapchatter Chrissy Teigen:   Cute and innocent though it may appear, the feature has become the target of conspiracy theorists claiming that Snapchat's corporate owner, Snap Inc., uses it to collect facial recognition data which it allegedly stores and shares with law enforcement agencies such as the FBI and CIA. We've found examples of such rumors dating back to Fall 2015 (soon after the Lenses feature was officially rolled out): you guys are all swooning over the snapchat filters... And The FBI is getting the most extensive facial recognition library ever  TEENWOLF (@TEENWOLFREMIX) October 3, 2015 October 3, 2015  It wasn't until April of the following year that the rumors reached takeoff speed, however, thanks largely to a tweet composed by hip hop artist, songwriter, and unabashed flat-earth theorist B.o.B to his roughly two million followers: tweet flat-earth when you realize all the snap chat filters are really building a facial recognition database ?  B.o.B (@bobatl) April 16, 2016 April 16, 2016 In May 2016, with civil cases already pending against Facebook and Google alleging unauthorized use of facial recognition technology, a class action lawsuit was filed by two Snapchat users in Illinois complaining that the app violated their rights under the state's Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA) by failing to obtain adequate permission before gathering and storing their ""biometric identifiers and biometric information"". lawsuit BIPA The company flatly denied it: denied Contrary to the claims of this frivolous lawsuit, we are very careful not to collect, store, or obtain any biometric information or identifiers about our community. The class action suit was eventually dismissed in favor of arbitration in September 2016, but as of this writing the case remains unresolved. Crucial to Snapchat's defense is their position, as stated in the Privacy Center of the company's web site, that the app relies on object recognition, not facial recognition, to make Lenses work: arbitration stated Have you ever wondered how Lenses make your eyes well up with tears or rainbows come out your mouth? Some of the magic behind Lenses is object recognition. Object recognition is an algorithm designed to understand the general nature of things that appear in an image. It lets us know that a nose is a nose or an eye is an eye. But object recognition isnt the same as facial recognition. While Lenses can recognize faces in general, they can't recognize a specific face. If it's true that Lenses can't recognize (i.e., identify) specific faces, then the claim that the app produces anything qualifying as a ""biometric identifier"" under Illinois law is seriously in doubt. (The district judge in Illinois overseeing the Google facial recognition case previously defined ""biometric identifier"" as ""a set of biology-based measurements ... used to identify a person.) case As to the wider claim that Snapchat is building a ""facial recognition database,"" the distinction between object and facial recognition, at minimum, places a burden of proof on those trumpeting the claim to show that the app is capable of identifying specific faces in the first place. If this explanation (provided by the web site Vox) of how the software works is accurate, Snapchat doesn't need to be able to identify specific faces to accomplish the task. It has to recognize a face as a face, and identify the parts of a face as the nose, eyes, ears, chin, etc., but it doesn't have to recognize who the face belongs to: this Moreover, Snapchat's Privacy Policy states that the company neither collects nor permanently stores user-created content (meaning photos and videos) let alone preserves such items in a database: states Snapchat lets you capture what its like to live in the moment. On our end, that means that we automatically delete the content of your Snaps (the photo and video messages that you send your friends) from our servers after we detect that a Snap has been opened by all recipients or has expired. And although the policy further acknowledges that Snap Inc. may share users' personal information ""to comply with any valid legal process, governmental request, or applicable law, rule, or regulation"" (and transparency reports show that the company has indeed complied with such requests in the past), they can't grant the FBI (or any other agency) access to a ""facial recognition database"" that doesn't exist. reports Some rumors die hard, however. An updated variant that cropped up in early 2017 brought two new claims to the mix: one, that the FBI literally created Snapchat's image filtering software (and alleged facial recognition database); and two, that there is a smoking gun to prove it  namely U.S. patent #9396354:   granted According to an analysis by Sophos' Naked Security blogger Alison Booth, the patent proposes using facial recognition software to identify individual subjects in photos, whereupon the latter would be modified and/or their distribution restricted in accordance with the subjects' pre-established privacy settings. analysis There is a catch. Implementation of the process would, of course, require amassing a facial recognition database. ""For facial recognition to work,"" writes Booth, ""Snapchat would need to store images of all users that sign up to the feature  as a reference image to compare photos against."" So, there it is  a ""facial recognition database"" of the sort conspiracy theorists have been going on about since 2015, except that Snapchat has not, to date, implemented such a feature (a fact we were able to confirm with the company), nor is there evidence that the FBI (or any other law enforcement agency) was involved in creating it, nor does the patent itself mention sharing facial recognition data with government entities. Despite finding no legitimate basis for the claim that Snapchat is currently engaged in collecting, storing, or sharing facial recognition data on its users, we do not wish to downplay the increasing prevalence of facial recognition technology in both commercial and government applications, nor the privacy issues this raises. Sen. Al Franken (D-Minnesota) articulated some of these issues in a statement announcing the release of a 2015 Government Accountability Office (GAO) report on the privacy implications of the technology: report The newly released report raises serious concerns about how companies are collecting, using, and storing our most sensitive personal information. I believe that all Americans have a fundamental right to privacy, which is why it's important that, at the very least, the tech industry adopts strong, industry-wide standards for facial recognition technology. But what we really need are federal standards that address facial recognition privacy by enhancing our consumer privacy framework. The tech industry has yet to address these concerns to the satisfaction of consumer privacy watchdogs, however, nor has Congress made progress toward establishing the federal standards Franken called for. Thus far, issue has been dealt with primarily in the court system via cases such as the aforementioned BIPA class action lawsuits against Facebook and Google. watchdogs lawsuits One of the ironies of the false alarms about Snapchat's alleged sharing of facial recognition data with the FBI is that the agency already maintains a biometric data network comprising the facial images of more than 117 million Americans (about half the U.S. adult population, and growing), mostly drawn from state DMV databases and other non-criminal sources. A 2016 report by the Georgetown Law Center for Privacy and Technology warned that the technology is both error-prone, with a disproportionate impact on communities of color, and almost totally unregulated. already report disproportionate In testimony before a Senate Judiciary subcommittee hearing chaired by Sen. Franken in 2012, Electronic Frontier Foundation attorney Jennifer Lynch urged Congress to act sooner rather than later to protect the biometric privacy of all Americans: testimony Face recognition and its accompanying privacy concerns are not going away. Given this, it is imperative that government act now to limit unnecessary biometrics collection; instill proper protections on data collection, transfer, and search; ensure accountability; mandate independent oversight; require appropriate legal process before government collection; and define clear rules for data sharing at all levels. This is important to preserve the democratic and constitutional values that are bedrock to American society. Booth, Alison.  ""Snapchat Turns Facial Recognition Technology on Its Head.""
 Naked Security.  20 July 2016. Danley-Greiner, Kristin.  ""Snapchat Defends Procedures After Facial Recognition Class Action.""
 Legal Newsline.  2 September 2016. Garvie, Clare et al.  ""The Perpetual Line-up: Unregulated Police Face Recognition in America.""
 Georgetown Law Center on Privacy & Technology.  18 October 2016. Graham, Meg.  ""Illinois Biometrics Lawsuits May Help Define Rules for Facebook, Google.""
 Chicago Tribune.  13 January 2017. Korte, Amy.  ""Federal Court in Illinois Rules Biometric Privacy Lawsuit Against Google Can Proceed.""
 Illinois Policy.  8 March 2017. Maass, Dave.  ""Memo to the DOJ: Facial Recognition's Threat to Privacy Is Worse than Anyone Thought.""
 Electronic Frontier Foundation.  18 October 2016. Mathies, Daven.  ""The Incredible Underlying Technology of Snapchat's Selfie Lenses.""
 Digital Trends.  1 July 2016. Nelson, Steven.  ""Half of U.S. Adults Are in Police Facial Recognition Networks.""
 US News & World Report.  18 October 2016. Roberts, Jeff John.  ""Tech Industry's Facial Recognition Plan Bashed by Privacy Groups.""
 Fortune.  16 June 2016. Thielman, Sam.  ""FBI Using Vast Public Photo Data and Iffy Facial Recognition Tech to Find Criminals.""
 The Guardian.  15 June 2016. Trujillo, Mario.  ""Facial Recognition Quietly Taking Hold.""
 The Hill.  1 August 2015. Welinder, Yana.  ""EFF Urges Congress to Protect Privacy in Face Recognition.""
 Electronic Frontier Foundation.  18 July 2012. Yakowicz, Will.  ""Snapchat Sued Under Illinois Biometric Information Usage Law.""
  Inc.  18 July 2016. Electronic Frontier Foundation.  ""Testimony of Jennifer Lynch to the Senate Committee on the Judiciary Subcommittee on Privacy, Technology, and the Law.""
 18 July 2012. Google.  ""Patent: Apparatus and Method for Automated Privacy Protection in Distributed Images - US 9396354 B1.""
  19 July 2016. Government Accounting Office.  ""Facial Recognition Technology: Commercial Uses, Privacy Issues, and Applicable Federal Law.""
 20 June 2015. U.S. Senate.  ""Sen. Franken: New Report on Facial Recognition Technology Highlights Lack of Privacy Standards.""
 30 July 2015. U.S. Senate.  ""Sen. Franken Releases Extensive Report Detailing Concerns with FBI Facial Recognition Program.""
 15 June 2016.",['accountability'],False," TEENWOLF (@TEENWOLFREMIX) October 3, 2015It wasn't until April of the following year that the rumors reached takeoff speed, however, thanks largely to a tweet composed by hip hop artist, songwriter, and unabashed flat-earth theorist B.o.B to his roughly two million followers: B.o.B (@bobatl) April 16, 2016In May 2016, with civil cases already pending against Facebook and Google alleging unauthorized use of facial recognition technology, a class action lawsuit was filed by two Snapchat users in Illinois complaining that the app violated their rights under the state's Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA) by failing to obtain adequate permission before gathering and storing their ""biometric identifiers and biometric information"".The company flatly denied it:The class action suit was eventually dismissed in favor of arbitration in September 2016, but as of this writing the case remains unresolved. Crucial to Snapchat's defense is their position, as stated in the Privacy Center of the company's web site, that the app relies on object recognition, not facial recognition, to make Lenses work:If it's true that Lenses can't recognize (i.e., identify) specific faces, then the claim that the app produces anything qualifying as a ""biometric identifier"" under Illinois law is seriously in doubt. (The district judge in Illinois overseeing the Google facial recognition case previously defined ""biometric identifier"" as ""a set of biology-based measurements ... used to identify a person.)As to the wider claim that Snapchat is building a ""facial recognition database,"" the distinction between object and facial recognition, at minimum, places a burden of proof on those trumpeting the claim to show that the app is capable of identifying specific faces in the first place. If this explanation (provided by the web site Vox) of how the software works is accurate, Snapchat doesn't need to be able to identify specific faces to accomplish the task. It has to recognize a face as a face, and identify the parts of a face as the nose, eyes, ears, chin, etc., but it doesn't have to recognize who the face belongs to:Moreover, Snapchat's Privacy Policy states that the company neither collects nor permanently stores user-created content (meaning photos and videos) let alone preserves such items in a database:And although the policy further acknowledges that Snap Inc. may share users' personal information ""to comply with any valid legal process, governmental request, or applicable law, rule, or regulation"" (and transparency reports show that the company has indeed complied with such requests in the past), they can't grant the FBI (or any other agency) access to a ""facial recognition database"" that doesn't exist.According to an analysis by Sophos' Naked Security blogger Alison Booth, the patent proposes using facial recognition software to identify individual subjects in photos, whereupon the latter would be modified and/or their distribution restricted in accordance with the subjects' pre-established privacy settings.Sen. Al Franken (D-Minnesota) articulated some of these issues in a statement announcing the release of a 2015 Government Accountability Office (GAO) report on the privacy implications of the technology:The tech industry has yet to address these concerns to the satisfaction of consumer privacy watchdogs, however, nor has Congress made progress toward establishing the federal standards Franken called for. Thus far, issue has been dealt with primarily in the court system via cases such as the aforementioned BIPA class action lawsuits against Facebook and Google.One of the ironies of the false alarms about Snapchat's alleged sharing of facial recognition data with the FBI is that the agency already maintains a biometric data network comprising the facial images of more than 117 million Americans (about half the U.S. adult population, and growing), mostly drawn from state DMV databases and other non-criminal sources. A 2016 report by the Georgetown Law Center for Privacy and Technology warned that the technology is both error-prone, with a disproportionate impact on communities of color, and almost totally unregulated.In testimony before a Senate Judiciary subcommittee hearing chaired by Sen. Franken in 2012, Electronic Frontier Foundation attorney Jennifer Lynch urged Congress to act sooner rather than later to protect the biometric privacy of all Americans:"
"Seattle Chase Wheedle can be paraphrased as ""Pursuit in Seattle by Wheedle"".",[''],"FACT CHECK: Is the city of Seattle forcing local businesses to comply with Sharia law?  Claim: The mayor of Seattle has ""launched"" a new ""rule"" forcing businesses to comply with Sharia law.   MOSTLY  WHAT'S :   Seattle is exploring options to make home loans accessible to Muslims who are unable to participate in standard mortgage programs due to religious proscriptions.     WHAT'S :  Seattle businesses are being forced to comply with tenets of sharia law. Examples:  [Collected via Twitter, July 2015] Seattle Mayor Planning to Force Banks to Give Sharia Compliant Homes Loans to Local Muslims https://t.co/QSKZ1XqzMB https://t.co/QSKZ1XqzMB  Warner Todd Huston (@warnerthuston) July 17, 2015 July 17, 2015   Seattle's Liberal Mayor Caves To Muslims Following Sharia Law - BuzzPo https://t.co/A3m76OJz7r https://t.co/A3m76OJz7r  EMERSON E.RODRIGUES (@EMERSON_NALITA) July 17, 2015 July 17, 2015   Mayor, no Sharia law applies in America!! Stop this unconstitutional junk. https://t.co/fx7VENmVQx https://t.co/fx7VENmVQx  Bunch (@bunch1243) July 17, 2015 July 17, 2015   Origins:On 17 July 2015, the unreliable web site Conservative Tribune published an article titled ""ALERT: Seattle Mayor Launches Rules to Force Local Businesses to Comply With SHARIAH LAW"" claiming that: article In one major American city, new rules may force banks to comply with Shariah law on lending and interest. One of the major tenets of Shariah law is that Muslims cannot pay interest on loans. In countries with large Muslim populations, theres something known as Islamic banking, which manages to get around this through various machinations. Seattle Mayor Ed Murray wants to see that change, and hes apparently willing to force banks into Shariah-compliant lending if necessary. This means that, if it passes, Seattle will be the first city in America to mandate that its banks allow access to Shariah-compliant financing.  That claim was sourced to the TeaParty.org site's article ""Seattle Mayor Offers Plan for Sharia-Compliant Housing Rules,"" which offered the following visual: article That article was a word-for-word copy of a Puget Sound Business Journal article about a potential plan by the mayor of Seattle to help Muslims obtain home loans to buy houses.  Quoting both Seattle Mayor Ed Murray and Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) Seattle-area Chapter Executive Director Arsalan Bukhari, the article explained that the city was examining housing options available to home-buying Muslims who are prohibited from participating in the traditional American housing market due to religious restrictions that prohibit them from obtaining standard home loans (despite their having desirable credit profiles): article   For some Muslims, it can be hard to buy a house, and Mayor Ed Murray plans to do something about it. Murray's housing committee released its recommendations for ways the city can increase housing in the city. Most ideas were what you'd expect, including increasing the city's housing levy and implementing new rules and regulations to foster development of market-rate and lower-income housing. One suggestion would help followers of Sharia law buy houses. That's virtually impossible now because Sharia law prohibits payment of interest on loans. The 28-member committee recommended the city convene lenders and community leaders to explore options for increasing access to Sharia-compliant loan products. More and more lenders are offering Sharia-compliant financing. The sector has grown to more than $1.6 trillion in assets worldwide over the past three decades, and analysts see potential for continued growth as the number of Muslims in the United States and Europe grows. Based on what he called ""rough anecdotal evidence,"" Bukhari estimated a couple hundred people aren't borrowing money for houses due to their religion. He said this includes even high-wage earners, such as the more than 1,000 Muslims who work for Microsoft and more than 500 Amazon.com  employees. They could easily qualify for home loans but opt not to apply ""simply because they don't want to pay interest,"" Bukhari said. ""We will work to develop new tools for Muslims who are prevented from using conventional mortgage products due to their religious beliefs,"" Murray said. The overall topic of Seattle-area Muslims and banking products was also addressed in another Puget Sound Business Journal article about retirement plans. According to that piece, CEO Thom Poulson of Falah Capital is working to facilitate opportunities for Muslim tech workers to access products such as 401(k)s and mortgages previously inaccessible to them due to religious barriers: article   It's estimated that more than 1,000 Muslims in the Puget Sound region work for Microsoft, and for those who closely follow their faith, it can be difficult to participate in the company's retirement plan. That's because Sharia law forbids them from investing in funds with holdings in companies that peddle pornography, alcohol and other vices. It's almost impossible for retirement funds to guarantee all their investments are free from those kinds of businesses. This has become an issue for workers at other tech companies, too. ""You have people who aren't getting the full benefits of their employer's offering,"" said Thom Polson, CEO of a new Seattle company, Falah Capital LLC, which works with Muslims to ensure they're investing while staying true to their beliefs. In partnership with Seattle-based Russell Investments and IdealRatings of San Francisco, Falah set up its first Islamic exchange traded fund (ETF) last fall. Listed on the New York Stock Exchange under the ticker ""FIA,"" the Russell-IdealRatings Islamic US Large Cap Index, the ETF is the first of its kind on the exchange. Polson said a large percentage of the Muslims who work at tech firms are not using their 401(k) plans because they're not Sharia-compliant. ""All of our advisory business is about addressing these needs,"" Polson said, adding his company is working with clients from the Muslim Association of the Puget Sound. The association has a large community center with a mosque in Redmond near Microsoft's headquarters. Next up for Fallah is a possible foray into home mortgages so clients can buy houses without taking out interest-bearing loans, which is against Sharia law. As part Seattle Mayor Ed Murray's landmark housing initiative, the city plans to work with lenders to help observant Muslims buy homes.   What these articles address are efforts to help businesses  service a significant portion of the local Seattle-area working population who are unable to utilize those business' current offerings  due to religious limitations, not to force businesses to comply with tenets of sharia law.  Mayor Murray's 13 July 2015 ""Action Plan to Address Seattles Affordability Crisis"" merely included a policy point of ""explor[ing] the best options for increasing access to Sharia-compliant loan products,"" not mandating that any local businesses offer such products: Action Plan  Support the Community in Finding Housing Tools for Sharia-Compliant Lending: For our low- and moderate-income Muslim neighbors who follow Sharia law  which prohibits the payment of interest or fees for loans of money  there are limited options for financing a home. Some Muslims are unable to use conventional mortgage products due to religious convictions. The City will convene lenders, housing nonprofits and community leaders to explore the best options for increasing access to Sharia-compliant loan products to help these residents become homeowners in Seattle.   Last updated: 17 July 2015 Originally published:  17 July 2015",['income'],False,"Seattle Mayor Planning to Force Banks to Give Sharia Compliant Homes Loans to Local Muslims https://t.co/QSKZ1XqzMB Warner Todd Huston (@warnerthuston) July 17, 2015Seattle's Liberal Mayor Caves To Muslims Following Sharia Law - BuzzPo https://t.co/A3m76OJz7r EMERSON E.RODRIGUES (@EMERSON_NALITA) July 17, 2015Mayor, no Sharia law applies in America!! Stop this unconstitutional junk. https://t.co/fx7VENmVQx Bunch (@bunch1243) July 17, 2015Origins:On 17 July 2015, the unreliable web site Conservative Tribune published an article titled ""ALERT: Seattle Mayor Launches Rules to Force Local Businesses to Comply With SHARIAH LAW"" claiming that:That claim was sourced to the TeaParty.org site's article ""Seattle Mayor Offers Plan for Sharia-Compliant Housing Rules,"" which offered the following visual:That article was a word-for-word copy of a Puget Sound Business Journal article about a potential plan by the mayor of Seattle to help Muslims obtain home loans to buy houses.  Quoting both Seattle Mayor Ed Murray and Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) Seattle-area Chapter Executive Director Arsalan Bukhari, the article explained that the city was examining housing options available to home-buying Muslims who are prohibited from participating in the traditional American housing market due to religious restrictions that prohibit them from obtaining standard home loans (despite their having desirable credit profiles):The overall topic of Seattle-area Muslims and banking products was also addressed in another Puget Sound Business Journal article about retirement plans. According to that piece, CEO Thom Poulson of Falah Capital is working to facilitate opportunities for Muslim tech workers to access products such as 401(k)s and mortgages previously inaccessible to them due to religious barriers:What these articles address are efforts to help businesses  service a significant portion of the local Seattle-area working population who are unable to utilize those business' current offerings  due to religious limitations, not to force businesses to comply with tenets of sharia law.  Mayor Murray's 13 July 2015 ""Action Plan to Address Seattles Affordability Crisis"" merely included a policy point of ""explor[ing] the best options for increasing access to Sharia-compliant loan products,"" not mandating that any local businesses offer such products:"
The national debt is on track to double during Obamas presidency.,[],"Possible presidential aspirant Scott Walker opens his newbookwith a dismal depiction of conditions in the nations capital. If you are like me, the view from Washington, D.C., these days is pretty grim, the Republican governor writes in Unintimidated: A Governor's Story and a Nation's Challenge, which is due out Nov. 19, 2013. Barack Obama has been elected to a second term. Obamacare will not be repealed anytime soon. Congress has approved massive tax increases. Then Walker makes this claim: The national debt is on track to double during Obamas presidency. Lets see how much the debt has grown and to what extent Obama is responsible. What is the debt? We hear plenty about the federal debt and annual federal budget deficits. So, lets make sure were on the same page before we dig in. Total federal debt, also known as gross debt, is the amount of debt issued by the U.S. Treasury and other federal agencies. It has two components: Debt held by the government is money the government owes itself. Mainly, the government borrows from trust funds such as Social Security and Medicare -- payments owed to beneficiaries in the future -- to fund current government operations. Debt held by the public is owed to investors outside the federal government, including individual and corporate investors in the United States and overseas, foreign governments, the Federal Reserve and other entities. It's money the government borrows when it runs annual budget deficits -- in other words, the money the government needs to bridge the gap between what it spends and what it takes in. How much is the debt? Jacquelynn Burke, a publicist for Sentinel, Walkers publisher, responded to our request to Walker for information to back his claim. She told us Walker was referring to total debt and to the portion held by the public and cited two documents from Obamas own administration, a2013 reportfrom the Council of Economic Advisers and Obamas2014 budget. Its helpful here to note that debt is tallied at the end of the fiscal year and that the federal fiscal year runs from October through September. So, fiscal 2008 started in October 2007 and ended in September 2008. The documents Walker relies on show total debt on pace to double -- from $9.99 trillion in fiscal 2008 to an estimated $20 trillion in fiscal 2016; and debt held by the public to more than double, from $5.8 trillion to $14.7 trillion. (FactCheck.org also reports that debt held by the public ison pace to doubleduring Obamas presidency.) Chris Edwards, director of tax policy studies at the libertarian Cato Institute, cited the same documents Walker did when we asked him about Walkers claim. Edwards said that, even though fiscal 2008 ended more than three months before Obama was first inaugurated, it is a good starting point because most of the debt accumulated in fiscal 2009 was from Obamas stimulus plan. Joshua Gordon, policy director at the centristConcord Coalition, which advocates for fiscal responsibility, argued that a better starting point is the end of fiscal 2009 -- a year later than what Walker uses -- since Obama would have been in office for nearly nine months at that point. He also argued against examining total debt, saying that since it includes borrowing from Social Security, it doesn't really have any economic significance. Gordon cited figures from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office for debt held by the public. They show that that portion of the total debt was $7.54 trillion at the end of fiscal 2009, but isnt projected to double until fiscal 2019, after Obama leaves office. Gordon and Marc Goldwein, senior policy director of the nonprofitCommittee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a bipartisan organization focused on debt reduction, also made another point on comparing debt levels over time. They told us measuring debt as a percentage of gross domestic product is better for comparison purposes than simply using raw dollars. According to Congressional Budget Office figures, debt held by the public as a percentage of gross domestic product wont double during Obamas presidency. They show debt held by the public at the end of 2009 was equal to 52.3% of gross domestic product. Thats expected to reach 76.2% at the end of fiscal 2014, but then drop during the rest of Obamas presidency. At the same time, the federal debt is commonly reported in raw dollars, not as a percentage of GDP. So, at least in terms of raw dollars, there is evidence that debt is projected to double during Obamas time in office. Who's to blame Walker implied that Obama plays a role in how much the debt has grown, but he didnt say the president caused the increase. That squares with how weve evaluated similar claims in the past. For one thing, each president inherits the previous presidents budget, as well as the interest payments needed to pay off debts accumulated under previous presidents. Moreover, about two-thirds of the annual deficit during Obamas presidency term has been from entitlements and interest. Entitlements, such as Social Security and Medicare, are less susceptible to a presidents policy preferences than discretionary spending that Congress must approve on an annual basis. Entitlements are also more heavily driven by demographic factors, such as the aging of the population, which is also out of any presidents control. For its part, The White House didn't challenge Walker's claim, but cited documents indicating that annual deficits are becoming smaller. A couple of other points on responsibility for the debt before we close. Ananalysisby the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities acknowledged that deficits and debt have been sharply higher under Obama. But the analysis says the Great Recession, tax cuts adopted under President George W. Bush, and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq explain most of the deficits that have occurred on Obamas watch. The Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, meanwhile, traces the the debt problem back even further, to around 1970, when the government decided to significantly increase spending without a corresponding increase in revenue. The problem cant be fixed, according to thatanalysis, without creating a mechanism to prevent the government from running persistent deficits in the future. Our rating Walker said: The national debt is on track to double during Obamas presidency. Documents from Obamas own administration indicate the debt is on pace to double in raw dollars, the way the debt is commonly reported, though not as a percentage of gross domestic product. Walker aptly indicated that Obama bears part of the blame. We rate Walkers statement Mostly True. To comment on this item, please go toJSOnline.com.","['Debt', 'Deficit', 'Federal Budget', 'Wisconsin']",True,"Possible presidential aspirant Scott Walker opens his newbookwith a dismal depiction of conditions in the nations capital.Total federal debt, also known as gross debt, is the amount of debt issued by the U.S. Treasury and other federal agencies. It has two components:Jacquelynn Burke, a publicist for Sentinel, Walkers publisher, responded to our request to Walker for information to back his claim. She told us Walker was referring to total debt and to the portion held by the public and cited two documents from Obamas own administration, a2013 reportfrom the Council of Economic Advisers and Obamas2014 budget.(FactCheck.org also reports that debt held by the public ison pace to doubleduring Obamas presidency.)Chris Edwards, director of tax policy studies at the libertarian Cato Institute, cited the same documents Walker did when we asked him about Walkers claim. Edwards said that, even though fiscal 2008 ended more than three months before Obama was first inaugurated, it is a good starting point because most of the debt accumulated in fiscal 2009 was from Obamas stimulus plan.Joshua Gordon, policy director at the centristConcord Coalition, which advocates for fiscal responsibility, argued that a better starting point is the end of fiscal 2009 -- a year later than what Walker uses -- since Obama would have been in office for nearly nine months at that point. He also argued against examining total debt, saying that since it includes borrowing from Social Security, it doesn't really have any economic significance.Gordon and Marc Goldwein, senior policy director of the nonprofitCommittee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a bipartisan organization focused on debt reduction, also made another point on comparing debt levels over time. They told us measuring debt as a percentage of gross domestic product is better for comparison purposes than simply using raw dollars.Ananalysisby the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities acknowledged that deficits and debt have been sharply higher under Obama. But the analysis says the Great Recession, tax cuts adopted under President George W. Bush, and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq explain most of the deficits that have occurred on Obamas watch.The Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, meanwhile, traces the the debt problem back even further, to around 1970, when the government decided to significantly increase spending without a corresponding increase in revenue. The problem cant be fixed, according to thatanalysis, without creating a mechanism to prevent the government from running persistent deficits in the future.To comment on this item, please go toJSOnline.com."
"By the end of Governor Rick Perry's term, he will have drained Texas taxpayers ... of more than $360,000 to pay for the rental mansion he has been living in while the historic Governor's Mansion is repaired.",[],"With the state facing a multibillion-dollar budget shortfall, Democratic gubernatorial nominee Bill White recently aired advice to GOP Gov. Rick Perry on how to save the state some money:Move.In fall 2007, the state rented a home for the governor and his wife, Anita, about 11 miles southwest of downtown Austin so the Governor's Mansion could be renovated. In an April 13 press release, White, who faces Perry in November, calls the monthly rent an extravagant, unwarranted use of taxpayer dollars, adding that by the end of his current term, Perry will have drained Texas taxpayers ... of more than $360,000 to pay for the rental mansion he has been living in while the historic Governor's Mansion is repaired and renovated.White then calls on Perry to set a budget-cutting example for other state employees and move out.We wondered whether White's right about how much Perry's rented pad will cost taxpayers.Katy Bacon, a spokeswoman for White, pointed us to a column in the Houston Chronicle that mentioned the monthly rent of the 4,600-square-foot home and to an earlier PolitiFact Texas item, in which we rated as Mostly True astatementby U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, that Perry lives in a luxury house that costs taxpayers $10,000 a month.The lease for the house at 8113 Hickory Creek Drive, which last year was appraised by the Travis Central Appraisal District at $1.1 million, was initially for one year starting Oct. 1, 2007. The rent was set at $9,900.Less than a year after the Perrys moved into the rental home in a gated community near Barton Creek, the Governor's Mansion, just southwest of the Capitol, was heavily damaged in an arson fire for which no one has been arrested. Work has stopped on the mansion pending a decision on options for rebuilding the historical structure.In fall 2008, the lease on the rental home was renewed through October 2011 with the rent lowered to $9,000. Through this April, the state has paid $290,700 in rent. Toss in the eight months left in Perry's current term -- as White does -- and the total rental payments come to $362,700.So, does White get the tab for Perry's rented digs right? Yes -- and that's not counting other housing-related expenses.The state has not responded to requests for information on the costs of security at the governor's home-away-from-mansion.However, $197,000 has been spent on utilities and other items, such as preparing the rental residence for the governor, according to the Texas Facilities Commission and State Preservation Board. While we don't have an exact comparison of the ancillary costs of living at the Governor's Mansion, we know that in 2007 -- the last year that Perry lived there -- those bills, including for grounds work and utilities, totaled more than $330,000. (Kay Molina, assistant executive director of the Facilities Commission, said high maintenance costs that year reflected the fact that the mansion needed to be renovated. )Regardless, White nails the expected rent costs for the Perrys to reside in suburban Austin. We rate White's statement as True.","['Elections', 'State Budget', 'Texas']",True,"With the state facing a multibillion-dollar budget shortfall, Democratic gubernatorial nominee Bill White recently aired advice to GOP Gov. Rick Perry on how to save the state some money:Move.In fall 2007, the state rented a home for the governor and his wife, Anita, about 11 miles southwest of downtown Austin so the Governor's Mansion could be renovated. In an April 13 press release, White, who faces Perry in November, calls the monthly rent an extravagant, unwarranted use of taxpayer dollars, adding that by the end of his current term, Perry will have drained Texas taxpayers ... of more than $360,000 to pay for the rental mansion he has been living in while the historic Governor's Mansion is repaired and renovated.White then calls on Perry to set a budget-cutting example for other state employees and move out.We wondered whether White's right about how much Perry's rented pad will cost taxpayers.Katy Bacon, a spokeswoman for White, pointed us to a column in the Houston Chronicle that mentioned the monthly rent of the 4,600-square-foot home and to an earlier PolitiFact Texas item, in which we rated as Mostly True astatementby U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, that Perry lives in a luxury house that costs taxpayers $10,000 a month.The lease for the house at 8113 Hickory Creek Drive, which last year was appraised by the Travis Central Appraisal District at $1.1 million, was initially for one year starting Oct. 1, 2007. The rent was set at $9,900.Less than a year after the Perrys moved into the rental home in a gated community near Barton Creek, the Governor's Mansion, just southwest of the Capitol, was heavily damaged in an arson fire for which no one has been arrested. Work has stopped on the mansion pending a decision on options for rebuilding the historical structure.In fall 2008, the lease on the rental home was renewed through October 2011 with the rent lowered to $9,000. Through this April, the state has paid $290,700 in rent. Toss in the eight months left in Perry's current term -- as White does -- and the total rental payments come to $362,700.So, does White get the tab for Perry's rented digs right? Yes -- and that's not counting other housing-related expenses.The state has not responded to requests for information on the costs of security at the governor's home-away-from-mansion.However, $197,000 has been spent on utilities and other items, such as preparing the rental residence for the governor, according to the Texas Facilities Commission and State Preservation Board."
"Donald Trump rooted for the housing crisis, because he knew he could make money off of it.",[]," During Donald Trumps recent fundraising trip to San Diego, Democratic Congressman Scott Peters had some harsh words for the GOP nominee. His economic policies are dangerous, Peters, who represents much of 'America's Finest City,' told reporters on a conference call. He will say or do anything that benefits him. We cant fact check that statement because its the congressmans opinion. But Peters repeated one critique thats open to examination: This is a guy, he said of Trump, who rooted for the housing crisis, because he knew he could make money off of it. Congressman Scott Peters, D-San Diego, campaigns at a town hall in October 2014. AP Photo/Lenny Ignelzi Hillary Clinton lodged the same attack in a Maycampaign video. In 2006, Donald Trump was hoping for a real estate crash, the ad says, showing a picture of Trump giving two thumbs up. The ad goes on to list consequences from the Great Recession, which peaked in 2008. It lists 9 million jobs lost and 5 million families who lost their homes. This campaign ad from Hillary For America includes 2006 audio from Donald Trump about the housing market. That's followed by audio, identified as being from 2006, of Trump saying, I sort of hope that happens because then people like me would go in and buy ... If there is a bubble burst, as they call it, you know, you could make a lot of money. And the man who could be our next president was rooting for it to happen, the ad contends. Peters statement that Trump rooted for the housing crisis, clearly draws on the Clinton ad. His office referred us to the Democratic National Committee, which supplied the Clinton ad with Trumps I sort of hope that happens audio. Our national PolitiFact team checked the original claim made in May by the Clinton ad andrated it Mostly True. Heres why: I sort of hope that happens Trumps statement comes from the audiobook How to Build a Fortune, created as part ofTrump University, which has been the subject of three lawsuits from former students who allege they were ripped off by the billionaire. In 2006, real estate values had peaked and there was concern that they were overpriced, creating a bubble that could burst, producing a rapid fall in values. The man interviewing Trump for the audiobook says, There's a lot of talk, which you've no doubt heard too, about a so-called real estate bubble. What's your take on that pessimism? Well first of all, I sort of hope that happens because then people like me would go in and buy. You know, if you're in a good cash position  which I'm in a good cash position today  then people like me would go in and buy like crazy, he says in a portion of the audiobookposted by CNN. If there is a bubble burst, as they call it, you know, you can make a lot of money. Whether the bubble burst that Trump was hoping for deserves to be called a crash, especially a crash on the scale of what occurred during the Great Recession, is open to debate. Trump, in the audiobook, adds: At the same time, I don't think that (real estate bubble burst) will happen because if interest rates stay fairly low, if the dollar stays pretty much where it is or even goes a little bit higher, but basically if you have a weak dollar, this is tremendous amounts of money pouring in, so I don't think that's going to happen. I'm not a believer that the interest market, that the real estate market, is going to take a big hit. Obviously, he would turn out to be wrong. A year later, in 2007, Trump wastelling the Toronto Globe and Mailthat he was ready to invest in real estate because the market was starting to head down. People have been talking about the end of the cycle for 12 years, and I'm excited if it is, he told the paper. I've always made more money in bad markets than in good markets. The Trump campaign didn't respond to PolitiFact's emails. Our ruling Rep. Scott Peters, D-CA, said Donald Trump rooted for the housing crisis, because he knew he could make money off of it. His statement parallels a claim in Hillary Clintons May campaign ad: In 2006, Donald Trump was hoping for a real estate crash. Trump said on more than one occasion that he welcomed a downturn in the real estate market because it would give him a chance to buy properties at a bargain and sell them at a higher price later. What's far less clear is whether Trump was rooting for something on the scale of the Great Recession, a suggestion made in the Clinton ad, or a housing crisis, as suggested by Peters. In fact, Trumps comments in his audiobook and to the Globe and Mail show he didn't envision the financial meltdown that followed. PolitiFact rated Clintons statementMostly True, saying it was accurate but needs clarification or additional information. For the same reason, we rate Peters statement Mostly True. MOSTLY TRUE The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information. Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check. https://www.sharethefacts.co/share/20b849c5-4175-4117-a150-6010ffdaec89","['Economy', 'Housing', 'California']",True,"Hillary Clinton lodged the same attack in a Maycampaign video.Our national PolitiFact team checked the original claim made in May by the Clinton ad andrated it Mostly True.Trumps statement comes from the audiobook How to Build a Fortune, created as part ofTrump University, which has been the subject of three lawsuits from former students who allege they were ripped off by the billionaire.Well first of all, I sort of hope that happens because then people like me would go in and buy. You know, if you're in a good cash position  which I'm in a good cash position today  then people like me would go in and buy like crazy, he says in a portion of the audiobookposted by CNN. If there is a bubble burst, as they call it, you know, you can make a lot of money.A year later, in 2007, Trump wastelling the Toronto Globe and Mailthat he was ready to invest in real estate because the market was starting to head down.PolitiFact rated Clintons statementMostly True, saying it was accurate but needs clarification or additional information.Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check.https://www.sharethefacts.co/share/20b849c5-4175-4117-a150-6010ffdaec89"
Yahoo! Mail Petition,['Will Yahoo! begin charging for its previously-free pop e-mail service in April?'],"Claim:  Yahoo! will begin charging for its previously-free POP e-mail service in April 2002.  Example:  [Collected on the Internet, 2002] I have just read and signed the online petition: ""Petition to request  that Yahoo Inc reconsider their decision to charge fees for pop mail, groups, and homepages"" hosted on the web by PetitionOnline.com, the free online petition service, at: https://www.PetitionOnline.com/11213/ https://www.PetitionOnline.com/11213/ I personally agree with what this petition says, and I think you might agree, too.  If you can spare a moment, please take a look, and consider signing yourself as it looks that Yahoo is going to try charging money for email addresses, yahoo groups and other things they currently offer for free. If you are against it, please take the time like I did to sign the petition. Origins:  In mid-March 2002, those who had been availing themselves of Yahoo!'s free POP mail service received a shock in their inboxes, an announcement from the company that as of 24 April 2002 those previously-free services would continue to be available only to those willing to pay for them. Beginning April 24, Yahoo! will charge $29.99 a year for this feature.  Those who sign up before that date can secure continuation of this service for $19.99 per annum. Before anyone becomes overly confused on this point, remember that we're talking strictly about POP (Post Office Protocol) e-mail accounts (a protocol that allows desktop e-mail clients such as Eudora and Microsoft Outlook to download mail messages from  host systems to users' PCs ).  Non-POP e-mail accounts  those accessed by reading e-mail from Yahoo! via a web browser  will still be  free. Advertising income on the Internet fell dramatically in 2001. Previously, Yahoo! could afford to offer its POP mail services free of charge because the revenue needed to support it was coming from the sale of ads displayed on its site.  Since that revenue has dropped due to the tech wreck of 2000-2001, Yahoo! has chosen to begin charging users for some of the more expensive-to-support features. The monies needed to pay for them have to come from somewhere, and if the ad revenue no longer supports them, then individual users must. Although signing an e-petition decrying this state of affairs might make someone momentarily feel a bit better, such action is highly unlikely to alter Yahoo!'s plans. All the e-signatures in the world won't pay the bills for Yahoo!, and that is the overriding factor. Customers always retain the option of ""voting with their feet"" by taking their business elsewhere, but you have to wonder at how ""unfair"" the decried treatment is when it amounts to someone's no longer providing something for free. As much as we like to have free stuff, we don't have an inherent right to it. Those who choose to rely upon free services should always keep firmly in mind the possibility that these services may someday go away. The incitement to sign the e-petition asserts that Yahoo! will be charging user fees for POP mail, groups, and homepages. That's only partially true. Although POP mail will be available only to those willing to pay a couple of bucks a month for it after April 24, there do not appear to be immediate plans in the works to institute across-the-board user charges for Yahoo!-based groups or homepages that will turn them into ""pay for it or lose it"" propositions. However, in the case of free GeoCities web sites that is a distinction without a difference, because Yahoo! has already gutted the free version of this service. Yahoo! has announced that by early April it will no longer support FTP (file transfer protocol) to its unpaid GeoCities subscribers. Without FTP capability, users cannot move HTML files to or from their web sites on their own; they have to maintain their web sites through Yahoo!'s advertising-laden forms. Those determined to host their personal web pages on GeoCities will have to become paid subscribers and cough up $4.95 a month to get that vital FTP capability back. (They'll also get extra storage and ad-free page display for their money, though.) Those who do not wish to pay the $4.95 a month fee can still keep their pages there, but they won't be able to use FTP to maintain them. As for Yahoo!'s discussion groups, if there are plans afoot to begin charging for them, no mention of this is showing up in any of Yahoo!'s statements or in news articles detailing changes to Yahoo!'s services. We suspect this claim might have been tossed in to incite a larger number of folks to support the petition. Last updated:  5 January 2008    Sources:   Mangalindan, Mylene.  ""Yahoo Will Charge Users a Yearly Fee for E-Mail Feature.""   The Wall Street Journal.  22 March 2002  (p. B5).     Bloomberg News.  ""Yahoo to Charge E-Mail Forwarding Fee.""   Ventura County Star.  26 March 2002  (p. D2).",['income'],True,"""Petition to request  that Yahoo Inc reconsider their decision to charge fees for pop mail, groups, and homepages"" hosted on the web by PetitionOnline.com, the free online petition service, at: https://www.PetitionOnline.com/11213/"
Was El Paso One of the 'Most Dangerous Cities' in U.S. Before a Border Fence Was Built?,"['What did make a difference was a flood of Border Patrol agents, who began Operation Hold the Line in 1993.']","On 5 February 2019, President Donald Trump delivered the annual State of the Union address and made an appeal in his ongoing effort to deliver on a campaign promise to build a border wall. In his speech, President Trump stated that the city of El Paso, Texas, ""used to have extremely high rates of violent crime  one of the highest in the country, and [was] considered one of our nations most dangerous cities. Now, with a powerful barrier in place, El Paso is one of our safest cities."" stated Following that remark, El Paso Mayor Dee Margo took to Twitter to dispute its accuracy: El Paso was NEVER one of the MOST dangerous cities in the US. Weve had a fence for 10 years and it has impacted illegal immigration and curbed criminal activity. It is NOT the sole deterrent. Law enforcement in our community continues to keep us safe #SOTU #SOTU  Mayor Dee Margo (@mayor_margo) February 6, 2019 February 6, 2019 We looked at crime data from the Federal Bureau of Investigation's Uniform Crime Report (UCR) to weigh which public official's statements were accurate. The FBI's UCR project compiles and analyzes data from ""more than 18,000 city, university and college, county, state, tribal, and federal law enforcement agencies voluntarily participating in the program."" UCR project Crime data do not support the president's claim either that El Paso was one of the country's ""most dangerous cities"" or that the barrier built between El Paso and Juarez, Mexico, had the effect of dramatically reducing crime on the U.S. side of the border. Instead, UCR data show that violent crime in El Paso generally followed a national trend. It spiked to its highest level in 30 years in the early 1990s and has steadily declined since. The following graph compares crime data from the El Paso Police Department with nationwide figures from 1985 to 2015.  Source: Uniform Crime Report.  online In 2018, US News & World Report ranked El Paso number 11 in ""best places to retire,"" citing in part the community's relative safety and thriving economy. This ranking was not new, as El Paso had regularly been ranked one of the country's safest cities for its population size going as far back as 2005 -- three years before the border fence there was built. ranked far back Construction on the barrier between El Paso and Juarez began in 2008 under President George W. Bush and was completed in 2009 as part of a larger border security plan known as ""Operation Hold the Line"" which was launched in 1993. UCR data drawn from the El Paso Police Department shows that violent crime, already trending downward, continued to drop fairly consistently in the five years leading up to fence construction, from a high of 6,109 incidents in 1993 to an all-time low in 2006 of 2,422:  Source: Uniform Crime Report.   Source: Uniform Crime Report.  KDBC El Paso's violent crime was at its peak in 1992. What did make a difference was a flood of Border Patrol agents, who began Operation Hold the Line in 1993. Hundreds of agents were stationed every few feet along the border. Violent crime in El Paso drastically reduced in the years following. We've played a big part of that, said Border Patrol Sector Chief Aaron Hull. We can't determine whether crime in El Paso fell as a result of increased Border Patrol presence, the dynamic that caused crime to drop nationwide, or some combination of both. But what can be determined from crime data is that over the previous three decades, border wall construction hadn't shown a positive impact on reducing violent crime in that community, and El Paso was far and away not one of the most dangerous cities in America. The 2019 State of the Union wasn't the first instance during which the Trump administration made this false claim, and it wasn't the first time that claim had been debunked. In their own fact check, the El Paso Times reported that Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton had also promoted the claim, along with White House press secretary Sarah Sanders: been debunked reported promoted In January 2018, White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders tweeted Ask El Paso, Texas (now one of Americas safest cities) across the border from Juarez, Mexico (one of the worlds most dangerous) if a wall works."" She linked to an opinion piece published in the New York Post that was titled This town is proof that Trumps wall can work. The piece, written by a conservative political commentator based in Washington, D.C., argued that El Pasos border fence is the reason for the city's low crime rate and decreased illegal border crossings. At the time, local leaders rejected the article's findings and argued that it did not mention the police-community relations and cooperation between law enforcement agencies that contributed to the city's safety before border fencing was put in place. On the 2016 campaign trail, Donald Trump promised supporters that if elected, he would build a border wall that Mexico would pay for. As time went by and it became clear Mexico would not finance the construction of such a wall, Trump waffled on how it would be funded, resulting in the longest partial shutdown of the federal government in U.S. history when he and Congressional Democrats reached an impasse over the issue. waffled Mekelburg, Madlin.  ""Fact Check State of the Union: Trump Says El Paso Among Most Dangerous Cities Until Fence.""
  El Paso Times.  5 February 2019. Mekelburg, Madlin.  ""Did Construction of a Border Fence Cut Down on Crime Rates in El Paso?""
  El Paso Times.  10 January 2019. Curtis, Genevieve.  ""Border Fence Didn't Make El Paso Safer From Violent Crimes.""
  KDBC-TV.  6 February 2019. Timmons, Patrick.  ""Low Crime in El Paso Predates 'Wall'; Smugglers Are U.S. Citizens.""
  UPI.  17 January 2019.",['finance'],False,"In his speech, President Trump stated that the city of El Paso, Texas, ""used to have extremely high rates of violent crime  one of the highest in the country, and [was] considered one of our nations most dangerous cities. Now, with a powerful barrier in place, El Paso is one of our safest cities.""El Paso was NEVER one of the MOST dangerous cities in the US. Weve had a fence for 10 years and it has impacted illegal immigration and curbed criminal activity. It is NOT the sole deterrent. Law enforcement in our community continues to keep us safe #SOTU Mayor Dee Margo (@mayor_margo) February 6, 2019We looked at crime data from the Federal Bureau of Investigation's Uniform Crime Report (UCR) to weigh which public official's statements were accurate. The FBI's UCR project compiles and analyzes data from ""more than 18,000 city, university and college, county, state, tribal, and federal law enforcement agencies voluntarily participating in the program."" Source: Uniform Crime Report.In 2018, US News & World Report ranked El Paso number 11 in ""best places to retire,"" citing in part the community's relative safety and thriving economy. This ranking was not new, as El Paso had regularly been ranked one of the country's safest cities for its population size going as far back as 2005 -- three years before the border fence there was built. Source: Uniform Crime Report. Source: Uniform Crime Report.The 2019 State of the Union wasn't the first instance during which the Trump administration made this false claim, and it wasn't the first time that claim had been debunked. In their own fact check, the El Paso Times reported that Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton had also promoted the claim, along with White House press secretary Sarah Sanders:On the 2016 campaign trail, Donald Trump promised supporters that if elected, he would build a border wall that Mexico would pay for. As time went by and it became clear Mexico would not finance the construction of such a wall, Trump waffled on how it would be funded, resulting in the longest partial shutdown of the federal government in U.S. history when he and Congressional Democrats reached an impasse over the issue."
Is this roster of modifications made to Social Security throughout the years authentic?,['The Social Security system has been subject to debate for many decades.'],"The Social Security system has been a contentious political issue ever since it was proposed by President Franklin D. Roosevelt and implemented in 1935. Arguments regarding how the system should be used, administered, and funded, and even whether it should exist at all, have been the subject of debate for many decades. For example, Franklin Roosevelt, a Democrat, introduced the Social Security (FICA) Program. He promised: 1.) That participation in the Program would be completely voluntary, 2.) That the participants would only have to pay 1% of the first $1,400 of their annual incomes into the Program, 3.) That the money the participants elected to put into the Program would be deductible from their income for tax purposes each year, 4.) That the money the participants put into the independent ""Trust Fund"" rather than into the General operating fund would only be used to fund the Social Security Retirement Program and no other government program, and 5.) That the annuity payments to the retirees would never be taxed as income. Since many of us have paid into FICA for years and are now receiving a Social Security check every month, only to find that we are being taxed on 85% of the money we paid to the federal government to ""put away,"" you may be interested in the following: Q: Which political party took Social Security from the independent ""Trust"" fund and put it into the General fund so that Congress could spend it? A: It was Lyndon Johnson and the Democratically-controlled House and Senate. Q: Which political party eliminated the income tax deduction for Social Security (FICA) withholding? A: The Democratic Party. Q: Which political party started taxing Social Security annuities? A: The Democratic Party, with Al Gore casting the ""tie-breaking"" deciding vote as President of the Senate while he was Vice President of the U.S. Q: Which political party decided to start giving annuity payments to immigrants? A: That's right! Jimmy Carter and the Democratic Party. Immigrants moved into this country and, at age 65, began to receive SSI Social Security payments! The Democratic Party gave these payments to them, even though they never paid a dime into it! Then, after doing all this lying and thieving and",['debt'],NEI,"There was no provision in the Social Security Act of 1935 (nor has there ever been any provision) for the payment of Social Security payroll taxes (now commonly known as FICA, from an acronym for the Federal Insurance Contributions Act) to be voluntary. Since the inception of the Social Security program, the law has required that payroll taxes for persons working at jobs covered by Social Security ""shall be collected by the employer of the taxpayer by deducting the amount of the tax from the wages as and when paid.""It is true that Social Security provisions originally applied only to ""workers in commerce and industry (except railroads) under age 65 in the continental United States, Alaska and Hawaii, and on American vessels,"" and thus those who worked in fields not designated as ""commerce and industry"" (e.g., government workers, farm workers, doctors, lawyers) neither paid into the Social Security fund nor received benefits from it. Nearly all of those exemptions have been since phased out:Social Security taxes were never limited to the first $1,400 of annual income, nor was there any provision in the Social Security Act of 1935 to permanently fix the tax rate at 1%. The Social Security Act of 1935 set the original rate at 1% of the first $3,000 of annual income, with provisions to gradually increase that rate to 3% over the next twelve years:However, whether the Social Security Trust Fund can truly be said to be ""independent"" is problematic. The Social Security Act specifies that the monies in the fund may only ""be invested in securities backed by the full faith and credit of the Federal government,"" such as treasury bills, treasury notes, and treasury bonds, as well as special issue bonds. So, essentially, the government can ""invest"" Social Security funds by lending them to itself, then spending that money on programs not related to Social Security (e.g., defense, foreign aid, education). The government ""pays back"" this money when the Social Security program redeems the bonds, but critics of the program contend Social Security will eventually fall into deficit by 2018, and the Treasury won't have the necessary cash on hand to redeem the bonds and pay back the fund. As the Social Security and Medicare Trustees themselves noted in their 2005 Annual Report:A somewhat dated but detailed article about how the Social Security trust funds are invested can be found here.It is true that Social Security benefits were not originally considered taxable income. However, that status was not due to any promise or act on the part of President Roosevelt, nor was it specified in the Social Security Act (or any other law); it was the result of a series of rulings by the Treasury Department in 1938 and 1941 that excluded Social Security benefits from federal income taxation. Those rulings were overriden by amendments to the Social Security act enacted in 1983.As noted above, the monies paid into the Social Security trust have never been ""put into the general fund."" The requirements for how the Social Security Trust Fund is to be financed and invested have not changed since the fund's inception in 1939. The reference to Lyndon Johnson indicates that someone was probably confused by a change implemented at the end of the Johnson administration (1969) that altered how the fund was accounted for in the federal budget but did not change the actual operations of the fund itself:As noted above, Social Security withholding has never been deductible from income for tax purposes. The original Social Security Act of 1935 specifically stated that monies paid into Social Security via payroll taxes were not to be allowed as income tax deductions.Responsibility for this change cannot fairly be assigned to either political party. The idea originated with a proposal issued by the bipartisan Greenspan Commission, which had been created by President Ronald Reagan, a Republican. The amendments were passed by a House of Representatives in which the Democrats held a clear majority of the seats (296-166), but the proposed amendments received ""Yea"" votes from members of both parties, and they were signed into law by President Reagan.This change to Social Security was but one element of the massive Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (OBRA) introduced in Congress in 1993. OBRA was barely passed by a 218-216 vote in the House of Representatives, with not a single Republican voting in favor of it (although 41 Democrats voted against it). Likewise, the Senate vote on OBRA was deadlocked at 50-50 (again, with not a single Republican voting in favor of it, although 6 Democrats voted against it) until Vice-President Al Gore (a Democrat) cast the deciding ""Yea"" vote. The bill was signed into law by President Bill Clinton (also a Democrat).No one  whether he be a citizen, immigrant, or illegal alien  is eligible to collect Social Security benefits unless he (or someone else, such as a parent or spouse) has paid into the system. Someone has confused Social Security itself with Supplemental Security Income (SSI)  the latter is a federal welfare program ""designed to help aged, blind, and disabled people, who have little or no income"" by providing ""cash to meet basic needs for food, clothing, and shelter."" Immigrants can qualify for SSI benefits under certain conditions, but SSI is financed by general revenues and not Social Security taxes. SSI was not enacted by the administration of President Jimmy Carter (a Democrat); it was created and signed into law in 1972, during the administration of President Richard Nixon (a Republican)."
Is This an Image of Trump and Manson Being Shared by Trump Supporters?,['A depiction  or two  of Jesus took on a political life in the summer of 2020.'],"On Aug. 24, 2020, a Twitter user posted an image of U.S. President Donald Trump being watched over by cult leader Charles Manson and claimed that the president's supporters were sharing it on Facebook under the false impression that it actually showed Jesus:  posted an image The above-displayed tweet was shared more than 34,000 times and received more than 140,000 likes. As this claim circulated on social media, we started receiving queries asking if Trump supporters were truly sharing the image. One reader even asked if it had been shared by the RNC:  Is the RNC really posting this image of Charles Manson and Donald Trump photoshopped together to appear as if Manson is Jesus endorsing Trump? While it's certainly possible that a handful of Trump supporters have shared this image by accident, we found no record of it being shared on the social media pages of the Republican National Convention, the White House, or the GOP. While we have not perused the accounts of every elected Republican lawmaker, we can say that we have not encountered any high-profile Republican accounts sharing the image in earnest, nor any postings by Trump's supporters that were widely shared on social media.  Republican National Convention White House GOP The image of Manson and Trump appears to be a manipulated version of a painting that originally showed Trump and Jesus entitled ""You are not Alone"" that was uploaded to Fine Art America by Danny Hahlbohm on May 28, 2020. Here's a look at the original painting (left) and the manipulated version (right): Fine Art America   A third version of this painting was also circulated on social media. This alternate version, however, also depicts Jesus standing behind Trump, not Manson. Hahlbohm confirmed to us in an email that he was the artist behind this alternate version, explaining that this was just an earlier version of his painting he had since revised.  A third version of this painting Here's a comparison of Hahlbohm's painting from Fine Art America (left) and the earlier version (right): Fine Art America   To sum up: A painting of Jesus standing behind Trump was digitally altered to make it appear as if Trump were being watched over by cult leader Manson, not Jesus. While the Trump / Manson image went viral along with the claim that it was unknowingly being shared by Trump supporters, we could find no popular instances of Trump supporters sharing the Manson image in earnest. ",['share'],False,"On Aug. 24, 2020, a Twitter user posted an image of U.S. President Donald Trump being watched over by cult leader Charles Manson and claimed that the president's supporters were sharing it on Facebook under the false impression that it actually showed Jesus: The above-displayed tweet was shared more than 34,000 times and received more than 140,000 likes. As this claim circulated on social media, we started receiving queries asking if Trump supporters were truly sharing the image. One reader even asked if it had been shared by the RNC:While it's certainly possible that a handful of Trump supporters have shared this image by accident, we found no record of it being shared on the social media pages of the Republican National Convention, the White House, or the GOP. While we have not perused the accounts of every elected Republican lawmaker, we can say that we have not encountered any high-profile Republican accounts sharing the image in earnest, nor any postings by Trump's supporters that were widely shared on social media. The image of Manson and Trump appears to be a manipulated version of a painting that originally showed Trump and Jesus entitled ""You are not Alone"" that was uploaded to Fine Art America by Danny Hahlbohm on May 28, 2020. Here's a look at the original painting (left) and the manipulated version (right):A third version of this painting was also circulated on social media. This alternate version, however, also depicts Jesus standing behind Trump, not Manson. Hahlbohm confirmed to us in an email that he was the artist behind this alternate version, explaining that this was just an earlier version of his painting he had since revised. Here's a comparison of Hahlbohm's painting from Fine Art America (left) and the earlier version (right):"
Is a housing project for Syrian refugees being constructed in West Virginia with intentions of establishing a 'Sharia Zone'?,"['A video shot at a public housing project makes numerous, factually challenged claims about Syrian migration to West Virginia. ']","On 5 March 2019, a conspiracy-minded Twitter account shared a video purporting to be from the site of a construction project funded by West Virginia taxpayer money for the purpose of housing 321 Syrian refugees. The video also claimed this was being done at the expense of regular Americans who, the man asserted, were being pushed into substandard housing. He stated that the area he was standing in would become a sharia zone, where no non-Muslims would be allowed to enter. Several factual problems exist with the assertions in this video. Chief among them is the fact that this video shows the Littlepage Terrace housing project, a low-income housing tax-credit property allocated through the West Virginia Housing Development Fund, which houses zero Syrian refugees and many regular Americans. Several lines of evidence support this conclusion. First, someone who works next to the project refers to it as Littlepage Terrace. Second, a wider, composite view of the man's video shows clearly identifiable markers of the Littlepage housing complex, including a telltale smokestack and buildings that exactly match the structures built at Littlepage. Third, Mark Taylor, the chief executive officer of the Charleston-Kanawha Housing Authority, which works with the Littlepage Terrace project, confirmed to us by email that the suspect video was taken at that site during renovations that likely occurred in May 2017. He also confirmed that the community houses no Syrian refugees. Another significant oversight in the tweeted narrative is that the entire state of West Virginia has taken in far fewer than 321 Syrian refugees in total. In 2016, the year the United States took in the largest number of Syrian refugees, West Virginia resettled only five of them. On 1 February 2017, the Trump Administration announced Executive Order 13769, commonly referred to as the ""travel ban,"" which indefinitely suspended the admission of Syrian refugees to the United States. In 2017, West Virginia took in 13 refugees, but these individuals were not necessarily Syrian. It is true that Littlepage was torn down and rebuilt, but that decision had nothing to do with refugee housing. Instead, the renovations aimed to reduce crime and revitalize the area, as reported by West Virginia's WCHS television station in 2016. The Charleston-Kanawha Housing Authority is now in the last phase of revitalizing three housing projects. Similar to Orchard Manor and Washington Manor, Littlepage Terrace will be demolished and rebuilt as two-story townhomes. This housing project was built nearly 80 years ago with no air conditioning and poor visibility. Now it is simply not a secure living space. The goal for these new developments is to reduce crime and revitalize the area. Because the housing complex displayed was not built for Syrian refugees, and because the state has taken virtually no Syrian refugees at all, we rank the claims made in this video as aggressively and demonstrably false.",['credit'],False,"On 5 March 2019, a conspiracy-minded Twitter account shared a video purporting to be from the site of a construction project funded by West Virginia taxpayer money for the purpose of housing 321 Syrian refugees. The video also claimed this was being done at the expense of regular Americans who, the man claims, were being pushed into substandard housing. He asserted that the area he was standing in will be a sharia zone, and no non-Muslims will be allowed to enter:Several factual problems exist with assertions in this video. Chief among them is the fact that this video shows the Littlepage Terrace housing project, a low-income, housing tax-credit property allocated through the West Virginia Housing Development Fund, which houses zero Syrian refugees and many regular Americans. Several lines of evidence support this conclusion. First, someone who works next to the project refers to it as Littlepage:Another significant oversight in the tweeted narrative is that the entire state of West Virginia has taken in far less than 321 Syrian refugees in total. In 2016, the year the United States took in the largest number of Syrian refugees, West Virginia resettled only five of them in their state. On 1 February 2017, the Trump Administration announced Executive Order 13769, commonly referred to as the travel ban,"" which indefinitely suspended the admission of Syrian refugees to the United States. In 2017, West Virginia took in 13 refugees, but these individuals were not necessarily Syrian.It is true that Littlepage was torn down and rebuilt, but that decision had nothing to do with refugee housing. Instead, the renovations aimed to reduce crime and revitalize the area, as reported by West Virginias WCHS television station in 2016:"
"As we've seen that federal support for states diminish, you've seen the biggest job losses in the public sector -- teachers, police officers, firefighters losing their jobs.",[],"President Barack Obama is negotiating with Republicans in Congress to increase the debt ceiling. Part of the deal could involve major cuts to government spending.At a press conference on Monday, Obama was asked whether cutting government spending was a good idea right now, given the high unemployment rate.Our biggest priority as an administration is getting the economy back on track and putting people back to work. Now, without relitigating the past, I'm absolutely convinced, and the vast majority of economists are convinced, that the steps we took in the Recovery Act saved millions of people their jobs or created a whole bunch of jobs, Obama said.And part of the evidence of that is as you see what happens with the Recovery Act phasing out, he continued. When I came into office and budgets were hemorrhaging at the state level, part of the Recovery Act was giving states help so they wouldn't have to lay off teachers, police officers, firefighters. As we've seen that federal support for states diminish, you've seen the biggest job losses in the public sector -- teachers, police officers, firefighters losing their jobs.We were interested in fact-checking that last statement, that public-sector job losses have increased as the stimulus money has receded. Was there data to back up Obama's point? We decided to fact-check his statement, and what we found was more complicated than we expected.First, we'll address the timing of the stimulus spending in the states, and then we'll turn to public-sector job losses.To refresh your memory on stimulus spending: The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act became law in 2009. It included $787 billion in tax cuts and spending designed to pump money into the economy and reverse the recession. The goal was to get the money out the door as soon as possible, and much of it was spent in 2009 and 2010. By the middle of 2011, the governmentreportedthat it had paid out 90 percent of the tax benefits; 78 percent of the contracts, grants and loans; and 83 percent of entitlement spending, such as money for Medicaid, unemployment benefits and food stamps.States received money for all sorts of projects and purposes, and the timetables were all different. For example: States got extra money to pay for Medicaid, the government-run health insurance program for the poor and disabled. This money ran out on June 30, 2011. States also got money for education, to keep school teachers on the job. The states were encouraged to spend that money as soon as possible, but they didn't have to. So every state had its own timetable for using these funds, according to Michael Leachman, an expert on state finances with the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.Next, we'll turn to public-sector job losses. Obama mentioned teachers, police officers, firefighters losing their jobs, and the logical inference is that these people were laid off due to budget constraints. Again, we were not able to find compiled data of jobs lost to state budget cuts. However, the U.S. Department of Labor's Bureau of Labor Statistics keeps data on the size of the government workforce at the state and local levels. We ran the data using the department's database and found that both the state and local workforce numbers have been generally declining since the beginning of this year.We looked at both state and local workforce numbers because jobs like school teachers, police officers and firefighters would typically be included in the numbers of the local workforce. Teachers at the public universities, on the other hand, would be counted as part of the state workforce. Most states also have state police forces, such as the Florida Highway Patrol and the Texas Rangers.To review some of the specifics of those numbers: Nationwide, the state workforce started 2010 with 5.140 million workers. For the rest of the year, the numbers jumped around, sometimes increasing and sometimes decreasing. By January 2011, the state workforce was down to 5.136 million workers. Since then, the numbers have declined every month, though May and June were preliminary numbers.The local workforce, meanwhile, started 2010 with 14.482 million workers. It saw steady declines with the exemption of one month through the rest of 2010. By January 2011, the local workforce was down to 14.240 million workers. Since then, the numbers have also declined every month, with May and June preliminary. To sum up, we can say very generally that the stimulus was ending, and also the state and local workforces were in decline.We noted ina recent itemon government employment that since the recession officially ended in June 2009, private payrolls have increased by more than 1 million workers, but government payrolls have declined by 493,000 -- cutting the number of jobs created almost in half. We also noted that the decline came from loss of employment at the state and local level, since federal employment had increased slightly.Leachman, the state finance expert at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, said there was little doubt that there's a connection between the end of the stimulus and public-sector layoffs.The recession has just been a historic one for state and local governments. Its very badly damaged their revenues, and they're still in a deep hole from the recession, he said, adding, It's clear that job losses are going to continue in the next year and beyond.Obama pointed to those job losses as evidence that the stimulus helped the economy. Now that the stimulus is going away, things are getting worse.The conservative fiscal experts we spoke with were not impressed with Obama's claim, though they did not dispute it. The problem is that the stimulus didn't revive the economy, said J.D. Foster of the conservative Heritage Foundation. The point of the stimulus was to get the private sector going well enough to carry the job-creating load. It failed, he said via e-mail.We're not going to assess here whether the stimulus worked, however. And as we've noted inpreviousreports, independent sources have concluded that the stimulus saved or created anywhere between 1.3 million and 2.6 million jobs. But the economic downturn has been particularly pernicious, so we think it's still too early to say whether the stimulus worked or not, and to what extent. We should note that here, Obama is in the odd position of pointing to increasing job losses as evidence that the stimulus worked.Here, we're checking Obama's statement, As we've seen that federal support for states diminish, you've seen the biggest job losses in the public sector -- teachers, police officers, firefighters losing their jobs. The data tends to support that, but it's more of a correlation than a causation. Other factors, including continuing weakness in the economy and shrinking state and local revenue are at work as well. We rate Obama's statement Mostly True.","['National', 'Economy', 'Jobs', 'Stimulus', 'Workers']",True,"President Barack Obama is negotiating with Republicans in Congress to increase the debt ceiling. Part of the deal could involve major cuts to government spending.At a press conference on Monday, Obama was asked whether cutting government spending was a good idea right now, given the high unemployment rate.Our biggest priority as an administration is getting the economy back on track and putting people back to work. Now, without relitigating the past, I'm absolutely convinced, and the vast majority of economists are convinced, that the steps we took in the Recovery Act saved millions of people their jobs or created a whole bunch of jobs, Obama said.And part of the evidence of that is as you see what happens with the Recovery Act phasing out, he continued. When I came into office and budgets were hemorrhaging at the state level, part of the Recovery Act was giving states help so they wouldn't have to lay off teachers, police officers, firefighters. As we've seen that federal support for states diminish, you've seen the biggest job losses in the public sector -- teachers, police officers, firefighters losing their jobs.We were interested in fact-checking that last statement, that public-sector job losses have increased as the stimulus money has receded. Was there data to back up Obama's point? We decided to fact-check his statement, and what we found was more complicated than we expected.First, we'll address the timing of the stimulus spending in the states, and then we'll turn to public-sector job losses.To refresh your memory on stimulus spending: The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act became law in 2009. It included $787 billion in tax cuts and spending designed to pump money into the economy and reverse the recession. The goal was to get the money out the door as soon as possible, and much of it was spent in 2009 and 2010. By the middle of 2011, the governmentreportedthat it had paid out 90 percent of the tax benefits; 78 percent of the contracts, grants and loans; and 83 percent of entitlement spending, such as money for Medicaid, unemployment benefits and food stamps.States received money for all sorts of projects and purposes, and the timetables were all different. For example: States got extra money to pay for Medicaid, the government-run health insurance program for the poor and disabled. This money ran out on June 30, 2011. States also got money for education, to keep school teachers on the job. The states were encouraged to spend that money as soon as possible, but they didn't have to. So every state had its own timetable for using these funds, according to Michael Leachman, an expert on state finances with the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.Next, we'll turn to public-sector job losses. Obama mentioned teachers, police officers, firefighters losing their jobs, and the logical inference is that these people were laid off due to budget constraints. Again, we were not able to find compiled data of jobs lost to state budget cuts. However, the U.S. Department of Labor's Bureau of Labor Statistics keeps data on the size of the government workforce at the state and local levels. We ran the data using the department's database and found that both the state and local workforce numbers have been generally declining since the beginning of this year.We looked at both state and local workforce numbers because jobs like school teachers, police officers and firefighters would typically be included in the numbers of the local workforce. Teachers at the public universities, on the other hand, would be counted as part of the state workforce. Most states also have state police forces, such as the Florida Highway Patrol and the Texas Rangers.To review some of the specifics of those numbers: Nationwide, the state workforce started 2010 with 5.140 million workers. For the rest of the year, the numbers jumped around, sometimes increasing and sometimes decreasing. By January 2011, the state workforce was down to 5.136 million workers. Since then, the numbers have declined every month, though May and June were preliminary numbers.The local workforce, meanwhile, started 2010 with 14.482 million workers. It saw steady declines with the exemption of one month through the rest of 2010. By January 2011, the local workforce was down to 14.240 million workers. Since then, the numbers have also declined every month, with May and June preliminary.To sum up, we can say very generally that the stimulus was ending, and also the state and local workforces were in decline.We noted ina recent itemon government employment that since the recession officially ended in June 2009, private payrolls have increased by more than 1 million workers, but government payrolls have declined by 493,000 -- cutting the number of jobs created almost in half. We also noted that the decline came from loss of employment at the state and local level, since federal employment had increased slightly.Leachman, the state finance expert at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, said there was little doubt that there's a connection between the end of the stimulus and public-sector layoffs.The recession has just been a historic one for state and local governments. Its very badly damaged their revenues, and they're still in a deep hole from the recession, he said, adding, It's clear that job losses are going to continue in the next year and beyond.Obama pointed to those job losses as evidence that the stimulus helped the economy. Now that the stimulus is going away, things are getting worse.The conservative fiscal experts we spoke with were not impressed with Obama's claim, though they did not dispute it. The problem is that the stimulus didn't revive the economy, said J.D. Foster of the conservative Heritage Foundation. The point of the stimulus was to get the private sector going well enough to carry the job-creating load. It failed, he said via e-mail.We're not going to assess here whether the stimulus worked, however. And as we've noted inpreviousreports, independent sources have concluded that the stimulus saved or created anywhere between 1.3 million and 2.6 million jobs. But the economic downturn has been particularly pernicious, so we think it's still too early to say whether the stimulus worked or not, and to what extent. We should note that here, Obama is in the odd position of pointing to increasing job losses as evidence that the stimulus worked.Here, we're checking Obama's statement, As we've seen that federal support for states diminish, you've seen the biggest job losses in the public sector -- teachers, police officers, firefighters losing their jobs. The data tends to support that, but it's more of a correlation than a causation. Other factors, including continuing weakness in the economy and shrinking state and local revenue are at work as well. We rate Obama's statement Mostly True."
"'Freedom Concert' Being Planned, But No Details Announced","['Some concert promoters are toying with the idea of a ""Freedom Concert,"" but no official plans have yet been announced.']","In December 2016, an image purportedly showing a flyer for a ""Freedom Concert"" was widely circulated on social media. This is not a real flyer for a ""Freedom Concert."" The image displayed above is a concept poster that has been circulating since at least December 20, 2016, when it was posted to Facebook by Adam Theis. He wrote, ""Please share if you would like to see this concert happen on the same day as the inauguration. It's as simple as that. #freedomconcert."" The poster design/concept was created by Erik Brown of FRISK Creative. While this image does not advertise a genuinely scheduled event, a real ""Freedom Concert"" to be held on Inauguration Day was discussed on social media in December 2016, with former Labor Secretary Robert Reich bringing attention to the idea when he explained the vision behind such an event in an 18 December 2016 Facebook post. He stated, ""The Trump people are upset that the only musicians willing to perform at the Trump inauguration are Kid Rock and Ted Nugent. Someone just suggested to me a televised 'freedom concert' to air at the same time as the inauguration, with huge celebrities like Beyoncé, Jay Z, Madonna, Katy Perry, Justin Timberlake, Lady Gaga, Bruce Springsteen, and so on. Alec Baldwin would MC the event, playing Trump as he does on SNL. Presto. The Trump inauguration loses all the TV ratings. Basically, no one watches it. Even better, the proceeds of the freedom concert go to the ACLU, Planned Parenthood, Lambda Legal, NAACP, Common Cause, CAIR, IRAP, SPLC, Environmental Defense Fund, Human Rights Campaign Fund, MoveOn, Economic Policy Institute, Inequality Media, and GLAD. What do you think?"" Reich's idea proved popular with some people, and at least one concert promoter was reportedly attempting to turn this idea into a real event. According to Politico's Playbook, Mark Ross, a concert promoter, was ""in the process of putting together a large-scale concert called We the People to DIRECTLY compete with Donald Trump's inauguration."" However, Ross has not provided any details about the event, and while a Politico source said that talent was ""banging on our doors"" to be involved with the event, no musical acts have officially been confirmed to play the show as of this writing. Ross confirmed that he was planning a concert in a December 23, 2016, Facebook post in which he mentioned he was ""getting together a really big show. Stay tuned,"" although he later deleted that message. Although the flyer for this ""Freedom Concert"" is not real, a similar event called ""Concert for America: Stand Up, Sing Out!"" scheduled for Inauguration Day has been announced. The concert's website states that the event will be a ""star-studded benefit concert highlighting the diversity and hope that is America at its best."" The lineup for this concert, however, was not the same as that promoted in the faux ""Freedom Concert"" flyer.",['share'],False," This is not a real flyer for a ""Freedom Concert."" The above-displayed image is a concept poster that has been circulating since at least 20 December 2016 when it was posted to Facebook by Adam Theis:Please share if you would like to see this concert happen on the same day as the inauguration. It's as simple as that. #freedomconcert. Poster design/concept by Erik Brown/ FRISK creativeWhile this image does not advertise a genuinely scheduled events, a real ""Freedom Concert"" to be held on Inauguration Day was discussed on social media in December 2016, with former Labor Secretary Robert Reich bringing attention to the idea when he explained the vision behind such an event in an 18 December 2016 Facebook post:Reich's idea proved popular with some people, and at least one concert promoter was reportedly attempting to turn this idea into a real event. According to Politico's Playbook, Mark Ross, a concert promoter, was ""in the process of putting together a large-scale concert called We the People to DIRECTLY compete with Donald Trumps inauguration."" However, Ross has not provided any details about the event, and while a Politico source said that talent was ""banging on our doors"" to be involved with the event, no musical acts have officially been confirmed to play the show as of this writing.Ross confirmed that he was planning a concert in a 23 December 2016 Facebook post in which he mentioned he was ""Getting together a really big show. Stay tuned,"" he later deleted that message.Although the flyer for this ""Freedom Concert"" is not real, a similar event called ""Concert for America: Stand Up, Sing Out!"" scheduled for Inauguration Day has been announced. The concert's web site states that the event will be a ""star-studded benefit concert highlighting the diversity and hope that is America at its best."" The lineup for this concert, however, was not the same as the promoted in the faux ""Freedom Concert"" flyer."
Is an Incurable “Mexican Blood Flu” Creating a Health Crisis at the Southern Border?,['Claims of a virulent outbreak at the U.S.-Mexico border mix inaccurate assertions from politicians with the claims of a supplement-peddling conspiracy publisher.'],"In mid-May 2019, viral claims began to emerge on Facebook warning about XDR-TB, or extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis, wreaking havoc at the Southern border. For example, a representative Facebook post asserted: ""Let me describe how dire the current situation is because the government is staying tight-lipped. It's known as the Mexican Blood Flu or its scientific name XDR-T. And you wouldn't wish the symptoms (internal bleeding, coughing up blood, seizures, and even suffocation) on your worst enemy."" For years, it was seen as a third-world problem, killing scores of people in the world's poorest countries, and a major outbreak within the U.S. was considered unthinkable. But here's the horrifying truth they don't want you to know: a U.S. outbreak has already begun, and officials have no idea how to contain it. The first case was discovered in McAllen, Texas, near the Mexican border. An illegal alien was detained by the U.S. Border Patrol, suffering from a scorching fever and coughing up blood. The Institute for Natural Healing is a subsidiary of a publishing company known as Agora, Inc., which has a lengthy history of using misleading tactics and politically charged language to get people to purchase supplements, eBooks, or stock tips. Snopes has previously debunked Agora content that suggested Hillary Clinton was hiding a cure for cancer, and an Agora advertisement for a $74 eBook explaining how to protect yourself from an alleged Klebsi plague set to ravage America. The founder of Agora once declared that ""our customers don't pay us to be right."" In point of fact, the scientific name of the disease in question is not XDR-T, but XDR-TB, a disease categorization that is a step more serious than multidrug-resistant TB (MDR-TB). According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), MDR-TB is resistant to at least isoniazid (INH) and rifampin (RIF), while XDR-TB is resistant to INH and RIF, any fluoroquinolone, and at least three of the injectable second-line anti-TB drugs. Agora often uses made-up names for commonly known conditions or cures to make it harder for potential buyers of supplements or eBooks to research them on their own. The term ""Mexican Blood Flu"" is another fabricated name, and it is also a poorly chosen one from a truth standpoint. The McAllen, Texas, incident referenced in the Institute for Natural Healing's advertisement took place in 2013 and concerned a Nepalese man who had traveled through South Asia, Brazil, and Mexico before crossing illegally into Texas, as reported by the Wall Street Journal. In medical isolation in South Texas, 100 miles or so from Mexico's border, is a man who embodies one of U.S. health officials' greatest worries: he is the first person to cross and be held in detention while infected with one of the most severe types of drug-resistant tuberculosis known today. The Nepalese man detained at the U.S. border carries a particularly deadly strain—XDR, ""extensively drug-resistant"" TB. His TB is resistant to at least eight of the 15 or so standard drugs, according to a U.S. government description of the case reviewed by the Journal. His XDR strain has been seen only once before in the U.S., in another patient of Nepalese origin, according to the government description. The assertion that a U.S. outbreak has already begun is similarly incorrect: following the McAllen incident, the United States reported zero XDR-TB cases in 2014 and 2015. In 2016, one case was reported in the entire United States. In 2017, the most recent year for which CDC data is available, two cases were reported. According to CDC data, the percentage of TB cases that are drug-resistant has remained stable for the last 20 years. The topic of multiple drug-resistant TB (not XDR-TB) at the Southern border was briefly revived in statements made by U.S. Rep. John Joyce, who in April 2019 participated in a fact-finding mission to the U.S.-Mexico border in Yuma, Arizona. During that trip, according to reporting by the Associated Press, Joyce said that there are 12 cases of multiple-drug-resistant strains of tuberculosis that had been identified in immigrants held in detention in Yuma, Arizona. Yuma, Arizona officials later stated that this information was incorrect, although the person who made the claim to the politician stood by it, according to the Arizona Republic. After a question from The Arizona Republic about a tuberculosis outbreak, Yuma County officials sought to set the record straight. ""I can say, after confirming with the Yuma County Health District, there is no drug-resistant tuberculosis in Yuma County,"" said Kevin Tunell, a spokesman for the county. ""Further, there are no cases of tuberculosis involving migrants in Yuma County at this time. All told, there is no basis for the claim that an XDR-TB outbreak is present at the Southern border."" Belief in such a claim would require taking the word of a company that once sold a $74 eBook created to teach readers how to find an incredible cure for cancer hidden in the Book of Matthew, over the reports of health officials on the ground and health monitoring agencies such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.",['lien'],False,"In mid-May 2019, viral claims began to emerge on Facebook warning about XDR-TB, or extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis, wreaking havoc at the Southern border. For example, a representative Facebook post asserted:As it turns out, these rumors are not driven by reality but by a company with a history of politically charged health misinformation selling a bogus natural health supplement. The claims made on Facebook mirror the claims made by an entity that calls itself the Institute for Natural Healing in a thinly sourced advertisement:The Institute for Natural Healing is a subsidiary of a publishing company known as Agora, Inc., which has a lengthy history of using misleading tactics and politically charged language to get people to purchase supplements, ebooks, or stock tips. Snopes has previously debunked Agora content that suggested Hillary Clinton was hiding a cure for cancer, and an Agora advertisement for a 74-dollar eBook explaining how to protect yourself from an alleged Klebsi plague set to ravage America. The founder of Agora once declared that our customers dont pay us to be right.In point of fact, the scientific name of the disease in question is not XDR-T, but XDR-TB, a disease categorization that is a step more serious than multidrug-resistant TB (MDR-TB). According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), MDR-TB is resistant to at least isoniazid (INH) and rifampin (RIF), while XDR-TB is resistant to INH and RIF, any fluoroquinolone, and at least three of the injectable second-line anti-TB drugs. Agora often uses made-up names for commonly known conditions or cures to make it harder for potential buyers of supplements or ebooks to research them on their own.Mexican blood flu is another made-up name, and its also a poorly chosen one from a truth standpoint. The McAllen, Texas, incident referenced in the Institute for Natural Healing's advertisement took place in 2013 and concerned a Nepalese man who had traveled through South Asia, Brazil, and Mexico before crossing illegally into Texas, as reported by the Wall Street Journal:The assertion that a U.S. outbreak has already begun is similarly incorrect: following the McCarren incident, the United States reported zero XDR-TB cases in 2014 and 2015. In 2016, one case was reported in the entire United States. In 2017, the most recent year for which CDC data is available, two cases were reported. According to CDC data, the percentage of TB cases that are drug resistant has remained stable for the last 20 years.The topic of multiple drug-resistant TB (not XDR-TB) at the Southern border was briefly revived in statements made by U.S. Rep. John Joyce, who in April 2019 participated in a fact-finding mission to the U.S.-Mexico border in Yuma, Arizona. During that trip, according to reporting by the Associated Press, Joyce said that there are 12 cases of multiple-drug-resistant strains of tuberculosis that had been identified in immigrants held in detention in Yuma, Arizona.Yuma, Arizona officials later stated that this information was incorrect, although the person who made the claim to the politician stood by it, according to the Arizona Republic:All told, there is no basis for the claim that an XDR-TB outbreak is present at the Southern border. Belief in such a claim would require taking the word of a company that once sold a $74 eBook created to teach readers how to find an incredible cure for cancer hidden in the Book of Matthew, over the reports of health officials on the ground and health monitoring agencies such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. As such, we rank the claim false."
Innovative Carburiser of Miracles,['A miraculous car that gets 200 miles to the gallon is sold by mistake then reclaimed by the factory and is never seen again.'],"Claim: A miraculous car that gets 200 miles to the gallon is sold by mistake, then reclaimed by the factory and is never seen again. Examples: [Collected via e-mail, 1999] A retiring General Motors employee, after many years of service, receives a car as a retirement gift (as well as a nice pension, etc.). He is given permission to select a car from the lot at the factory. He chooses a Chevrolet Caprice, a large luxury car. After receiving it, he is satisfied with his choice. After all, who wouldn't enjoy driving around in a roomy, comfortable car? After driving it for a while, he notices something quite odd: a car like this usually consumes a substantial amount of fuel, but the gas gauge hardly moves at all. After a few weeks, he becomes suspicious. Things like this don't happen. Being the company man he is, he returns it to the factory. Explaining this to the service technician must have caused some strange looks, but they took it in anyway. After he got his car back, he noticed it got the typical gas mileage of a comparable car. Could this car have had some secret ""modifications"" that allowed him to drive for weeks on the same tank of gas? Detroit's automakers have purportedly seized, or rather bought out, patents for items that improve gasoline mileage, like the 100 mpg carburetor. Maybe the R&D department at GM put this theory into practice, and this was an example. [Collected via e-mail, 1997] A couple journeys from Western Canada to Detroit to buy a new car and presumably save on shipping costs while enjoying a vacation in the States at the same time. Driving back to the prairies, they find, to their astonishment, that the gas gauge is not moving down to ""empty,"" even though they've been driving for hours. Arriving home, thousands of miles away from Detroit, they have only refilled the tank once or twice. A few days after returning, the husband looks out at his driveway in the morning to find two mysterious men tinkering with his car (the hood is up). Running out, they race off; he checks under the hood, finds nothing amiss, and concludes it's just vandals or would-be thieves whom he was fortunate to apprehend before any damage was done. However, when they drive the car, they find their gas mileage is now normal. Variations: The miraculous car legend ends one of four ways: Mysterious men appear and tinker with the engine, rendering the car no different than any other. The car is reclaimed by the factory. If the owner afterwards gets the same car back (sometimes it's replaced outright with another vehicle), it now gets ordinary gas mileage. No-nonsense business types show up to make a fabulous offer for the car, which is accepted. The owner wakes up one morning to find the car vanished without a trace. Origins: The legend of the miracle high-mileage automobile has been around longer than most of our readers, with a version set in Philadelphia having appeared in a 1948 newspaper. Even at that time, the story proved unverifiable, with the article's writer identifying it as such and passing it along only as an example of a current rumor sweeping through the community. Since that early sighting of more than half a century ago, the legend has gone on to enthrall audience after audience, as each couple of years sees it pop up anew. Its origins are as strange as the story itself. Between 1928 and 1935, Charles Nelson Pogue, an inventor from Canada, applied for numerous patents for what he claimed was a new type of carburetor that supposedly completely vaporized gasoline before introducing it to the cylinders, thereby extracting a great deal more energy from the fuel. According to the Pogue patent description, fuel was introduced into the engine in this vaporous ""dry"" state rather than in the normal droplet-laden ""wet"" state, thus combining more readily with air and making it burn with far greater efficiency. Better combustion, combined with raising the engine's operating temperature from 160°F to 180°F, was said to be responsible for vastly improved fuel economy. So much for the techno-talk. The Pogue carburetor was touted as getting 200+ miles to the gallon. Glowing reports about this miracle of ingenuity making a 1,879-mile trip on 14.5 gallons appeared in the May 1936 issue of Canadian Automotive Trade magazine, reports which Pogue later denied. A manager of a Winnipeg auto dealership claimed he had driven a Pogue-equipped car 217 miles on a gallon of gasoline. A different dealer principal claimed to have driven 26 miles on a pint of fuel. The story snowballed onward from those breathless testimonials as one rumor quickly followed on the heels of another. Thieves were reputed to have broken into Pogue's shop and made off with three of his carburetors. There was talk of armed guards and wolfhounds guarding the shop and the now-famous inventor. Wealthy backers (from Winnipeg or Toronto, depending on whom you heard the story from) were rumored to be bankrolling Pogue, but the arrangements mysteriously fell through. Ford of Canada was said to have bought the invention outright. All in all, it was a very exciting time. Alas, one can get by on mere smoke and mirrors for only so long. Those with enough sense to not be deafened by the hyperbole were not long kept at bay with tales of wolfhounds, thieves, and mysterious briefcase-toting moneymen. They wanted to see the carburetor. That, of course, was never permitted. No one reputable was allowed to see the mechanical miracle in action, let alone have a chance to measure its results. After the initial excitement over Pogue's 1936 announcement had faded, more serious types began to openly doubt that the carburetor would work as described. In the December 1936 issue of Automotive Industries magazine, its engineering editor, P.M. Heldt, said of a sketch of the Pogue carburetor: ""The sketch fails to show any features hitherto unknown in carburetor practice and absolutely gives no warrant for crediting the remarkable results claimed."" Other journalists began to voice similar opinions. In response to calls to put up or shut up, Pogue's miracle carburetor was heard of no more. Faced with the choice of believing someone had made claims his invention couldn't later live up to or that a monied bad guy had bought up a technology to forever keep it off the market, at least some chose to believe the suppression theory. That the carburetor never made it to the public, they said, was proof enough of its existence. Those 1930s news stories breathlessly trumpeting Pogue's miracle of technology form the basis of the economical carburetor legend now before us. As gas prices fluctuate, our dependence on fossil fuels is driven home time and again. Who wouldn't long for a miracle of engineering that would free us from the tyranny of the gas pump? And thus the groundwork for belief is laid. As sometimes happens in the world of urban legends, the desire for something to be true transforms a rumor into certainty that this very thing is fact. Over the years, our legend about a 200 mpg car has bobbed to the surface in community after community, been debunked in numerous respected publications, and bobbed right back up in the wake of those debunkings. The need to believe in this wondrous technology and the evil car manufacturers who are deliberately withholding it from the market appears too strong to combat. A bit of rational thought should be all that's needed to lay this legend to rest. Why would the car manufacturers care at all about keeping such a technological advance away from consumers? Unlike the petroleum companies, they have no vested interest in how much fuel a car uses. An automaker's self-interest is best served by getting the newest irresistible technology to the consumer before his competitors do. If any one of them possessed the secret of the 200 mpg car, he would have rushed it into production, hoping to beat his competitors to the punch. Those who are tempted to believe the Evil Government is responsible for keeping this miracle out of our hands should reflect for a moment on the current state of world politics. The government of the United States would like nothing better than to throw off the yoke of dependence upon foreign oil. A miraculous carburetor would grant that freedom, allowing Americans to continue to enjoy current levels of use without the need to go hat in hand to OPEC or even those dastardly Canadians. The domestic supply would be more than enough. Though rarely is this tale told about anything other than a gas-miserly carburetor, this version describes a miraculous lightbulb: It was around 1920, shortly after he had married, when the old man originally purchased the light bulb from a small store in town. It appeared to be a normal light bulb. However, when after sixty years it was still going strong, he decided to write to the manufacturers and tell them of this remarkable phenomenon. By return, a reply came from the company indicating that they were very interested in the bulb and would like to send someone to see it. Eventually, one of the directors of the firm called and, instead of just showing interest, offered to buy it for $1,000. The old man, of course, refused, as the light bulb had given him good service. However, his curiosity was certainly aroused—why so much money for his light bulb? The director could provide no plausible explanation as to why they were willing to offer so much for the bulb, so the old man decided to explore this mystery further. With the help of a solicitor friend, he did a little investigating and discovered that in the 1920s, this particular light bulb manufacturer had bought and tested the patent for an everlasting bulb. Only a few of these bulbs were made, and the company, finding the invention worked, destroyed the bulbs and suppressed the idea—after all, it would have put them out of business. Unknown to the company, one of the lights had accidentally become mixed up with a batch of ordinary bulbs, and this was the light bulb that had lit the old man's kitchen for the past sixty years. (Sometimes lore collides with reality: A long-lived light bulb has been burning since 1901 and currently lights a fire station in Livermore, California.) light bulb Barbara ""gasoline allied"" Mikkelson Origins: The legend about the need to suppress the steam-driven carburetor that can produce 200 mpg to protect the oil industry surfaces in an episode of the TV series Spoils of Babylon (""The Foundling: The War Within; original air date 9 January 2014). Last updated: 26 June 2014 The Mexican Pet Brunvand, Jan Harold. The Vanishing Hitchhiker. New York: W. W. Norton, 1981. ISBN 0-393-95169-3 (pp. 175-178). The Vanishing Hitchhiker Dale, Rodney. The Tumour in the Whale. London: Duckworth, 1978. ISBN 0-7156-1314-6 (pp. 114-115). The Tumour in the Whale Dorson, Richard. American Folklore. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1959 (p. 253). American Folklore Ellis, William and Alan E. Mays. ""Art Linkletter and the Contemporary Legend."" FOAFTale News. June 1994 (pp. 1-10). Morgan, Hal and Kerry Tucker. Rumor! New York: Penguin Books, 1984. ISBN 0-14-007036-2 (pp. 123-125). Rumor! Smith, Paul. The Book of Nasty Legends. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1983. ISBN 0-00-636856-5 (pp. 9, 67). The Book of Nasty Legends Vance, Bill. ""Was Winnipeg Inventor Victim of Oil Barons?"" The Toronto Star. 17 April 1993 (p. H2). The Complete and Totally Book of Urban Legends Holt, David and Bill Mooney. Spiders in the Hairdo. Little Rock: August House, 1999. ISBN 0-87483-525-9 (pp. 85, 106). Spiders in the Hairdo The Big Book of Urban Legends. New York: Paradox Press, 1994. ISBN 1-56389-165-4 (p. 22). The Big Book of Urban Legends",['returns'],False,"(Sometimes lore collides with reality: A long-lived light bulb has been burning since 1901 and currently lights a fire station in Livermore, California.)   Brunvand, Jan Harold.  The Vanishing Hitchhiker.   New York: W. W. Norton, 1981.  ISBN 0-393-95169-3  (pp. 175-178).   Dale, Rodney.  The Tumour in the Whale.   London: Duckworth, 1978.  ISBN 0-7156-1314-6  (pp. 114-115).   Dorson, Richard.  American Folklore.   Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1959  (p. 253).   Morgan, Hal and Kerry Tucker.  Rumor!   New York: Penguin Books, 1984.  ISBN 0-14-007036-2  (pp. 123-125).    Smith, Paul.  The Book of Nasty Legends.  London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1983.  ISBN 0-00-636856-5  (pp. 9, 67).    Holt, David and Bill Mooney.  Spiders in the Hairdo.  Little Rock: August House, 1999.  ISBN 0-87483-525-9  (pp. 85, 106).  The Big Book of Urban Legends.  New York: Paradox Press, 1994.  ISBN 1-56389-165-4  (p. 22)."
Did Country Singer Joe Diffie Die from Lung Cancer?,"['The country music star passed away on March 29, 2020. ']","Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And, please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease.  fighting Find out Read Submit Become a Founding Member CDC WHO In March 2020, country music fans were saddened by the news that ""Pickup Man"" singer Joe Diffie had died from complications of COVID-19, the coronavirus disease. While fans of the singer mourned the loss, some social media users attempted to obfuscate the cause of Diffie's death to further an unfounded claim that hospitals were inflating reported death counts from COVID-19 in order to increase funding.  news claim One such social media post racked up more than 100,000 shares within a week: post    Another person claimed that Diffie had actually died from lung cancer, not COVID-19:     There is no truth to these claims. Country musician Joe Diffie did not die from lung cancer, and the hospital did not alter the cause of death. Diffie published a statement to his Facebook page on March 27, 2020, announcing that he had been diagnosed with COVID-19: statement announcing A few days later, on March 29, his Facebook page was updated again with a statement announcing that he had died due to complications from the disease:  statement GRAMMY-winning country music legend Joe Diffie passed away today, Sunday, March 29 from complications of coronavirus (COVID-19). His family requests privacy at this time. In addition to these official updates from Diffie's social media pages, his wife, Tara, also disputed the claim that the singer died from lung cancer. On April 18, she took to Instagram writing that he ""did NOT HAVE LUNG CANCER."" She further explained that the confusion may have started because Diffie's father, also named Joe, had died from lung cancer a few years prior: Instagram my husband @officialjoediffie did NOT HAVE LUNG CANCER. his father passed, same name, November 2018 to stage IV lung cancer. STOP STARTING FAKE NEWS. Ive seen multiple posts and its upsetting to all of us.  @officialjoediffie The social media posts falsely claiming that the musician the died from lung cancer, not COVID-19, attempted to downplay a disease that, as of this writing, has killed nearly 170,000 people dead worldwide, including at least 40,000 in the United States. In addition, these posts are also causing the Diffie family pain and going against the wishes of the late singer.  40,000 When Diffie was first diagnosed with COVID-19, he told his fans to ""to be vigilant, cautious and careful during this pandemic."" Betts, Stephen.  ""Joe Diffie, Nineties Countrys Pickup Man, Dead at 61 From Coronavirus.""
  Rolling Stone.  29 March 2020. Betts, Stephen and Patrick Doyle.  ""John Prine, One of Americas Greatest Songwriters, Dead at 73.""
  Rolling Stone.  7 April 2020. CMT.  ""Joe Diffie Confirms Hes Tested Positive for Coronavirus."" 
 27 March 2020.",['loss'],False,"Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And, please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease. In March 2020, country music fans were saddened by the news that ""Pickup Man"" singer Joe Diffie had died from complications of COVID-19, the coronavirus disease. While fans of the singer mourned the loss, some social media users attempted to obfuscate the cause of Diffie's death to further an unfounded claim that hospitals were inflating reported death counts from COVID-19 in order to increase funding. One such social media post racked up more than 100,000 shares within a week:Diffie published a statement to his Facebook page on March 27, 2020, announcing that he had been diagnosed with COVID-19:A few days later, on March 29, his Facebook page was updated again with a statement announcing that he had died due to complications from the disease:In addition to these official updates from Diffie's social media pages, his wife, Tara, also disputed the claim that the singer died from lung cancer. On April 18, she took to Instagram writing that he ""did NOT HAVE LUNG CANCER."" She further explained that the confusion may have started because Diffie's father, also named Joe, had died from lung cancer a few years prior:my husband @officialjoediffie did NOT HAVE LUNG CANCER. his father passed, same name, November 2018 to stage IV lung cancer. STOP STARTING FAKE NEWS. Ive seen multiple posts and its upsetting to all of us. The social media posts falsely claiming that the musician the died from lung cancer, not COVID-19, attempted to downplay a disease that, as of this writing, has killed nearly 170,000 people dead worldwide, including at least 40,000 in the United States. In addition, these posts are also causing the Diffie family pain and going against the wishes of the late singer. "
A Message to George W. Bush and Dick Cheney from a Dying Veteran,['Letter from a disabled veteran criticizes George Bush and Dick Cheney over the Iraq War.'],"A Message to George W. Bush and Dick Cheney  
From: Tomas Young  

I write this letter on the 10th anniversary of the Iraq War on behalf of my fellow Iraq War veterans. I write this letter on behalf of the 4,488 soldiers and Marines who died in Iraq. I write this letter on behalf of the hundreds of thousands of veterans who have been wounded and on behalf of those whose wounds, both physical and psychological, have destroyed their lives. I am one of those gravely wounded. I was paralyzed in an insurgent ambush in 2004 in Sadr City. My life is coming to an end. I am living under hospice care. I write this letter on behalf of husbands and wives who have lost spouses, on behalf of children who have lost a parent, on behalf of the fathers and mothers who have lost sons and daughters, and on behalf of those who care for the many thousands of my fellow veterans who have brain injuries. I write this letter on behalf of those veterans whose trauma and self-revulsion for what they have witnessed, endured, and done in Iraq have led to suicide, and on behalf of the active-duty soldiers and Marines who commit, on average, a suicide a day. I write this letter on behalf of the approximately 1 million Iraqi dead and on behalf of the countless Iraqi wounded. I write this letter on behalf of us all—the human detritus your war has left behind, those who will spend their lives in unending pain and grief. I write this letter, my last letter, to you, Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney. I write not because I think you grasp the terrible human and moral consequences of your lies, manipulation, and thirst for wealth and power. I write this letter because, before my own death, I want to make it clear that I, and hundreds of thousands of my fellow veterans, along with millions of my fellow citizens, along with hundreds of millions more in Iraq and the Middle East, know fully who you are and what you have done. You may evade justice, but in our eyes, you are each guilty of egregious war crimes, of plunder, and, finally, of murder, including the murder of thousands of young Americans—my fellow veterans—whose future you stole.",['returns'],True,"[Rest of article here.]Origins:  Tomas Young is a disabled veteran who enlisted in the military after the 9/11 attacks on the U.S. in 2001 and was severely wounded in Iraq in 2004; he subsequently became an outspoken critic of the Iraq War and was featured in the 2007 documentary film Body of War:In a March 2013 interview with Chris Hedges, Young provided more detail about his decision to end his life:On 18 March 2013, in conjunction with the tenth anniversary of beginning of the Iraq War, Tomas Young  submitted a letter (referenced above) that was published on the truthdig web site.  Titled ""The Last Letter"" and subtitled ""A Message to George W. Bush and Dick Cheney from a Dying Veteran,"" the letter criticized the former president and vice president for sending ""hundreds of thousands of young men and women to be sacrificed in a senseless war with no more thought than it takes to put out the garbage."""
"West Virginias exports increased for the second year in a row in 2018, reaching $8.1 billion. Additionally, West Virginias export growth rate was 14.2%, nearly double the national average of 7.6%.",[],"Have West Virginia exports been on fire recently? A tweet by the West Virginia Republican Party suggests so. In an April 2tweet, the state party said, West Virginias exports increased for the second year in a row in 2018, reaching $8.1 billion. Additionally, West Virginias export growth rate was 14.2%, nearly double the national average of 7.6%. West Virginias exports increased for the second year in a row in 2018, reaching $8.1 billion. Additionally, West Virginias export growth rate was 14.2%, nearly double the national average of 7.6%.https://t.co/PW0hpM1e8z Did West Virginia really outpace the national average of export growth rates? The tweet linked to a March 17articlein WVNews. In turn, the article cites a March 15news releaseby the West Virginia Department of Commerce that reported data from the U.S. Census Bureau. Caitlin Ashley-Lizarraga, an international trade specialist at the West Virginia Department of Commerce, pointed us to detailed Census Bureau data collected by a private-sector subscription database, theGlobal Trade Atlas. The table shows that West Virginia did indeed export $8.1 billion to the rest of the world in 2018, and that represented a 14.2% increase over the export total for 2017. The increase for the nation as a whole was a little over half that -- 7.6%. We were able to replicate this data using the Census Bureaus ownUSA Trade Onlinedata portal. While the export growth in West Virginia was strong between 2017 and 2018, its worth noting that this expansion came from a small base. In fact, West Virginia ranks thirteenth from the bottom in total exports for 2018. The states ranking below West Virginia are Arkansas, Delaware, Idaho, Maine, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Vermont, and Wyoming. The West Virginia Republican Party tweeted, West Virginias exports increased for the second year in a row in 2018, reaching $8.1 billion. Additionally, West Virginias export growth rate was 14.2%, nearly double the national average of 7.6%. The data, which we verified with a U.S. Census Bureau database, supports what the tweet said. We rate the statement True.","['West Virginia', 'Trade']",True,"In an April 2tweet, the state party said, West Virginias exports increased for the second year in a row in 2018, reaching $8.1 billion. Additionally, West Virginias export growth rate was 14.2%, nearly double the national average of 7.6%.West Virginias exports increased for the second year in a row in 2018, reaching $8.1 billion. Additionally, West Virginias export growth rate was 14.2%, nearly double the national average of 7.6%.https://t.co/PW0hpM1e8zThe tweet linked to a March 17articlein WVNews. In turn, the article cites a March 15news releaseby the West Virginia Department of Commerce that reported data from the U.S. Census Bureau.Caitlin Ashley-Lizarraga, an international trade specialist at the West Virginia Department of Commerce, pointed us to detailed Census Bureau data collected by a private-sector subscription database, theGlobal Trade Atlas.We were able to replicate this data using the Census Bureaus ownUSA Trade Onlinedata portal."
Does Pelosi Want 'Guaranteed Minimum Incomes' for 'Illegal Aliens' in Next COVID-19 Stimulus?,['A right-wing provocateur made the claim in a May 2020 tweet as federal leaders negotiated what to include in their next COVID-19 economic relief package.'],"Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And, please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease.  fighting Find out Read Submit Become a Founding Member CDC WHO On May 4, 2020  as federal leaders debated how to respond to an unprecedented interruption to the U.S. economy due to the COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic  a conservative provocateur tweeted that U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said she wanted the country's next economic relief package to establish ""guaranteed minimum incomes"" for ""illegal aliens."" COVID-19 Suggesting that only legal U.S. residents should benefit from federal stimulus packages, Charlie Kirk  who's the founder of the conservative political group Turning Point USA and social media ally of U.S. President Donald Trump  said in the tweet to his roughly 1.7 million followers:   To investigate the validity of his claim, we examined Pelosi's public statements and media appearances to determine if, or when, she used the phrased ""guaranteed income""  and under what circumstances. While Kirk provides no explanation for where or when or to whom Pelosi made the remarks in the above-displayed tweet  aside from the tweet's indication with the word ""BREAKING"" that the House Speaker had made the comments shortly before he composed the post  we considered statements by Pelosi since the beginning of the COVID-19 U.S. outbreak in early 2020 for our investigation. Within that timeframe, she used or referenced the phrase ""guaranteed income"" in three public statements, two of which were televised interviews. First, the House Speaker spoke the words on HBO's ""Real Time with Bill Maher"" on April 24. In light of the federal government's approval of the $2.2 trillion Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act in March 2020 (and stimulus bills totaling about $500 billion since then), Maher asked Pelosi if the federal government could afford similar economic relief packages for Americans should the pandemic keep businesses closed and systems locked down in the coming months. She responded: April 24 CARES I think that it should be clear that this (COVID-19 stimulus spending so far) is not doing the job that it is set out to do completely, that we may have to consider some other options. Others have proposed a sovereign fund  profits of which go to these unemployed people  or guaranteed income, other things that may not even be as costly as continuing down this path. She provided no further details on the so-called proposals for ""guaranteed income,"" which generally refers to a government-imposed system so that every citizen receives a minimum income  a central idea of the 2020 presidential campaign by former Democratic candidate Andrew Yang. Also in the conversation with Maher, Pelosi did not explicitly state that she wanted the system implemented via Congressional legislation. Andrew Yang Three days later, however, the House Speaker again said the words ""guaranteed income"" in a televised interview, this time with more specificity on her openness to the social welfare system. In the April 27 segment of MSNBC's ""Live with Stephanie Ruhle,"" while explaining federal leaders' next steps to help small businesses survive the financial crisis, Pelosi said: MSNBC As we go forward, let's see what works: what is operational and what needs other attention. Others have suggested a minimum income for  a guaranteed income for  people. Is that worthy of attention now? Perhaps so, because there are many more people than just in small business and hired by small business, as important as that is to the vitality of our economy. And other people who are not in the public sector, you know, meeting our needs in so many ways, that may need some assistance as well. Soon after she made the statement on live TV, news outlets including CBS News and CNBC published stories with headlines such as, ""Pelosi says 'guaranteed income' for Americans is worth considering for coronavirus recovery."" In a story by Business Insider about the televised comments, an aid to Pelosi said the House Speaker was referring to proposals that would guarantee worker paychecks  not a sweeping system for universal basic income. CBS News CNBC Business Insider guarantee worker paychecks Then, on May 1, the House Speaker and the Congressional Hispanic Caucus made themselves available to journalists via a conference call to discuss provisions within the CARES Act that exclude immigrants without Social Security numbers from receiving one-time stimulus checks.  May 1 receiving one-time stimulus checks.  In the call, Pelosi expressed support for legislation that would guarantee COVID-19 economic relief to not only people with Social Security numbers but also immigrants and their families who use Individual Taxpayer Identification Numbers (ITINs), which the IRS assigns to workers without Social Security numbers, to pay annual taxes. According to the IRS, the federal agency issues the numbers ""regardless of immigration status, because both resident and nonresident aliens may have a U.S. filing or reporting requirement under the Internal Revenue Code."" In other words, some immigrants who use the identification numbers (ITINs)  not social security numbers  to pay taxes may be ""undocumented."" According to a transcript of the May 1 call, at one point a reporter asked Pelosi: transcript Pretty recently you said that Congress should consider adding some form of guaranteed monthly income into the next coronavirus relief package. So I was wondering if you would extend that form of guaranteed income to undocumented immigrants and non-citizens who file taxes with tax ID numbers, ITINs, instead of Social Security numbers? In her response, Pelosi reiterated that she thinks federal leaders should consider guaranteed income and that she would talk to chairs of House committees about exploring the idea further. Additionally, as they consider future economic benefits for Americans during the pandemic, she said: Any way we go down the path that [ITINs] should apply, whether its direct payments, whether its participation in PPP (the federal Paycheck Protection Plan loan program)... I said it [guaranteed income] should be considered. And, why it should be considered, in my view, is because there is a lot of money, federal taxpayer dollars, going out the door. Whether its PPP, whether its Unemployment Insurance, whether its direct payments ... But, whatever we do, I think the tax number is an easy entre to many more people who deserve it, who should get this, but are being cut out now, in whatever it is that we are putting out there.  Given the nature of and circumstances surrounding the May 1 call, and considering the fact that Pelosi did not mention ""guaranteed income"" in any other public statements after the U.S. COVID-19 outbreak and before Kirk's viral posting, we determined it to be the most likely source of inspiration for his May 4 tweet. However, though Pelosi said she wants people who use ITINs to receive economic relief from the federal government during the pandemic  a group that would include ""undocumented"" immigrants  she did not say she wants the government to provide stimulus payments to all ""undocumented"" immigrants. Additionally, the House Speaker said she wanted federal leaders to consider, not implement, ""guaranteed income"" for Americans, unlike what Kirk's tweet implies. In sum, given those reasons  as well as the lack of clarity for what Pelosi means by the phrase ""guaranteed income,"" the context in which she made the comments analyzed above, and the fact that she did say she wanted future stimulus money to help foreign people without Social Security numbers  we rate this claim as ""false.""   Rosenberg, Mattew and Rogers, Katie. ""For Charlie Kirk, Conservative Activist, the Virus Is a Cudgel.""
 The New York Times. 19 April 2020. Ruhle, Stephanie. ""Pelosi says guaranteed income may be worth considering amid coronavirus hardships.""
 MSNBC. 27 April 2020. Real Time with Bill Maher. ""Speaker Nancy Pelosi | Real Time with Bill Maher (HBO).""
 YouTube. 24 April 2020. Silverstein, Jason. ""Pelosi says 'guaranteed income' for Americans worth considering for coronavirus recovery.""
 CBSNews. 28 April 2020. Zeballos-Roig, Joseph. ""House Speaker Nancy Pelosi opens the door to guaranteed income for Americans, saying it's 'worthy of attention.'""
 Business Insider. 27 April 2020. Pelosi, Nancy. ""Pelosi Remarks on Press Call with Congressional Hispanic Caucus and Mixed-Status Families on Denial of COVID-19 Stimulus Checks.""
 Newsroom. 1 May 2020. Pelosi, Nancy. ""Transcript of Pelosi Interview on MSNBC's Live with Stephanie Ruhle.""
 Newsroom. 27 April 2020. Pelosi, Nancy. ""Transcript of Pelosi Interview on HBO's Real Time with Bill Maher.""
 Newsroom. 24 April 2020. Internal Revenue Service. ""Individual Taxpayer Identification Number.""
 Accessed 11 May 2020.",['taxes'],False,"Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And, please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease. On May 4, 2020  as federal leaders debated how to respond to an unprecedented interruption to the U.S. economy due to the COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic  a conservative provocateur tweeted that U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said she wanted the country's next economic relief package to establish ""guaranteed minimum incomes"" for ""illegal aliens.""Suggesting that only legal U.S. residents should benefit from federal stimulus packages, Charlie Kirk  who's the founder of the conservative political group Turning Point USA and social media ally of U.S. President Donald Trump  said in the tweet to his roughly 1.7 million followers: First, the House Speaker spoke the words on HBO's ""Real Time with Bill Maher"" on April 24. In light of the federal government's approval of the $2.2 trillion Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act in March 2020 (and stimulus bills totaling about $500 billion since then), Maher asked Pelosi if the federal government could afford similar economic relief packages for Americans should the pandemic keep businesses closed and systems locked down in the coming months. She responded:She provided no further details on the so-called proposals for ""guaranteed income,"" which generally refers to a government-imposed system so that every citizen receives a minimum income  a central idea of the 2020 presidential campaign by former Democratic candidate Andrew Yang. Also in the conversation with Maher, Pelosi did not explicitly state that she wanted the system implemented via Congressional legislation.Three days later, however, the House Speaker again said the words ""guaranteed income"" in a televised interview, this time with more specificity on her openness to the social welfare system. In the April 27 segment of MSNBC's ""Live with Stephanie Ruhle,"" while explaining federal leaders' next steps to help small businesses survive the financial crisis, Pelosi said:Soon after she made the statement on live TV, news outlets including CBS News and CNBC published stories with headlines such as, ""Pelosi says 'guaranteed income' for Americans is worth considering for coronavirus recovery."" In a story by Business Insider about the televised comments, an aid to Pelosi said the House Speaker was referring to proposals that would guarantee worker paychecks  not a sweeping system for universal basic income.Then, on May 1, the House Speaker and the Congressional Hispanic Caucus made themselves available to journalists via a conference call to discuss provisions within the CARES Act that exclude immigrants without Social Security numbers from receiving one-time stimulus checks. According to a transcript of the May 1 call, at one point a reporter asked Pelosi:"
Did 'Pioneer Woman' Ree Drummond Experience 'Allegations' or Sad News and Endorse CBD and Keto Gummies?,"['Drummond, perhaps better known by her nickname, ""The Pioneer Woman,"" was featured in Facebook ads that falsely claimed she had experienced sad news and that there were ""allegations"" against her.']","On June 28, 2022, we received reader mail informing us that scammers were using food blogger, author, and Food Network TV host Ree Drummond's image and likeness to sell supposed weight loss products or ""dementia solutions"" called Condor CBD Gummies, Truly Keto, and TrimClinical Keto. Drummond, also known as ""The Pioneer Woman,"" was featured in several Facebook ads that claimed she had experienced a ""tragic end,"" a tragedy, sad news or unspecified ""allegations."" These ads were nothing more than misleading clickbait and part of a scam. She never endorsed any CBD or keto gummies products or a ""dementia solution."" Food Network A reader who emailed us included a screenshot of one of the misleading ads. One of the ads read, ""Her entire future is now in jeopardy! Fans feel sad about today's news. A tragic end today for Ree Drummond.""  Another reader sent in a different ad that read, ""Fans are up in arms over the allegations pending against Ree Drummond. Here is all the information available to the public at this moment.""  These false clickbait Facebook ads were familiar territory. We've reported before on misleading, scammy tactics just like these that were used in other CBD and keto gummies scams. In reality, there were no ""allegations"" against Drummond, nor was there any brand new sad or tragic news about her. Facebook CBD keto We received a screenshot of the article that showed a picture of Drummond and her name. The article was misleadingly designed to mimic the Fox News website. Fox News had nothing to do with the scam. Drummond Fox News  The headline of the fake Fox News article read, ""Ree Drummond reverses dementia solution, sparks huge lawsuit pressure on Fox, she finally fights back on air."" This was basically the same CBD gummies scam that previously featured ""Jeopardy"" host Mayim Bialik. the same CBD gummies scam Mayim Bialik Meanwhile, a second article that was designed to look like the Time magazine website claimed, ""Weight Loss Industry In Outrage Over Ree Drummond's Keto Formula That's Helping Millions Of Women & Even Men Melt Body Fat And Get Healthy Again In Memory Of Her Brother!"" Just as with the fake Fox News article, this one also did not genuinely come from Time. We found these articles being hosted on j40ev2.com/h4Fhjee/, lirknluck.uk.com/tiram/index.html, and sgn394.com/7bn3lo9u/. The web domains may have been registered in China. Time magazine A third false article was created by scammers to mimic the ""Today"" TV show website and showed the headline, ""Ree Drummond Forced To Lose 30 Pounds by 'Food Network' Producers She Lost 50! (Her Diabetes Finally In Control)."" In our research, we located a number of scammy Facebook pages that mentioned Drummond's name with the words CBD or keto gummies. According to when several of the pages were created or had their previous names changed, it looked like this scam began no earlier than mid-June 2022. a number of scammy Facebook pages  We reached out to Hearst Digital Media to inform them of the scam. The publisher hosts ""The Pioneer Woman"" blog. We also requested a statement, which we will add to this story if we receive a response. scam blog In sum, there was no sad or tragic news or any ""allegations"" to report about Drummond, nor did ""The Pioneer Woman"" ever endorsed Condor CBD Gummies, Truly Keto, and TrimClinical Keto, or any other similar products for Fox News, Time, or ""Today."" The Pioneer Woman Note: If readers spot any CBD or keto gummies scams for celebrities other than Ree Drummond, please contact us. It's likely that scammers will switch to a different celebrity for the scam in future weeks. If possible, please include a direct link to the Facebook ad or to the page that's hosting the ad. Unlike a screenshot, a link will allow us to fully look into the matter. contact us Ree Drummond. Food Network, https://www.foodnetwork.com/profiles/talent/ree-drummond. The Pioneer Woman. Hearst Digital Media, https://www.thepioneerwoman.com/. On July 5, 2022, this article was updated with new details after a helpful reader located ads that falsely claimed Drummond had experienced ""allegations"" against her.",['loss'],False,"On June 28, 2022, we received reader mail informing us that scammers were using food blogger, author, and Food Network TV host Ree Drummond's image and likeness to sell supposed weight loss products or ""dementia solutions"" called Condor CBD Gummies, Truly Keto, and TrimClinical Keto. Drummond, also known as ""The Pioneer Woman,"" was featured in several Facebook ads that claimed she had experienced a ""tragic end,"" a tragedy, sad news or unspecified ""allegations."" These ads were nothing more than misleading clickbait and part of a scam. She never endorsed any CBD or keto gummies products or a ""dementia solution.""These false clickbait Facebook ads were familiar territory. We've reported before on misleading, scammy tactics just like these that were used in other CBD and keto gummies scams. In reality, there were no ""allegations"" against Drummond, nor was there any brand new sad or tragic news about her.We received a screenshot of the article that showed a picture of Drummond and her name. The article was misleadingly designed to mimic the Fox News website. Fox News had nothing to do with the scam.The headline of the fake Fox News article read, ""Ree Drummond reverses dementia solution, sparks huge lawsuit pressure on Fox, she finally fights back on air."" This was basically the same CBD gummies scam that previously featured ""Jeopardy"" host Mayim Bialik.Meanwhile, a second article that was designed to look like the Time magazine website claimed, ""Weight Loss Industry In Outrage Over Ree Drummond's Keto Formula That's Helping Millions Of Women & Even Men Melt Body Fat And Get Healthy Again In Memory Of Her Brother!"" Just as with the fake Fox News article, this one also did not genuinely come from Time. We found these articles being hosted on j40ev2.com/h4Fhjee/, lirknluck.uk.com/tiram/index.html, and sgn394.com/7bn3lo9u/. The web domains may have been registered in China.In our research, we located a number of scammy Facebook pages that mentioned Drummond's name with the words CBD or keto gummies. According to when several of the pages were created or had their previous names changed, it looked like this scam began no earlier than mid-June 2022.We reached out to Hearst Digital Media to inform them of the scam. The publisher hosts ""The Pioneer Woman"" blog. We also requested a statement, which we will add to this story if we receive a response.In sum, there was no sad or tragic news or any ""allegations"" to report about Drummond, nor did ""The Pioneer Woman"" ever endorsed Condor CBD Gummies, Truly Keto, and TrimClinical Keto, or any other similar products for Fox News, Time, or ""Today.""Note: If readers spot any CBD or keto gummies scams for celebrities other than Ree Drummond, please contact us. It's likely that scammers will switch to a different celebrity for the scam in future weeks. If possible, please include a direct link to the Facebook ad or to the page that's hosting the ad. Unlike a screenshot, a link will allow us to fully look into the matter."
Did Jamaica Ban K-Pop?,['A 2018 satirical article continues to get traction online. '],"In June 2021, messages began to circulate on social media claiming that the country of Jamaica had banned K-Pop music. However, Jamaica has not banned K-Pop. This claim originates from a satirical article published in 2018 on the website 8satire.com. In addition to having ""satire"" in its name, 8satire.com (which previously published content as ""8shit"") also carries a disclaimer labeling its content as fiction: ""8Shit is a satire news and humor website. All its content is fiction (except those posts under the serious category) and shouldn't be taken as real. All references, names, and marks of institutions on this website are used as contextual elements, like in any novel or science-fiction story."" It should also be noted that while Jamaica is most famous for reggae music, Jamaicans enjoy a variety of different musical genres. The Jamaican Observer reported in 2019 that a K-Pop party hosted by the Embassy of the Republic of Korea in Jamaica was well-attended by young Jamaicans. Despite South Korea being approximately 13,473 km away from Jamaica, the K-Pop wave has breached Jamaican shores. Last September, the Embassy of the Republic of Korea in Jamaica hosted its annual K-Lovers' Party and Talent Competition, as well as its inaugural Korean Language Speech Competition. The events were well-attended by young Jamaicans who openly expressed their love for Korean culture by singing along to popular K-Pop tracks in the Korean language, dancing to the music, and participating in the two competitions. It was surprising to see the display of talent, particularly because there are not many places to learn Hangul, the Korean language, in Jamaica. The events represented the growing interest in Korean culture among Jamaican youth.",['interest'],False,"In June 2021, messages started to circulate on social media claiming that the country of Jamaica had banned K-Pop music. Jamaica has not banned K-pop. This claim originates with a satirical article that was published in 2018 on the website 8satire.com. It should also be noted that while Jamaica is most famous for Reggae music, Jamaicans enjoy a variety of different musical genres. The Jamaican Observer reported in 2019 that a K-Pop party hosted by the Embassy of the Republic of Korea in Jamaica was well-attended by young Jamaicans:"
"Did the U.S. Government Purposely Poison 10,000 Americans During Prohibition?",['An Internet meme claims that government agencies tried to curb consumption of illegal liquor by adding poison.'],"As if Americans hadn't accumulated enough dark suspicions about their government over the past 50-odd years, along comes an Internet factoid holding that the United States government intentionally (and fatally) poisoned more than 10,000 of its own citizens between 1926 and 1933:   The alarming claim is that the U.S. government added poison to alcohol to discourage people from drinking it during Prohibition, the period from 1920 to 1933 in which it was illegal to produce, transport, or sell alcoholic beverages anywhere in the United States. That didn't mean people stopped making, buying, and drinking booze  they just did it illegally. As noted in virtually every U.S. history textbook ever written, one of the many negative unintended consequences of Prohibition was a booming black market in alcohol that law enforcement was never able to subdue. Prohibition To the question at hand: Did the federal government really add poison to alcohol to discourage people from drinking it? It did, in fact. The government did purposely add poisonous substances to alcohol, and this did result in thousands of deaths during Prohibition. The story of how that came to pass is longer and more nuanced than the Internet meme suggests, however. And it began well before the passage of the 18th Amendment, which made Prohibition the law of the land. According to Deborah Blum, author of The Poisoner's Handbook: Murder and the Birth of Forensic Medicine in Jazz Age New York (Penguin Press, 2010), the practice was called ""denaturing"". It consisted of adding noxious chemicals to alcohol sold for industrial purposes to make it unfit for human consumption. The process, long used in Europe, was introduced in the United States in 1906 as a means of exempting producers of alcohol used in paints, solvents, and the like from having to pay the taxes levied on potable spirits. 2010 Mainly, this was done by adding some methyl alcohol (""wood alcohol"") to grain alcohol, rendering it poisonous. Some formulas also contained substances that made the product taste too awful to drink. One of the ways crime syndicates tried to flout Prohibition, Blum explained in a 2010 Slate article, was stealing industrial alcohol and finding ways to make it potable. The government, in turn, resorted to making it more poisonous: article To sell the stolen industrial alcohol, the liquor syndicates employed chemists to ""renature"" the products, returning them to a drinkable state. The bootleggers paid their chemists a lot more than the government did, and they excelled at their job. Stolen and redistilled alcohol became the primary source of liquor in the country. So federal officials ordered manufacturers to make their products far more deadly. By mid-1927, the new denaturing formulas included some notable poisonskerosene and brucine (a plant alkaloid closely related to strychnine), gasoline, benzene, cadmium, iodine, zinc, mercury salts, nicotine, ether, formaldehyde, chloroform, camphor, carbolic acid, quinine, and acetone. The Treasury Department also demanded more methyl alcohol be addedup to 10 percent of total product. It was the last that proved most deadly. TIME magazine's 2008 Prohibition retrospective described the horrendous consequences of an unregulated  and, in many instances, purposely adulterated  black-market liquor supply: retrospective It wasn't just the violent Prohibition-era gang wars that were dangerous to Americans drinking homemade moonshine and bathtub gin. According to the Dec. 26, 1922 edition of the New York Times, five people were killed in the city on Christmas Day from drinking ""poisoned rum."" That was only the beginning. By 1926, according to Prohibition, by Edward Behr, 750 New Yorkers perished from such poisoning and hundreds of thousands more suffered irreversible injuries including blindness and paralysis. On New Year's Day 1927, 41 people died at New York's Bellevue Hospital from alcohol-related poisonings. Oftentimes, they were drinking industrial methanol, otherwise known as wood alcohol, which was a legal but extremely dangerous poison. One government report said that of 480,000 gallons of liquor confiscated in New York in 1927, nearly all contained poisons. Although it is inaccurate in the sense that none of this deadly business began in 1926, the factoid we set out to investigate wasn't entirely wrong in citing that year as a pivotal one. Blum points out that the spate of alcohol-related poisonings that culminated in so many fatalities on New Year's Day 1927 actually commenced a week earlier, on Christmas: It was Christmas Eve 1926, the streets aglitter with snow and lights, when the man afraid of Santa Claus stumbled into the emergency room at New York City's Bellevue Hospital. He was flushed, gasping with fear: Santa Claus, he kept telling the nurses, was just behind him, wielding a baseball bat. Before hospital staff realized how sick he wasthe alcohol-induced hallucination was just a symptomthe man died. So did another holiday partygoer. And another. As dusk fell on Christmas, the hospital staff tallied up more than 60 people made desperately ill by alcohol and eight dead from it. Within the next two days, yet another 23 people died in the city from celebrating the season. As for the claim that some 10,000 people died of alcohol poisoning during the course of Prohibition through its repeal in 1933, that, too, is a figure we can source to Blum (who did not, in the Slate article, specify where this estimate came from): Frustrated that people continued to consume so much alcohol even after it was banned, federal officials had decided to try a different kind of enforcement. They ordered the poisoning of industrial alcohols manufactured in the United States, products regularly stolen by bootleggers and resold as drinkable spirits. The idea was to scare people into giving up illicit drinking. Instead, by the time Prohibition ended in 1933, the federal poisoning program, by some estimates, had killed at least 10,000 people. In sum, federal attempts to reduce the palatability of industrial alcohol came well before Prohibition, and efforts to intensify the risks of consuming it were both well-known and controversial at the time. Such evidence as we've seen does not support the the implication that the government set out to purposely kill drinkers of alcohol, although Prohibition-era lawmakers and public health experts decried what they described as a callous disregard for those who died as result of drinking denatured alcohol. before known Andrews, Evan.  ""10 Things You Should Know About Prohibition.""
  History.  16 January 2015. Blum, Deborah.  ""The Chemist's War.""
  Slate.  19 February 2010. Damrau, Frederic, M.D.  ""The Truth About Poison Liquor.""
  Popular Science Monthly.  April 1927. Norris, Charles, M.D.  ""Our Essay In Extermination.""
  The North American Review.  December 1928. Rothman, Lily.  ""The History of Poisoned Alcohol Includes an Unlikely Culprit: The U.S. Government.""
  TIME.  14 January 2015. TIME.  ""Top 10 Prohibition Tales: Mortal Moonshine.""
  2008. Chicago Tribune.  ""Alcohol Gets Double Poison Ration Jan. 1.""
  30 December 1926. Wikipedia.  ""Prohibition In The United States.""
  Accessed 11 May 2017. Wikipedia.  ""Prohibition In The United States.""
  Accessed 11 May 2017.",['taxes'],NEI,"The alarming claim is that the U.S. government added poison to alcohol to discourage people from drinking it during Prohibition, the period from 1920 to 1933 in which it was illegal to produce, transport, or sell alcoholic beverages anywhere in the United States. That didn't mean people stopped making, buying, and drinking booze  they just did it illegally. As noted in virtually every U.S. history textbook ever written, one of the many negative unintended consequences of Prohibition was a booming black market in alcohol that law enforcement was never able to subdue.According to Deborah Blum, author of The Poisoner's Handbook: Murder and the Birth of Forensic Medicine in Jazz Age New York (Penguin Press, 2010), the practice was called ""denaturing"". It consisted of adding noxious chemicals to alcohol sold for industrial purposes to make it unfit for human consumption. The process, long used in Europe, was introduced in the United States in 1906 as a means of exempting producers of alcohol used in paints, solvents, and the like from having to pay the taxes levied on potable spirits.One of the ways crime syndicates tried to flout Prohibition, Blum explained in a 2010 Slate article, was stealing industrial alcohol and finding ways to make it potable. The government, in turn, resorted to making it more poisonous:TIME magazine's 2008 Prohibition retrospective described the horrendous consequences of an unregulated  and, in many instances, purposely adulterated  black-market liquor supply:In sum, federal attempts to reduce the palatability of industrial alcohol came well before Prohibition, and efforts to intensify the risks of consuming it were both well-known and controversial at the time. Such evidence as we've seen does not support the the implication that the government set out to purposely kill drinkers of alcohol, although Prohibition-era lawmakers and public health experts decried what they described as a callous disregard for those who died as result of drinking denatured alcohol."
Did Teen Activist Greta Thunberg Tell China to Stop Using Chopsticks?,['Some activists have noted the adverse impact disposable chopsticks have on the environment.'],"Swedish environmental activist Greta Thunberg has been the subject of a number of baseless rumors ever since the then-15-year-old stepped into the spotlight in 2018. We've previously examined false accusations that Thunberg was the ""highest paid activist,"" that she was actually an actress, and that she was once filmed firing a machine gun.  highest paid activist actually an actress firing a machine gun In May 2020, after Thunberg was invited to participate in a CNN Town Hall, an old rumor concerning a quote ostensibly uttered by the activist about how China should stop using chopsticks was recirculated on social media: participate  Thunberg did not ask China to ""give up"" chopsticks.  This rumor has been circulating since at least January 2020. Although it has taken several forms, we've yet to encounter any social media posts pointing to when or where Thunberg allegedly made this request.  One of the earliest postings of this rumor, which was shared by the unverified Twitter account @Geoloong on Jan. 14, included a GIF of Thunberg speaking at the Climate Action Summit in 2019, but Thunberg made no mention of ""chopsticks"" during this speech. We searched other articles, interviews, and speeches delivered by Thunberg around this time and found no record of her asking China to ban chopsticks.  Geoloong no mention Other red flags in this post indicate the rumor is little more than an invented anecdote to mock the teenager. For starters, we found that this story was being shared almost exclusively by people expressing a negative view of Thunberg. If this was a genuine quote, you'd expect this story would have been shared (at least initially) by Thunberg's supporters.  Furthermore, the anecdote described in this post is simply ludicrous. Although it wouldn't be out of the ordinary for Thunberg, a teenager who became Time magazine's youngest Person of the Year for her work addressing climate change, to note the adverse environmental impact of disposable chopsticks, it would be quite extraordinary for the government of the most populous country in the world to issue a juvenile response telling someone not to ""wipe their butt"" because toilet paper is made from trees. Time magazine's youngest Person of the Year adverse environmental impact If China did issue such a statement, it would have surely been international news. Yet, just as we were unable to find a source for Thunberg's alleged comment, we were unable to find a credible source for China's alleged insult. In fact, the text on the above-displayed meme is a near-verbatim copy of the text published to the humor website Joe.ks.com. Joe.ks.com. Although Thunberg did not urge China to ban the use of chopsticks, China truly uses millions of trees every year to produce billions of pairs of disposable chopsticks. When concerns about the adverse impact disposable chopsticks had on the environment were raised in 2006, the Chinese government implemented a 5% tax on the utensil in an attempt to slow deforestation.  implemented a 5% tax BBC News reported: reported The Chinese government is introducing a 5% tax on disposable wooden chopsticks in a bid to preserve its forests. It produces about 45 billion pairs of chopsticks a year, consuming millions of trees and bamboo plants. The move came as China said it would raise some consumption taxes next month in a bid to help the environment and narrow the gap between rich and poor. Although this tax may have slowed deforestation, it certainly hasn't stopped it. In 2013, Bo Guangxin, the head of the China Jilin Forest Industry Group, estimated that China was using 20 million trees a year to produce nearly 80 billion pairs of disposable chopsticks. estimated NPR.  ""Transcript: Greta Thunberg's Speech At The U.N. Climate Action Summit.""
  23 September 2019. BBC.  ""China Introduces Chopsticks Tax.""
  22 March 2006. Lee, Don.  ""Chinas Chopstick Tax Seems Dim to Some.""
  Los Angeles Times.  24 March 2006. Nuwer, Rachel.  ""Disposable Chopsticks Strip Asian Forests.""
  The New York Times.  24 October 2011.",['taxes'],False,"Swedish environmental activist Greta Thunberg has been the subject of a number of baseless rumors ever since the then-15-year-old stepped into the spotlight in 2018. We've previously examined false accusations that Thunberg was the ""highest paid activist,"" that she was actually an actress, and that she was once filmed firing a machine gun. In May 2020, after Thunberg was invited to participate in a CNN Town Hall, an old rumor concerning a quote ostensibly uttered by the activist about how China should stop using chopsticks was recirculated on social media:One of the earliest postings of this rumor, which was shared by the unverified Twitter account @Geoloong on Jan. 14, included a GIF of Thunberg speaking at the Climate Action Summit in 2019, but Thunberg made no mention of ""chopsticks"" during this speech. We searched other articles, interviews, and speeches delivered by Thunberg around this time and found no record of her asking China to ban chopsticks. Furthermore, the anecdote described in this post is simply ludicrous. Although it wouldn't be out of the ordinary for Thunberg, a teenager who became Time magazine's youngest Person of the Year for her work addressing climate change, to note the adverse environmental impact of disposable chopsticks, it would be quite extraordinary for the government of the most populous country in the world to issue a juvenile response telling someone not to ""wipe their butt"" because toilet paper is made from trees.If China did issue such a statement, it would have surely been international news. Yet, just as we were unable to find a source for Thunberg's alleged comment, we were unable to find a credible source for China's alleged insult. In fact, the text on the above-displayed meme is a near-verbatim copy of the text published to the humor website Joe.ks.com.Although Thunberg did not urge China to ban the use of chopsticks, China truly uses millions of trees every year to produce billions of pairs of disposable chopsticks. When concerns about the adverse impact disposable chopsticks had on the environment were raised in 2006, the Chinese government implemented a 5% tax on the utensil in an attempt to slow deforestation. BBC News reported:Although this tax may have slowed deforestation, it certainly hasn't stopped it. In 2013, Bo Guangxin, the head of the China Jilin Forest Industry Group, estimated that China was using 20 million trees a year to produce nearly 80 billion pairs of disposable chopsticks."
Did Ken Huber Ask 'What Has America Become' in a Letter to the Editor?,"['A letter to the editor purportedly written by Ken Huber from Tawas City, Michigan, was shared on Facebook.']","In April 2021, a purported letter to the editor from a newspaper was shared on Facebook. The letter, titled ""What has America become?,"" was credited to Ken Huber from Tawas City, Michigan. It appeared in a Facebook meme with the words: ""This is from a small Michigan newspaper who had the guts to say what most of the rest of us are thinking!!"" shared on Facebook  The letter as it appeared in a meme in April 2021.  This was a real letter to the editor. Readers who might have given it a quick glance on Facebook in 2021 may have left with the impression that it was new. However, it was first published in 2010. on Facebook Part of the letter included references to former U.S. Presidents Barack Obama and George W. Bush, with the former in the White House at the time of its original publishing. Barack Obama George W. Bush We've received inquiries about the letter for a number of years. The originally printed name was Ken Huber in the Iosco County News-Herald. However, we've also seen variations online in which the name was changed to Ted Huber, Ken Huber, and Kwen Huber. Iosco County News-Herald Tawas City, which was mentioned as Huber's place of residence, is located in Iosco County, Michigan. We also found ""What has America become?"" was published in newspapers in Louisiana as far back as July 7, 2010. All of the newspaper reprints included the name Ken Huber. The variations appeared to only appear on the internet. The letter read as follows: What has America become? Editor, Has America become the land of special interest and home of the double standard? Lets see: if we lie to the Congress, it's a felony and if the congress lies to us its just politics; if we dislike a black person, we're racist and if a black person dislikes whites, its their 1st Amendment right; the government spends millions to rehabilitate criminals and they do almost nothing for the victims; in public schools you can teach that homosexuality is OK, but you better not use the word God in the process; you can kill an unborn child, but it is wrong to execute a mass murderer; we don't burn books in America, we now rewrite them; we got rid of the communist and socialist threat by renaming them progressives; we are unable to close our border with Mexico, but have no problem protecting the 38th parallel in Korea; if you protest against President Obama's policies you're a terrorist, but if you burned an American flag or George Bush in effigy it was your 1st Amendment right. You can have pornography on TV or the internet, but you better not put a nativity scene in a public park during Christmas; we have eliminated all criminals in America, they are now called sick people; we can use a human fetus for medical research, but it is wrong to use an animal. We take money from those who work hard for it and give it to those who don't want to work; we all support the Constitution, but only when it supports our political ideology; we still have freedom of speech, but only if we are being politically correct; parenting has been replaced with Ritalin and video games; the land of opportunity is now the land of hand outs; the similarity between Hurricane Katrina and the gulf oil spill is that neither president did anything to help. And how do we handle a major crisis today? The government appoints a committee to determine who's at fault, then threatens them, passes a law, raises our taxes; tells us the problem is solved so they can get back to their reelection campaign. What has happened to the land of the free and home of the brave? - Ken HuberTawas City We don't know who this Ken Huber is, however, we can see this letter used a number of odd comparisons. It didn't provide any evidence to support its claims in a classic appeal to emotion. Readers may be reminded of the term ""logical fallacy,"" which is best defined as ""an error in reasoning"" with a conclusion that does not follow the subject preceding it. defined The dated letter has spawned a number of responses and a bit of discussion over the years. It was also reprinted on blogs as far back as July 2010. a number of responses a bit of discussion reprinted on blogs In sum, it's true that a 2010 letter to the editor asking ""What has America become?"" was credited to Ken Huber. On March 11, 2022, we changed the rating for this story from ""Correct Attribution"" to ""Outdated."" The reason for the rating change came after we examined the original rating and came to the conclusion that ""Outdated"" made more sense.",['taxes'],NEI,"In April 2021, a purported letter to the editor from a newspaper was shared on Facebook. The letter, titled ""What has America become?,"" was credited to Ken Huber from Tawas City, Michigan. It appeared in a Facebook meme with the words: ""This is from a small Michigan newspaper who had the guts to say what most of the rest of us are thinking!!"" The letter as it appeared in a meme in April 2021.This was a real letter to the editor. Readers who might have given it a quick glance on Facebook in 2021 may have left with the impression that it was new. However, it was first published in 2010.Part of the letter included references to former U.S. Presidents Barack Obama and George W. Bush, with the former in the White House at the time of its original publishing.We've received inquiries about the letter for a number of years. The originally printed name was Ken Huber in the Iosco County News-Herald. However, we've also seen variations online in which the name was changed to Ted Huber, Ken Huber, and Kwen Huber.We don't know who this Ken Huber is, however, we can see this letter used a number of odd comparisons. It didn't provide any evidence to support its claims in a classic appeal to emotion. Readers may be reminded of the term ""logical fallacy,"" which is best defined as ""an error in reasoning"" with a conclusion that does not follow the subject preceding it.The dated letter has spawned a number of responses and a bit of discussion over the years. It was also reprinted on blogs as far back as July 2010."
Did Harrison Ford Really Improvise Han Solo's 'I Know' in 'The Empire Strikes Back'?,['The pivotal line comes right before Han Solo is frozen in carbonite.'],"On Nov. 20, 2021, Twitter user @delaneykingrox tweeted that film actor Harrison Ford improvised ""I know"" to Carrie Fisher's ""I love you"" in 1980's ""Star Wars: Episode V - The Empire Strikes Back,"" just before his character, Han Solo, is frozen in carbonite. She also claimed that the originally scripted line for Solo to respond to Princess Leia was, ""I love you too."" tweeted frozen in carbonite claimed She tweeted the thread to talk about ""on the nose"" dialogue, which she defined as ""communicating what is obvious to the audience with no subtly or subtext."" tweeted     There are a number of rumors out there about ""The Empire Strikes Back"" that aren't true. For example, there's the fake audience reaction sound recording from 1980 that's received nearly 10 million views on YouTube. (A video with genuine audience reaction audio from 1980 does exist, but it only had several thousand views.) rumors fake audience reaction sound recording from 1980 As for this fact check, it's true that Ford improvised Solo's line, ""I know,"" in ""The Empire Strikes Back,"" and that the originally scripted line was, ""I love you too."" While many fans might debate that the trophy for the best line in the franchise would go to Darth Vader's ""I am your father,"" there would perhaps also be a handful of people who would vote for Solo's ""I know."" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdlRmWd_R7AIn a 2011 sitdown with ""Cowboys and Aliens"" director Jon Favreau, Ford explained that he wasn't a fan of ""I love you too,"" which was the original line in the ""Empire Strikes Back"" script from story creator George Lucas. Leigh Brackett and Lawrence Kasdan also drafted the screenplay. Lucas also served as an executive producer on the film but did not direct it. The film was directed by Irvin Kershner. directed In the interview, Ford called Lucas ""a powerful producer at the time,"" after the success of ""American Graffiti"" and ""Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope."" ""George had artfully contrived for Han Solo to say, 'I love you too,'"" Ford said. However, the actor called it a ""lost opportunity"" and told Favreau: ""You want your badasses to be a badass until the end."" On the set of the film, Ford said he asked a question of Lucas and perhaps other members of the cast and crew. ""What's the last thing a woman wants to hear when she says, 'I love you'? She says 'I love you,' and I say... 'I know.'"" said https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U4xdWpo4bh8According to Ford, they shot one take with the line, ""I love you too,"" but said it was ""just for protection."" That recording has never been made public. ""We shot one just for protection where I spoke the line as written,"" Ford said. ""And George, I think, this is fair enough to say, he went apeshit. He thought it was horrible and that it would get a bad laugh. So I was obliged to sit next to him when he tested it for the first screening. There was a laugh, but it was a laugh of recognition. And so, he generously let it stay in the movie.""  Carrie Fisher and Harrison Ford in 1980's ""Star Wars: Episode V - The Empire Strikes Back."" (Photo by Lucasfilm/Sunset Boulevard/Corbis via Getty Images)  In a separate interview that appeared to be recorded years before 2011, Kershner remembered that there were perhaps more takes with either the ""I love you too"" line or ""I know,"" but didn't specify which one. remembered ""We tried take after take after take. Nothing satisfied me,"" Kershner said. ""And finally, I said, 'Harrison, don't think about it. Don't think about it. Let's shoot it. Ok, action.' And he dropped in and I said, 'cut.' I said, 'yeah, that's a great line. That's Han Solo.'"" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KM_tGKSnMUEIn sum, yes, Ford improvised Solo's ""I know"" that was spoken in response to Leia's ""I love you"" in ""The Empire Strikes Back,"" an exchange that perhaps could be considered as a pivotal scene in one of the most beloved onscreen love stories of all time.",['lien'],True,"On Nov. 20, 2021, Twitter user @delaneykingrox tweeted that film actor Harrison Ford improvised ""I know"" to Carrie Fisher's ""I love you"" in 1980's ""Star Wars: Episode V - The Empire Strikes Back,"" just before his character, Han Solo, is frozen in carbonite. She also claimed that the originally scripted line for Solo to respond to Princess Leia was, ""I love you too.""She tweeted the thread to talk about ""on the nose"" dialogue, which she defined as ""communicating what is obvious to the audience with no subtly or subtext.""There are a number of rumors out there about ""The Empire Strikes Back"" that aren't true. For example, there's the fake audience reaction sound recording from 1980 that's received nearly 10 million views on YouTube. (A video with genuine audience reaction audio from 1980 does exist, but it only had several thousand views.)https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdlRmWd_R7AIn a 2011 sitdown with ""Cowboys and Aliens"" director Jon Favreau, Ford explained that he wasn't a fan of ""I love you too,"" which was the original line in the ""Empire Strikes Back"" script from story creator George Lucas. Leigh Brackett and Lawrence Kasdan also drafted the screenplay. Lucas also served as an executive producer on the film but did not direct it. The film was directed by Irvin Kershner.On the set of the film, Ford said he asked a question of Lucas and perhaps other members of the cast and crew. ""What's the last thing a woman wants to hear when she says, 'I love you'? She says 'I love you,' and I say... 'I know.'"" Carrie Fisher and Harrison Ford in 1980's ""Star Wars: Episode V - The Empire Strikes Back."" (Photo by Lucasfilm/Sunset Boulevard/Corbis via Getty Images)In a separate interview that appeared to be recorded years before 2011, Kershner remembered that there were perhaps more takes with either the ""I love you too"" line or ""I know,"" but didn't specify which one."
Is This 'Monster Bullfrog' Real?,"['A photograph of a ""monster bullfrog"" is real, but forced perspective makes it look larger than it actually is.']","On 25 May 2017, the South Texas Hunting Association Facebook page posted two images of a man holding an unusually large bullfrog. Markcuz Rangel wrote, ""Wanted to share a monster bullfrog we got yesterday afternoon at one of our fishing ponds in South Texas ranch located in Batesville, TX. 13 lb monster frog!!! #stxha."" Although the South Texas Hunting Association claimed that this image showed a real 13-pound bullfrog, we're skeptical about the creature's size. For one, 13 pounds is simply too big for a frog. Adult American Bullfrogs, the largest frogs in the United States, only weigh about 1.5 pounds. The largest frog in the world, the Goliath Frog, is also too small to meet the requirements of this claim. The Goliath Frog, which has a relatively small habitat range in Cameroon and Equatorial Guinea (and not South Texas), only weighs about 7 pounds. In addition to its exaggerated weight, we suspect this picture makes the frog appear larger than it actually is by using forced perspective. The hunter is most likely using a gig pole to hold the frog closer to the camera. This places the frog in the foreground, making it appear much larger in comparison to the man, who is now standing in the background. Photographs showing people ""holding up"" the Leaning Tower of Pisa are good examples of forced perspective photography. The man in the following image, for instance, is not nearly as tall as the famous Italian structure. Lightfoot stated that the image was real but noted that forced perspective was used to make the frog appear unusually large: ""It's not as bigly as it appears. [It's an] optical illusion created by extending the frog toward the camera -- similar to what you see with fishermen holding up fish to make them appear larger. Still a big bullfrog, though."" A very similar claim, featuring a very similar photograph and using a very similar optical trick, was circulated in November 2015. That image, purportedly showing a 42-pound bullfrog, was also fake.",['share'],False,"On 25 May 2017, the South Texas Hunting AssociationFacebook page posted two images of a man holding an unusually large bullfrog:For one, 13 poundsis simply too big for a frog. AdultAmerican Bullfrogs, the largest frogs in the United States, only weigh about 1.5 pounds. The largest frog in the world, the Goliath Frog, is also too small to meet the requirements of this claim. The Goliath Frog, which has a relatively small habitat range in Cameroon and Equatorial Guinea(and not South Texas), only weighs about 7 pounds.Photographs showing people ""holding up"" the Leaning Tower of Pisa are good examples of forced perspective photography. The man in the following image, for instance, is not nearly as tall as the famous Italian structure:Chron.com that the image was real, but said that forced perspective was used to to make the frog appear unusually large:A very similar claim, featuring a very similar photograph, which used a very similar optical trick, was circulated in November 2015. That image purportedly showing a 42-pound bullfrogwas also fake."
SCAM: E-ZPass Bill Overdue Notice,['E-mail phishing scam poses as overdue notifications for E-Z Pass bills.'],"Phishing bait: E-mailed messages pose as overdue notifications for E-ZPass bills. SCAM Example: [Collected via e-mail, July 2014] I just received word from my dad about a virus that I didn't see listed on your site: ------------------ Judy got an e-mail with the subject line ""Payment for driving on a toll road."" She forwarded it to me. The message stated, ""You are overdue for paying your E-ZPass bill. Click here to download your invoice."" I should have known better than to do it, but I did. It downloaded an ""exe"" file to my computer. Like a fool, I actually instructed my computer to open it. I received a warning message saying, ""The publisher cannot be verified. Are you sure you want to open this file?"" At that point, I realized that I had narrowly escaped infecting my computer with some kind of malware, virus, identity theft, or something of that nature. I permanently deleted the exe file and any e-mail messages containing the link to it. Origins: In July 2014, Internet users were spammed with emails appearing to originate from the E-ZPass Service Center (an electronic toll-collection system used on most tolled roads, tunnels, and bridges in the eastern half of the United States) with subject lines such as ""In arrears for driving on toll road."" The text of such messages informed recipients that ""You have not paid for driving on a toll road"" and invited them to click on a link to download an invoice and ""service your debt in the shortest possible time."" These messages were not legitimate; they were part of a phishing scheme intended to lure recipients into clicking links or opening attachments and downloading malware onto their computers. The New York State Thruway Authority has posted a warning on its site advising customers that the messages are not authorized communications from E-ZPass, the New York State Thruway Authority, or any other toll collection agency and should not be opened or responded to: warning The New York State Thruway Authority is warning motorists about a scam involving fake e-mails. The authority says it recently learned of an email phishing scam that appears to be an attempt to collect unpaid tolls. An example of the email is as follows: ""Dear customer, You have not paid for driving on a toll road. This invoice is sent repeatedly; please service your debt in the shortest possible time."" The authority is warning that this is not an authorized communication from E-ZPass, the New York State Thruway Authority, or any other toll agency associated with E-ZPass. People are advised not to open or respond to such a message. The safest thing to do is to delete the email. The E-ZPass Service Center does not send out email invoices for payment. If you owe money for using E-ZPass on a toll facility, the E-ZPass Service Center will send an invoice through the US Postal Service for payment. If you have any questions about the validity of any message received from E-ZPass, contact the E-ZPass New York Customer Service Center at 800-333-8655. Last updated: 10 July 2014.",['debt'],False,"These messages were not legitimate; they were part of a phishing scheme intended to lure recipients into clicking links or opening attachments and downloading malware onto their computers.  The New York State Thruway Authority has posted a warning on its site advising customers that the messages are not authorized communications from E-ZPass, the New York State Thruway Authority, or any other toll collection agency and should not be opened or responded to:"
Is This Photo of a Baby Albino Bat Real?,"['It\'s time for another round of ""Toy or Animal?""']","In May 2021, a set of photographs supposedly showing a baby albino bat was widely circulated on social media.  set of photographs   The ""animal"" seen here isn't an animal at all. This is actually a small plush doll.  This doll appears to have been made by Anna Yastrezhembovskya, an artist from Russia who sells similar figurines on her Etsy page. We haven't been able to find a listing for this specific item, but Yastrezhembovskya did share several photos of this plush albino baby bat doll to her Instagram in October 2019. Etsy page   In June 2020, Yastrezhembovskya posted a message on her Instagram explaining that some fraudulent websites were claiming that they were selling the doll. Yastrezhembovskya's work, however, is only available via her Etsy page: Again!!! ? Scammers still cant calm down and again steal my photos. Now they are selling the white bat. They use my photos, but theyre sending to buyers another things. Scroll through the photo to see an example of what they are sending. I want to warn everyone, I sell my works ONLY in the store on Etsy - a link in the profile, or in the instagram. All other stores and stuff are SCAMMERS!!! Please be careful. Do not be fooled. Yastrezhembovskya talked to MyModernMet.com about her work in 2019. The Russian artist said that she primarily works in felt and that these figurines typically take 12-14 hours to make: MyModernMet.com Yastrezhembovskya said: My first toy wasnt nearly as pretty, it was rather funny but I enjoyed the process so much that I kept trying. I was felting during my free time, even at night, and I got better with each toy I made ... I am flattered that my bats won the hearts of so many people, but the amount of orders I got was terrifying ... Of course, I will keep felting as many bats as I can, but I want people to understand that these toys are fully handmade, so its a fairly lengthy process. The internet has a relatively difficult time determining the difference between dolls and genuine real-world animals, apparently. Photographs of figurines featuring albino tarantulas, four-eyed goats, tiny birds, giant moths, and adorable bunnies have all been shared on social media as if they were real animals.  albino tarantulas four-eyed goats tiny birds giant moths adorable bunnies",['share'],False,"In May 2021, a set of photographs supposedly showing a baby albino bat was widely circulated on social media. This doll appears to have been made by Anna Yastrezhembovskya, an artist from Russia who sells similar figurines on her Etsy page. We haven't been able to find a listing for this specific item, but Yastrezhembovskya did share several photos of this plush albino baby bat doll to her Instagram in October 2019.Yastrezhembovskya talked to MyModernMet.com about her work in 2019. The Russian artist said that she primarily works in felt and that these figurines typically take 12-14 hours to make:The internet has a relatively difficult time determining the difference between dolls and genuine real-world animals, apparently. Photographs of figurines featuring albino tarantulas, four-eyed goats, tiny birds, giant moths, and adorable bunnies have all been shared on social media as if they were real animals. "
Daily Snopes,[''],"This page features a daily collection of links to news articles and websites of interest to readers of our website. Due to the ephemeral nature of this type of material, some of the links may expire within a few days of being posted here. Stories are chosen for inclusion based purely on their appeal to our readers; we make no claims about the reliability of the information linked from this page. All of the links included here are viewable at no charge, although some publications may require a free one-time registration to access their articles. 

Because They Got High (21 September 2015) FACT CHECK: Did Republican presidential candidate Carly Fiorina say that half of reported rapes were women regretting something they did while high or drunk? 

One Misdirection (26 August 2015) FACT CHECK: Did Joey Fatone pen an open letter to One Direction? 

Boston's Nasty Snowpile Still Hasn't Melted (CityLab) We're coming up on July, and New England temperatures are in the 70s, yet Boston's snow doesn't seem to know that. It's still there, sitting in a cold, corpulent mound that occasionally melts just enough to discharge garbage. 

Woman, 88, Charged With Assaulting Police Officer (Associated Press) An 88-year-old woman has been charged with assaulting police who responded to her home, which turned out to be the wrong address. 

Beekeepers Set Out to Remove a Million Bees from Home (Associated Press) Beekeepers have quite the task ahead of them as they remove an estimated 1 million honey bees that have taken up residence at a home. 

Firefighter Accused of Reporting Fake Fire to Earn Paycheck (Associated Press) An auxiliary firefighter reported a fake fire so he could head to the scene and earn a paycheck, but a different department was dispatched instead, and he is now facing charges. 

Handsome Gorilla Delights Female Zoo-Goers (UPI) Zoo officials said young women hoping to get into the good graces of the gorilla with the chiseled features and brooding poses might be disappointed to learn he has two wives of his own species, Ai and Nene. 

Cow Puts the MOO-ves on Comrade During Live News Broadcast (UPI) A TV reporter delivering a live report from a local farm was interrupted by a pair of frisky bovines copulating in the background. 

8-Foot-Wide Vortex Opens Up in Lake (UPI) The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers shared video of an 8-foot-wide vortex that officials said could swallow a boat. 

Woman Trying to Kiss Llama Gets Face Full of Spit (UPI) A woman leaning in to kiss a llama learned a valuable lesson in the form of a face full of spit. 

Queen's Guard Draws Gun on Tourist Who Touched Him (UPI) A video features a tourist making an important discovery: You can mock a Queen's Guard, but don't ever touch one. 

Airplane Wheel Crashes Into Apartment Roof (UPI) Aviation authorities are investigating after an airplane wheel fell from a private jet and crashed through the roof of an apartment building. 

Trashed Golfer Gets Head Stuck in Garbage Can (UPI) A golfer who stuck his head in a trash bin as an alcohol-fueled joke ended up with his noggin stuck in the garbage. 

Subway Long Jump Attempt Fails (UPI) A video going viral online features a man attempting to long jump over the train tracks at a subway station and failing. 

Illegally Parked Car Covered in Post-Its (UPI) A video shows the car covered in blue and white sticky notes to draw the International Symbol of Access—a stick figure in a wheelchair—on the back and side of the vehicle after it was illegally parked in an accessible space. 

Something's Rotten: Stench from Fridge Sends 11 to Hospital (Associated Press) A smelly refrigerator sent nearly a dozen people to the hospital. 

Men Hospitalized, Recovering After Rare Beaver Attack (Reuters) Two hikers who were assaulted by a beaver after they climbed onto its dam have been hospitalized for injuries incurred during the rare attack. 

Theater Switches Horror Movie for Disney Film (Associated Press) Parents and children settled into their seats for a new animated Disney film got a quick jolt when a horror movie came on the screen instead. 

Break-In Suspect Left Wallet Behind (Associated Press) Sheriff's deputies had little trouble identifying a break-in suspect whose wallet and ID were left at the scene. 

16 Police Forces Respond to Wedding Brawl (UPI) More than a dozen different police departments responded to a wedding brawl that grew violently out of control. 

Sex Sounds Rile Neighbors (UPI) A note posted at a housing complex blasts loud lovemaking neighbors for ""Oh God"" exclamations confused by children and seniors for ""religion or suicide."" 

Loose Dog at Motel Leads to Drug Arrest (Associated Press) A loose dog at a motel led to a room with a bathtub containing marijuana and the arrest of the dog's owner. 

Robbers Chased Away by Shopkeeper Wielding Vacuum Cleaner (Reuters) A shop assistant in a late-night convenience store chased away two armed robbers demanding money with the hose of a vacuum cleaner she was using to clean her shop. 

Police Apologize After Sex Talk Broadcast from Helicopter (Reuters) Police apologized after a lewd conversation about sex was broadcast from the loudspeakers of a police helicopter to a neighborhood below. 

Gumbo Seasoning Dispute Gets Spicy (Panama City (FL) News Herald) A man was arrested on charges of aggravated battery with a deadly weapon after a work squabble over gumbo seasoning quickly escalated into an armed engagement. 

Mermaids, Other Creatures Turn Out for Parade (Associated Press) Tens of thousands of revelers turned out for Coney Island's 33rd annual Mermaid Parade despite gray skies and steady drizzle. 

Newlyweds Win $15 Million in Lottery (Associated Press) Newlyweds are planning to buy a house, pay off student loans, and buy a truck after winning $15 million on an instant scratch-off ticket. 

City Slaps Car Sculpture with a Ticket (CityLab) There must be a traffic officer out there with either no sense of humor or an excellent one, because this weirdly bent truck—an obvious work of public art—just got a parking ticket. 

Skinny Jeans Send Woman to Hospital with Nerve Damage (UPI) A doctor has warned against the dangers of so-called ""skinny jeans,"" citing a patient who collapsed after a day of strenuous activity while wearing tight pants. 

'Fridgehenge' Welcomes Solstice with Refrigerators (UPI) An appliance store owner celebrated the summer solstice by creating ""Fridgehenge,"" a Stonehenge-inspired monument made from refrigerators. 

Brave Kitty Stares Down Mountain Lion (Reuters) A video of an unfazed, fluffy house cat staring down a large mountain lion as the predator paws at a kitchen window has gone viral. 

Bleating Beauties: Village Holds Goat Pageant (UPI) A village celebrated the 645th anniversary of its founding by holding a beauty pageant for the most attractive local goats. 

Flight Video Catches Cat Stowing Away on Plane Wing (UPI) A pilot shared video from an ultralight plane flight featuring a feline stowaway crawling out from inside a wing after takeoff. 

Smuggler Hides Cigarettes in Buddha Statues (Sky News) Officers found five colored fiberglass statues of Buddha, all filled with cigarettes. 

Pilots Warned of 70,000 Homing Pigeons (Associated Press) Airplane pilots have been advised to fly with special care after 70,000 homing pigeons were released to participate in a race back to their homes. 

Bank Robber Who Stopped for Biscuits Gets Prison (Associated Press) A man who was arrested for robbing a bank when he stopped to eat biscuits at a nearby restaurant will spend two to four years in prison. 

Man Drives Himself to Station, Asks for DUI Arrest (Associated Press) A man drove under the influence of alcohol to a small-town police station, where he requested that officers arrest him. 

66 Surfers Set Record for Most People Riding a Board at Once (Associated Press) Surf champions and local heroes were among those who hung loose on a custom-built, 42-foot board. 

Father Sends Lookalike to Paternity Test (International Business Times) A young father who did not want to pay child support was called highly manipulative in court after he sent a look-alike to his DNA paternity test. 

Cabbie Drives Taxi Down Three Flights of Stairs (UPI) A taxi driver who apparently got confused on a college campus became a viral star when he decided to drive his cab down three flights of stairs.",['loan'],NEI,"  Because They Got High  (21 September 2015)  One Misdirection  (26 August 2015)  Boston's Nasty Snowpile Still Hasn't Melted  (CityLab)  Woman, 88, Charged With Assaulting Police Officer  (Associated Press)  Beekeepers Set Out to Remove a Million Bees from Home  (Associated Press)  Firefighter Accused of Reporting Fake Fire to Earn Paycheck  (Associated Press)  Handsome Gorilla Delights Female Zoo-Goers  (UPI)  Cow Puts the MOO-ves on Comrade During Live News Broadcast  (UPI)  8-Foot-Wide Vortex Opens Up in Lake  (UPI)  Woman Trying to Kiss Llama Gets Face Full of Spit  (UPI)  Queen's Guard Draws Gun on Tourist Who Touched Him  (UPI)  Airplane Wheel Crashes Into Apartment Roof  (UPI)  Trashed Golfer Gets Head Stuck in Garbage Can  (UPI)  Subway Long Jump Attempt Fails  (UPI)  Illegally Parked Car Covered in Post-Its  (UPI)  Something's Rotten: Stench from Fridge Sends 11 to Hospital  (Associated Press)  Men Hospitalized, Recovering After Rare Beaver Attack  (Reuters)  Theater Switches Horror Movie for Disney Film  (Associated Press)  Break-In Suspect Left Wallet Behind  (Associated Press)  16 Police Forces Respond to Wedding Brawl  (UPI)  Sex Sounds Rile Neighbors  (UPI)  Loose Dog at Motel Leads to Drug Arrest  (Associated Press)  Robbers Chased Away by Shopkeeper Wielding Vacuum Cleaner  (Reuters)  Police Apologize After Sex Talk Broadcast from Helicopter  (Reuters)  Gumbo Seasoning Dispute Gets Spicy  (Panama City (FL) News Herald)  Mermaids, Other Creatures Turn Out for Parade  (Associated Press)  Newlyweds Win $15 Million in Lottery  (Associated Press)  City Slaps Car Sculpture with a Ticket  (CityLab)  Skinny Jeans Send Woman to Hospital with Nerve Damage  (UPI)  'Fridgehenge' Welcomes Solstice with Refrigerators  (UPI)  Brave Kitty Stares Down Mountain Lion  (Reuters)  Bleating Beauties: Village Holds Goat Pageant  (UPI)  Flight Video Catches Cat Stowing Away on Plane Wing  (UPI)  Smuggler Hides Cigarettes in Buddha Statues  (Sky News)  Pilots Warned of 70,000 Homing Pigeons  (Associated Press)  Bank Robber Who Stopped for Biscuits Gets Prison  (Associated Press)  Man Drives Himself to Station, Asks for DUI Arrest  (Associated Press)  66 Surfers Set Record for Most People Riding a Board at Once  (Associated Press)  Father Sends Lookalike to Paternity Test  (International Business Times)  Cabbie Drives Taxi Down Three Flights of Stairs  (UPI)"
Walmart Bows Down to Sharia Law?,['Has Walmart agreed to start selling halal meat?']," Claim:  An Ohio Walmart store has begun selling halal meat. : Example:  [Collected via e-mail, November 2014] Is Walmart going to start selling sharia compliant meat?   Origins:  On 12 November 2014, Miami (Ohio) University's student newspaper, The Miami Student, published an article about a local Walmart's decision to add a halal meat section to their grocery aisles: article Upon the request of Muslim students at Miami University, Walmart recently made the decision to provide halal-certified meat at the Oxford location. Store manager Elijah Woodard made a formal announcement on Oct. 21 that the store would be accommodating these requests.  ""I appreciated the students bringing this interest to our attention,"" Woodard said. ""I am pleased to announce that we have set a halal meat section in the store."" Visiting assistant professor Tareq Hasan Khan and the Muslim Student Association (MSA) had petitioned all local grocers to carry Halal meat. So far, the local Walmart is the only store to have obliged to the request:  Between Khan and members of the Muslim Student Association (MSA), efforts were made to convince Walmart to provide the Halal meat. Many students reached out directly to the management at Walmart. In addition, a petition was passed around on the Internet. The petition acquired nearly 50 signatures and was directed at all Oxford grocers including MOON co-op and Kroger. Thus far, Walmart is the only provider who has responded to the requests of the Muslim students. ""For halal meat, we needed to drive from Oxford to Cincinnati, around 40 miles one way, almost every week,"" Khan said. ""This long drive is very tiresome and takes about two hours only to go to Cincinnati and return back."" This case is not the first instance of a Walmart store's choosing to carry Halal meat: Similar products have been sold at dozens of Walmart stores around the U.S. since at least 2010.  Still, the announcement that the Oxford location had added a halal meat section stirred up anger on social media sites: Walmart social media    While some people viewed Walmart's decision to sell halal meat as proof the company was ""bowing down"" to Sharia law, the Associated Press noted demand for halal products has been on the rise throughout the world: The worldwide market for Islamically permitted goods, called halal, has grown to more than half a billion dollars annually. Ritually slaughtered meat is a mainstay, but the halal industry is much broader, including foods and seasoning that omit alcohol, pork products and other forbidden ingredients, along with cosmetics, finance and clothing. Corporations have been courting immigrant Muslim communities in Europe for several years. Nestle, for example, has about 20 factories in Europe with halal-certified production lines and advertises to Western Muslims through its marketing campaign called ""Taste of Home."" Nestle plans to increase its ethnic and halal offerings in Europe in coming years. In the United States, iconic American companies such as McDonald's (which already has a popular halal menu overseas) and Wal-Mart have entered the halal arena.   Although Walmart has opted to offer halal meat in their Oxford store, it appears it is making such decisions on a case-by-case basis rather than instituting a country-wide policy to that effect.   Last updated:  19 February 2015    Zoll, Rachel.   ""US Muslims: A New Consumer Niche.""   Business Week.  27 December 2010.",['finance'],True,"Origins:  On 12 November 2014, Miami (Ohio) University's student newspaper, The Miami Student, published an article about a local Walmart's decision to add a halal meat section to their grocery aisles:This case is not the first instance of a Walmart store's choosing to carry Halal meat: Similar products have been sold at dozens of Walmart stores around the U.S. since at least 2010.  Still, the announcement that the Oxford location had added a halal meat section stirred up anger on social media sites:"
Did Michael Cohen Tweet at Hillary Clinton That Room and Board Will Be Free When She Goes to Prison?,"[""President Trump's long-time personal attorney deleted the tweet after pleading guilty to multiple counts relating to fraud and campaign finance violations.""]","On 21 August 2018, comedian Kathy Griffin, a frequent critic of U.S. President Donald Trump, dug up a 2015 tweet composed by Trump's long-time former personal attorney, Michael Cohen, to mock the latter on the day he pled guilty to multiple counts relating to fraud and campaign finance violations. dug up Although Cohen has since deleted the tweet, a cached version remains available online: deleted cached version   The tweet was cast as ironic in light of the fact that Cohen is now the one facing prison time. On 21 August 2018, he pled guilty to eight counts, including campaign finance violations that involve paying hush money to an adult film actress and Playboy model to buy their silence on alleged affairs with Trump. He is due to be sentenced in December 2018 and faces up to 63 months in prison.  Cohen's tweet stems from the fact that Trump supporters often chanted ""lock her up"" about Hillary Clinton in the run-up to the 2016 election (and continue to do so despite current events), and Trump himself vowed that if elected, he would ensure that Clinton was prosecuted and punished for various alleged crimes. continue Instead, members of Trump's inner circle and campaign have been the ones charged with crimes, as Department of Justice Special Counsel Robert Mueller continues to investigate allegations involving Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election. investigate Cohen is not the only person in Trump's political realm to have taunted Clinton during the campaign, only to end up slapped with criminal charges himself. Michael Flynn, Trump's former National Security Advisor, famously led chants of ""lock her up"" at rallies and later pled guilty in 2017 to lying to the FBI. guilty On the same day Cohen pled guilty, Trump's former campaign chair Paul Manafort was found guilty by a jury on eight counts including bank fraud, tax fraud, and failure to disclose a foreign bank account. guilty Horton, Alex.  ""Michael Cohens Tweet About Hillary Clinton and Prison Came Back to Haunt Him. Now Its Gone.""
  The Washington Post.  22 August 2018. Orden, Erica et al.  ""Michael Cohen Implicates Trump in Hush Money Scheme.""
  CNN.  22 August 2018. LaFraniere, Sharon. ""Paul Manafort, Trumps Former Campaign Chairman, Guilty of 8 Counts.""
  The New York Times.  21 August 2018. Shear, Michael D. and Adam Goldman.  ""Michael Flynn Pleads Guilty to Lying to the F.B.I. and Will Cooperate with Russia Inquiry.""
  The New York Times.  1 December 2017.",['finance'],True,"On 21 August 2018, comedian Kathy Griffin, a frequent critic of U.S. President Donald Trump, dug up a 2015 tweet composed by Trump's long-time former personal attorney, Michael Cohen, to mock the latter on the day he pled guilty to multiple counts relating to fraud and campaign finance violations.Although Cohen has since deleted the tweet, a cached version remains available online:Cohen's tweet stems from the fact that Trump supporters often chanted ""lock her up"" about Hillary Clinton in the run-up to the 2016 election (and continue to do so despite current events), and Trump himself vowed that if elected, he would ensure that Clinton was prosecuted and punished for various alleged crimes.Instead, members of Trump's inner circle and campaign have been the ones charged with crimes, as Department of Justice Special Counsel Robert Mueller continues to investigate allegations involving Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election.Cohen is not the only person in Trump's political realm to have taunted Clinton during the campaign, only to end up slapped with criminal charges himself. Michael Flynn, Trump's former National Security Advisor, famously led chants of ""lock her up"" at rallies and later pled guilty in 2017 to lying to the FBI.On the same day Cohen pled guilty, Trump's former campaign chair Paul Manafort was found guilty by a jury on eight counts including bank fraud, tax fraud, and failure to disclose a foreign bank account."
A study conducted by Stanford University provides evidence of election fraud based on inconsistencies observed in exit polls.,['Two researchers released a paper (not a study) examining whether primary election fraud that favored Hillary Clinton had occurred.'],"On 8 June 2016, the Facebook page ""The Bern Report"" shared a document authored by researchers Axel Geijsel of Tilburg University in The Netherlands and Rodolfo Cortes Barragan of Stanford University suggesting that ""the outcomes of the 2016 Democratic Party nomination contest [are not] completely legitimate: That social media share described the document as ""a fantastic research piece put together by a couple of college students, Rodolfo Cortes Barragan & Axel Geijsel."" That document (properly termed a ""paper,"" not a ""study,"" as the latter term implies some form of professional vetting) concluded with the statement that the data examined by its author ""suggest that election fraud is occurring in the 2016 Democratic Party Presidential Primary election"" and that ""this fraud has overwhelmingly benefited Secretary Clinton at the expense of Senator Sanders"": document Are the results we are witnessing in the 2016 primary elections trustworthy? While Donald Trump enjoyed a clear and early edge over his Republican rivals, the Democratic contest between former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Senator Bernard Sanders has been far more competitive. At present, Secretary Clinton enjoys an apparent advantage over Sanders. Is this claimed advantage legitimate? We contend that it is not, and suggest an explanation for the advantage: States that are at risk for election fraud in 2016 systematically and overwhelmingly favor Secretary Clinton. We provide converging evidence for this claim. First, we show that it is possible to detect irregularities in the 2016 Democratic Primaries by comparing the states that have hard paper evidence of all the placed votes to states that do not have this hard paper evidence. Second, we compare the final results in 2016 to the discrepant exit polls. Furthermore, we show that no such irregularities occurred in the 2008 competitive election cycle involving Secretary Clinton against President Obama. As such, we find that in states wherein voting fraud has the highest potential to occur, systematic efforts may have taken place to provide Secretary Clinton with an exaggerated margin of support. In an appendix, Geijsel and Barragan stated that their research was still in progress and had not yet been subject to peer review, but since the information was highly topical they believed it better to pre-release their findings due to the ongoing primary ballot count in California (among other factors): Statement on peer-review: We note that this article has not been officially peer-reviewed in a scientific journal yet. Doing so will take us several months. As such, given the timeliness of the topic, we decided to publish on the Bern Report after we received preliminary positive feedback from two professors (both experts in the quantitative social sciences). We plan on seeking peer-reviewed publication at a later time. As of now, we know there may be errors in some numbers (one has been identified and sent to us: it was a mislabeling). We encourage anyone to let us know if they find any other error. Our aim here truly is to understand the patterns of results, and to inspire others to engage with the electoral system. The post-introduction portion of the paper began with a comparison of outcomes in ""primary states with paper trails and without paper trails,"" holding that potentially inaccurate results led the researchers to ""restrict [our] analysis to a proxy: the percentage of delegates won by Secretary Clinton and Senator Sanders."" After identifying via the Ballotpedia web site 18 states that use a form of paper verification for votes compared to 13 states without such a ""paper trail,"" they concluded that states without ""paper trails"" demonstrated a higher rate of support for Hillary Clinton: Analysis: The [data] show a statistically significant difference between the groups. States without paper trails yielded higher support for Secretary Clinton than states with paper trails. As such, the potential for election fraud in voting procedures is strongly related to enhanced electoral outcomes for Secretary Clinton. In the Appendix, we show that this relationship holds even above and beyond alternative explanations, including the prevailing political ideology and the changes in support over time. The information included in the Appendix didn't explicate exactly what those alternative explanations might be: Are there other variables that could account for our main effect (states without paper trails going overwhelmingly for Clinton)? We conducted a regression model and included the % of Non-Hispanic Whites in a state as of the last Census, the states electoral history from 1992 to 2012 of favoring Democratic or Republican nominees for President (i.e., the blueness of a state), and our variable of interest: paper trail vs. no paper trail. As expected, race/ethnicity and political ideology played a role: The Whiter and more liberal a state, the less it favored Clinton. However, the effect for paper trail remains significant. States with paper trails show significantly less support for Clinton. As such, even beyond the potential for other likely factors to play a role, the potential for fraud is associated with gains for Clinton.  Dependent variable: Percent support for Clinton in the primaries  In the paper's second portion, the researchers examined discrepancies between exit polls and final results by state, a subject of debate (hashtagged #ExitPollGate on social media) that antedated the publication of their paper and was addressed in a Nation article disputing the claim that exit polls revealed fraud. The Nation's analysis held that fraud detection exit polling varied significantly from the type of exit polling typically carried out in the United States: While exit polls are used to detect potential fraud in some countries, ours arent designed, and arent accurate enough, to accomplish that purpose. [A polling company VP], who has conducted exit polls in fragile democracies like Ukraine and Venezuela, explained that there are three crucial differences between their exit polls and our own. Polls designed to detect fraud rely on interviews with many more people at many more polling places, and they use very short questionnaires, often with just one or two questions, whereas ours usually have twenty or more. Shorter questionnaires lead to higher response rates. Higher response rates paired with larger samples result in much smaller margins of error. Theyre far more precise. But it costs a lot more to conduct that kind of survey, and the media companies that sponsor our exit polls are only interested in providing fodder for pundits and TV talking heads. All they want to know is which groups came out to vote and why, so thats what they pay for. As well, standard exit polling conducted in the U.S. can be very inaccurate and systematically biased for a number of reasons, including: including o Differential nonresponse, in which the supporters of one candidate are likelier to participate than those of another candidate. Exit polls have limited means to correct for nonresponse, since they can weight only by visually identifiable characteristics. Hispanic origin, income and education, for instance, are left out. o Cluster effects, which happen when the precincts selected arent representative of the overall population. This is a very big danger in state exit polls, which include only a small number of precincts. As a result, exit polls have a larger margin of error than an ordinary poll of similar size. These precincts are selected to have the right balance of Democratic and Republican precincts, which isnt so helpful in a primary. o Absentee voters arent included at all in states where they represent less than 20 percent or so of the vote. As the New York Times put it, ""[N]o one who studies the exit polls believes that they can be used as an indicator of fraud in the way the conspiracy theorists do."" Nonetheless, Geijsel and Barragan contended in their paper that: Anomalies exist between exit polls and final results Data procurement: We obtained exit poll data from a database kept by an expert on the American elections. Analysis: On the overall, are the exit polls different from the final results? Yes they are. The data show lower support for Secretary Clinton in exit polls than the final results would suggest. While an effect size of 0.71 is quite substantial, and suggests a considerable difference between exit polls and outcomes, we expected that this difference would be even more exaggerated in states without paper voting trails. Indeed, the effect size in states without paper voting trails is considerably larger: 1.50, and yields more exaggerated support for the Secretary in the hours following the exit polls. The expert whose numbers were utilized for the paper wasn't expressly cited by name, but his moniker appeared on the linked spreadsheet: Richard Charnin. Charnin indeed lists some impressive statistical credentials on his personal blog, but he also appears to expend much of his focus on conspiracy theories related to the JFK assassination (which raises the question of whether his math skills outstrip his ability to apply skeptical reasoning to data). spreadsheet conspiracy theories Geijsel addressed questions about exit poll numbers in a subsequent e-mail to a blogger who was highly skeptical of his research: skeptical In short, exit polling works using a margin of error, you will always expect it to be somewhat off the final result. This is often mentioned as being the margin of error, often put at 95%, it indicates that there's a 95% chance that the final result will lie within this margin. In exit polling this is often calculated as lying around 3%. The bigger the difference, the smaller the chance that the result is legitimate. This is because although those exit polls are not 100% accurate, they're accurate enough to use them as a reference point. In contrast to the idea that probably 1 out of 20 results will differ. Our results showed that (relatively) a huge amount of states differed. This would lead to two possibilities, a) the Sanders supporters are FAR more willing to take the exit polls, or b) there is election fraud at play. Considering the context of these particular elections, we believe it's the latter. Though that's our personal opinion, and others may differ in that, we believe we can successfully argue for that in a private setting considering the weight of our own study, the beliefs of other statisticians who have both looked at our own study (and who have conducted corroborating studies), and the fact that the internet is littered with hard evidence of both voter suppression and election fraud having taken place. That blogger passed the anlysis on to his father (""a retired Professor Emeritus in Mathematics and Applied Statistics at the University of Northern Colorado""), Donald T. Searls, Ph.D., for comment: comment I simply asked him to review it in full and send me his comments as to its methodology and his view as to its validity. For the record, he has been a Republican for as long as I can recall and has no interest in voting for the Democratic nominee, whoever that might be. I received his response via e-mail today. Here is what he wrote: I like the analysis very much up to the point of applying probability theory. I think the data speak for itself (themselves). It is always problematic to apply probability theory to empirical data. Theoretically unknown confounding factors could be present. The raw data is in my mind very powerful and clear on its own. My personal opinion is that the whole process has been rigged against Bernie at every level and that is devastating even though I don't agree with him. I called him after receiving his response to [ask him to] clarify his remarks on the application of probability theory to the data. His comment to me was that he did not believe it was necessary for the authors to take that step. If he had done the study himself, he would not have bothered with doing so. As he said, the data speaks for itself. Although Geijsel cited a number of sources to substantiate the claim that fraud was well-documented in the 2016 primary season, most of those citations involved persons with an interest in the overall dispute (such as groups party to lawsuits). That factor doesn't necessarily cast doubt on the researchers' findings, but it highlights that not much independent and neutral verification of their conclusions has occurred yet.  Cohn, Nate.  ""Exit Polls, And Why The Primary Was Not Stolen From Bernie Sanders.""
  27 June 2016. Geijsel, Axel and Rodolfo Cortes Barragan.  ""Are We Witnessing a Dishonest Election?""
  7 June 2016. Holland, Joshua.  ""Reminder: Exit-Poll Conspiracy Theories Are Totally Baseless.""
  The Nation.  7 June 2016. Booman Tribune.  ""My Dad's View of Election Fraud Study.""
  11 June 2016. Booman Tribune.  ""Election Fraud Study Authors Respond.""
  13 June 2016.",['income'],NEI,"That social media share described the document as ""a fantastic research piece put together by a couple of college students, Rodolfo Cortes Barragan & Axel Geijsel."" That document (properly termed a ""paper,"" not a ""study,"" as the latter term implies some form of professional vetting) concluded with the statement that the data examined by its author ""suggest that election fraud is occurring in the 2016 Democratic Party Presidential Primary election"" and that ""this fraud has overwhelmingly benefited Secretary Clinton at the expense of Senator Sanders"":As well, standard exit polling conducted in the U.S. can be very inaccurate and systematically biased for a number of reasons, including:The expert whose numbers were utilized for the paper wasn't expressly cited by name, but his moniker appeared on the linked spreadsheet: Richard Charnin. Charnin indeed lists some impressive statistical credentials on his personal blog, but he also appears to expend much of his focus on conspiracy theories related to the JFK assassination (which raises the question of whether his math skills outstrip his ability to apply skeptical reasoning to data).Geijsel addressed questions about exit poll numbers in a subsequent e-mail to a blogger who was highly skeptical of his research:That blogger passed the anlysis on to his father (""a retired Professor Emeritus in Mathematics and Applied Statistics at the University of Northern Colorado""), Donald T. Searls, Ph.D., for comment:"
Is this Real Footage From Inside Plane Just Before it Crashed in Nepal?,['The harrowing Facebook Live video appeared to show passengers in moments before the crash.'],"Content warning: While the linked footage does not have gruesome imagery, it contains the final moments before the crash, with the sounds of screams, images of flames, and burning airplane debris. We therefore have only shared screenshots from the video and not linked directly to it. Harrowing footage authenticallydepicts the final moments of an airplane crash in Nepal on Jan. 15, 2023, from a Facebook Live video taken by a passenger. A group of Indian friends appeared to be enjoying themselves as they recorded the plane's descent into the town of Pokhara. The flight carried 72 passengers and crew, and no one was believed to have survived. depicts 72 passengers The friends can be heard laughing. With no warnings from the airplane staff, the aircraft appeared to shake, followed by crashing sounds, before the entire screen filled with flames. Shots of airplane debris covered in flames and smoke was briefly visible before the footage ended. Numerous independent media reports and local fact-checkers, who reached out to family and friends of the Indian passengers, confirmed the footage as real; a close analysis of the footage also confirmed it to be in the Yeti Airlines flight that was landing in Pokhara.  independent local fact The video waspublishedby Indian media. published The footage was reportedly taken by Sonu Jaiswal, a 29-year-old father of three young children who was visiting temples and planning to paraglide with his friends in Nepal's Annapurna mountain range. Vishal Koswal, a friend of his, confirmed to the Guardian news site that the footage was from Jaiswal's phone, and the other men who could be seen or heard in the video were Anil Rajbhar, Vishal Sharma, and Abhishek Singh Kushwaha. Koswal said he had been planning to join them on the trip but stayed home after the death of a relative. Local police also confirmed the identities of the men in the video. Vishal Koswal Koswal spoke to them many times via a video call before the flight. ""Sonu was showing us the mountains around on the call and was clearly excited, so were we,"" he told the Guardian. ""He told me on that call that after landing in Pokhara, they would visit some temples there and then in the evening take a train back home."" the Guardian Indian fact-checking site Boom Livealso closely analyzed the footage. It noted that the poster in the video on the back of the passenger seat showed prominent Nepali and Hindi film actors. The aerial view of the city also showed sports stadiums, which they confirmed as being the Pokhara Football Stadium and Pokhara Cricket Ground. Jaiswal's Facebook account, while private, also featured the same profile picture as that seen in the corner of the livestream. Nepal Fact Check also shared a passenger list of the foreigners who were on the flight, and the names of the Indian friends were confirmed there. Boom Live Nepal Fact Check Screenshot showing prominent Nepali and Hindi film actors. Screenshot that shows one of the Indian passengers. Screenshot that shows an aerial view of Pokhara, Nepal.  Rajat Jaiswal, Sonu Jaiswal's cousin, reportedly confirmed to Indian media that the latter did the Facebook Live feed. ""Sonu was on Facebook live after boarding the flight for Pokhara. The live-streaming showed that Sonu and his companions were in a happy mood, but suddenly, flames appear before the streaming stopped,"" he said. Rajat Jaiswal The plane crash is believed to be the deadliest one in Nepal in the last 30 years. Aviation accidents are not uncommon in the country due to the remote runways, hazardous weather conditions, and difficult mountain terrains. Poor regulations and a lack of investment had also been blamed. The European Union has banned Nepalese airlines from its airspace over concerns about their training and maintenance standards. deadliest banned We rate this claim as   Alphonso, Anmol. ""BOOM Verified: Video Of FB Live By Indian Flyer Captures Nepal Plane Crash."" BOOM, 16 Jan. 2023, https://www.boomlive.in/boom-verified//viral-video-nepal-pokhara-plane-crash-facebook-live-flyer-sonu-jaiswal-capturing-last-moments-20761. Accessed 16 Jan. 2023. Ellis-Petersen, Hannah, and Aakash Hassan. ""Nepal Plane Crash: Last Moments inside Cabin Caught on Passenger's Facebook Live Video."" The Guardian, 16 Jan. 2023. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jan/16/nepal-plane-crash-facebook-live-video.Accessed 16 Jan. 2023. ""Flyer Onboard Nepal Plane Captures Moments before Crash."" Deccan Herald, 16 Jan. 2023, https://www.deccanherald.com/national/flyer-onboard-nepal-plane-captures-moments-before-crash-1181442.html.Accessed 16 Jan. 2023. ""Nepal Plane Crash: Pilot Didn't Report Anything Untoward, Official Says."" BBC News, 15 Jan. 2023. www.bbc.com, https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-64284366.Accessed 16 Jan. 2023. ""          ?"" Nepal Factcheck. 16 Jan. 2023, https://nepalfactcheck.org/2023/01/yeti-airlines-crash-live-streaming-facebook/.Accessed 16 Jan. 2023.",['investment'],True,"Harrowing footage authenticallydepicts the final moments of an airplane crash in Nepal on Jan. 15, 2023, from a Facebook Live video taken by a passenger. A group of Indian friends appeared to be enjoying themselves as they recorded the plane's descent into the town of Pokhara. The flight carried 72 passengers and crew, and no one was believed to have survived.Numerous independent media reports and local fact-checkers, who reached out to family and friends of the Indian passengers, confirmed the footage as real; a close analysis of the footage also confirmed it to be in the Yeti Airlines flight that was landing in Pokhara.The video waspublishedby Indian media.The footage was reportedly taken by Sonu Jaiswal, a 29-year-old father of three young children who was visiting temples and planning to paraglide with his friends in Nepal's Annapurna mountain range. Vishal Koswal, a friend of his, confirmed to the Guardian news site that the footage was from Jaiswal's phone, and the other men who could be seen or heard in the video were Anil Rajbhar, Vishal Sharma, and Abhishek Singh Kushwaha. Koswal said he had been planning to join them on the trip but stayed home after the death of a relative. Local police also confirmed the identities of the men in the video.Koswal spoke to them many times via a video call before the flight. ""Sonu was showing us the mountains around on the call and was clearly excited, so were we,"" he told the Guardian. ""He told me on that call that after landing in Pokhara, they would visit some temples there and then in the evening take a train back home.""Indian fact-checking site Boom Livealso closely analyzed the footage. It noted that the poster in the video on the back of the passenger seat showed prominent Nepali and Hindi film actors. The aerial view of the city also showed sports stadiums, which they confirmed as being the Pokhara Football Stadium and Pokhara Cricket Ground. Jaiswal's Facebook account, while private, also featured the same profile picture as that seen in the corner of the livestream. Nepal Fact Check also shared a passenger list of the foreigners who were on the flight, and the names of the Indian friends were confirmed there.Rajat Jaiswal, Sonu Jaiswal's cousin, reportedly confirmed to Indian media that the latter did the Facebook Live feed. ""Sonu was on Facebook live after boarding the flight for Pokhara. The live-streaming showed that Sonu and his companions were in a happy mood, but suddenly, flames appear before the streaming stopped,"" he said.The plane crash is believed to be the deadliest one in Nepal in the last 30 years. Aviation accidents are not uncommon in the country due to the remote runways, hazardous weather conditions, and difficult mountain terrains. Poor regulations and a lack of investment had also been blamed. The European Union has banned Nepalese airlines from its airspace over concerns about their training and maintenance standards."
Is Anthony Hopkins considered one of the 'most petite men in Hollywood'?,"['We clicked the ""next page"" button a whopping 95 times in a slideshow article so you don\'t have to.']","Since at least January 2021, actor Anthony Hopkins was featured in an online advertisement about the height of Hollywood celebrity men. The ad read: ""Some of the Shortest Men in Hollywood Today.""   Readers who clicked the online ad were led to a 95-page story on Cleverst.com. Its headline read: ""These Short Male Celebrities Remind Us That Height Doesn't Matter In Hollywood."" The lengthy article began with a picture of actor Dave Franco, who is purported to be 5 feet 7. We clicked ""next page"" 95 times until we realized we had clicked ""next article"" at the end. Hopkins didn't even show up in the story. Anthony Hopkins' height is listed at 5 feet 9 on various sources, including on his IMDb page. The actor is anything but ""short."" his IMDb page Hopkins is perhaps best known for his work in the 1991 classic, ""The Silence of the Lambs."" He won the best actor Oscar for playing the role of the terrifying cannibal, Hannibal Lecter. The long story of ""short male celebrities"" also featured a 6-feet-tall Vin Diesel, a 5 feet 10 Jason Statham, and 5 feet 9 actors Robert Downey Jr. and Tom Hardy. This was hardly a list of ""some of the shortest men in Hollywood today."" The Cleverst.com story appeared to be a strategy known as advertising ""arbitrage."" The goal was to make more money on ads that were displayed on all 95 pages than it cost to display the original Hopkins clickbait picture. The Hopkins photograph lured the readers. Readers then clicked ""next page"" in a search for Hopkins, who never appeared. The business and technology blog Margins defined ""arbitrage"" as ""leveraging an inefficient set of systems to make a riskless profit, usually by buying and selling the same asset."" They also called it ""the mythical free lunch that economics tells us does not exist."" Margins The same strategy employed for Hopkins' height was used by other advertisers in the past who placed an ad about Pierce Brosnan's net worth. The ad claimed that ""Pierce Brosnan's final net worth left his family in tears."" Not only was Pierce Brosnan still alive, but he also did not appear in the lengthy slideshow story that resulted. Pierce Brosnan's net worth Snopes debunks a wide range of content, and online advertisements are no exception. Misleading ads often lead to obscure websites that host lengthy slideshow articles with lots of pages. It's called advertising ""arbitrage."" The advertiser's goal is to make more money on ads displayed on the slideshow's pages than it cost to show the initial ad that lured them to it. Feel free to submit ads to us, and be sure to include a screenshot of the ad and the link to where the ad leads. submit ads to us",['asset'],False,"Anthony Hopkins' height is listed at 5 feet 9 on various sources, including on his IMDb page. The actor is anything but ""short.""The business and technology blog Margins defined ""arbitrage"" as ""leveraging an inefficient set of systems to make a riskless profit, usually by buying and selling the same asset."" They also called it ""the mythical free lunch that economics tells us does not exist.""The same strategy employed for Hopkins' height was used by other advertisers in the past who placed an ad about Pierce Brosnan's net worth. The ad claimed that ""Pierce Brosnan's final net worth left his family in tears."" Not only was Pierce Brosnan still alive, but he also did not appear in the lengthy slideshow story that resulted.Snopes debunks a wide range of content, and online advertisements are no exception. Misleading ads often lead to obscure websites that host lengthy slideshow articles with lots of pages. It's called advertising ""arbitrage."" The advertiser's goal is to make more money on ads displayed on the slideshow's pages than it cost to show the initial ad that lured them to it. Feel free to submit ads to us, and be sure to include a screenshot of the ad and the link to where the ad leads."
L UTA Flight 772 Memorial,['Rumor: Photographs show a desert memorial constructed to honor the victims of UTA Flight 772.']," Claim:  Photographs show a desert memorial constructed to honor the victims of UTA Flight 772.  Example:  [Collected via e-mail, November   2013] A friend told me to go to a certain latitude and longitude on Google Maps. When I noticed it seemed to be in the middle of an African desert, I thought he was just sending nonsense. But when I zoomed in, my mind was blown. I noticed a tiny icon that looked like an airplane. So I did some more research and discovered theres an incredibly tragic and beautiful story behind it. Here it is, from start to finish.   UTA Flight 772 was a scheduled flight operating from Brazzaville in the Republic of Congo to Paris CDG airport in France.  On Tuesday, September 19th, 1989 the aircraft exploded over Niger in the Tenere region of the Sahara Desert. French investigators determined a suitcase bomb planted by Libyan terrorists to be the cause. All 170 people on board died.   Eighteen years later, families of the victims gathered at the crash site to build a memorial.   Due to the remoteness of the location, pieces of the wreckage could still be found at the site.     The memorial was created by Les Familles de lAttentat du DC-10 dUTA, an association of the victims families along with the help of local inhabitants.     The memorial was built mostly by hand and uses dark stones to create a 200-foot diameter circle.   The Tenere region is one of the most inaccessible places on the planet. The stones were trucked to the site from over 70 kilometers away.      The memorial was built over the course of two months in May and June of 2007.    170 broken mirrors, representing each victim, were placed around the circumference of the memorial.   The memorial is anchored by the starboard wing of the aircraft which was trucked to the site from 10 miles away. Workers had to dig up the wing and empty it of sand.   A plaque commemorating each victim is affixed to the wing.          The memorial was partly funded by the $170 million compensation package provided by the Libyan government.     The memorial can be seen from Google Earth.     Origins:  On 19 September 1989 a DC-10 operated by the French airline UTA (Union des Transports Ariens) as Flight 772 between Brazzaville, Congo and Paris, France with a stop in N'Djamena, Chad, exploded 46 minutes after taking off from N'Djamena International Airport.  The explosion blew apart the plane over the Sahara Desert, killing all 170 persons aboard (155 passengers and 15 crew members). An investigation by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) determined the deadly explosion had been caused by a bomb placed in a suitcase which was stored in the forward cargo hold.  Six Libyans were eventually tried and convicted at the Paris Assize Court in absentia (because Libya declined to allow their extradition to France)  for their participation in the bombing.  The motives behind the bombing were somewhat murky, but they have generally been ascribed to a desire for punishing France due to that country's opposition to Libyan intervention in Chad's civil war. The Paris Assize Court awarded the families of the UTA bombing victims amounts ranging from about $4,000 to $40,000 each, and an association representing the victims' families, Les Familles de l'Attentat du DC10 d'UTA, negotiated a separate settlement with the Gaddafi International Foundation for Charity Associations in 2004 for $170 million ($1 million for each of the 170 victims).  As well, in 2008 Libya paid $1.5 billion into a fund to compensate the relatives of persons killed in several terrorism-related events, including the 1988 bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 (also known as the Lockerbie bombing), the 1986 bombing of a Berlin discotheque, and the 1989 UTA Flight 772 bombing. Les Familles de l'Attentat du DC10 d'UTA In 2007 Les Familles de l'Attentat du DC10 d'UTA, using compensation funds paid by the Libyan government, financed the construction of a memorial to the victims shown above, made of dark rocks which form the shape of a DC-10 inside a compass: It was constructed by 100 people working largely by hand under the desert sun. The life-size silhouette of the aircraft lies inside a circle more than 200ft in diameter, created using dark stones set into the sand. Surrounding this circle are 170 broken mirrors, representing those who died, and arrows marking the points of the compass. At the northern point, part of the right wing of the DC-10 has been erected as a monument, with a plaque commemorating the victims. This memorial has garnered additional visibility in recent years because it can be clearly seen in satellite imagery viewable through Google Earth and has been chronicled in web sites such as Google SightSeeing. Google Earth Google SightSeeing  Last updated:  4 September 2015 ",['finance'],True,"The Paris Assize Court awarded the families of the UTA bombing victims amounts ranging from about $4,000 to $40,000 each, and an association representing the victims' families, Les Familles de l'Attentat du DC10 d'UTA, negotiated a separate settlement with the Gaddafi International Foundation for Charity Associations in 2004 for $170 million ($1 million for each of the 170 victims).  As well, in 2008 Libya paid $1.5 billion into a fund to compensate the relatives of persons killed in several terrorism-related events, including the 1988 bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 (also known as the Lockerbie bombing), the 1986 bombing of a Berlin discotheque, and the 1989 UTA Flight 772 bombing.This memorial has garnered additional visibility in recent years because it can be clearly seen in satellite imagery viewable through Google Earth and has been chronicled in web sites such as Google SightSeeing."
Says the military accounts for about 10 percent of Florida's economy.,[],"Gov.-elect Rick Scott kicked off a five-day, 10-city tour of the state's major industries on Dec. 6, 2010, by meeting with defense contractors and Florida-based military leaders.Scott started the tour in the Panhandle, meeting with about 20 defense contractors, including Boeing, Lockheed Martin, L-3 Communications and InDyne Corp., at the University of Florida Research and Engineering Education Facility in Shalimar, before meeting with military leaders at Eglin Air Force Base.We want to make sure we're always thought of as a very military-friendly state,Scott said to reporters at a brief press conference. We're going to focus on what our strengths are. We're clearly a logical place for the military to expand and for the defense industry to expand. We've got a lot of talent in the state, we like the defense industry and the military, so we're going to figure out where we have the most value.Scott tried to underscore the importance of the military to Florida by noting that the military accounts for about 10 percent of Florida's economy, according to theSt. Petersburg Times.Florida is home to 20 major military installations and three unified combatant commands. The Gulf of Mexico is a key training ground for both the Air Force and the Navy, and the state also has two U.S. Coast Guard air stations and another dozen other Coast Guard stations.But does all of that translate to a 10 percent share of the state's gross domestic product,which was $737 billion in 2009?The answer comes from an arm of Enterprise Florida called theFlorida Defense Alliance, a public/private partnership created in 1998 to help position Florida to keep its military infrastructure in place and expand in other areas when opportunities arise. The group commissioned a study in 2008 to examine the economic impact of Florida's stationed military and auxiliary defense industry work.The study was conducted by Rick Harper, an economist from the University of West Florida, who has studied the economic impact of the film and entertainment industry in Florida and who represented Northwest Florida on former Gov. Jeb Bush's Council of Economic Advisers from 2001-2006. Using 2005 data, Harper concluded that defense-related spending is responsible for $52 billion, or 7.5 percent, of Florida's gross state product that year.The military spent $27 billion across Florida counties in fiscal year 2005, Harper concluded -- $10.4 billion was for goods and services, $12.4 billion for pensions and transfer payments, and $4.3 billion for salaries and wages. The rest of the economic impact is measured in indirect and induced spending, which would include parts of the private defense industry as well as parts of the Florida economy that help service the military, the defense industry and their employees.Harper said that defense and military spending accounted for 732,300 direct and indirect jobs in the state and generated state and local tax revenues of nearly $1 billion.Counties with larger installations enjoy larger impacts, Harper found. Military and defense spending in Duval County had a $12.1 billion impact, a $5.3 billion impact in Hillsborough County and a $6.6 billion impact in Okaloosa County. All but six counties have at least $3 million per year in direct defense-related spending.Harper and Florida Defense Alliance executive director Rocky McPherson noted that the study does not include the economic impact generated by the Florida National Guard or Coast Guard operations. You can see a short synopsis of the study for yourselfhere. Or if you have a lot of time, here's thethree-volume version.Harper's study relies on five-year-old data, so we wanted to see if there was anything more recent. McPherson said Harper and University of West Florida researchers were updating their study using 2008 data but, he said, that report is not available yet. Harper declined to share the results of the study with PolitiFact Florida, but did talk about the results in general terms.Since 2005, Department of Defense spending has risen substantially, particularly in terms of procurement (i.e., contracting), as well as payments to disabled veterans, although active duty military staffing numbers (number of people) have declined somewhat and payments to retirees are not growing as they did earlier due to attrition of WWII and Korean era veterans, Harper wrote. The overall growth in military spending (the study to be released uses 2008 federal spending data), combined with weakness in other areas of the Florida economy in the most recent years, means that DoD (Department of Defense) spending will have risen as a share of the total economy.We searched around for other studies measuring the military's economic impact in Florida, but found none. In examining Harper's study, we found it to be a straightforward, unbiased report. Researchers relied on Department of Defense actual expenditures, precise personnel levels and actual government contracts.Where does it leave us? Scott told reporters military spending makes up about 10 percent of the state's economy. In 2005, military spending accounted for 7.5 percent of the state gross domestic product, but that figure did not include the impact of the Florida National Guard or Coast Guard bases. The author of the study, who is now updating his report using 2008 numbers, said that while he cannot release more up-to-date numbers, that the military's position in the economy has risen since 2005. That will make Scott's point nearly right on. We rate this claim True.","['Economy', 'Military', 'Florida']",True,"Gov.-elect Rick Scott kicked off a five-day, 10-city tour of the state's major industries on Dec. 6, 2010, by meeting with defense contractors and Florida-based military leaders.Scott started the tour in the Panhandle, meeting with about 20 defense contractors, including Boeing, Lockheed Martin, L-3 Communications and InDyne Corp., at the University of Florida Research and Engineering Education Facility in Shalimar, before meeting with military leaders at Eglin Air Force Base.We want to make sure we're always thought of as a very military-friendly state,Scott said to reporters at a brief press conference. We're going to focus on what our strengths are. We're clearly a logical place for the military to expand and for the defense industry to expand. We've got a lot of talent in the state, we like the defense industry and the military, so we're going to figure out where we have the most value.Scott tried to underscore the importance of the military to Florida by noting that the military accounts for about 10 percent of Florida's economy, according to theSt. Petersburg Times.Florida is home to 20 major military installations and three unified combatant commands. The Gulf of Mexico is a key training ground for both the Air Force and the Navy, and the state also has two U.S. Coast Guard air stations and another dozen other Coast Guard stations.But does all of that translate to a 10 percent share of the state's gross domestic product,which was $737 billion in 2009?The answer comes from an arm of Enterprise Florida called theFlorida Defense Alliance, a public/private partnership created in 1998 to help position Florida to keep its military infrastructure in place and expand in other areas when opportunities arise. The group commissioned a study in 2008 to examine the economic impact of Florida's stationed military and auxiliary defense industry work.The study was conducted by Rick Harper, an economist from the University of West Florida, who has studied the economic impact of the film and entertainment industry in Florida and who represented Northwest Florida on former Gov. Jeb Bush's Council of Economic Advisers from 2001-2006. Using 2005 data, Harper concluded that defense-related spending is responsible for $52 billion, or 7.5 percent, of Florida's gross state product that year.The military spent $27 billion across Florida counties in fiscal year 2005, Harper concluded -- $10.4 billion was for goods and services, $12.4 billion for pensions and transfer payments, and $4.3 billion for salaries and wages. The rest of the economic impact is measured in indirect and induced spending, which would include parts of the private defense industry as well as parts of the Florida economy that help service the military, the defense industry and their employees.Harper said that defense and military spending accounted for 732,300 direct and indirect jobs in the state and generated state and local tax revenues of nearly $1 billion.Counties with larger installations enjoy larger impacts, Harper found. Military and defense spending in Duval County had a $12.1 billion impact, a $5.3 billion impact in Hillsborough County and a $6.6 billion impact in Okaloosa County. All but six counties have at least $3 million per year in direct defense-related spending.Harper and Florida Defense Alliance executive director Rocky McPherson noted that the study does not include the economic impact generated by the Florida National Guard or Coast Guard operations. You can see a short synopsis of the study for yourselfhere. Or if you have a lot of time, here's thethree-volume version.Harper's study relies on five-year-old data, so we wanted to see if there was anything more recent. McPherson said Harper and University of West Florida researchers were updating their study using 2008 data but, he said, that report is not available yet. Harper declined to share the results of the study with PolitiFact Florida, but did talk about the results in general terms.Since 2005, Department of Defense spending has risen substantially, particularly in terms of procurement (i.e., contracting), as well as payments to disabled veterans, although active duty military staffing numbers (number of people) have declined somewhat and payments to retirees are not growing as they did earlier due to attrition of WWII and Korean era veterans, Harper wrote. The overall growth in military spending (the study to be released uses 2008 federal spending data), combined with weakness in other areas of the Florida economy in the most recent years, means that DoD (Department of Defense) spending will have risen as a share of the total economy.We searched around for other studies measuring the military's economic impact in Florida, but found none. In examining Harper's study, we found it to be a straightforward, unbiased report. Researchers relied on Department of Defense actual expenditures, precise personnel levels and actual government contracts.Where does it leave us? Scott told reporters military spending makes up about 10 percent of the state's economy. In 2005, military spending accounted for 7.5 percent of the state gross domestic product, but that figure did not include the impact of the Florida National Guard or Coast Guard bases. The author of the study, who is now updating his report using 2008 numbers, said that while he cannot release more up-to-date numbers, that the military's position in the economy has risen since 2005. That will make Scott's point nearly right on. We rate this claim True."
Do banks need to disclose all transactions exceeding $600 to the IRS as part of the Biden proposal?,['The American Families Plan has a reporting requirement for banks that has infuriated some.'],"Announced in April 2021, U.S. President Joe Biden's American Families Plan is an ambitious proposal that aims to expand Americans' access to childcare and education and increase the number of women in the workforce. The plan intends to fund all of this through higher taxes on income earners and increased reporting requirements for banks that could potentially yield more tax revenue. These reporting requirements have drawn the ire of several banks that took issue with this less widely known section of the plan. A Facebook post by FNB Community Bank claimed: ""The Biden administration has proposed requiring all community banks and other financial institutions to report to the IRS on all deposits and withdrawals through business and personal accounts worth more than $600, regardless of tax liability. This indiscriminate, comprehensive bank account reporting to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) could soon be enacted in Congress and will create an unacceptable invasion of privacy for our customers."" Another screenshot shared by our readers expressed similar concerns: ""The Independent Community Bankers of America (ICBA) even began a campaign, calling on communities to send a letter to Biden to prevent this so-called intrusive proposal: 'Tell Congress: Don't Let IRS Invade My Privacy.' The Biden administration is proposing requiring financial institutions to report to the IRS all transactions of all business and personal accounts worth more than $600. This is an unprecedented invasion of privacy. In order to oppose this intrusive proposal, please send this letter to your representative and senators immediately."" We looked up the proposal itself, and it does require more robust reporting of transactions across business and personal accounts. The proposal, which aims to go into effect after December 31, 2022, states: ""This proposal would create a comprehensive financial account information reporting regime. Financial institutions would report data on financial accounts in an information return. The annual return will report gross inflows and outflows with a breakdown for physical cash, transactions with a foreign account, and transfers to and from another account with the same owner."" This requirement would apply to all business and personal accounts from financial institutions, including bank, loan, and investment accounts, with the exception of accounts below a low de minimis gross flow threshold of $600 or fair market value of $600. We begin by explaining some of the more technical terms in this proposal. A ""de minimis threshold"" is broadly defined as the amount of a transaction that has such a small value that accounting for it would be unreasonable. We spoke to Visiting Assistant Professor of Tax Law at New York University, Nyamagaga Gondwe, who explained, ""It is the amount below which the IRS would argue isn't worth investigating. It's the difference between your company giving you a $5 card to Subway versus traveling on a private jet on your company's dime. The latter is worth reporting."" In this case, ""gross flow"" refers to the aggregate inflows and outflows of cash from bank accounts. In sum, the current proposal stipulates that an aggregate amount of less than $600 worth of cash flowing into and out of accounts is not worth reporting. The ""fair market value"" refers to the amount people are willing to pay for an asset in the open market. In this case, Gondwe argued, the use of the term could possibly refer to the changing market value of transactions exceeding $600 that may occur in foreign currency transactions. The ICBA claims that the proposal will make banks report ""all transactions"" above the limit, but this is misleading. While it is true that the IRS will have more information on cash flows above $600, that doesn't mean they will have all the information pertaining to all transactions. The Center for American Progress (CAP) points out that banks will only be providing aggregate numbers to the IRS after each year—gross inflow and gross outflow—and not individualized transaction information. This reporting requirement would also extend to peer-to-peer payment services like Venmo, but wouldn't require people to report any additional information to the government. According to The Wall Street Journal, financial institutions must already report interest, dividends, and investment incomes to the IRS, and the IRS can obtain other information through audits. According to Marie Sapirie of Tax Notes, a publication focused on tax news, a parenthetical to the proposal indicates that there is some flexibility in raising the minimum account balance/inflow/outflow above $600. The Tax Notes report also states that the Treasury Department estimated this form of reporting would raise $463 billion over the 10-year budget window, making it the third-largest revenue raiser proposed in the budget. The aim is to target businesses outside of large corporations that carry out gross underreporting of their income, amounting to $166 billion per year. According to the proposal: ""Requiring comprehensive information reporting on the inflows and outflows of financial accounts will increase the visibility of gross receipts and deductible expenses to the IRS. Increased visibility of business income will enhance the effectiveness of IRS enforcement measures and encourage voluntary compliance."" Banks claim this would be an invasion of consumer privacy, with the ICBA saying it would allow the government to monitor account information. However, CAP analysts Seth Hanlon and Galen Hendricks argue, ""Only the prior year's total inflow and total outflow would be reported on annual forms. No one would say that the IRS monitors you on your job because it receives a W-2 from your employer with your total wages every January."" Another challenge not mentioned in the ICBA's consumer alert is the higher costs this reporting proposal may impose on banks. In May 2021, a coalition of banking associations wrote a letter to the U.S. Senate Committee on Finance, arguing that they already provide a lot of data to the IRS, and that this would impose additional costs on their systems. The costs and other burdens imposed to collect and report account flow information would surpass the potential benefits from such a reporting scheme. New reporting would appear to require material development costs and process additions for financial institutions, as well as significant reconciliation and compliance burdens on impacted taxpayers. For example, reporting total gross receipts and disbursements would require a new reporting paradigm for depository institutions, necessitating system changes to collect the information. On the flipside, Sapirie wrote for Tax Notes, the benefits of such a reporting proposal may be difficult to realize: ""Increasing the amount of information flowing into the IRS would not in itself lead to increased enforcement, and it might come with added challenges."" Former IRS Commissioner Charles O. Rossotti acknowledged that the IRS today cannot use all the information it already receives, and significant areas of noncompliance are barely addressed, so more reporting alone will not solve the problem. It would almost certainly have a deterrent effect for taxpayers contemplating evasion, but the extent of that effect is unclear, and it might be insufficient to justify the costs to financial institutions and the federal government of implementing such a large new reporting regime. However, CAP's analysis argues that this will help prevent tax evasion while also providing more funding to enhance data security for consumers. Additional funding would go to enhancing data security. Even at present, the IRS's data security is already much better than that of the financial industry, with only very rare and limited breaches compared to the exponentially larger data breaches from financial institutions. Second, the reporting of information flows only from financial institutions to the IRS and not in the other direction, as some earlier proposals had called for. The Biden administration's bank reporting proposal is a critical element of the Build Back Better agenda. It gives the IRS some visibility into opaque forms of income that disproportionately accrue to high-income individuals. Despite fearmongering from bank lobbies, the proposal protects taxpayers' privacy while simply requiring banks to provide basic, aggregated information about flows. That enables the IRS to select audits in a more efficient and equitable way so that the vast majority of taxpayers will be less likely to be audited. By deterring and helping catch tax cheats, the proposal raises substantial revenue for the Build Back Better agenda, which provides critical investments to increase economic opportunities for American families and communities. On October 12, 2021, Speaker Nancy Pelosi defended the proposal in response to a question from a reporter, who said, ""[Banks] are concerned about the tracking of transactions that are greater than $600; Americans are starting to get worried about this. Do you think [this] is going to stay in the Reconciliation Bill?"" ""With all due respect, the plural of anecdote is not data,"" Pelosi said. ""Yes, there are concerns that some people have. But if people are breaking the law and not paying their taxes, one way to track them is through the banking measure. I think $600—that's a negotiation that will go on as to what the amount is. But yes."" Whatever the impact of this proposal is, it does require additional reporting of certain bank transactions, just not in the way the banks are portraying it.",['investment'],NEI,"Announced in April 2021, U.S. President Joe Bidens American Families Plan is an ambitious proposal that aims to expand Americans' access to childcare and education and increase the number of women in the workforce. The plan is to fund all of this through more taxes on higher-income earners and increased reporting requirements of banks that could potentially yield more tax revenue. These reporting requirements have caught the ire of a number of banks that took issue with this less widely known section of the plan.A Facebook post by FNB Community Bank claimed: The Biden administration has proposed requiring all community banks and other financial institutions to report to the IRS on all deposits and withdrawals through business and personal accounts worth more than $600 regardless of tax liability. This indiscriminate, comprehensive bank account reporting to the [Internal Revenue Service (IRS)] can soon be enacted in Congress and will create an unacceptable invasion of privacy for our customers.The Independent Community Bankers of America (ICBA) even began a campaign, calling on communities to send a letter to Biden to prevent this so-called intrusive proposal"":We looked up the proposal itself, and it does require more robust reporting of transactions across business and personal accounts. The proposal, which aims to go into effect after Dec. 31, 2022, states:We begin by explaining some of the more technical terms in this proposal. A ""de minimis threshold"" is broadly defined as the amount of a transaction that has such a small value that accounting for it would be unreasonable. We spoke to Visiting Assistant Professor of Tax Law at New York University, Nyamagaga Gondwe, who explained, ""It is the amount below which the [IRS] would argue isn't worth investigating. It's the difference between your company giving you a $5 card to Subway, versus traveling on a private jet on your company's dime. [The latter] is worth reporting."" In this case, ""gross flow"" refers to the aggregate inflows and outflows of cash from bank accounts. In sum, the current proposal stipulates that an aggregate amount of less than $600 worth of cash flowing into and out of accounts is not worth reporting. The ""fair market value"" refers to the amount people are willing to pay for an asset in the open market. In this case, Gondwe argued, the use of the term could possibly refer to the changing market value of transactions more than $600 that may occur in foreign currency transactions. The ICBA claims that the proposal will make banks report ""all transactions"" above the limit, but this is misleading. While it is true that the IRS will have more information on cashflows above $600, that doesnt mean they will have all the information pertaining to all transactions. The Center for American Progress (CAP) points out that banks will only be providing aggregate numbers to the IRS after each year  gross inflow and gross outflow  and not individualized transaction information. This reporting requirement would also extend to peer-to-peer payment services like Venmo, but wouldnt require people to report any additional information to the government. According to The Wall Street Journal, financial institutions must already report interest, dividends, and investment incomes to the IRS, and the IRS can get other information through audits.According to Marie Sapirie of Tax Notes, a publication focused on tax news, a parenthetical to the proposal indicates that there is some flexibility on raising the minimum account balance/inflow/outflow above $600.The Tax Notes report also states that the treasury department estimated this form of reporting would raise $463 billion over the 10-year budget window, making it the third largest revenue raiser proposed in the budget. The aim is to target businesses outside of large corporations that carry out gross underreporting of their income in the amount of $166 billion per year. According to the proposal: Requiring comprehensive information reporting on the inflows and outflows of financial accounts will increase the visibility of gross receipts and deductible expenses to the IRS. Increased visibility of business income will enhance the effectiveness of IRS enforcement measures and encourage voluntary compliance.Banks claim this would be an invasion of consumer privacy, with the ICBA saying it would allow the government to monitor account information. However, CAP analysts Seth Hanlon and Galen Hendricks argue, Only the prior years total inflow and total outflow would be reported on annual forms. No one would say that the IRS monitors you on your job because it receives a W-2 from your employer with your total wages every January.Another challenge not mentioned in the ICBAs consumer alert is the higher costs this reporting proposal may place on banks. In May 2021, a coalition of banking associations wrote a letter to the U.S. Senate Committee on Finance, arguing that they already give a lot of data to the IRS, and that this would impose additional costs on their systems:On the flipside, Sapirie wrote for Tax Notes, the benefits of such a reporting proposal may be difficult to come by:But CAPs analysis argues that this will help prevent tax evasion, while also providing more funding to enhance data security for consumers:On Oct. 12, 2021, Speaker Nancy Pelosi defended the proposal in response to a question from a reporter, who said, ""[Banks] are concerned about the tracking of transactions that are greater than $600, Americans are starting to get worried about this. Do you think [this] is going to stay in the Reconciliation Bill?"" "
"When it comes to income taxes, Wisconsin is one of the best places in the country to be poor but top 4 or 5 worst for middle-income earners.",[],"Its one of Madisons worst-kept secrets: Republicans at the Capitol want to cut state income taxes, and hope to take up the issue in the 2013 legislative session, which begins in January.The question is: Cut them for who?On that, its a good idea to listen to Rep. Robin Vos, the Republican from Rochester who was elected Nov. 13, 2012 as speaker of the state Assembly.Vos made clear in a recentWisPolitics interviewthat his top priority is a middle-class income tax cut.If youre poor in Wisconsin, it is one of the best places in the country to be poor. Were in the bottom 10 states as far as paying taxes if youre poor, Vos said in the interview. If youre successful, we are in the middle. I think were number 15 or 16 ...But if youre a person in the middle class, somebody who makes $20,000 to $200,000, youre in the top 4 or 5 worst places in the country to be a middle-class income taxpayer.Vos went on to tell WisPolitics that Republicans want an across-the-board income-tax cut, though the primary benefits would go to the middle class. When we asked him to clarify what he meant, he told us fiscal constraints might preclude -- for now -- reducing income tax rates on upper-income earners for whom legislative Democrats and Gov. Jim Doyle raised the top rate in 2010.So, is Vos right about how the income tax burden affects low and middle-income earners?When asked for backup, Vos pointed us to research presented to the bipartisanSteering Committee on Income Tax, a study group chaired by Vos that was set up through the nonpartisan Wisconsin Legislative Council.Lower-income workers:Vos said their income tax burden is in the bottom 10, and its clear from the complete interview he meant among the 41 states that levy a personal income tax.In a November 2009 study, the nonpartisan, liberal Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP)ranked the burdenon the lowest one-fifth of Wisconsins earners as the 29th-lowest among those 41 states.Thats not quite bottom 10, but the groups executive Matthew Gardner told us the difference between Wisconsin and the lowest rung of the bottom 10 was so trivially small as to be meaningless.Another 50-state study, by theMinnesota Taxpayers Associationin 2011, ranked the low-income burden in Wisconsin as either 32nd- or 34th-lowest for married couples at $10,000 or $20,000. Both are bottom 10.In Wisconsin, as in several other states, the working poor often have a negative income tax bill -- they get tax credits that wipe out their tax liability and in some cases result in a payment to them from the state.Wisconsin would be lower in these rankings, but some states pay even larger credits.Middle-income earners:Vos said this group faces a top-five burden.Income taxes paid by Wisconsin married couples and single heads of household in the $75,000 to $100,000 income range are fifth-highest in the country, based on the Minnesota study. The Wisconsin Department of Revenue indirectly cited the Minnesota study in testimony before the Vos-chaired study group.A sub-group of all married couples -- senior couples making $100,000 -- have the fourth-highest.The Minnesota groups research director, Aaron Twait, said he considers the $100,000 mark for two earners a classic middle-class household, based on average incomes in Wisconsin and Minnesota.In addition, the ITEP study shows only four states collecting a higher average tax rate than Wisconsin in the $57,000-$88,000 range.So Vos has evidence to back up this part of his claim.But when you look at other levels within Voss middle-class range of $20,000 to $200,000, the burden is not quite as heavy as Vos said.For example, at the $150,000 level in the Minnesota study, the rankings are No. 10 for singles, No. 8 for married couples filing jointly and No. 9 for single heads of household. Again, thats among the 41 states with an income tax.At $50,000, we found a mix of rankings between No. 3 and No. 7.Finally, Vos mentioned one other income group, the successful, by which he meant upper-income. Its not part of the claim were testing, but Vos said that groups income-tax burden was in the middle of the 41 states.Thats basically on target. We found tax-burden rankings from No. 11 to No. 17 for top earners in categories such as $250,000, $500,000 and $1 million annual income. These rankings were from the Minnesota study. The ITEP study also shows the rankings falling as income rises.Our ratingVos said that when it comes to income taxes, Wisconsin is one of the best places in the country to be poor but top 4 or 5 worst for middle-income earners.Hes mostly on target here, based on credible tax studies showing a very low burden on the working poor, compared to a very high burden on many middle-income earners.Not all the middle-income earners face a top-5 tax burden, though: Its top-10 for some in the middle-class as he defined it.We rate his claim Mostly True.","['State Budget', 'Taxes', 'Wisconsin']",True,"Its one of Madisons worst-kept secrets: Republicans at the Capitol want to cut state income taxes, and hope to take up the issue in the 2013 legislative session, which begins in January.The question is: Cut them for who?On that, its a good idea to listen to Rep. Robin Vos, the Republican from Rochester who was elected Nov. 13, 2012 as speaker of the state Assembly.Vos made clear in a recentWisPolitics interviewthat his top priority is a middle-class income tax cut.If youre poor in Wisconsin, it is one of the best places in the country to be poor. Were in the bottom 10 states as far as paying taxes if youre poor, Vos said in the interview. If youre successful, we are in the middle. I think were number 15 or 16 ...But if youre a person in the middle class, somebody who makes $20,000 to $200,000, youre in the top 4 or 5 worst places in the country to be a middle-class income taxpayer.Vos went on to tell WisPolitics that Republicans want an across-the-board income-tax cut, though the primary benefits would go to the middle class. When we asked him to clarify what he meant, he told us fiscal constraints might preclude -- for now -- reducing income tax rates on upper-income earners for whom legislative Democrats and Gov. Jim Doyle raised the top rate in 2010.So, is Vos right about how the income tax burden affects low and middle-income earners?When asked for backup, Vos pointed us to research presented to the bipartisanSteering Committee on Income Tax, a study group chaired by Vos that was set up through the nonpartisan Wisconsin Legislative Council.Lower-income workers:Vos said their income tax burden is in the bottom 10, and its clear from the complete interview he meant among the 41 states that levy a personal income tax.In a November 2009 study, the nonpartisan, liberal Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP)ranked the burdenon the lowest one-fifth of Wisconsins earners as the 29th-lowest among those 41 states.Thats not quite bottom 10, but the groups executive Matthew Gardner told us the difference between Wisconsin and the lowest rung of the bottom 10 was so trivially small as to be meaningless.Another 50-state study, by theMinnesota Taxpayers Associationin 2011, ranked the low-income burden in Wisconsin as either 32nd- or 34th-lowest for married couples at $10,000 or $20,000. Both are bottom 10.In Wisconsin, as in several other states, the working poor often have a negative income tax bill -- they get tax credits that wipe out their tax liability and in some cases result in a payment to them from the state.Wisconsin would be lower in these rankings, but some states pay even larger credits.Middle-income earners:Vos said this group faces a top-five burden.Income taxes paid by Wisconsin married couples and single heads of household in the $75,000 to $100,000 income range are fifth-highest in the country, based on the Minnesota study. The Wisconsin Department of Revenue indirectly cited the Minnesota study in testimony before the Vos-chaired study group.A sub-group of all married couples -- senior couples making $100,000 -- have the fourth-highest.The Minnesota groups research director, Aaron Twait, said he considers the $100,000 mark for two earners a classic middle-class household, based on average incomes in Wisconsin and Minnesota.In addition, the ITEP study shows only four states collecting a higher average tax rate than Wisconsin in the $57,000-$88,000 range.So Vos has evidence to back up this part of his claim.But when you look at other levels within Voss middle-class range of $20,000 to $200,000, the burden is not quite as heavy as Vos said.For example, at the $150,000 level in the Minnesota study, the rankings are No. 10 for singles, No. 8 for married couples filing jointly and No. 9 for single heads of household. Again, thats among the 41 states with an income tax.At $50,000, we found a mix of rankings between No. 3 and No. 7.Finally, Vos mentioned one other income group, the successful, by which he meant upper-income. Its not part of the claim were testing, but Vos said that groups income-tax burden was in the middle of the 41 states.Thats basically on target. We found tax-burden rankings from No. 11 to No. 17 for top earners in categories such as $250,000, $500,000 and $1 million annual income. These rankings were from the Minnesota study. The ITEP study also shows the rankings falling as income rises.Our ratingVos said that when it comes to income taxes, Wisconsin is one of the best places in the country to be poor but top 4 or 5 worst for middle-income earners.Hes mostly on target here, based on credible tax studies showing a very low burden on the working poor, compared to a very high burden on many middle-income earners.Not all the middle-income earners face a top-5 tax burden, though: Its top-10 for some in the middle-class as he defined it.We rate his claim Mostly True."
"According to Ted Cruz's tax proposal, businesses are required to pay a 16 percent tax on their earnings, as well as on the wages they distribute to their employees.",[],"Ted Cruzs tax plan, envisioningtax returns that fit on postcards, would whack businesses twice over, Marco Rubio says. We wondered about that. In the Jan. 14, 2016, Fox Business Network Republican presidential debate in North Charleston, S.C., Sen. Rubio of Florida said that under the plan advocated by Sen. Cruz of Texas, businesses basically will have to pay a tax, both on the money they make, but they also have to pay taxes on the money that they pay their employees. A moment later, Rubio said Cruzs plan does not eliminate the corporate (income) tax or the payroll tax. Businesses will now have to pay 16 percent on the money they make. They will also have to pay 16 percent on the money they pay their employees. Cruz disputed that characterization, saying in part that a critical piece that Marco seems to be missing is that this 16 percent business flat tax enables us to eliminate the corporate income tax. It goes away. Cruzs plan replaces the corporate income tax, the payroll tax and others with a flat tax. Does it also make businesses pay 16 percent on profits and payroll, as Rubio said? Cruzs plan outlined After emailing Rubios campaign about how he reached his 16 percent conclusions, we turned to Cruzs tax plan asoutlined by his campaign. Under the Simple Flat Tax, Cruz says on a campaign webpage, the current seven rates of personal income tax will collapse into a single low rate of 10 percent. For a family of four, the first $36,000 will be tax-free. The Child Tax Credit will remain in place, Cruz proposes, and the plan revamps the earned-income tax credit while preserving deductions for charitable contributions and mortgage interest payments. Heres the flat-tax postcard as envisioned by Cruz:  SOURCE:Web page,The Simple Tax Plan,Ted Cruz presidential campaign (viewed Jan. 20, 2016) Next up: the 16 percent element. On Cruzs website, we spotted no direct indication the 16 percent would apply to payroll spending. For businesses, Cruz says there, the corporate income tax will be eliminated. It will be replaced by a simple Business Flat Tax at a single 16 percent rate. The current payroll tax system will be abolished, while maintaining full funding for Social Security and Medicare. Cruz further says the business flat tax will be based on revenues minus expenses such as equipment, computers, and other business investments. In general, Cruz says, his proposed tax overhaul will deliver a tremendous economic boost, according to the well-respected Tax Foundation, a Washington, D.C., nonprofit thatdescribes itselfas a leading independent tax policy research organization. Independent breakdowns We fetched the foundationsOctober 2015 analysisof Cruzs plan which, the foundation said, would replace the corporate income tax and all payroll taxes with a 16 percent Business Transfer Tax, or subtraction method value-added tax. In addition, his plan would repeal a number of complex features of the current tax code. Farther along, the analysis spelled out a payroll aspect. Specifically, the foundation said, Cruzs plan: Enacts a broad-based, 16 percent Business Transfer Tax or value-added tax. This tax is levied on all business profits, less capital investment. This would include the payroll of business, government, and nonprofit institutions, as well as net imports. The tax would exempt from taxation the purchase of health insurance. A business transfer tax is also often known as a subtraction-method value-added tax. While its base is identical in economic terms to that of the credit-invoice VAT seen in many OECD countries, it is calculated from corporate accounts, not on individual transactions. The foundation also said: Under current law, some taxes on labor are explicitly levied on nominal wages, reducing take-home pay, while others are implicitly passed on to workers through lower nominal wages. The business transfer tax would also fall substantially on payrolls, but it would do so entirely through implicit reductions in nominal wages rather than explicit reductions in take-home pay. Thats a bit gobbledy-gooky for us. A foundation official, Kyle Pomerleau, told us by phone and email that what Rubio said largely holds up, though it would be wrong to conclude businesses under Cruzs plan would pay 16 percent on the same money twice. That is, Pomerleau elaborated, Cruzs plan eliminates the existing payroll tax, which is 15.3 percent of wages (half of that paid by employers, the other half by employees), but the plan counts payroll expenditures as part of net business profits, which are taxed at 16 percent. Even though his plan gets rid of the payroll tax, Pomerleau emailed, his new Business Flat Tax will end up taxing that payroll by disallowing its deduction at the business level. Another authority, Joe Rosenberg of theUrban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, told us by phone that Rubio was accurate about Cruzs plan presuming he meant what most people define as profit by his phrase what you make. Rosenberg walked us through how he sees Cruzs plan working: Say a business buys something for 50 cents at wholesale and has to pay its employees 50 cents, accumulating $1 in costs. Then the business sells the something for $1.10, drawing a 10-cent profit. Under the Cruz plan, Rosenberg said, the business pays the flat tax solely on the 60-cent difference between the $1.10 in sales and the 50 cents spent on the wholesale purchase. And, Rosenberg noted, theres another way to pin what Cruzs plan subjects to the 16 percent tax -- by isolating what the business makes, the 10 cents, and then adding the 50 cents in employee payroll. Its very fair to interpret what Sen. Rubio said as correct, Rosenberg said, though its also worth mention (again) that Cruzs plan eliminates existing payroll and income taxes. Broadly, Rosenberg didnt agree that Cruzs plan whipsaws businesses, saying: Its a change in the way theyre taxed. Its not taxing something twice. We didnt hear back from Rubios camp about his claim nor did Cruz aides engage. Footnote: A Jan. 14, 2016,foundation postby economist Alan Cole says Cruz and Rubio arent proposing entirely distinct tax approaches. In fact, Cole wrote, if you put together two taxes from Rubios plan (and fiddle with the rates), you can actually synthetically construct the business flat tax from Cruzs plan! Our ruling Rubio said that under Cruzs tax plan, businesses will now have to pay 16 percent on the money they make. They will also have to pay 16 percent on the money they pay their employees. Under Cruzs plan, that rate applies both to net income and payroll expenditures though the way this description was phrased by Rubio merits clarification. That is, the 16 percent would not be applied to what a business makes and separately applied again to money paid to employees. Also unsaid: The proposed tax would replace taxes including payroll and income taxes. We rate this claim Mostly True. MOSTLY TRUE The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information. Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check.","['Taxes', 'Texas']",True,"Ted Cruzs tax plan, envisioningtax returns that fit on postcards, would whack businesses twice over, Marco Rubio says.After emailing Rubios campaign about how he reached his 16 percent conclusions, we turned to Cruzs tax plan asoutlined by his campaign. Under the Simple Flat Tax, Cruz says on a campaign webpage, the current seven rates of personal income tax will collapse into a single low rate of 10 percent. For a family of four, the first $36,000 will be tax-free. The Child Tax Credit will remain in place, Cruz proposes, and the plan revamps the earned-income tax credit while preserving deductions for charitable contributions and mortgage interest payments.SOURCE:Web page,The Simple Tax Plan,Ted Cruz presidential campaign (viewed Jan. 20, 2016)In general, Cruz says, his proposed tax overhaul will deliver a tremendous economic boost, according to the well-respected Tax Foundation, a Washington, D.C., nonprofit thatdescribes itselfas a leading independent tax policy research organization.We fetched the foundationsOctober 2015 analysisof Cruzs plan which, the foundation said, would replace the corporate income tax and all payroll taxes with a 16 percent Business Transfer Tax, or subtraction method value-added tax. In addition, his plan would repeal a number of complex features of the current tax code.Another authority, Joe Rosenberg of theUrban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, told us by phone that Rubio was accurate about Cruzs plan presuming he meant what most people define as profit by his phrase what you make.Footnote: A Jan. 14, 2016,foundation postby economist Alan Cole says Cruz and Rubio arent proposing entirely distinct tax approaches. In fact, Cole wrote, if you put together two taxes from Rubios plan (and fiddle with the rates), you can actually synthetically construct the business flat tax from Cruzs plan!Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check."
Amelia Bassano: The True Shakespeare?,['Did a black woman named Amelia Bassano really write all of the plays attributed to William Shakespeare?  Unlikely.'],"In August 2015, a meme claiming that a black woman named Amelia Bassano Lanyer was the true (uncredited) author of all of William Shakespeare's plays began circulating online:   Although the authorship of Shakespeare's plays remains a topic of some debate among scholars, the above-displayed meme contains several factual errors. First, Aemilia Bassano (later Emilia Lanier) was indeed a published author, not someone whose work was suppressed because of her race or gender. In fact, the Shakespearean Authorship Trust notes that Bassano became the ""first woman to publish a book of original poetry"" when her work Salve Deus Rex Judaeorum was put into print in 1611: Brought up opposite the theatre district in a family of Venetian Jews of Moroccan ancestry, at the age of 7 she was given to be educated by Countess Susan Bertie, in the family headed by Peregrine Bertie, Lord Willoughby. At the age of 13 she became mistress to Lord Hunsdon, the man in charge of the English theatre. When she got pregnant a decade later she was expelled from court and married off to a minstrel. She was one of the first women to own and operate a school and the first woman to publish a book of original poetry Salve Deus Rex Judaeorum (1611). She died in poverty. Second, Bassano was not black. She was born to Baptista Bassano (a Venice musician at the court of Elizabeth I) and Margaret Johnson in 1569, and biographies of her note that she ""was part of a family of Italian court musicians of Moroccan/Semitic ancestry who lived as clandestine Jews."" born No contemporaneous accounts describe Bassano as ""black"" (or ""African""), and although its provenance is uncertain, many historians believe that this miniature portrait by Nicholas Hilliard depicts Amelia Bassano: portrait  Amelia Bassano may have been dark-complected, however. A 2009 paper published in the Oxfordian, the journal of Shakespearean authorship studies, stated that some of Bassano's relatives were referred to as ""black"" when they arrived in London, likely due to their dark complexions:  referred Brought to London from Venice in 1538/9, the dark-skinned Bassanos, some of whom were described in contemporary records as 'black' and who may have been of Moroccan as well as Jewish ancestry, became established as the Court recorder troupe."" Lastly, the claim that Amelia Bassano wrote all of William Shakespeare's plays is a decidedly fringe notion, even within the world of Shakespearean authorship controversies. While she is listed as a potential candidate by the Shakespearean Authorship Trust (a group seemingly determined to credit Shakespeare's work to anyone but Shakespeare himself), even among that group she is included as just one of 66 candidates identified so far: candidate She has long been identified as the 'dark lady' of the Sonnets. Her candidacy was announced in March 2007 in a lecture at the Smithsonian Institution as part of the Washington Shakespeare Festival by John Hudson, artistic director of the Dark Lady Players, a New York company who perform the underlying Jewish allegories in the plays. A 5000 word major article on her appears in the Summer/Fall 2009 special issue of The Oxfordian dedicated to the top authorship candidates.",['credit'],False,"Second, Bassano was not black. She was born to Baptista Bassano (a Venice musician at the court of Elizabeth I) and Margaret Johnson in 1569, and biographies of her note that she ""was part of a family of Italian court musicians of Moroccan/Semitic ancestry who lived as clandestine Jews.""No contemporaneous accounts describe Bassano as ""black"" (or ""African""), and although its provenance is uncertain, many historians believe that this miniature portrait by Nicholas Hilliard depicts Amelia Bassano:Amelia Bassano may have been dark-complected, however. A 2009 paper published in the Oxfordian, the journal of Shakespearean authorship studies, stated that some of Bassano's relatives were referred to as ""black"" when they arrived in London, likely due to their dark complexions: Lastly, the claim that Amelia Bassano wrote all of William Shakespeare's plays is a decidedly fringe notion, even within the world of Shakespearean authorship controversies. While she is listed as a potential candidate by the Shakespearean Authorship Trust (a group seemingly determined to credit Shakespeare's work to anyone but Shakespeare himself), even among that group she is included as just one of 66 candidates identified so far:"
Where's the Outrage - Alisa Wilson,"[""Letter to the 'Wall Steet Journal' responds to a 'Where's the Outrage?' editorial?""]","Claim:  Letter to the Wall Steet Journal responds to a ""Where's the Outrage?"" editorial. CORRECTLY ATTRIBUTED Example:  [Collected via e-mail, April 2009] This letter was sent to the Wall Street Journal on August 8, 2008 by Alisa Wilson, Ph.D. Of Beverly Hills, CA, in response to the Wall Street Journal article titled ""Where's The Outrage?"" that appeared July 31, 2008. Really. I can tell you where the outrage is. The outrage is here, in this middle-aged, well-educated, upper-middle class woman. The outrage is here, but I have no representation, no voice. The outrage is here, but no one is listening for who am I? I am not a billionaire like George Soros that can fund an entire political movement. I am not a celebrity like Barbra Streisand that can garner the attention of the press to promote political candidates. I am not a film maker like Michael Moore or Al Gore that can deliver misleading movies to the public. The outrage is here, but unlike those with money or power, I don't know how to reach those who feel similarly in order to effect change. Why am I outraged? I am outraged that my country, the United States of America, is in a state of moral and ethical decline. There is no right or wrong anymore, just what's fair. Is it fair that millions of Americans who overreached and borrowed more than they could afford are now being bailed out by the government and lending institutions to stave off foreclosure? Why shouldn't these people be made to pay the consequences for their poor judgment? When my husband and I purchased our home, we were careful to purchase only what we could afford. Believe me, there are much larger, much nicer homes that I would have loved to have purchased. But, taking responsibility for my behavior and my life, I went with the house that we could afford, not the house that we could  not afford. The notion of personal responsibility has all but died in our country. I am outraged, that the country that welcomed my mother as an immigrant from Hitler's Nazi Germany and required that she and her family learn English now allows itself to be overrun with illegal immigrants and worse, caters to those illegal immigrants. I am outraged that my hard-earned taxes help support those here illegally. That the Los Angeles Public School District is in such disarray that I felt it incumbent to send my child to private school, that every time I go to the ATM, I see ""do you want to continue in English or Spanish?"", that every time I call the bank, the phone company, or similar business, I hear ""press 1 for English or press 2 for Spanish"". WHY? This is America, our common language is English and attempts to promote a bi- or multi-lingual society are sure to fail and to marginalize those who cannot communicate in English. I am outraged at our country's weakness in the face of new threats on American traditions from Muslims. Just this week, Tyson's Food negotiated with its union to permit Muslims to have Eid-al-Fitr as a holiday instead of Labor Day. What am I missing? Yes, there is a large Somali Muslim population working at the Tyson's plant in Tennessee. Tennessee, last I checked, is still part of the United States. If Muslims want to live and work here they should be required to live and work by our American Laws and not impose their will on our long history. In the same week, Random House announced that they had indefinitely delayed the publication of The Jewel of Medina, by Sherry Jones, a book about the life of Mohammed's wife, Aisha due to fear of retribution and violence by Muslims. When did we become a nation ruled by fear of what other immigrant groups want? It makes me so sad to see large corporations cave rather than stand proudly on the principles that built this country. I am outraged because appeasement has never worked as a political policy, yet appeasing Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is exactly what we are trying to do. An excellent article, also published recently in the Wall Street Journal, went through over 20 years of history and why talking with Iran has been and will continue to be ineffective. Yet talk, with a madman no less, we continue to do. Have we so lost our moral compass and its ability to detect evil that we will not go in and destroy Iran 's nuclear program? Would we rather wait for another Holocaust for the Jews  one which they would be unlikely to survive? When does it end? As if the battle for good and evil isn't enough, now come the Environmentalists who are so afraid of global warming that they want to put a Bag tax on grocery bags in California; to eliminate Mylar balloons; to establish something as insidious as the recycle police in San Francisco. I do my share for the environment: I recycle, I use water wisely, I installed an energy efficient air conditioning unit. But when and where does the lunacy stop? Ahmadinejad wants to wipe Israel off the map, the California economy is being overrun by illegal immigrants, and the United States of America no longer knows right from wrong, good from evil.. So what does California do? Tax grocery bags. So, America , although I can tell you where the outrage is, this one middle-aged, well-educated, upper middle class woman is powerless to do anything about it. I don't even feel like my vote counts because I am so outnumbered by those who disagree with me. Alisa Wilson, Ph.D.Beverly Hills, California Origins:  On 31 July 2008, the Wall Street Journal published an editorial by Arthur C. Brooks, a professor at Syracuse University's Maxwell School of Public Affairs, entitled ""Where's the Outrage? Really.""  The gist of Mr. Brooks' commentary was to note that""virtually every group in the [U.S.] population [was] less angry"" in 2008 than in 1996 with the exception of those who identify themselves as ""very liberal,"" and to question why ""folks outside their ranks (including moderate liberals) are failing so miserably to muster up much rage in the current environment."" editorial In response to Mr. Brooks' opinion piece, Beverly Hills, California, resident Dr. Alisa Wilson penned the above-quoted letter, which was submitted to (but not published by) the Wall Street Journal.  As Dr. Wilson told us: a) I did indeed write that letter in August 2008.  Please note, however, that although I submitted the letter to the Wall Street Journal, the Wall Street Journal did not publish my letter.   b) The thoughts and sentiments in that article are my own, but apparently have resonated with many people.   c) I have seen some people in the ""blog-o-sphere"" question whether I am a real person.  Yes, indeed, I exist. Last updated:  19 May 2009 ",['economy'],True,"Origins:  On 31 July 2008, the Wall Street Journal published an editorial by Arthur C. Brooks, a professor at Syracuse University's Maxwell School of Public Affairs, entitled ""Where's the Outrage? Really.""  The gist of Mr. Brooks' commentary was to note that""virtually every group in the [U.S.] population [was] less angry"" in 2008 than in 1996 with the exception of those who identify themselves as ""very liberal,"" and to question why ""folks outside their ranks (including moderate liberals) are failing so miserably to muster up much rage in the current environment."""
What is the reason for NFL players standing on the sidelines during the National Anthem?,"['For much of the NFL\'s history, players weren\'t present on the field during the playing of ""The Star-Spangled Banner.""']","An image widely circulated on Facebook in response to the National Football League's anthem controversy claimed that NFL players did not stand on the sidelines during the playing of the U.S. national anthem before games prior to 2009. Instead, they stayed in locker rooms during the anthem and did not begin standing along the sidelines for renditions of ""The Star-Spangled Banner"" until after the Defense Department began paying the NFL to hold patriotic displays in 2009. The issue has been in the public spotlight ever since San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick began protesting police brutality by kneeling during the national anthem during exhibition games played prior to the start of the 2016 NFL season. Several other players, including some in other sports, have since participated in similar silent demonstrations during the 2016 and 2017 seasons. Tom E. Curran of Comcast Sportsnet New England reported in a story published on August 29, 2016, that teams standing together on the field during the national anthem was a relatively recent development in NFL history. ""NFL spokesman Brian McCarthy confirmed that this practice began in 2009, adding, 'As you know, the NFL has a long tradition of patriotism. Players are encouraged but not required to stand for the anthem.'"" What actually changed in 2009, according to NFL spokesman Brian McCarthy, was that players had previously remained in their locker rooms during the national anthem for primetime games due to network timing issues. After 2009, players appeared on the sidelines for the anthem during primetime games, just as they had been doing all along for Sunday afternoon games. The distinction often went unnoticed by viewers, as network telecasts frequently did not air the pre-game anthem ceremonies. ESPN commentator Stephen A. Smith referenced Curran's report during a segment on September 14, 2016, adding a ""paid patriotism"" element to the mix. The players were moved to the field during the national anthem because it was seen as a marketing strategy to make the athletes look more patriotic. The United States Department of Defense paid the National Football League $5.4 million between 2011 and 2014, and the National Guard paid $6.7 million between 2013 and 2015 to stage on-field patriotic ceremonies as part of military recruitment budget-line items. The practice of ""paid patriotism"" came to light on April 30, 2015, when Sen. Jeff Flake (R-AZ) released a statement chiding the New Jersey Army National Guard for paying between $97,000 and $115,000 to the New York Jets for a series of promotions involving military personnel. That November, Flake and fellow Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain issued a report stating that the Defense Department had been paying for patriotic displays in football and other sports between 2011 and 2014. Contrary to the public statements made by the DOD and the NFL, the majority of the contracts—72 of the 122 contracts analyzed—clearly show that the DOD paid for patriotic tributes at professional football, baseball, basketball, hockey, and soccer games. These paid tributes included on-field color guards, enlistment and reenlistment ceremonies, performances of the national anthem, full-field flag details, ceremonial first pitches, and puck drops. The National Guard paid teams for the opportunity to sponsor military appreciation nights and to recognize its birthday. It paid the Buffalo Bills to sponsor its Salute to the Service game. The DOD even paid teams for the opportunity to perform surprise welcome home promotions for troops returning from deployments and to recognize wounded warriors. While well-intentioned, it raises questions about how many of these displays included a disclaimer that these events were, in fact, sponsored by the DOD at taxpayer expense. Even with that disclosure, it is hard to understand how a team accepting taxpayer funds to sponsor a military appreciation game, or to recognize wounded warriors or returning troops, can be construed as anything other than paid patriotism. However, this report did not cover the year 2009, so it is unclear whether NFL teams' appearances on the field for the national anthem truly began in conjunction with the ""paid patriotism"" policy. In a September 2017 piece about the anthem controversy, CNN noted that the connection between ""paid patriotism"" and players being mandated to be present for the anthem is tenuous. The report does mention several instances where teams were paid for anthem performances, but that was about the specific artist or presentation. There is nothing in the report to suggest teams were paid or coerced into pulling players onto the field as part of ""paid patriotism"" initiatives. In fact, Pentagon spokesman Army Major Dave Eastburn recently clarified the Defense Department's current relationship with professional sports. ""DoD does not require or request that athletes be on the field during the playing of the national anthem when military members are part of the patriotic opener,"" he said in a statement to CNN. The league announced in May 2016 that they would refund $723,724 to taxpayers, which they said ""may have been mistakenly applied to appreciation activities rather than recruitment efforts"" during the years in question. This story was updated to note that the 2009 changes in NFL anthem policy were specific to primetime games.",['budget'],NEI,"Tom E. Curran of Comcast Sportsnet New England reported in a story published on 29 August 2016 that teams standing together on the field during the playing of the national anthem was a relatively recent development in NFL history: ""NFL spokesman Brian McCarthy confirmed this the practice began in 2009, adding, 'As you know, the NFL has a long tradition of patriotism. Players are encouraged but not required to stand for the anthem.'""ESPN commentator Stephen A. Smith referenced Currant's report during a segment on 14 September 2016, adding a ""paid patriotism"" element to the mix:The practice of ""paid patriotism"" came to light on 30 April 2015, when Sen. Jeff Flake (R-AZ) released a statement chiding the New Jersey Army National Guard for paying between $97,000 and $115,000 to the New York Jets for a series of promotions involving military personnel. That November, Flake and fellow Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain issued a report stating that the Defense Department had been paying for patriotic displays in football and other sports between 2011 and 2014:The league announced in May 2016 that they would refund $723,724 to taxpayers which they said ""may have been mistakenly applied to appreciation activities rather than recruitment efforts"" during the years in question."
Is George Soros providing financial support for debit cards distributed by the United Nations to refugees?,"['Conspiracy-pushing blogs seized on a  Slovenian ""report"" and conflated separate refugee aid programs.']","In November 2018, various conspiracy-pushing websites latched onto a dubious post originating from Europe to incite hysteria about both refugees and the United Nations. The original story, published on the right-wing Slovenian website Nova24TV, ""revealed"" that immigrants were spotted in Bosnia and Herzegovina using MasterCard debit cards and included an accusation sourced from an anonymous ""local police officer"": Migrants who are caught and sent back, in a few days or weeks, again try to illegally enter Croatia. Some of them are really poor, but many are well-equipped: they have new footwear, new clothes, sophisticated smartphones, and some also have MasterCards with no names, just numbers. The cards can be used to withdraw money from ATMs, but we do not know who funds them. The story also included a stock photograph of young black men who had no connection to the events described in the article, alongside the caption ""The image is symbolic."" The ""report"" was soon picked up by equally dubious websites, some of which included the same image without mentioning that it was a stock photo used only for ""symbolic"" purposes. Now the mystery has been solved regarding how so many poor migrants have been able to fund their illegal journeys to Europe. The UN, EU, and Soros, in partnership with MasterCard, have spent hundreds of millions of dollars providing migrants with prepaid debit cards, and European taxpayers have not been informed that their taxes are being spent on handouts to illegal immigrants. What those sites did, however, was expand on the original story by employing a familiar anti-Semitic dog whistle and attempting to tie the claim to liberal billionaire George Soros by falsely citing Nova24TV's piece—even though it did not mention him—and saying that the United Nations Refugee Agency (UNHCR) was working ""in cooperation"" with Soros. In reality, these posts conflated an existing United Nations Refugee Agency (UNHCR) program with a separate humanitarian partnership involving Soros and the credit card provider MasterCard. The UNHCR's program was launched in Moldova in 2011 and expanded in 2016. That program provided aid to 10.5 million people across 94 countries between 2016 and August 2018, with recipients accessing their money via cash machines or ""mobile money"" electronic payments distributed through specialized cell phones. Vulnerable persons fleeing persecution and seeking asylum in Moldova can now use debit cards under a new UNHCR initiative to expedite the distribution of the agency's monthly subsistence allowances. Moldova is the first country in Europe where the UN refugee agency has implemented the debit card scheme to streamline the distribution of its monthly financial support via Automated Teller Machines (ATMs). The new card scheme was launched by UNHCR in cooperation with BCR Chisinau S.A. It enables needy refugees, asylum seekers, and beneficiaries of humanitarian protection to receive convenient debit cards that they can use to withdraw the monthly support. ""UNHCR is very pleased to launch this initiative in Moldova as it enables people to withdraw funds at nearby bankomats at their convenience rather than having to commute to a central distribution point to collect the allowance,"" said Peter Kessler, UNHCR's representative in Moldova. ""Refugees have often suffered indignities and find it difficult to integrate into a new, safe host country,"" he added. ""Having these cards is another step towards helping them more actively participate in daily life and maintain a greater degree of dignity."" The sums being distributed to beneficiaries of the UNHCR initiative are modest, currently not more than 500-600 Moldovan leu (30-36 euros) per person each month. Experienced aid workers—including staff of the Ministry of Interior's Refugee Directorate, UNHCR, and its implementing partners—meet regularly to review applications for assistance. Recipients of the cards were pleased to gain bankomat access and avoid having to pay for city buses to go and collect their monthly support. Asylum seekers only receive social support for six months under the UN scheme while they await their decisions. However, refugees and beneficiaries of humanitarian protection may be assisted for longer periods if they are sick, have disabilities, or are elderly or unemployed. One of the most important benefits is that the debit cards will also give the recipients access to bank accounts, where they may eventually save money and earn interest. The UNHCR initiative was unrelated to either of two similar separate MasterCard-sponsored aid programs. The first, a June 2016 partnership between the credit card company, the Serbian Ministry of Labor, and the humanitarian group Mercy Corps, sought to provide prepaid debit cards to refugees to help meet basic needs. The global organization Mercy Corps launched the pilot program in partnership with MasterCard and the Serbian Ministry of Labor to distribute prepaid debit cards to eligible refugees traveling through Serbia. Families received cards with a value of about $235 (210 Euros), and individuals approximately $78 (70 Euros). The money could be used to make purchases that help meet immediate needs. It was the first such program in the region to use an international cashless payment mechanism to help the tens of thousands of refugees and migrants seeking haven in Europe. ""By leveraging our technologies and products such as MasterCard Aid Network and Prepaid, MasterCard collaborates with partners to provide essential services at the most critical times of refugees' lives."" To date, MasterCard Aid and Prepaid cards have been deployed in humanitarian responses across Africa, Asia, and Europe—in countries such as Turkey, Kenya, Yemen, Nepal, Ethiopia, Nigeria, Niger, the Philippines, and Greece—and are on track to support thousands of beneficiaries. ""We are working with Mercy Corps to provide assistance to thousands of refugees in Europe to cover their basic needs and allow them to live with dignity during one of the most difficult times in their lives."" A separate partnership between MasterCard and Soros to launch a ""standalone entity,"" Humanity Ventures, was first announced in January 2017. That program sought to provide private sector solutions to social issues such as joblessness, lack of access to healthcare, inadequate education, and financial exclusion among migrants and their host communities. Operating as a standalone entity, Humanity Ventures would initially combine solutions designed to expand access to healthcare and education, foster local economic development and entrepreneurship, and enhance the delivery of aid. One such solution is the MasterCard Aid Network, an award-winning digital voucher platform designed in partnership with humanitarian organizations. With the creation of Humanity Ventures, Soros could invest up to $50 million to make these solutions even more scalable and sustainable. The social enterprise could also serve as an incubator and accelerator for smaller projects committed to mitigating the migration crisis. Designed to combine the need for business returns with social impact, Humanity Ventures would also act as a new model for how civil society, governments, and the private sector improve quality of life and drive economic growth. Migrants are often forced into lives of despair in their host communities because they cannot gain access to financial, healthcare, and government services. ""Our potential investment in this social enterprise, coupled with MasterCard's ability to create products that serve vulnerable communities, can show how private capital can play a constructive role in solving social problems,"" said George Soros. Humanity Ventures is intended to be profitable to stimulate involvement from other businesspeople. ""We also hope to establish standards of practice to ensure that investments are not exploitative of the vulnerable communities we intend to serve."" The UNHCR has been involved with a program to provide cash to refugees via debit cards to help meet immediate needs, and George Soros has been involved with a program to assist migrants in partnership with MasterCard, but Soros is not funding the distribution of MasterCard debit cards to refugees via the United Nations.",['credit'],False,"What those sites did do, however, was expand on the original story by employing a familiar anti-Semitic dog whistle and attempting to tie the claim to liberal billionaire George Soros by falsely citing Nova24TV's piece -- even though it did not mention him -- and saying that the United Nations Refugee Agency (UNHCR) was working ""in cooperation"" with Soros.The UNCHR's program was launched in Moldova in 2011 and expanded in 2016. That program provided aid to 10.5 million people across 94 countries between 2016 and August 2018, with recipients accessing their money via cash machines or ""mobile money"" electronic payments distributed through specialized cell phones:The first, a June 2016 partnership between the credit card company, the Serbian Ministry of Labor, and the humanitarian group the Mercy Corps, sought to provide prepaid debit cards to refugees to help meet basic needs:A separate partnership between MasterCard and Soros to launch a ""standalone entity,"" Humanity Ventures, was first announced in January 2017. That program sought to provide private sector solutions to social issues such as joblessness, lack of access to healthcare, inadequate education, and financial exclusion among migrants and their host communities:"
Did Muslims Demand the Cross Be Removed From the Swiss Flag?,['A purported flag-burning incident in Switzerland is wanting of real facts.'],"In late September 2019, the anti-Muslim hate site Frontlines News published a bogus story reporting that ""Muslims in Switzerland are demanding that the white cross be removed from the Swiss national flag because, as a Christian symbol, it 'no longer corresponds to today's multicultural Switzerland.'"" The story contains a thumbnail image of men holding up a flag and burning it. The image was not taken recently, nor was it taken in Switzerland; in fact, the flag being burned is Danish, not Swiss. The photograph in question was taken by Agence France-Presse photographer Rizwan Tabassum in February 2006 in Karachi, Pakistan. According to the picture's caption, it depicts men burning a flag in response to outrage over cartoons in European newspapers depicting the Prophet Muhammad, the central figure of Islam. Generally, depicting Muhammad in images and statues is forbidden for observant Muslims. Frontlines News quotes and links to a story that was originally published by the Gatestone Institute, an anti-Muslim non-profit organization that, as NBC News reported in April 2018, ""promoted misleading and false anti-Muslim news, some of which was amplified by a Russian troll factory"" in the lead-up to the 2016 U.S. presidential elections. The Gatestone story cited by Frontlines News quotes only one source, Ivica Petrusic, who was the vice president of the Swiss social justice advocacy group Second@s Plus. Petrusic was quoted as saying the cross should be removed from the flag to reflect a separation between church and state and the country's growing cultural diversity. Petrusic makes no mention of Muslim people making that demand. The only element of the story linking to Muslims is Gateway's unfounded assertion that Second@s ""represents mostly Muslim second-generation foreigners in Switzerland."" Because the image took place at a different time and in a different place than Frontlines News reported, and because the underlying story originated in 2011 from an already unreliable source, we rate this claim ""False.""",['profit'],False,"In late September 2019, the anti-Muslim hate site Frontlines News published a bogus story reporting that ""Muslims in Switzerland are demanding that the white cross be removed from the Swiss national flag because as a Christian symbol it 'no longer corresponds to todays multicultural Switzerland.'""The story contains a thumbnail image of men holding up a flag and burning it.The image was not taken recently and it wasn't taken in Switzerland  in fact, the flag being burned is Danish, not Swiss. The photograph in question was taken by Agence France-Presse photographer Rizwan Tabassum in February 2006 in Karachi, Pakistan. According to the picture's caption, it depicts men burning a flag in response to outrage over cartoons in European newspapers depicting the Prophet Muhammad, the central figure of Islam. Generally, depicting Muhammad in images and statues is forbidden for observant Muslims.Frontlines News quotes and links to a story that was originally published by the Gatestone Institute, an anti-Muslim, non-profit organization that, as NBC News reported in April 2018, ""promoted misleading and false anti-Muslim news, some of which was amplified by a Russian troll factory"" in the lead-up to the 2016 U.S. presidential elections."
Is ICE 'Citizens Academy' Training Civilians To Arrest 'Undocumented' Immigrants?,"['An ICE initiative in Chicago aims to ""debunk myths"" about the agency known for its detention centers and targeting of immigrant communities.']","As so-called undocumented immigrants in the U.S. struggled to avoid deportation and risked their health during the 2020 coronavirus pandemic, government agencies created potential new challenges for them. In July, the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcements (ICE) Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) department announced they would be offering a six-day Citizens Academy training starting in September in Chicago, which would allow civilians and ICE officers to engage with each other. struggled risked their health announced Snopes readers shared the following letter from ICE, reportedly sent to potential participants across Chicago, and asked us if it meant the agency would be training civilians to assist in the apprehension of undocumented people. The answer is complicated. letter   We found that this was an actual letter sent by ICE. Although they said they were planning to conduct trainings in September and would show civilians how they made arrests, the notion that this would lead to civilians actually apprehending undocumented people was disputed by the agency. Immigration advocates, however, were skeptical.  In order to understand the actual nature and likely outcome of these trainings, we reached out to ICE, as well as immigration advocates, and looked at past examples of such academies.  According to an ICE press release, the interactive program would occur once a week over six weeks. Participants would learn about ICE policies and procedures from ERO officers, while officers would hear participants perspectives and debunk myths about ICE. press release The curriculum will include, but is not limited to, classroom instruction, visiting an immigration detention center, learning more about the health care ICE provides to those in its custody, and examining ICEs role in ensuring dignity, respect and due process of an immigration case from start to finish. Many in Chicago received letters from ICE inviting them to apply. The letter said, attendees will participate in scenario-based training ... including, but not limited to defensive tactics, firearms familiarization, and targeted arrests. received Nicole Alberico, an ICE spokesperson, responded to Snopes' request for more information about the training (emphasis ours): ...the academy is not to train members of the public to do the work of trained, federal law enforcement officers. ICE ERO Citizens Academy is modeled after other law enforcement community outreach programs  including ICEs Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), FBI and local police departments  all with the goal of directly engaging and educating the public. Chicago ERO is looking for a diverse set of influential community leaders  regardless of their stance on ICE  to apply. The spokesperson said that they also had not determined whether media would be permitted to attend the training, as they were considering health precautions because of the pandemic and privacy concerns.  In sum, according to their own descriptions, ICE plans on showing civilians how they as an agency carry out arrests but will not be training civilians to do arrests themselves.  According to one report, such a Citizens Academy has already taken place in Los Angeles for years, with participants simulating drug busts, arrests, and stakeouts. According to one graduate, the course immersed people in what the agents do. While the Chicago program was to be run by ERO, the Los Angeles Academy was being run under ICEs Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) department.  one report simulating The goal of such training appeared to be to get more people to understand ICEs perspective, see how they operate, and eventually construct a positive image of the agency in various communities. There is no available evidence that such trainings led to civilians participating in actual arrests.  Testimony from activists, human rights organizations, and reporting show ample proof of ICEs history of violating detainees rights, inhumane arrests of undocumented immigrants, separating children from their parents, and the lack of accountability surrounding their operations. ICE has also used civilian informants before. violating detainees rights arrests lack of accountability civilian informants The Citizens Academy announcement faced swift backlash from activists and government officials, including Chicago's alderman, Rossana Rodriguez, who labeled it a vigilante academy. In July, Democratic Rep. Mike Quigley put forward an amendment to the Homeland Security spending bill, barring agencies like ICE from using government funds to run Citizens Academy courses. vigilante academy forward Immigration activists said these classes were at best propaganda and at worst would train civilians to ""snitch"" on undocumented immigrants. Lam Nguyen Ho, executive director of Beyond Legal Aid, an organization that provides legal services to immigrants in Chicago, spoke to Snopes about the dangers of such academies:  said propaganda ... the best case scenario for this training is ICE doing a marketing campaign to justify continuing to deport undocumented immigrants indiscriminately and separating families inhumanely ... We have immigrants afraid of opening their doors and applying for immigration rights to which they are actually eligible due to the fears and violence they see ... I cant imagine the misinformation and fears that will be created when an agency of our government is basically sanctioning and coordinating neighbors surveilling, profiling, or worse against each other. (Update: The Chicago Citizen's Academy was postponed in 2020 due to the pandemic, and a new date had not been announced. According to a statement from an ICE official, it will be tentatively scheduled for the spring of 2021.) In sum, ICE confirmed that the Citizens Academy course will take place, but denied they will train civilians to carry out arrests. Based on ICEs history of abuses against immigrant populations, the fears surrounding this particular training aren't unreasonable, but the exact nature and outcome of the training remains to be seen. Based on all of the above factors, we rate this claim a Mixture. Da Silva, Chantal.  ""DHS Spending Bill Amended to Ban Funding for ICE's Citizen's Academy.""
 Newsweek. 15 July 2020. Da Silva, Chantal.  ""ICE Offering 'Citizens Academy' Course with Training on Arresting Immigrants.""
 Newsweek. 9 July 2020. Gonzalez, Christina.""ICE Citizen Academy Causing Uproar in Chicago, Has Been Going on in Los Angeles - for Years.""
 Fox11 Los Angeles. 11 July 2020. Human Rights Watch.  ""US: Stop Using Untrained, Abusive Agencies at Protests.""
 5 June 2020. Kaplan, Emily.  ""What Isolation Does to Undocumented Immigrants.""
  The Atlantic. 27 May 2020. Katz, Ryan. ""Play to Stay.""
 The Intercept. 24 September 2018. McFarling, Usha Lee. ""Fearing Deportation, Many Immigrants at Higher Risk of Covid-19 Are Afraid to Seek Testing or Care.""
  StatNews. 15 April 2020. Mejia, Brittny. ""At Citizen Academies, Devoted Participants Get Their Law Enforcement Fix.""
 Los Angeles Times. 3 December 2018. Tashman, Brian. ""Congress Needs To Hold ICE Accountable for Abuses.""
 ACLU. 2 February 2018. Torres, Adry. ""ICE Is Offering a Six-week Course on How to Arrest Immigrants - Including 'Firearms and Defensive Training' - as Critics Warns They Are Using Private Citizens As Their Eyes and Ears.""
 The Daily Mail.8 July 2020. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. ""ICE Offers First Citizens Academy for Public to Learn More About Agencys Mission in Chicago.""
 13 July 2020. Zamudio, Maria Ines. ""ICE Citizens Trainings May Be a 'Vigilante Academy,' Chicago Alderman Warns.""
 NPR. 10 July 2020.",['funds'],NEI,"As so-called undocumented immigrants in the U.S. struggled to avoid deportation and risked their health during the 2020 coronavirus pandemic, government agencies created potential new challenges for them. In July, the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcements (ICE) Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) department announced they would be offering a six-day Citizens Academy training starting in September in Chicago, which would allow civilians and ICE officers to engage with each other.Snopes readers shared the following letter from ICE, reportedly sent to potential participants across Chicago, and asked us if it meant the agency would be training civilians to assist in the apprehension of undocumented people. The answer is complicated.According to an ICE press release, the interactive program would occur once a week over six weeks. Participants would learn about ICE policies and procedures from ERO officers, while officers would hear participants perspectives and debunk myths about ICE.Many in Chicago received letters from ICE inviting them to apply. The letter said, attendees will participate in scenario-based training ... including, but not limited to defensive tactics, firearms familiarization, and targeted arrests.According to one report, such a Citizens Academy has already taken place in Los Angeles for years, with participants simulating drug busts, arrests, and stakeouts. According to one graduate, the course immersed people in what the agents do. While the Chicago program was to be run by ERO, the Los Angeles Academy was being run under ICEs Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) department. Testimony from activists, human rights organizations, and reporting show ample proof of ICEs history of violating detainees rights, inhumane arrests of undocumented immigrants, separating children from their parents, and the lack of accountability surrounding their operations. ICE has also used civilian informants before.The Citizens Academy announcement faced swift backlash from activists and government officials, including Chicago's alderman, Rossana Rodriguez, who labeled it a vigilante academy. In July, Democratic Rep. Mike Quigley put forward an amendment to the Homeland Security spending bill, barring agencies like ICE from using government funds to run Citizens Academy courses.Immigration activists said these classes were at best propaganda and at worst would train civilians to ""snitch"" on undocumented immigrants. Lam Nguyen Ho, executive director of Beyond Legal Aid, an organization that provides legal services to immigrants in Chicago, spoke to Snopes about the dangers of such academies: "
Did Pelosi Say Congress Would Not Return 'Unless There Is an Emergency'?,['Both the U. S. House and Senate extended their recesses until May 4 due to the dangers of coronavirus.'],"In April 2020, as much of the U.S. economy was at a standstill while the federal and state governments scrambled to deal with the COVID-19 coronavirus disease pandemic, a meme circulated via social media held that U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi had declared Congress would be out of session until the following month unless an ""emergency"" arose:  This meme was a gross distortion of what actually took place, which was not that Pelosi took it upon herself to decide no current emergency required lawmakers' attention and to adjourn Congress until the following month (a power she does not possess). Rather, bipartisan statements from the majority leaders of both houses of Congress  Republican Mitch McConnell for the Senate and Democrat Steny Hoyer for the House of Representatives  announced that Congress would be extending its current recess by an additional two weeks due to the COVID-19 outbreak, but legislators would continue to work remotely until May 4 unless they needed to return to Washington, D.C., earlier than that to pass emergency measures related to the pandemic. For example, CNBC reported the following of the House Majority Leader's statement on scheduling: reported scheduling The House will not come back to Washington until at least May 4 unless it needs to pass emergency measures to respond to the coronavirus pandemic, Majority Leader Steny Hoyers office told representatives. The chamber previously expected lawmakers to return on April 20 after an extended absence. House members, most of whom have been in their districts for all of April as Covid-19 spreads, will not have to travel to Washington before May 4 absent an emergency, the Maryland Democrats office said. It added that lawmakers would get sufficient notice if they have to travel to Washington to vote on coronavirus legislation. Similarly, NPR reported the following of the Senate Majority Leader's statement on scheduling: reported Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell announced the full Senate will not plan to return to the Capitol before May 4 -- a delay from a planned return [on April 20]. McConnell said the decision to change the schedule was made ""following the advice of health experts"" and in consultation with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer. McConnell, R-Ky., stressed that Congress continues to work remotely to respond to the economic impact of the coronavirus. ""As Senators continue working together from our home states, we must stay totally focused on fighting this pandemic and strengthening our nation. The coronavirus does not take days off and the United States Senate must not either, wherever we are,"" McConnell said in a written statement. The move follows a similar announcement a day earlier from House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., informing members the House would not return until May 4. Both leaders indicated that if Congress needed to act quickly on something, members would be given at least 24 hours' notice. Here is the full announcement issued by U.S. Senate Majority Leader McConnell on April 14, 2020, regarding scheduling: announcement Since the Senate passed the historic CARES Act in late March, Senators have been working around the country to monitor its implementation and help our states and nation attack this pandemic. As the country continues working together to flatten the curve, following the advice of health experts, the full Senate is not expected to travel back to Washington D.C. sooner than Monday, May 4th. All members will receive at least 24 hours notice if this changes. This bipartisan decision reflects consultation with Leader Schumer and my colleagues in Senate leadership. As Senators continue working together from our home states, we must stay totally focused on fighting this pandemic and strengthening our nation. The coronavirus does not take days off and the United States Senate must not either, wherever we are. For example, the crucial Paycheck Protection Program (PPP), which is literally saving millions of American jobs, will run dry this week if we do not pass more funding. While other CARES Act programs such as hospital funding and assistance for state governments are just beginning to push out money, 70% of the PPPs funding has been already allotted in just a week and a half. President Trump, Secretary Mnuchin, and Senate and House Republicans simply want to add more funding for this job-saving program that both parties designed together. There is no time to insist on sweeping renegotiations or ultimatums about other policies that passed both houses unanimously. Clean funding for worker pay in a crisis should not be controversial. I hope our Democratic colleagues will let Congress act this week. American workers deserve paychecks, not pink slips caused by political games. And here is the scheduling announcement issued by U.S. House Majority Leader Hoyer: announcement Members are advised that absent an emergency, the House is not expected to meet prior to Monday, May 4, 2020. Members are further advised that if the House is required to take action on critical legislation related to the coronavirus response or other legislative priorities, Members will be given sufficient notice to return to Washington, DC. Further information will be provided as it becomes available. Congressional leaders also left open the possibility that members might return sooner than May 4 if pandemic-related legislation was ready to be voted upon:  Pramuk, Jacob.  ""House Will Not Return to Washington Until May 4 Unless It Has to Pass Emergency Bill.""
  CNBC.  13 April 2020. Walsh, Deirdre.  ""Congress Won't Return Until May, As Talks Appear yo Stall on Small Business Aid.""
  NPR.  13 April 2020.",['economy'],False,"For example, CNBC reported the following of the House Majority Leader's statement on scheduling:Similarly, NPR reported the following of the Senate Majority Leader's statement on scheduling:Here is the full announcement issued by U.S. Senate Majority Leader McConnell on April 14, 2020, regarding scheduling:And here is the scheduling announcement issued by U.S. House Majority Leader Hoyer:"
Fake Map Image Says Musk's Jet Was Flown to Jeffrey Epstein's Island,"[""An image of a flight path was shared on Twitter that claimed Elon Musk's jet had made numerous trips to one of Epstein's islands.""]","On Dec. 14, 2022, Twitter user Sheetz is Antifa (@wawajawn) posted an image of a map that appeared to show that, since 2010, Elon Musk's jet had made 12 trips to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein's island, Little Saint James, in the U.S. Virgin Islands. However, after other users reposted the image, @wawajawn soon admitted to creating it and stated that it was fake. According to NBC News, a lawsuit that was settled in November alleged that Little Saint James and Great Saint James, both of which the late Epstein owned, were once used as ""the base of an extensive sex trafficking operation."" The tweet with the fake map image was shared by @wawajawn on the same day that Twitter removed an account named @elonjet, which had tracked the real-time location of Musk's aircraft. We previously reported on that story, which included news of alleged stalking and the banning of several journalists, among other developments. Despite the map image being fake, it still spread on other Twitter accounts, including popular shares from Anonymous Operations (@AnonOpsSE) and a user named Keith Edwards (@keithedwards). Edwards is a former communications director for the Florida Democratic gubernatorial candidate Nikki Fried's 2022 campaign. He also once worked for the anti-Trump organization known as the Lincoln Project. Edwards tweeted, ""This is old data from Elon's jet, so it's ok to share."" This was somewhat of a response to a tweet Musk had shared just seven minutes earlier. Musk's tweet read, ""Any account doxxing real-time location info of anyone will be suspended, as it is a physical safety violation. This includes posting links to sites with real-time location info."" The last part of the tweet was apparently what Edwards was referencing: ""Posting locations someone traveled to on a slightly delayed basis isn't a safety problem, so is ok."" We reached out to Edwards via a Twitter DM to ask if he had posted the map image as a joke, but did not receive a response before publishing this story. A screenshot of @AnonOpsSE's tweet with the fake map image also appeared in new posts on Reddit. One Reddit post showed @wawajawn's original tweet. Many of the comments in the posts, as well as replies to tweets, noted that there appeared to be no landing strip on Little Saint James, which would mean that the flight path in the image couldn't even be a possibility. On top of all the shares on Twitter and Reddit (and 9GAG), the fake image was even posted in a 4Chan thread. (The relevant post can be found by searching the page for the text, ""elon-jet-epstein.jpg."") While the map image was fake, we found that Vanity Fair did report in 2019 that Musk said he and his then-wife, Talulah Riley, once met briefly with Epstein in New York. Musk added that he declined invitations from Epstein to visit his island. Musk and Riley later divorced. ""Several years ago, I was at his house in Manhattan for about 30 minutes in the middle of the afternoon with Talulah, as she was curious about meeting this strange person for a novel she was writing,"" Musk said. ""We did not see anything inappropriate at all, apart from weird art. He tried repeatedly to get me to visit his island. I declined."" Riley also provided a statement on Twitter in 2020, saying that the single meeting with Epstein was nothing more than ""part of an itinerary of appointments."" For further reading, we previously reported on a photograph of Musk and convicted sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell. Note: According to an autopsy, Epstein died by suicide in 2019 while awaiting trial on sex-trafficking charges in New York.",['share'],False,"According to NBC News, a lawsuit that was settled in November alleged that Little Saint James and Great Saint James, both of which the late Epstein owned, were once used as ""the base of an extensive sex trafficking operation.""The tweet with the fake map image was shared by @wawajawn on the same day that Twitter removed an account named @elonjet that had tracked the real-time location of Musk's aircraft. We previously reported on that story, which included the news of alleged stalking and the banning of several journalists, among other developments.Despite the map image being fake, it still spread on other Twitter accounts, including popular shares fromAnonymous Operations(@AnonOpsSE) and a user named Keith Edwards (@keithedwards).Edwards tweeted, ""This is old data from Elon's jet, so it's ok to share."" This was somewhat of a response to a tweet Musk had shared just seven minutes earlier.Musk's tweetread, ""Any account doxxing real-time location info of anyone will be suspended, as it is a physical safety violation. This includes posting links to sites with real-time location info."" The last part of the tweet was apparently what Edwards was referencing: ""Posting locations someone traveled to on a slightly delayed basis isn't a safety problem, so is ok.""A screenshot of @AnonOpsSE's tweet with the fake map image also appeared in new posts on Reddit. One Redditpostshowed @wawajawn's original tweet.Many of the comments in the posts, as well as replies to tweets, noted that there appeared to be no landing strip on Little Saint James, which would mean that the flight path in the image couldn't even be a possibility.On top of all of the shares on Twitter and Reddit (and 9GAG), the fake image was even posted in a 4Chan thread. (The relevant post can be found by searching the page for the text, ""elon-jet-epstein.jpg."")While the map image was fake, we found that Vanity Fair did reportin 2019 that Musk said he and his then wife, Talulah Riley, once met briefly with Epstein in New York. Musk added that he declined invitations from Epstein to visit his island. Musk and Riley later divorced.Riley also provided a statement on Twitter in 2020,saying that the single meeting with Epstein was nothing more than ""part of an itinerary of appointments.""For further reading, we previously reported on a photograph of Musk and convicted sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell."
"West Virginia has the nations lowest workforce participation rate, which hovers around 50 percent, when the national average is about 63 percent.",[],"Is workforce participation lower in West Virginia than in any state? Thats what West Virginia University president Gordon Gee wrote in a recentop-ed. Gees Jan. 14 column in the State Journal newspaper was titled, An effective education system is key to West Virginias future. In the column, Gee wrote, As I often point out, our state does not have a job problem. It has a skills problem that leaves many high-paying jobs unfilled. We have the nations lowest workforce participation rate, which hovers around 50 percent, when the national average is about 63 percent. Is this claim accurate? We took a closer look. Economists say the most appropriate statistic in this case is the civilian labor force participation rate, which is calculated on a regular basis by the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics. Thestatistictakes the number of people who are employed, adds it to the number of unemployed people who are looking for work, and divides the sum by the total population that is at least 16 years of age, not serving on active duty in the military, and not institutionalized in a facility such as a prison or a long-term-care home. The most recentdataavailable from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, from December 2018, showed that West Virginia had a civilian labor force participation rate of 53.9 percent. The figure didnt deviate much throughout 2018, ranging from 53.7 percent to 54 percent depending on the month. The past five years also looked similar to 2018. The average workforce participation rate in 2018 was 53.9 percent. In 2017 it was 53.3 percent, in 2016 it was 53.1 percent, in 2015 it was 52.8 percent, and in 2014 it was 53.1 percent. He would have been a little closer using a similar, but distinct, statistic known as the employment-population ratio. This statistic takes the number of employed people and divides it by the same overall population used in the civilian labor force participation rate. In West Virginia, that was 51.2 percent in December 2018, and was close to that during 2018. So for this part of his statement, Gee was close, and he did say around 50 percent, which gives him some wiggle room. West Virginia did indeed have the lowest civilian labor force participation rate in the nation in December 2018. The next-closest state was Mississippi, with 55.8 percent. And the pattern was much the same for the rest of 2018. In fact, West Virginia has remained in the lowest spot since the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics began reporting the series on a consistent basis in 1976, said Brian Lego, research assistant professor at West Virginia Universitys Bureau of Business and Economic Research. Thenational civilian labor force participation ratewas 63.1 percent in December 2018, after rising from a low of 62.7 percent earlier in the year. So Gee is on target with his statement that the national rate was about 63 percent. Lego said there are a range of factors that explain the states weak performance. The big picture reasons are related to human capital deficiencies such as lack of skills needed for jobs available, he said. He also cited poor health, drug abuse, and a large number of elderly residents in West Virginia. Gee said, We have the nations lowest workforce participation rate, which hovers around 50 percent, when the national average is about 63 percent. He was very close on all three elements of the statement, and he gave himself some breathing room by using the words around and about. We rate his statement True.","['West Virginia', 'Economy', 'Jobs', 'Workers']",True,"Is workforce participation lower in West Virginia than in any state? Thats what West Virginia University president Gordon Gee wrote in a recentop-ed.Thestatistictakes the number of people who are employed, adds it to the number of unemployed people who are looking for work, and divides the sum by the total population that is at least 16 years of age, not serving on active duty in the military, and not institutionalized in a facility such as a prison or a long-term-care home.The most recentdataavailable from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, from December 2018, showed that West Virginia had a civilian labor force participation rate of 53.9 percent. The figure didnt deviate much throughout 2018, ranging from 53.7 percent to 54 percent depending on the month.Thenational civilian labor force participation ratewas 63.1 percent in December 2018, after rising from a low of 62.7 percent earlier in the year."
"What Republicans call the death tax is the estate tax on the ultra wealthy which, in 2016, was paid by only two out of every 1,000 people.",[],"Ripping thesweeping tax reformspushed by PresidentDonald Trumpand other leading Republicans, U.S. Rep.Mark Pocan, D-Madison, singled out the provision to eliminate the death tax. In an Oct. 18, 2017, appearanceon a talk showon Janesvilles WCLO radio, Pocan said: They (Republicans) go about getting rid of the estate tax -- which, to me, is the one that I wish more people would really understand. Theyve done a good of marketing it as a death tax -- you die and you get taxed. But the reality is, its a tax on the ultra-wealthy that the vast majority of people will never, ever, ever see in their life. Last year, two out of every 1,000 people paid an estate tax. So its not like a common tax thats out there. With the overall reform gaining momentum froma Senate votethe day after Pocans claim, anda House votea week later, lets see if his statistic is correct. Aimed at the rich? Thereisdebate about how the rich are treated by the reform proposal, which at this stage is considered only a framework, since it lacks details. Weverated as Mostly Falsea claim by House SpeakerPaul Ryan, a Janesville Republican who represents the congressional district that borders Pocans. Ryan said the framework, which he supports, is focused on tax breaks for the middle class and not about people who are really high-income earners getting a tax break. The framework does offer some benefits for the middle class, but whats more clear is there are specific provisions benefiting the wealthy. As for what is conventionally known as the estate tax, theTrump administration usesthe term death tax (asdo Ryanandother Republicans) in promoting how the framework would repeal the tax. Trump himself claimed ending the tax would protect millions of small businesses and the American farmer. But PolitiFact Nationalsrating was Pants on Fire: Only 5,460 estates even pay the tax each year, with only 80 being small businesses or farms. Pocans figure The Internal Revenue Service tells usthe estate tax is a tax on your right to transfer property at your death. It consists of an accounting of everything you own or have certain interests in at the date of death -- including cash and securities, real estate, insurance, trusts, business interests and other assets. In 2016, the year cited in Pocans claim, an unmarried individuals estate was potentially taxable only if the estates value exceeded $5.45 million. (The value had to exceed $10.9 million to be taxable, if there was a surviving spouse.) After deductions, such estates generally are taxed at40 percent. IRS figures showthere were 12,411 estate tax returns filed in 2016 -- but a tax was owed on only 5,219 of them. That smaller figure aligns with what PolitiFact National found. And the non-profit Urban Institute-Brookings Institution Tax Policy Centermakes a similar estimatefor 2017: 5,460 estates owing a tax.) In 2016, those 5,219 estates paid a total estate tax of$18.3 billion. Since annual estate tax filings include deaths that occur in previous years, the Tax Policy Center says that each year, there are roughly 5,000 estates that pay the federal estate tax out of roughly 2.6 million deaths each year. That comes to 2 of every 1,000. Point of view on the tax While he doesnt dispute the statistics,Chris Edwards, director of tax policy studies at the libertarian-leaning Cato Institute, told us there are other points to consider regarding the estate tax, saying: The estate tax affects far more people than the relatively small number who pay. Many people who own businesses and/or investments have to spend a lot of time and money on lawyers/accountants planning to avoid it. A substantial portion of the life insurance industry exists only to avoid the estate tax. And, indeed, that is an important criticism: it is one of the most inefficient taxes in the sense that the ratio of paperwork/avoidance to tax collections is very high . The estate tax is anti-saving and anti-investment. It encourages wealthy folks to consume their wealth before death because, if the rate is high, they dont want the government to grab it. For the rest of us, it would be better if wealthy people kept their money invested in the economy,  because that spurs growth. Its better for us if the wealthy hold large pools of savings rather than going out and buying expensive cars and yachts. A high estate tax rate encourages them to go out and buy expensive cars and yachts, which does nothing for long term economic growth. Our rating Pocan says that what Republicans call the death tax is the estate tax on the ultra wealthy which, in 2016, was paid by only two out of every 1,000 people. Republicans who are proposing to eliminate the estate tax do use the death tax term. In 2016, the tax, generally 40 percent, applied only to estates worth $5.45 million or more. After deductions, the tax was paid by only about two out of every 1,000 people who died. We rate the statement True.","['Income', 'Wealth', 'Taxes', 'Wisconsin']",True,"Ripping thesweeping tax reformspushed by PresidentDonald Trumpand other leading Republicans, U.S. Rep.Mark Pocan, D-Madison, singled out the provision to eliminate the death tax.In an Oct. 18, 2017, appearanceon a talk showon Janesvilles WCLO radio, Pocan said:With the overall reform gaining momentum froma Senate votethe day after Pocans claim, anda House votea week later, lets see if his statistic is correct.Weverated as Mostly Falsea claim by House SpeakerPaul Ryan, a Janesville Republican who represents the congressional district that borders Pocans. Ryan said the framework, which he supports, is focused on tax breaks for the middle class and not about people who are really high-income earners getting a tax break. The framework does offer some benefits for the middle class, but whats more clear is there are specific provisions benefiting the wealthy.As for what is conventionally known as the estate tax, theTrump administration usesthe term death tax (asdo Ryanandother Republicans) in promoting how the framework would repeal the tax.Trump himself claimed ending the tax would protect millions of small businesses and the American farmer. But PolitiFact Nationalsrating was Pants on Fire: Only 5,460 estates even pay the tax each year, with only 80 being small businesses or farms.The Internal Revenue Service tells usthe estate tax is a tax on your right to transfer property at your death. It consists of an accounting of everything you own or have certain interests in at the date of death -- including cash and securities, real estate, insurance, trusts, business interests and other assets.In 2016, the year cited in Pocans claim, an unmarried individuals estate was potentially taxable only if the estates value exceeded $5.45 million. (The value had to exceed $10.9 million to be taxable, if there was a surviving spouse.) After deductions, such estates generally are taxed at40 percent.IRS figures showthere were 12,411 estate tax returns filed in 2016 -- but a tax was owed on only 5,219 of them. That smaller figure aligns with what PolitiFact National found. And the non-profit Urban Institute-Brookings Institution Tax Policy Centermakes a similar estimatefor 2017: 5,460 estates owing a tax.)In 2016, those 5,219 estates paid a total estate tax of$18.3 billion.While he doesnt dispute the statistics,Chris Edwards, director of tax policy studies at the libertarian-leaning Cato Institute, told us there are other points to consider regarding the estate tax, saying:"
Charlie Daniels -- The Press and Paula Deen,['Country singer Charlie Daniels authored an opinion piece about press coverage of the Paula Deen racial controversy?']," Claim:  Country singer Charlie Daniels authored an opinion piece about press coverage of the Paula Deen racial controversy. CORRECTLY ATTRIBUTED Example:  [Collected via e-mail, July  2013] The was attributed to Charlie Daniels about Paula Deen.  Did he write it?  I think that if anything exemplifies the overt prejudice and determination of the American media to report only the news that suits their social and political interests and concept of what does and does not fit their agenda, it's the totally overblown coverage of something Paula Deen said 20 years ago, and some party she planned that she wanted to resemble a plantation scene featuring black male waiters in period dress. If Hollywood plans a movie featuring black waiters in a plantation scene or portray women as prostitutes or cast minorities in caricature roles does the media get upset and start calling the movie moguls racists? Is there any grown person who could truthfully declare under oath that they have never uttered something that someone might find personally offensive? ""Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."" Do the twenty-year-old words of a lady with a television cooking show trump the lie an Attorney General told Congress, or officials at the IRS usurping the rights of the American public and pleading the fifth amendment when confronted about it or the hiding of the facts surrounding the murder of four Americans at a Consulate in Libya or the incredibly shabby image of a president taking a one hundred million dollar vacation in this economy while closing down tours of the White House or the NSA invasion on the privacy of millions of unsuspecting citizens? [Rest of article here.] here Origins:  Grammy award-winning singer/musician Charlie Daniels regularly writes and posts opinion pieces about current political topics to the ""Soapbox"" section of the Charlie Daniels Band web site. As he notes in his periodic explanations of his efforts: Soapbox explanations From time to time in this column I feel somewhat obligated to explain myself, what I am, what I believe and what I am attempting to do by writing the things I write. It seems that as we acquire new readers there is some misunderstanding of what the soapbox is all about, so here we go again. First of all, this column is a series of essays made up of my personal opinion, my experiences and my beliefs.  I don't claim that the essays in this column represent anybody but myself. As far as the intellectual content is concerned it is being written by a man with limited formal education and the grammar, punctuation and spelling may from time to time leave something to be desired, but I will however, get my point across. I happen to believe very strongly in the things I write about, from the point of a private citizen who happens to love his country and its people and wants what he considers best in the national interest. My articles will range from the profound to the ridiculous, the sad to the humorous, the informative to the inane. It is not meant to be a news column and I'm not good at remembering dates and names. This above-quoted ""The Press and Paula Dean"" article was published by Charlie on 1 July 2013 in response to a racial discrimination controversy involving celebrity chef Paula Deen that broke in June 2013, stemming from a lawsuit filed by a former employee of restaurants owned by Deen and her brother, Earl ""Bubba"" Hiers. The Press and Paula Dean Last updated:  8 July 2013 ",['interest'],True,"[Rest of article here.]Origins:  Grammy award-winning singer/musician Charlie Daniels regularly writes and posts opinion pieces about current political topics to the ""Soapbox"" section of the Charlie Daniels Band web site. As he notes in his periodic explanations of his efforts:This above-quoted ""The Press and Paula Dean"" article was published by Charlie on 1 July 2013 in response to a racial discrimination controversy involving celebrity chef Paula Deen that broke in June 2013, stemming from a lawsuit filed by a former employee of restaurants owned by Deen and her brother, Earl ""Bubba"" Hiers."
Is This a Trump Tower Billboard in Mumbai?,['A photograph purportedly shows a billboard for Trump Tower in Mumbai with homeless people sleeping in the street beneath it.'],"An image purportedly showing a billboard advertisement for Trump Tower Mumbai  which shows a photograph of the American businessman and President-elect alongside the slogan ""There is only one way to live"" with a group of apparently homeless people sitting and sleeping in the street beneath it  was circulated on social media in December 2016:     Embed from Getty Images A billboard for the upcoming luxury residential apartment complex Trump Tower Mumbai, which bears the name of billionaire real estate tycoon and US presidential hopeful Donald Trump, is seen next to a busy road in Mumbai on June 3, 2016. Trump, the Republican frontrunner in the US presidential elections, to his fans, is the definition of American success, the cut-throat tycoon who can magically fix all that ails a nation no longer sure of its place in the world, and home to an increasingly frustrated white working and middle class. But there is barely a corner of Manhattan that the Trump Organization hasn't conquered with luxury buildings. Its portfolio of hotels, golf courses, casinos and luxury estates straddles the world, from California to Mumbai. A photograph published by India news outlet Mid-Day in May 2016 also shows that a similar billboard in the same area displayed the slogan ""Trump is back"" rather than ""There is only one way to live"": Mid-Day    We uncovered an image that was posted on 21 December 2016 by Muhammad Sabir, the founder of Slumabad (an organization that works to give homeless children access to education and economic opportunities) along with a message about income inequality: posted Muhammad Sabir Slumabad This photo tells a story of poverty, inequality and deprivation of basic human dignity and rights. It puts all human development in question and asks basic simple questions from us: Can we call ourselves civilized, while we see our fellow human beings living on footpath like animals? Is there only one way to live left for millions of deprived souls? Let us hope sun also rises for marginalized souls, I mean sun of equality, development and justice. While many people who viewed the image were initially skeptical about its authenticity (including us), the image is real. It was originally posted to Facebook on 27 August 2014 by Paul Needham, who took the photograph: Needham also sent us a high-resolution, uncropped version of the photograph to prove its authenticity:   He also sent us different photographs of the same scene:     Note: The original version of this article said that the image was not real, based on our initial inability to track down its photographer or source. We have now heard from him and updated our article accordingly. Singh, Varun.  ""Donald Trump Is Mumbai builder's Latest Poster Boy.""
  Mid-Day.  31 May 2016.",['income'],True,"A photograph published by India news outlet Mid-Day in May 2016 also shows that a similar billboard in the same area displayed the slogan ""Trump is back"" rather than ""There is only one way to live"":We uncovered an image that was posted on 21 December 2016 by Muhammad Sabir, the founder of Slumabad (an organization that works to give homeless children access to education and economic opportunities) along with a message about income inequality:"
McAfee Phishing Scam Email Claims 'Device at Risk',"['We strongly advise against clicking links in emails and texts that seem suspicious, as they often can lead to phishing scams.']","On July 27, 2022, we reviewed a scam email that claimed to come from ""McAfee Support,"" presumably the tech troubleshooting arm of the company that's best known for providing antivirus software. The message had an unofficial email address as its sender, and the body of the message read, ""Device at risk, hurry up and update your license."" The bottom of the email displayed the words, ""Click here to remove yourself from our emails list."" All of the links in the message, including the one for unsubscribing, led to the same web page. Clearly, this email did not really come from McAfee. We ran the link to the web page through two malicious website scanners. According to IPQualityScore, the URL was part of a phishing scam. Email Veritas' URL Checker also dubbed the link unsafe. IPQualityScore Email Veritas' URL Checker  official correspondence We strongly advise readers to never click links in suspicious emails and texts, as they can possibly lead to phishing. The same goes with phone numbers that appear in these kinds of messages, as they often will link you directly with scammers. phishing scammers The scammers' goal with sending these kinds of emails and texts is likely to compromise users' online accounts, personal and financial information, credit and debit card numbers, Social Security numbers, and, perhaps, other sensitive data. AgingCare.com published tips for users who accidentally click phishing links. According to the article, it's best to disconnect your device from the internet, back up your files, scan your device for malware, change your passwords, and set up fraud alerts. article malware We notified McAfee of the above-displayed phishing email and asked if the company had additional information regarding the scammers' motives. This story will be updated if we receive further details. McAfee EmailVeritas. URL Checker. https://www.emailveritas.com/url-checker. Fraud Prevention. IP Quality Score, https://www.ipqualityscore.com. Kerskie, Carrie. 5 Steps to Take After Clicking on a Phishing Link. AgingCare.com, 24 Sept. 2021, https://www.agingcare.com/articles/5-steps-to-take-after-clicking-on-a-phishing-link-178044.htm. The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica. Phishing. Britannica, https://www.britannica.com/technology/phishing. You Get Fake Emails from Scammers Posing as McAfee. McAfee KB, https://www.mcafee.com/support/?articleId=TS103285&page=shell&shell=article-view.",['credit'],False,"We ran the link to the web page through two malicious website scanners. According to IPQualityScore, the URL was part of a phishing scam. Email Veritas' URL Checker also dubbed the link unsafe.We strongly advise readers to never click links in suspicious emails and texts, as they can possibly lead to phishing. The same goes with phone numbers that appear in these kinds of messages, as they often will link you directly with scammers.AgingCare.com published tips for users who accidentally click phishing links. According to the article, it's best to disconnect your device from the internet, back up your files, scan your device for malware, change your passwords, and set up fraud alerts.We notified McAfee of the above-displayed phishing email and asked if the company had additional information regarding the scammers' motives. This story will be updated if we receive further details."
Does NASA Video Show Aliens Flying 2 Rectangular UFOs?,"['A popular tweet said the video showed ""two rectangular UFOs"" that were ""fast moving through an \'atmosphereless\' region of space.""']","On Feb. 21, 2023, a Twitter user posted a video with a caption that claimed it had been recorded by NASA ""eight years ago"" and showed two rectangular UFOs being flown by aliens. The tweet read, ""Two UFOs recorded by NASA eight years ago have finally been released. Two rectangular UFOs are fast moving through an 'atmosphereless' region of space. It turns out that it transcends the technology of NASA."" The tweet ended with the hashtag, ""#Aliens."" Readers likely won't be surprised to learn that this was not true. [See also:Is Outer Space 'Only an Hour Away' if You Could Drive Straight up at 60 MPH?] Is Outer Space 'Only an Hour Away' if You Could Drive Straight up at 60 MPH? The video truly was released by NASA, but it had not been ""recorded"" with cameras. The clip showed a digital animation created byNASA's Scientific Visualization Studio thatshowed two twin spacecraft satellites from theGravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) mission, not ""two rectangular UFOs"" being flown by aliens. (Twitter user @HoaxEye alsonotedthe truth behind this video.) Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) mission noted The part from the tweet appears at the 1:37 mark in the video's upload on theNASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory YouTube channel.  The original GRACE science mission ended in October 2017.NASApublished that its purpose had been to ""study key changes in the planet's waters, ice sheets and the solid Earth"": NASA An award-winning mission that's changed the way we study Earth's gravitational forces and the Earth system, the Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment, or GRACE, mission flew twin spacecraft in tandem around Earth to study key changes in the planet's waters, ice sheets and the solid Earth. In 2011, the gravity measurement technique pioneered by GRACE, which works by measuring changes in the push and pull between the twin spacecraft as they orbit Earth, was put to use on NASA's twin GRAIL spacecraft embarking on an ambitious mission to study the gravitational forces of Earth's moon. In more than 15 years of operations, the GRACE satellite mission revolutionized our view of how water moves and is stored on Earth. GRACE measured changes in the local pull of gravity as water shifts around Earth due to changing seasons, weather and climate processes. Among its innovations, GRACE has monitored the loss of ice mass from Earth's ice sheets, improved understanding of the processes responsible for sea level rise and ocean circulation, provided insights into where global groundwater resources may be shrinking or growing and where dry soils are contributing to drought, and monitored changes in the solid Earth. This story will be updated if further details come to light. ""15 Years of GRACE Earth Observations."" YouTube, NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory, 15 Mar. 2017, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fKVPFyu_tHQ. ""Grace - Earth Missions."" NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/missions/gravity-recovery-and-climate-experiment-grace. ""Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE)."" NASA.Gov, http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/Grace/index.html. @HoaxEye. ""That's Animated. Source."" Twitter, 21 Feb. 2023, https://twitter.com/hoaxeye/status/1628273280669851651. @uBF2fV1cVQxRjQo. ""Two UFOs Recorded by NASA Eight Years Ago Have Finally Been Released. Two Rectangular UFOs Are Fast Moving through an Atmosphereless Region of Space. It Turns out That It Transcends the Technology of NASA."" Twitter, 21 Feb. 2023, https://twitter.com/uBF2fV1cVQxRjQo/status/1627956530774675457.",['loss'],False,"[See also:Is Outer Space 'Only an Hour Away' if You Could Drive Straight up at 60 MPH?]The video truly was released by NASA, but it had not been ""recorded"" with cameras. The clip showed a digital animation created byNASA's Scientific Visualization Studio thatshowed two twin spacecraft satellites from theGravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) mission, not ""two rectangular UFOs"" being flown by aliens. (Twitter user @HoaxEye alsonotedthe truth behind this video.)The original GRACE science mission ended in October 2017.NASApublished that its purpose had been to ""study key changes in the planet's waters, ice sheets and the solid Earth"":"
Is This Carl Sagan's 'Foreboding of an America'?,['A quote from a 1995 book by the late astronomer and science communicator Carl Sagan struck a nerve with some readers decades later.'],"Amid talk of alternative facts and a post-truth world that dominated the news directly after the inauguration of President Donald Trump on January 20, 2017, a quote from astrophysicist and science communicator Carl Sagan emerged as a viral meme. This is the excerpt from the passage containing that quote, which was shared most frequently: ""Science is more",['economy'],True,"This is the excerpt from the passage containing that quote which was shared most frequently:This excerpt was taken from Sagans 1995 book The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark. In a May 1997 review of that work, Smithsonian magazine described Sagan's motivation for writing it: ""In The Demon-Haunted World, the late astronomer Carl Sagan writes in defense of science and reason in a world he sees as darkened by ignorance, superstition, pseudoscience, deceitful advertising and mindless television.""Sagan, for his part, described the book as ""a personal statement, reflecting my lifelong love affair with science.""The discussion of a loss of manufacturing jobs, an inability for public officials to grasp issues, and increasing distrust in science led many to assert that Sagan was predicting our current political and scientific climate  although, as Matt Novak articulated in a piece for Gizmodo, its often easy to view predictions of the future in a way that biases one's reading of the them:"
Did Putin Acknowledge Biden's Win Before Mitch McConnell?,"[""Some onlookers attempted to read between the lines of the two leaders' remarks.""]","Voting in the 2020 U.S. Election may be over, but the misinformation keeps on ticking. Never stop fact-checking. Follow our post-election coverage here. here On Dec. 15, 2020  the day after the U.S. Electoral College confirmed Joe Biden as America's 46th President  the tweet displayed below alleged Russian President Vladimir Putin acknowledged Biden's victory over President Donald Trump before U.S. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell did. U.S. Electoral College Joe Biden tweet Donald Trump  The claim was accurate, and we unpack why below. It followed weeks of both leaders' remaining quiet on the election's outcome amid court battles and an aggressive misinformation campaign by Trump to try to overturn his loss. misinformation campaign Let us lay out the timeline. At 10:20 a.m. Moscow standard time, which is 2:20 a.m. Eastern Standard Time (EST) in the U.S., on Dec. 15, the Kremlin released a statement in which Putin congratulated Biden on winning the presidential race and wished him ""every success."" The statement read: released a statement In his message, Vladimir Putin wished the President-elect every success and expressed confidence that Russia and the United States, which bear special responsibility for global security and stability, can, despite their differences, effectively contribute to solving many problems and meeting challenges that the world is facing today. The President of Russia noted that with this in mind, Russian-American cooperation, based on the principles of equality and mutual respect, would meet the interests of both nations and the entire international community. 'For my part, I am ready for interaction and contacts with you,' Russias Head of State stressed. Hours later, McConnell, a Republican, acknowledged the victory for Biden and Vice President-elect Kamala Harris for the first time in a prepared speech on the Senate floor. Kamala Harris According to a video of the remarks on the Majority Leader's YouTube channel  footage that was uploaded to the video platform around 11 a.m. EST and also appeared on his official website as a Kentucky senator  McConnell said: official website as a Kentucky senator The Electoral College has spoken. So today, I want to congratulate President-elect Joe Biden. The President-elect is no stranger to the Senate. He has devoted himself to public service for many years. I also congratulate the Vice President-elect, our colleague from California, Senator Harris. Beyond our differences, all Americans can take pride that our nation has a female Vice President-elect for the first time. News outlets, including MSNBC, first reported on McConnell's remarks around 10:20 a.m. (ET). A tweet from McConnell's press team with a link to the YouTube video posted less than 30 minutes later, at 10:47 a.m. tweet   Some onlookers on social media speculated McConnell purposefully waited for Putin's statement on the election before making his own. ""It has always been Putin pulling their strings, not Trump,"" one Twitter user alleged, referring to Republican leadership. Twitter user But there was no evidence to explicitly explain why or under what rationale the senator made his comments on the Senate floor, congratulating Biden more than a month after he was announced the next head of the White House. Also unknown was if or to what extent he at all considered Putin's statement hours prior signifying a new chapter in U.S.-Russia relations.  All of that said, the Kentucky Republican recognized a Biden presidency roughly eight hours after the Russian leader. For that reason, we rate this claim ",['loss'],True,"Voting in the 2020 U.S. Election may be over, but the misinformation keeps on ticking. Never stop fact-checking. Follow our post-election coverage here.On Dec. 15, 2020  the day after the U.S. Electoral College confirmed Joe Biden as America's 46th President  the tweet displayed below alleged Russian President Vladimir Putin acknowledged Biden's victory over President Donald Trump before U.S. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell did.The claim was accurate, and we unpack why below. It followed weeks of both leaders' remaining quiet on the election's outcome amid court battles and an aggressive misinformation campaign by Trump to try to overturn his loss.Let us lay out the timeline. At 10:20 a.m. Moscow standard time, which is 2:20 a.m. Eastern Standard Time (EST) in the U.S., on Dec. 15, the Kremlin released a statement in which Putin congratulated Biden on winning the presidential race and wished him ""every success."" The statement read:Hours later, McConnell, a Republican, acknowledged the victory for Biden and Vice President-elect Kamala Harris for the first time in a prepared speech on the Senate floor.According to a video of the remarks on the Majority Leader's YouTube channel  footage that was uploaded to the video platform around 11 a.m. EST and also appeared on his official website as a Kentucky senator  McConnell said:News outlets, including MSNBC, first reported on McConnell's remarks around 10:20 a.m. (ET). A tweet from McConnell's press team with a link to the YouTube video posted less than 30 minutes later, at 10:47 a.m.Some onlookers on social media speculated McConnell purposefully waited for Putin's statement on the election before making his own. ""It has always been Putin pulling their strings, not Trump,"" one Twitter user alleged, referring to Republican leadership.But there was no evidence to explicitly explain why or under what rationale the senator made his comments on the Senate floor, congratulating Biden more than a month after he was announced the next head of the White House. Also unknown was if or to what extent he at all considered Putin's statement hours prior signifying a new chapter in U.S.-Russia relations."
"Did Portland Mayor Declare State of Emergency After Antifa, BLM Posters Called for Violence?","['Flyers allegedly posted around Portland urged protesters to ""rage"" no matter what the Chauvin verdict proved to be. ']","On the eve of former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin's conviction on murder and manslaughter charges in the killing of George Floyd, a Black man whose death sparked a global reckoning over racism, cities around the U.S. braced for the potential fallout of the trial outcome. On April 19, 2021, one day before the verdict was reached, Mayor Ted Wheeler of Portland, Oregon -- which had been a hotbed of racial justice protests for over a year -- declared a state of emergency. The declaration was widely reported by national news outlets as the world awaited the verdict reading in the Chauvin trial. In a 45-minute news conference, Wheeler was joined by other city leaders to respond to violence that had already erupted in Portland in anticipation of the verdict. Wheeler called the event a high-intensity moment and said that the city needed to be ready as possible for anything. widely reported national news outlets As the mayor, Ive declared a state of emergency to allow city bureaus to facilitate peaceful first amendment activity and respond to any violence if necessary, said Wheeler, adding that the state of emergency would be activated for 24 hours and could be extended if necessary. In response, Oregon Governor Kate Brown had made available the state police and select members of the national guard should the city need the resources. The mayor also acknowledged a coordinated plan to combat anarchist posters and a group of 100 or so largely white, self-described anarchists who engage in the criminal destruction of Portlands economy and confidence. Lets be clear, anarchist flyers call for what they describe as quote direct action which are code words for breaking windows, ransacking businesses, arson and intimidation. They call for attacks on public employees, said Wheeler. They use crime and violence to intimidate those who dont share their political views. These people are not protestors. They are criminals.  A tweet shared by conservative journalist Andy Ngo (archived here) appeared accurately described Wheelers emergency declaration but claimed that Antifa had put out flyers calling for violence regardless of the trial outcome. Ngo is also the editor-at-large of The Post Millennial, a Canadian conservative news website, that has been accused of pamphleteering. (Ngo did not respond to our request for comment.) tweet here pamphleteering   A tweet that was shared on the afternoon of April 20, 2021 (archived here) furthered Ngo's sentiment, implying that the state of emergency was in part due to antifa and the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement, who were both supposedly behind the poster that told rioters to rage in Portland no matter what the verdict is. tweet here   As of this writing, Snopes has not been able to determine if the flyer in question was actually posted around Portland. Furthermore, the text did not specifically mention antifa or BLM, though it did imply that Dont Shoot Portland, a social justice nonprofit, was supporting the protest. In an email to Snopes, the organization said that they were not involved with the posters in any capacity. Unfortunately, it is not uncommon for people to use our name for their own agendas. Our marches center [on] children and nonviolence, a spokesperson told Snopes. A reverse image search did not return any results, and Snopes contacted both BLM and Wheeler's office but did not receive a response in time for publication. reverse image search While it is true that Wheeler issued a state of emergency in advance of the Chauvin verdict and mentioned ""anarchist posters,"" there is not enough evidence to confirm whether Wheeler was speaking of the flyer above, or what group(s) were behind this flyer, if it was real. We will update this article if and when more information becomes available. Update [April 21, 2021]: This article was updated to include statements from Dont Shoot Portland.",['economy'],NEI,"On April 19, 2021, one day before the verdict was reached, Mayor Ted Wheeler of Portland, Oregon -- which had been a hotbed of racial justice protests for over a year -- declared a state of emergency. The declaration was widely reported by national news outlets as the world awaited the verdict reading in the Chauvin trial. In a 45-minute news conference, Wheeler was joined by other city leaders to respond to violence that had already erupted in Portland in anticipation of the verdict. Wheeler called the event a high-intensity moment and said that the city needed to be ready as possible for anything.A tweet shared by conservative journalist Andy Ngo (archived here) appeared accurately described Wheelers emergency declaration but claimed that Antifa had put out flyers calling for violence regardless of the trial outcome. Ngo is also the editor-at-large of The Post Millennial, a Canadian conservative news website, that has been accused of pamphleteering. (Ngo did not respond to our request for comment.)A tweet that was shared on the afternoon of April 20, 2021 (archived here) furthered Ngo's sentiment, implying that the state of emergency was in part due to antifa and the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement, who were both supposedly behind the poster that told rioters to rage in Portland no matter what the verdict is.A reverse image search did not return any results, and Snopes contacted both BLM and Wheeler's office but did not receive a response in time for publication."
Are the 'Las Vegas Travel' Facebook Vacation Giveaways Real?,['Facebook failed to take action on a number of Las Vegas travel pages that promoted scam vacation giveaways from 2019 through early 2021.'],"In early March 2021, readers alerted us to a Facebook scam that involved a Bora Bora vacation getaway. This led us to revisit Facebook pages like Las Vegas Travel that advertised a Las Vegas vacation giveaway. involved Las Vegas Travel We previously made note of the suspicious Vegas page in July 2020. At the time, we archived a post from a different, though similar one: Las Vegas Vacations. At least one of the pages had a Russian page manager. archived On July 2, we noticed that the Las Vegas Travel page had shared a post from Las Vegas Vacations. It mentioned a purported grand opening celebration for a resort. ""We're going to celebrate our grand opening by doing something special for you. We will be rewarding someone who has shared then commented by August 26th with a 7-night stay for up to 5 people in a luxury suite. Don't worry about flights and transfers, it's all included."" shared  As of March 2021, the above post and likely many other posts like it had been deleted. This appeared to be an effort to cover the tracks of the scammers so they could keep the pages alive for future fake giveaways.  Just like with the Bora Bora getaway, the Las Vegas pages were illegitimate. They should be avoided for the possibility of phishing, identity theft, and other potential consequences. We strongly suggest against submitting any personal information to links on these pages. Since July, the Las Vegas Travel page attempted to expand its scheme to Instagram. Meanwhile, the Las Vegas Vacations page was still running the ""Grand Opening Celebration"" scam. expand still running  The Las Vegas Vacations Facebook page was created in July 2020. It was purportedly managed from the United Kingdom and Germany.  For almost a year and a half, Facebook failed to take action on the illegitimate pages. The Las Vegas Travel Facebook page was created in 2019. As of March 2021, it had around 250,000 followers. Las Vegas Vacations was created in July 2020. It was building toward 50,000 followers. The scam appeared to work in a similar way to the Bora Bora getaway. In fact, the same person or group of people appeared to manage both fake giveaways. We came to this conclusion after noticing similarities in dates and text on the pages. Further, the same .xyz domain website was listed. Bora Bora getaway Here's how the scam worked. First, Facebook users were asked to like, share, and comment with the word: ""WIN."" This February - We are giving away 10 nights at the The Venetian Las Vegas for 5 people. Includes Flights, Accommodation & Transfers. You will have 2 years to use the holiday! To participate:1. Like2. Share3. Comment: ""WIN""Closes 28th February at 9pm. Next, a personal Facebook profile that appeared to be a page responded to each entrant. (A Facebook profile is for an individual person. A page is for companies, bands, personalities, etc.) The response to each entrant read: ""You win. Check my profile."" The profile named ""Las Vegas-Nevanda"" had a name in its Facebook URL: facebook.com/titis.ariandini. It read: ""Titis Ariandini.""  ""Honey, just a reminder that we're having dinner on Friday with the Vegas-Nevandas.""  Entrants who clicked to view the ""Las Vegas-Nevanda"" profile were led to yet another post. It advised Facebook users to visit a link to register for a prize.  The post also told readers ""this is original and official."" How reassuring.  One Facebook user named Jason appeared to believe the scam giveaway was real. In the same comment, he also referred to effective measures to reduce the chance of more deaths from the COVID-19 pandemic as a ""communist shutdown."" The link in the post led to a registration page that mirrored scammy websites we've seen before.  Needless to say, this is not a registration page from a real Las Vegas resort.  The registration page resulted in affiliate marketing links for streaming movie websites. This was where the Bora Bora getaway pages ended as well. The point of the affiliate marketing was for the scammers to make commissions on signups on the streaming movie websites. Again, it was also possible that the scam involved phishing, identity theft, and other dangerous outcomes. We found a number of other pages that shared the Las Vegas scams. They appeared to be in the same network of Facebook pages. They included: Maldives 2021, Bora Bora Vacations, Cancun Tours, New York Christmas Vacations, Maldives Getaways, Santorini - Greece, Package Holidays 2021, Dominican Republic Vacations 2021, Bali Tourism, Visit Hawaii, Seychelles Holidays, Tourism Bali, Cabo Tourism, Cabo San Lucas 2021, and Bali Holidays. Maldives 2021 Bora Bora Vacations Cancun Tours New York Christmas Vacations Maldives Getaways Santorini - Greece Package Holidays 2021 Dominican Republic Vacations 2021 Bali Tourism Visit Hawaii Seychelles Holidays Tourism Bali Cabo Tourism Cabo San Lucas 2021 Bali Holidays We noticed that some of these pages were scrubbed of their past scam posts. This allowed the page managers to plead innocence and continue running their post-and-delete operations. Further, this list of pages perhaps only scratched the surface of the entire scam empire. In sum, the giveaways that showed up on the Las Vegas Travel and Las Vegas Vacations Facebook pages were not legitimate. Facebook failed to take action on these scams despite their existence dating back to at least 2019. As a rule, it's always good to look for the ""verified"" badge on Facebook pages. ""verified"" badge",['share'],False,"In early March 2021, readers alerted us to a Facebook scam that involved a Bora Bora vacation getaway. This led us to revisit Facebook pages like Las Vegas Travel that advertised a Las Vegas vacation giveaway.We previously made note of the suspicious Vegas page in July 2020. At the time, we archived a post from a different, though similar one: Las Vegas Vacations. At least one of the pages had a Russian page manager.On July 2, we noticed that the Las Vegas Travel page had shared a post from Las Vegas Vacations. It mentioned a purported grand opening celebration for a resort. ""We're going to celebrate our grand opening by doing something special for you. We will be rewarding someone who has shared then commented by August 26th with a 7-night stay for up to 5 people in a luxury suite. Don't worry about flights and transfers, it's all included."" As of March 2021, the above post and likely many other posts like it had been deleted. This appeared to be an effort to cover the tracks of the scammers so they could keep the pages alive for future fake giveaways.Since July, the Las Vegas Travel page attempted to expand its scheme to Instagram. Meanwhile, the Las Vegas Vacations page was still running the ""Grand Opening Celebration"" scam. The Las Vegas Vacations Facebook page was created in July 2020. It was purportedly managed from the United Kingdom and Germany.The scam appeared to work in a similar way to the Bora Bora getaway. In fact, the same person or group of people appeared to manage both fake giveaways. We came to this conclusion after noticing similarities in dates and text on the pages. Further, the same .xyz domain website was listed. ""Honey, just a reminder that we're having dinner on Friday with the Vegas-Nevandas."" The post also told readers ""this is original and official."" How reassuring. Needless to say, this is not a registration page from a real Las Vegas resort.We found a number of other pages that shared the Las Vegas scams. They appeared to be in the same network of Facebook pages. They included: Maldives 2021, Bora Bora Vacations, Cancun Tours, New York Christmas Vacations, Maldives Getaways, Santorini - Greece, Package Holidays 2021, Dominican Republic Vacations 2021, Bali Tourism, Visit Hawaii, Seychelles Holidays, Tourism Bali, Cabo Tourism, Cabo San Lucas 2021, and Bali Holidays.In sum, the giveaways that showed up on the Las Vegas Travel and Las Vegas Vacations Facebook pages were not legitimate. Facebook failed to take action on these scams despite their existence dating back to at least 2019. As a rule, it's always good to look for the ""verified"" badge on Facebook pages."
Indiana Requiring All Gay Residents to Wear Sensor That Will Trigger Alarm Upon Entering a Store,"[""Rumor: An amendment to Indiana's Religious Freedom Restoration Act requires gay residents to wear a sensor for identification purposes.""]","Claim: An amendment to Indiana's Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) requires gay residents to wear a sensor for identification. Example: [Collected via e-mail, April 2015] it basically says that Indiana is making a law where all gay people have to wear a sensor to alert store owners when they enter an establishment. Sounds really fake to me, but people have been reposting it all over social media. Origins: On 28 March 2015, the Free Wood Post published an article titled ""Indiana Requiring All Gay Residents to Wear Sensor That Will Trigger Alarm Upon Entering a Store."" (Interestingly, that article was published prior to a large national debate that occurred after the owners of an Indiana pizza restaurant controversially supported the law during the course of a 31 March 2015 news interview.) The Free Wood Post's article didn't attempt to tread a line of plausibility in its claims: As an amendment to Indiana's Religious Freedom Restoration Act, all LGBT citizens would be required to register with the state so that they could be mailed a sensor to wear on their bodies at all times. The sensor would notify any business that doesn't want an LGBT individual entering their establishment of their arrival, triggering an alarm. These sensors would be much like a modern-day version of the 'Star of David' that Jewish citizens in Germany were required to wear during Hitler's reign. The article included a purported quote from Indiana Governor Mike Pence about the amendment to the RFRA: ""It's all about freedom. Freedom for these business owners to know all the money they're receiving didn't come from gay hands. That's the devil's money, really. And who wants to pay payroll or rent or taxes with the devil's money?"" Although (coincidentally) well-timed, the article was nothing more than a spoof published by a satirical website. Free Wood Post's disclaimer page states: ""Free Wood Post is a news and political satire web publication, which may or may not use real names, often in semi-real or mostly fictitious ways. All news articles contained within FreeWoodPost.com are fiction, and presumably fake news. Any resemblance to the truth is purely coincidental, except for all references to politicians and/or celebrities, in which case they are based on real people, but still based almost entirely in fiction. FreeWoodPost.com is intended for a mature, sophisticated, and discerning audience."" Previous Free Wood Post articles included a claim that the FCC had labeled Fox News as satire, quoted Ann Romney on the wage gap, and suggested that Mitt Romney had said he could relate to black people because his ancestors owned slaves. Last updated: 16 April 2015.",['taxes'],True,"Origins:  On 28 March 2015, the Free Wood Post published an article titled ""Indiana Requiring All Gay Residents to Wear Sensor That Will Trigger Alarm Upon Entering a Store"". (Interestingly, that article was published prior to a large national debate that occurred after the owners of an Indiana pizza restaurant controversially supported the law during the course of a 31 March 2015 news interview.)Although (coincidentally) well-timed, the article was nothing more than a spoof published by a satirical web site. Free Wood Post's disclaimer page states:Previous Free Wood Post articles included a claim that the FCC had labeled Fox News as satire, quoted Ann Romney on the wage gap, and suggested that Mitt Romney had said he could relate to black people because his ancestors owned slaves."
Could this image be depicting the Bitterroot Forest Fire?,"['An awe-inspiring photograph reportedly captured wildlife fleeing a  fire in Bitterroot Forest, Montana.']","A Once-in-a-Lifetime Photo of a Forest Fire in Bitterroot Forest, Montana

This awesome picture was taken in the Bitterroot National Forest in Montana on August 6, 2000, by a fire behavior analyst from Fairbanks, Alaska, named John McColgan, using a digital camera. Since he was working when he took the picture, he cannot sell or profit from it, so he should at least be recognized as the photographer of this once-in-a-lifetime shot. The year 2000 brought one of the worst fire seasons in half a century to the United States. By August, more than 4 million acres (an area greater in size than the states of Connecticut and Rhode Island combined) had been burned by wildfires, and dozens of blazes raged out of control in eleven western states, with nearly half of the conflagrations occurring in Idaho and Montana. On August 6, 2000, as several fires converged in the Bitterroot National Forest near the town of Sula in western Montana, John McColgan, a fire behavior analyst employed by the USDA Forest Service, snapped the spectacular photograph shown above with a digital camera and described the experience to a writer for the western Montana newspaper The Missoulian: ""That's a once-in-a-lifetime look there. I just happened to be in the right place at the right time. I've been doing this for 20 years, and it ranks in the top three days of fire behavior I've seen."" The day was August 6, the Sunday when several forest fires converged near Sula into a firestorm that overran 100,000 acres and destroyed 10 homes. Temperatures in the flame front were estimated at more than 800 degrees. Nevertheless, McColgan said, the wildlife appeared to be taking the crisis in stride, gathering near the East Fork of the Bitterroot River where it crosses under U.S. Highway 93. ""They know where to go, where their safe zones are,"" McColgan said. ""A lot of wildlife did get driven down there to the river. There were some bighorn sheep there. A small deer was standing right underneath me, under the bridge."" McColgan snapped the photo with a Kodak DC280 digital camera. Since he was working as a Forest Service firefighter, the shot is public property and cannot be sold or used for commercial purposes. After McColgan downloaded his amazing image to an office computer, a friend found it, e-mailed a copy to another friend, and by mid-September 2000, the picture was blazing its way across the Internet. Because many forwarded copies of the image lacked any attribution or explanation, e-mail recipients began to circulate rumors about its origins and authenticity; some claimed that the photo was snapped by a tourist, that it was taken during the extensive Yellowstone National Park fire of 1988, or that it was yet another digital fake. As John McColgan said afterward, ""I couldn't have profited from [the photograph], so I guess I'm glad so many people are enjoying it."" We're happy to help him at least receive proper credit for his work. This picture has also been circulated with text identifying it as a photograph of August 2003 forest fires in British Columbia, of October 2007 California wildfires, of the June 2012 Waldo Canyon Fire in Colorado Springs, Colorado, and of the November 2016 forest fires in Gatlinburg, Tennessee. 

Chaney, Rob. ""Mystery Solved: Forest Service Firefighter Captured Tragedy with Digital Camera."" The Missoulian. 15 September 2000. CNN.com. ""Montana Homes Threatened by Wildfires."" 7 August 2000.",['profit'],True,"On 6 August 2000, as several fires converged in the Bitterroot National Forest near the town of Sula in western Montana, John McColgan, a fire behavior analyst in the employ of the USDA Forest Service, snapped the spectacular photograph shown above with a digital camera and described the experience to a writer for the western Montana newspaper The Missoulian:After McColgan downloaded his amazing image to an office computer, a friend found it, e-mailed a copy to another friend, and by mid-September 2000 the picture was blazing its way across the Internet. Because many forwarded copies of the image lacked any attribution or explanation, e-mail recipients began to circulate rumors about its origins and authenticity  some claimed that the photo was snapped by a tourist, that it was taken during the extensive Yellowstone National Park fire of 1988, or that it was yet another digital fake."
Are individuals involved in sex trafficking labeling vehicles as potential victims?,"['Human trafficking is a real problem in the world, but the schemes outlined in many viral rumors like this one are not.']","In August 2020, a photograph showing the figures ""1f1b"" written on the back window of a vehicle began circulating on social media, accompanied by a warning about an alleged tactic used by sex traffickers to flag potential targets. Those sharing this meme claimed that this term stood for either ""1 female 1 boy"" or ""1 female 1 baby,"" asserting that cars were being tagged with these codes by sex traffickers. The meme gained viral traction when it was posted on actor James Woods' Twitter account. The text read: ""A very close friend of mine was out today shopping with her child at the Bricktown Walmart. When she left the store, a lady stopped her and made her aware of what was written on her back window (1f1b). I'm just going to assume that it stands for 1 female 1 baby. She was then informed that this is how sex traffickers are tagging cars. Please, please, mothers, fathers, grandparents, aunts, and uncles, be AWARE! Feel free to share! I won't be tagging my friend for personal reasons."" The claims made in this viral social media post are unfounded. Police in Bricktown, New Jersey, have stated that they are unaware of any such activity. Before we delve into the police statement regarding this matter, let's examine the game of telephone that helped this rumor spread. The text of this post indicates that this incident happened to a ""friend of mine."" As we read further, we discover that this ""friend"" was warned about this new criminal tactic by a random stranger—not a police officer, a news reporter, or even a Walmart employee, just an anonymous ""lady."" The original post received a few thousand shares, but this version garnered far wider circulation. As we moved further away from the rumor's origins, the details became increasingly muddled. One poster, for instance, claimed that this incident took place in Bricktown, Oklahoma City, despite the fact that there is no Walmart in that location. When we attempt to trace this rumor back to its origins, we find that the claim is based on something someone saw on Facebook, written by a person asserting that their friend had heard from a stranger that the code ""1f1b"" was being used by sex traffickers to flag future targets. In other words, this rumor lacks credible origins. The local Patch website reported that Brick Township Sgt. Jim Kelly said the department had not been notified. ""We have no reports of anything like this,"" Kelly stated. He also mentioned that the department has not been alerted by state or federal authorities about any information indicating that criminals are marking vehicles ""as a method for anything."" It's simply another Facebook rumor without any facts, Kelly said. A new variant of this rumor emerged on social media in July 2021. ""AND THIS, THIS IS WHY I CARRY! Not only do I carry, but I'm educated in how to defend myself if ever put in a circumstance like this! Please be aware of your surroundings AT ALL TIMES!"" On July 27, 2021, a post described an incident that occurred around 3:30 PM between Prairie Grove and Hogeye, where a truck was stopped by a black Tahoe. A man exited the vehicle and began asking the female driver for directions. She rolled down her window but kept her seatbelt on and doors locked. As the man approached, he punched her in the left eye and cut her arm. Thankfully, she was armed and managed to grab her gun. He fled the scene. She called the police, who advised her that the mark ""1FW"" on her back window is a human trafficking mark. She had been marked somewhere, and the man followed her, making a move to take her when she was on a road alone. Thankfully, she returned home to her family that night. We are told they often mark mailboxes and trash cans too. This particular marking stands for one female white. This is not the first time that such baseless warnings have gone viral on social media. In July 2019, for example, we reported on the false claim that sex traffickers were flagging targets by placing zip ties on houses, mailboxes, or vehicles. In December of that year, a false rumor circulated that sex traffickers were lying down in front of vehicles to trick them into stopping. That same month saw the spread of another false rumor claiming that roses were being placed on cars to mark potential targets. Human trafficking is a real problem in the world, but the schemes described above are not based on any real-world threats. In fact, The Polaris Project, a non-profit that operates the U.S. National Human Trafficking Hotline, states that the forced kidnapping aspect of the aforementioned rumors is one of the most prevalent myths surrounding trafficking: ""The most pervasive myth about human trafficking is that it often involves kidnapping or physically forcing someone into a situation. In reality, most traffickers use psychological means such as tricking, defrauding, manipulating, or threatening victims into providing commercial sex or exploitative labor.""",['profit'],False,"In August 2020, a photograph showing the figures ""1f1b"" written on the back window of a vehicle started to circulate on social media along with a warning about an alleged tactic being used by sex traffickers to flag potential targets. Those sharing this meme claimed that this term stood for either ""1 female 1 boy,"" or ""1 female 1 baby,"" and that cars were being tagged with these codes by sex traffickers. The meme received a viral boost when it was posted to actor James Woods' Twitter account:The text of this post states that this happened to a ""friend of mine."" When we read a little further, we see that this ""friend"" was warned about this new criminal tactic by a random stranger. Not a police officer, a news reporter, or even a Walmart employee  just an anonymous ""lady."" The original post received a few thousand shares, but this post received far wider circulation. And the farther we moved away from the rumor's origins, the muddier the details got. One poster, for instance, informed people that this incident took place in Bricktown, Oklahoma City, despite the fact that there is no Walmart in this location.The local Patch website reported:Nor was this the first time that this type of baseless warning has gone viral on social media. In July 2019, for example, we wrote about the false claim that sex traffickers were flagging targets by placing zip ties on houses, mailboxes, or vehicles. In December of that year, a false rumor circulated that sex traffickers were laying down in front of vehicles in order to trick them into stopping. That same month saw the spread of another false rumor holding that roses were being placed on cars to mark potential targets. Human trafficking is a real problem in the world, but the schemes described above are not based on any real-world threats. In fact, The Polaris Project, a non-profit that runs the U.S. National Human Trafficking Hotline, writes that the forced kidnapping aspect of the aforementioned rumors is one of the most prevalent myths when it comes to trafficking:"
"The State of Texas is providing funding for women's health services at record-high levels, as they have recently raised it by an additional $50 million for the upcoming two years.",[],"At a Texas Capitol rally, an anti-abortion advocate suggested that Texas has reached a record pace in funding women's health. Video from the July 2015 rally shows Joe Pojman of the Texas Alliance for Life initially praising Republican leaders for launching investigations in response to stealth videos showing Planned Parenthood employees discussing donations of fetal tissue rather casually. The videos had been circulated by the California-based Center for Medical Progress, which describes itself as a group of citizen journalists dedicated to monitoring and reporting on medical ethics. Next, Pojman told the crowd, to cheers and applause: ""I just wanted to emphasize, the state of Texas is doing its part... The state of Texas is funding women's health services at historically high levels; they just increased that level by another $50 million for the next two years."" Pojman noted that none of the $50 million would go to Planned Parenthood. ""Texas takes care of our people, and Planned Parenthood is not part of that picture,"" he said. 

Pojman's declaration caught our attention in part because actions set in motion by the 2011 Legislature drove down family planning spending in the state budget by more than $70 million (from an existing two-year expenditure of $111 million) in 2012-13. Also in 2011, lawmakers voted to bar state family planning aid from going to health care providers affiliated with organizations that perform or promote abortions, such as Planned Parenthood, whose clinics had been the Texas program's biggest provider of contraceptive care and cancer screening, serving more than 40,000 women a year. Two years later, the state's ruling Republicans passed into law a ban on most abortions after 20 weeks of gestation and mandated that facilities providing abortions meet tougher health and safety standards, a move under court challenge that has caused providers to predict a substantial reduction in clinics statewide. 

After the 2011 actions, the federal government moved to cut off what had been a 9-to-1 match of federal to state dollars paying to provide contraceptive care for women who otherwise would qualify for Medicaid if they were to become pregnant. State health officials said the affected initiative, launched in 2005, had saved the state money—$21.4 million in 2008, for instance—by reducing Medicaid-financed births. Federal aid accounted for $65 million of the money spent on the program in 2010-11. Reacting to the pending cutoff, then-Gov. Rick Perry announced that state officials would ensure such services were delivered through clinics not affiliated with abortion providers. The promised transition fully played out starting in 2013. 

So, given all this, could it be that the state has set a record for expenditures on women's health? We asked Pojman, executive director of the alliance, which opposes the advocacy and practice of abortion (except to preserve the pregnant woman's life), how he reached his historically high conclusion. By email, Pojman responded with a chart, which he sourced to state budgets, indicating that nearly $285 million in state and federal funds budgeted by the 2015 Legislature for several women's health efforts in 2016-17 would exceed such spending in each of the nine previous two-year state budgets, dating to 1998-99, with the previous record being $240.1 million for such programs in 2014-15. The previous low, per the chart, was $128.8 million in 2012-13. Pojman's chart attributed the touted $50 million in fresh spending to a provision in the 2016-17 budget stating that the money should increase access to women's health and family planning services. In his email, Pojman told us that at the rally, he was referring to total legislatively appropriated state and federal funding, not per-person funding, on four programs providing family planning or female-specific health care such as breast and cervical cancer screenings. Conversely, he said he wasn't including funding for perinatal care, including childbirth. Planned Parenthood, he said, provides virtually no services for pregnant women, certainly not support for childbirth, except elective abortion. 

In his email, Pojman said a February 2014 Texas Health and Human Services Commission presentation amounted to a good summary of how the state spends money on women's health. From that, we pulled these thumbnails: The Texas Women's Health Program was put in place by the state starting in 2013 to provide services previously available through the defunct, federally supported Medicaid Women's Health Program. The successor program, serving women living at or below 185 percent of the federal poverty level, retains the same program objectives and client eligibility previously provided by WHP and has expanded program benefits to include treatment of certain sexually transmitted infections. Services offered in annual appointments include pelvic examinations and STD, diabetes, HIV, cholesterol, blood pressure, and breast and cervical cancer screenings, plus Pap tests, a clinical breast exam, contraceptives, and family planning counseling. Family planning services, available to women of childbearing age and men living at 250 percent of the poverty level or less, offer the tests provided in the women's health program plus sterilizations. Expanded Primary Health Care, a new program offered to women 18 and older living at or below 200 percent of the poverty level, covers the services offered in the other programs plus immunizations, mammograms, diagnostic services for women with abnormal breast or cervical cancer test results, cervical dysplasia treatment, individualized case management, and optional prenatal medical and dental services. Breast and Cervical Cancer Services, open to women living at or below 200 percent of the poverty level, provide breast screenings for women aged 50 to 64 and cervical screenings for women aged 21 to 64. In addition to services covered by the Expanded Primary Health Care program, BCCS assists clients needing to apply to Medicaid's Breast and Cervical Cancer program. 

In addition, a chart in the presentation included spending figures that mostly aligned with what Pojman had offered to us for fiscal 2010 through 2015—including the legislated decrease in 2012-13 and a rebound in spending budgeted for 2014-15 (which ran through August 2015): SOURCE: Presentation to Senate Committee on Health and Human Services: Texas Women's Health and Family Planning Programs, Feb. 20, 2014 (received by email from Joe Pojman, Aug. 6, 2015). 

Next, we asked the commission and outside experts about Pojman's rally statement. The consensus was that spending budgeted by lawmakers for 2016-17 would set a record, though some advocates cautioned this didn't mean all needs would be met, and others said that not all the described programs focus only on services typically provided by family planning clinics. To our inquiry, the Texas Health and Human Services Commission emailed a more detailed chart, basically lining up with Pojman's recap. From the commission's figures, it looked to us like the appropriated 2016-17 funds for women's health services exceeded previous two-year expenditures by $40 million or more. At the Austin-based Center for Public Policy Priorities, which advocates for programs serving low-income residents, analyst Stacey Pogue said Pojman was on solid ground, though it's complicated. For instance, Pogue said, the 2015 Legislature called for three women's health programs to be reorganized in 2016 into two offerings overseen by the commission, and precise spending results remain to be seen. By email, Pogue pointed out a two-page summary of the 2016-17 state budget prepared by the Texas Women's Healthcare Coalition, which promotes access to preventive health care for all Texas women, working toward the vision of a state where every woman has access to the preventive and preconception care that will help her stay healthy and prepare for healthy, planned pregnancies. According to this June 2015 summary, $260.9 million in spending on women's health care budgeted by lawmakers for 2016-17 reflected an increase of $46.5 million, or 22 percent, from what was budgeted for 2014-15. We confirmed the latest figures in the 2016-17 appropriations act approved by a Texas House-Senate conference committee; it shows $130,321,510 in budgeted spending on women's health services in the fiscal year beginning Sept. 1, 2015, and $130,548,682 for the subsequent year, totaling $260,870,192 in the biennium. As noted by Pojman, the act also states that each year, on approval of the budget board, the commission shall allocate $50 million to provide primary health care services to women, including but not limited to preventive health screenings such as breast and cervical cancer screenings, diabetes, cholesterol, hypertension, and STD-HIV screenings; family planning services including contraception; perinatal services; and dental services. Due to such spending, the act estimates that annually, 65,000 adults and adolescents would receive family planning services. It's that additional spending, the coalition summary indicates, that makes the budgeted spending higher despite legislated reductions in spending for family planning (a cut of $1.5 million, or nearly 4 percent) and the Texas Women's Health program (a cut of $2 million, or 3 percent). 

Also to our inquiry, Heather Busby of NARAL Pro-Choice Texas, which focuses on guaranteeing Texans the right to make personal reproductive health decisions, including contraception and safe abortions, suggested we query Kari White, a University of Alabama at Birmingham professor and expert on women's health issues who has been part of a Texas-based team studying the effects of the Texas decision barring aid to clinics affiliated with abortion providers. By phone and email, White agreed that the state has allocated what looks like a record level of money to the efforts singled out by Pojman, though she speculated by email that the spending bump might be less dramatic than available figures suggest. The focus on funding allocated for the four programs on Pojman's list, White said, does not entirely capture how some of the women's health services have historically been paid for. For example, primary care services for women that are now covered by EPHC were previously paid for using other state-administered and federal programs (not included on Pojman's list). By not factoring these programs into funding totals in previous years, the recent increase may seem larger than it actually is. 

Also, White wrote, funding allocations do not reflect how effectively these programs are serving women. In other words, there may be more total dollars set aside for services, but since quite a bit of this new funding has been going to organizations that do not have a lot of experience with family planning, the state is spending more but not necessarily serving more women. White suggested we consider research by the Guttmacher Institute, a nonprofit that promotes reproductive health and abortion rights. In 2013, more than 1.7 million Texas women were in need of publicly supported contraceptive services and supplies, according to a July 2015 institute report that started from U.S. Census Bureau survey results. That year, the report said, publicly supported health centers provided contraceptive care to 281,170 women in Texas, plus 47,390 teens. These totals amount to substantial proportions—but not nearly all—of the women in need of publicly supported contraception, the report said. For our part, we asked the commission for help estimating the number of Texas women eligible for the health services. Could it be that even with spending up, less money is available per potential beneficiary? By email, spokesman Bryan Black provided a chart, drawing on U.S. Census Bureau surveys, estimating the number of female U.S. citizens aged 15-44 living in Texas at or below 200 percent of the federal poverty level from 2010 through 2017—in other words, the women who most likely would qualify for the health services. Next, we calculated that some $109 per potential beneficiary was spent in 2010-11 and 2012-13; this was exceeded by the $205 per potential beneficiary appropriated by lawmakers for such programs in 2014-15 and the $236 per potential beneficiary appropriated for 2016-17. 

Pojman said the state of Texas is funding women's health services at historically high levels; they just increased their level by another $50 million for the next two years. Texas lawmakers this year voted to appropriate more for women's health services than before—including the $50 million bump. This includes funding for general health services such as diabetes and cholesterol screenings. It also may be meaningful that programs are under reorganization. Too, lawmakers started putting more money on the table after their actions led the federal government to cut off tens of millions of dollars for reproductive services. We rate this claim True. TRUE The statement is accurate, and there's nothing significant missing.","['Abortion', 'Health Care', 'State Budget', 'Women', 'Texas']",True,"Videoof the July 2015 rally showsJoe Pojmanof the Texas Alliance for Life initially saluting Republican leaders for launching investigations in reaction to stealth videos showing Planned Parenthood employees talking rather casually about donations of fetal tissue. The videos had been circulated by the California-based Center for Medical Progress,which describes itselfas a group of citizen-journalists dedicated to monitoring and reporting on medical ethics.We asked Pojman, executive director of the alliance, whichsaysit opposes the advocacy and practice of abortion (except to preserve the pregnant womans life), how he reached his historically high conclusion.By email, Pojman responded with achart, which he sourced to state budgets, indicating that nearly $285 million in state and federal funds budgeted by the 2015 Legislature for several womens health efforts in 2016-17 would exceed such spending in each of the nine previous two-year state budgets, dating to 1998-99with the previous record being $240.1 million for such programs in 2014-15. The previous low, per the chart, was $128.8 million in 2012-13.In his email, Pojman said aFebruary 2014 Texas Health and Human Services Commission presentationamounted to a good summary of how the state spends money on womens health. From that, we pulled these thumbnails:SOURCE:Presentation to Senate Committee on Health and Human Services: Texas Womens Health and Family Planning Programs,Feb. 20, 2014 (received by email from Joe Pojman, Aug. 6, 2015)To our inquiry, the Texas Health and Human Services Commission emailed amore detailed chartbasically lining up with Pojmans recap. From the commissions figures, it looked to us like the appropriated 2016-17 funds for womens health services exceeded previous two-year expenditures by $40 million or more.By email, Pogue pointed out a two-pagesummary of the 2016-17 state budgetprepared by theTexas Womens Healthcare Coalition, which says it promotes access to preventive health care for all Texas women working toward the vision of a state where every woman has access to the preventive and preconception care that will help her stay healthy and prepare for healthy, planned pregnancies. According to this June 2015 summary, $260.9 million in spending on womens health care budgeted by lawmakers for 2016-17 reflected an increase of $46.5 million, or 22 percent, from what was budgeted for 2014-15.We confirmed the latest figures inthe 2016-17 appropriations act approved by a Texas House-Senate conference committee; it shows $130,321,510 in budgeted spending on womens health services in the fiscal year beginning Sept. 1, 2015, and $130,548,682 for the subsequent year, totaling $260,870,192 in the biennium.Also to our inquiry, Heather Busby of NARAL Pro-Choice Texas, whichsaysit focuses on guaranteeing Texans the right to make personal reproductive health decisions including contraception and safe abortions, suggested we queryKari White, a University of Alabama at Birmingham professor and expert on womens health issues whos been part of aTexas-based teamstudying effects of the Texas decision barring aid to clinics affiliated with abortion providers.White suggested we consider research by the Guttmacher Institute, a nonprofit that promotes reproductive health and abortion rights. In 2013, more than 1.7 million Texas women were in need of publicly supported contraceptive services and supplies, according to a July 2015 institute reportthat started fromU.S. Census Bureau survey results. That year, the report said, publicly supported health centers provided contraceptive care to 281,170 women in Texas plus 47,390 teens. These totals amount to substantial proportionsbut not nearly allof the women in need of publicly supported contraception, the report said.By email, spokesman Bryan Black provided achart, drawing on U.S. Census Bureau surveys, estimating the number of female U.S. citizens aged 15-44 living in Texas at or below 200 percent of the federal poverty level from 2010 through 2017--in other words, the women who most likely would qualify for the health services. Next, we calculated that some $109 per potential beneficiary was spent in 2010-11 and 2012-13; this was exceeded by the $205 per potential beneficiary appropriated by lawmakers for such programs in 2014-15 and the $236 per potential beneficiary appropriated for 2016-17.Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check."
Secret Service Coverage of John Kerry,"[""Would the Secret Service have to provide lifetime protection for all of John Kerry's homes?""]","Claim:  If John Kerry were elected President, the Secret Service would have to protect him and every property he owns for the rest of his life.  Example:  [Collected on the Internet, 2004] You will pay upkeep/Secret Service for 5 Kerry mansions.  It is good to be John F. Kerry....... The F stands for Forbes in case you ever wondered. He is one of the richest Senators in Government. When someone is elected president, it means the Secret Service has to protect the President and his family as well as his property. The Kerry's have five US properties not counting the several foreign properties they own too. The cost to run these homes are more than what the average American could afford, even if the rent was free, and all you had to pay the water, gas & electric. Including ground keepers, maintenance, pool, and house keepers. To be President would require the taxpayers to pay for all that now if elected. Including a complete staffed Secret Service security 24 hours a day. In addition to that we will have to pay for each of their homes for security improvements even if they never go to them all there is that just in case. Who do you think will pay for all this? We Pay! This takes all the expense off Kerry and puts it on us. Nevertheless, factor another major cost to Americans that Kerry does not want you to know about. Becoming president would automatically include taking care of all their properties with Secret Service Agents that includes 5 agents per 6 hour shift 4 times a day 365 days of the year for the rest of their lives so long as they own those properties. It comes with being President once you are elected. It requires us the taxpayers, to pay for this as well as his annual salary as well as his retirements including the cost of living adjustments to boot.  These salaries and agents protect all their real estate property with Secret Service Agents and pay the bills for the rest of his life. In addition, feed the Secret Service Agents and rotate new ones every 6 hours for the rest of his life. Do the math. Five properties need to be protected. This requires five Secret Service Agents per shift, daily every six hours, per property! That is 20 Secret Service Agents per day per property everyday including Holidays. Wow, what does that cost? Lets say an average of 20 agents per property, each earning a about $60K per agent to survey the perimeters and protect. Now times that by five properties so far. That is if the Kerry's do not buy any more properties afterwards. This also includes the Agents vehicles and repairs, gas, meals, days off, paid vacation, and medical plan visits etc per agent. Who pays? YOU pay, the whole time they are alive after becoming President! Is this the best use of our tax money electing Kerry to take care of all their properties both foreign and domestic? On the other hand, shouldn't he pay for his own? Yet, the Presidential salary could not afford it. The more I think about paying for Kerry's properties everyday, just makes me happy keeping President Bush all the more merrier. Without raising taxes to boot. How on earth would Kerry pay for everyone to have Healthcare, increase our military, and have us pay to protect his investments, all without raising our taxes? Tax and spend Kerry is his party motto. Which really has to make you wonder why anyone with his wealth, would take a salary of that of a U.S. Senator, never mind wanna be President? Do you believe him now why he needs to be the Prez? To serve the people? On the other hand, the people serve Him and his wife! IF YOU AREN'T COMPLETELY APPALLED, THEN YOU HAVEN'T BEEN PAYING ATTENTION Origins:   The fact that Senator John Kerry's middle name is ""Forbes"" is about the only piece of information this latest political diatribe gets  right. John Kerry and his wife, Teresa Heinz Kerry, together own several homes, but since they signed a prenuptial agreement and have kept their premarital assets separate,  a Boston townhouse (which John Kerry mortgaged in 2003 to finance his presidential bid) is the only one of these homes that they technically own as a couple.  The government is obligated to provide Secret Service protection to the President and his immediate family, so if John Kerry were elected to that office, of course he and his family would be entitled to the same level of security detail that the Secret Service provides to every President.  That protection might indeed include the use of public funds to pay the costs of installation and maintenance for security systems at some of the Kerrys' homes, because the protection of First Families is viewed as a right and proper charge upon the nation.  Security measures of this level would not be specific to the Kerrys; the homes of all Presidents are treated this way, as (to a lesser extent) are the homes of all former Presidents.  homes It is not true, however, that every single residence owned by the either of the Kerrys (whether it be in America or abroad) would be staffed by five Secret Service agents around the clock, and that those agents would be guarding the Kerrys and all their properties for the rest of John Kerry's life.  Secret Service staffing levels vary as the situation requires, and lifetime protection for former Presidents and their spouses was eliminated by Congressional legislation in 1997.  President Clinton and his wife, Hillary, are the last First Couple who will receive such a benefit; President George W. Bush and all who succeed him in the White House will be limited to receiving Secret Service protection for a period of not more than 10 years from the time they leave office.  protection In any case, the idea that U.S. voters would have to pay higher taxes if John Kerry were elected President in order to ""protect his investments"" is just silly.  The projected U.S. federal budget for 2005 is $2.4 trillion  the amount of money spent to protect the President and his family (whoever that President might be) is but a teeny-tiny fraction of a drop in that vast bucket.  The only thing sillier than that notion that taxes would have to be raised to protect a putative President Kerry is the suggestion that the cost of Secret Service protection should be a factor in voters' choosing who should serve as President of the United States. budget For more information about the protection afforded former Presidents, see our article about a similar rumor that was attached to the previous First Couple when President Bill Clinton left office in 2001. article Last updated:  2 October 2004    Sources:   Burger, Timothy and Kenneth Bazinet.  ""Hil and Bill Buy 3M Home, Sweet Home in Capital.""   [New York] Daily News.  30 December 2000  (p. 6).     DeFrank, Thomas.  ""1st Family's N.Y. Bunker.""    Fuchs, Marek.  ""First Family's Arrival Changes the Focus of Secret Service Office.""   The New York Times.  29 October 2000  (Weekend Calendar; p. 5).     Grove, Lloyd.  ""The Reliable Source.""   The Washington Post.  12 January 2001  (p. C3).",['asset'],False,"John Kerry and his wife, Teresa Heinz Kerry, together own several homes, but since they signed a prenuptial agreement and have kept their premarital assets separate,  a Boston townhouse (which John Kerry mortgaged in 2003 to finance his presidential bid) is the only one of these homes that they technically own as a couple.  The government is obligated to provide Secret Service protection to the President and his immediate family, so if John Kerry were elected to that office, of course he and his family would be entitled to the same level of security detail that the Secret Service provides to every President.  That protection might indeed include the use of public funds to pay the costs of installation and maintenance for security systems at some of the Kerrys' homes, because the protection of First Families is viewed as a right and proper charge upon the nation.  Security measures of this level would not be specific to the Kerrys; the homes of all Presidents are treated this way, as (to a lesser extent) are the homes of all former Presidents. It is not true, however, that every single residence owned by the either of the Kerrys (whether it be in America or abroad) would be staffed by five Secret Service agents around the clock, and that those agents would be guarding the Kerrys and all their properties for the rest of John Kerry's life.  Secret Service staffing levels vary as the situation requires, and lifetime protection for former Presidents and their spouses was eliminated by Congressional legislation in 1997.  President Clinton and his wife, Hillary, are the last First Couple who will receive such a benefit; President George W. Bush and all who succeed him in the White House will be limited to receiving Secret Service protection for a period of not more than 10 years from the time they leave office. In any case, the idea that U.S. voters would have to pay higher taxes if John Kerry were elected President in order to ""protect his investments"" is just silly.  The projected U.S. federal budget for 2005 is $2.4 trillion  the amount of money spent to protect the President and his family (whoever that President might be) is but a teeny-tiny fraction of a drop in that vast bucket.  The only thing sillier than that notion that taxes would have to be raised to protect a putative President Kerry is the suggestion that the cost of Secret Service protection should be a factor in voters' choosing who should serve as President of the United States.For more information about the protection afforded former Presidents, see our article about a similar rumor that was attached to the previous First Couple when President Bill Clinton left office in 2001."
Was the individual who created the 'Bernie Mittens' design forced to shut down their business due to taxation?,"[""That would be ironic considering the progressive senator's unabashed proposals to impose new taxes.""]","As memes of U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders wearing hand-crafted mittens at Joe Biden's presidential inauguration plastered the Internet in early 2021, rumors surfaced alleging that the creator of the mittens had stopped selling recycled wool products because of high federal taxes. Snopes received numerous inquiries to investigate the validity of the claim, which attempted to expose the hypocrisy of people who support the Vermont senator's goals of imposing new taxes to pay for various proposals, including free universal health care. Here's some background: Jen Ellis, a Vermont elementary school teacher, said she made the mittens out of discarded wool sweaters and gifted them to the senator after he lost the Democratic presidential nomination to Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential race. ""I sent him these mittens kind of as a shoutout to who he is, and I put a note in that said something to the effect of, 'I hope you run again,'"" she told Slate. The viral image of Sanders wearing Ellis' gift and sitting with his arms and legs crossed made the teacher famous by the viral standards of 2021. She gave multiple interviews to news outlets including NPR and Slate in which she discussed her support for Sanders and her reaction to the memes; social media users and other websites republished those comments, in part to harness the virality of the moment. Among the latter group was The Federalist, an online hub of articles with a conservative bent. Two days after the inauguration, the website published a page with the headline, ""Woman Behind Bernie Sanders' Iconic Mittens Quit Making Them Because High Taxes Killed Her Business,"" reading: ""The Vermont school teacher who made Bernie Sanders' mittens, featured in the most recent viral meme, said she had to stop making them after the federal government taxed her too much."" To support the claim, The Federalist cited a portion of Ellis' interview with Slate. According to a transcribed version of that conversation, which Slate published on Jan. 21, the elementary school teacher indeed told writer Rachelle Hampton: ""Speaking of bittersweet, you supported Bernie. How did you feel about watching Biden be sworn in as president?"" Ellis responded, ""Oh my gosh, I cried. I'm 42 and I've waited four decades of my life to see a woman be vice president. I wish that she was president, although I think Biden is pretty great. [...] And then there was this little side nagging thing of every five minutes I was getting several hundred more emails about the mittens. A year ago, when Bernie was on the campaign trail, he was wearing those mittens and Twitter buzzed about it then. I'm not really on Twitter—I have an account, but I don't really participate—but a lot of my younger colleagues do, and they were like, 'You've gotta check this out.' [...] So I put it out there that I made the mittens, they were a gift, and they're not knitted, they're sewn from repurposed and up-cycled sweaters. At that time, I had 30 or 40 mittens for sale, and being a little naïve about Twitter, I put my Gmail account on that, which someone picked up yesterday and retweeted. People have been contacting me thinking that they can get mittens, and actually they can't. I don't have any more, and I don't have much of a mitten business anymore because it really wasn't worth it. Independent crafters get really taken for a ride by the federal government. We get taxed to the nth degree, and it wasn't really worth it pursuing that as a business, even as a side hustle. I mostly just make them as gifts."" In other words, Ellis said she did not ""have much of a mitten business anymore,"" or that she previously sold the handmade items for a price and then mostly stopped. She implied that federal taxes were a leading factor in her decision to make that change. On Jan. 20, as social media lit up with the memes following the inauguration, she confirmed on Twitter that she was not selling mittens like the senator's. Snopes reached out to Ellis to learn more about her history of trying to sell mittens for profit and paying federal taxes as a self-described independent crafter. We have not yet received a response, but we'll update this report when or if we do. All of that said, the size of Ellis' former business was unknown, as well as how long or via what methods she sold the handmade mittens. U.S. tax code requires all independent contractors—no matter if they use online marketplaces such as Etsy to sell handmade products—to pay local and federal taxes based on net profits. Also, we should note here: Sanders' proposed changes to the country's tax system would repeal aspects of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act so that taxpayers who earn between about $9,500 and $250,000 would pay about 4% more, and taxes on the country's top earners would generate the majority of revenue. Additionally, he wants to impose a new payroll tax on businesses that earn more than $2 million annually, a change that intends to protect ventures like Ellis' from paying more. So while it was true that taxes played a role in Ellis' decision to stop charging people money for mittens prior to her viral fame, it was false to claim that she ""quit"" making them altogether, as The Federalist headline alleged. Between Jan. 23 and 24, she said in a series of tweets that she made three more pairs of ""Bernie mittens,"" two of which she donated to Passion 4 Paws Vermont and Outright Vermont for fundraising, and one that she was auctioning off to benefit her daughter's college fund. After that, Sanders' official campaign began selling merchandise with the senator's meme-worthy image that Ellis made possible. The so-called ""Chairman Sanders"" sweatshirts, T-shirts, stickers, etc., helped raise $1.8 million for charitable organizations in Vermont over the course of five days, The Associated Press reported. On Jan. 24, Ellis tweeted that the senator called her to tell her that ""the mitten frenzy"" had raised ""an enormous amount of money"" for the charities. Besides that evidence, it was unclear how, or to what extent, the teacher was involved in the making or selling of the campaign-official products featuring her mittens. As further proof to debunk claims that she had ceased all mitten-making, the teacher on Jan. 27 announced that she had partnered with entities including Darn Tough Socks to make socks inspired by the viral mittens, and the following day she said she was in the process of another project ""to get Bernie Mittens for ALL."" ""I'm not opening a mitten factory or quitting my job as a second-grade teacher! However, I am going to choose a new adventure on the side,"" Ellis said on her official website and GoFundMe page. ""Never fear—I will make more mittens, but I won't be selling them for myself. I will be donating them to Vermont charities to help them fundraise and make up for the funds lost due to the pandemic."" In sum, while it was true that, prior to her viral fame, Ellis mostly stopped charging people for handmade mittens due to costs including federal taxes, she was still creating the recycled wool products, and people were spending money on them as of this writing. For those reasons, we rate this claim a ""Mixture"" of truthful and misleading information.",['taxes'],NEI,"As memes of U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders wearing hand-crafted mittens at Joe Biden's presidential inauguration plastered the Internet in early 2021, rumors surfaced alleging that the creator of the mittens had stopped selling recycled wool products because of high federal taxes.Snopes received numerous inquiries to investigate the validity of the claim, which attempted to expose hypocrisy of people who support the Vermont senator's goals of imposing new taxes to pay for various proposals, including free universal health care.Here's some background: Jen Ellis, a Vermont elementary school teacher, said she made the mittens out of discarded wool sweaters and gifted them to the senator after he lost the Democratic presidential nomination to Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential race. ""I sent him these mittens kind of as a shoutout to who he is, and I put a note in that said something to the effect of, 'I hope you run again,'"" she told Slate. (Photo by JONATHAN ERNST/POOL/AFP via Getty Images)The viral image of Sanders wearing Ellis' gift and sitting with his arms and legs crossed made the teacher famous by the viral standards of 2021. She gave multiple interviews to news outlets including NPR and Slate in which she discussed her support for Sanders and reaction to the memes; social media users and other websites republished those comments, in part to harness the virality of the moment.Among the latter group was The Federalist, an online hub of articles with a conservative bent. Two days after the inauguration, the website published a page with the headline, ""Woman Behind Bernie Sanders' Iconic Mittens Quit Making Them Because High Taxes Killed Her Business,"" reading:The Vermont school teacher who made Bernie Sanders mittens, featured in the most recent viral meme, said she had to stop making them after the federal government taxed her too much.To support the claim, The Federalist cited a portion of Ellis' interview with Slate. According to a transcribed version of that conversation, which Slate published on Jan. 21, the elementary school teacher indeed told writer Rachelle Hampton:So I put it out there that I made the mittens, they were a gift, and theyre not knitted, theyre sewn from repurposed and up-cycled sweaters. At that time, I had 30 or 40 mittens for sale and being a little nave about Twitter, I put my Gmail account on that, which someone picked up yesterday and retweeted it. People have been contacting me thinking that they can get mittens, and actually they cant. I dont have any more, and I dont have much of a mitten business anymore because it really wasnt worth it. Independent crafters get really taken for a ride by the federal government. We get taxed to the nth degree, and it wasnt really worth it pursuing that as a business, even as a side hustle. I mostly just make them as gifts.On Jan. 20, as social media lit up with the memes following the inauguration, she confirmed on Twitter that she was not selling mittens like the senator's.All of that said, the size of Ellis' former business was unknown, as well as how long or via what methods she sold the handmade mittens. U.S. tax code requires all independent contractors  no matter if they use online marketplaces such as Etsy to sell handmade products  to pay local and federal taxes based on net profits.Also, we should note here: Sanders' proposed changes to the country's tax system would repeal aspects of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act so that taxpayers who earn between about $9,500 and $250,000 would pay about 4% more, and taxes on the country's top earners would generate the majority of revenue. Additionally, he wants to impose a new payroll on businesses that earn more than $2 million annually, a change that intends to protect ventures like Ellis' from paying more. (See here for a detailed breakdown of Sanders' tax proposal by Forbes.)Between Jan. 23 and 24, she said in a series of tweets that she made three more pairs of ""Bernie mittens,"" two of which she donated to Passion 4 Paws Vermont and Outright Vermont for fundraising and one that she was auctioning off to benefit her daughters college fund.After that, Sanders' official campaign began selling merchandise with the senator's meme-worthy image that Ellis made possible. The so-called ""Chairman Sanders"" sweatshirts, T-shirts, stickers, etc. helped raise $1.8 million for charitable organizations in Vermont over the course of five days, The Associated Press reported.On Jan. 24, Ellis tweeted that the senator called her to tell her that ""the mitten frenzy"" had raised ""an enormous amount of money"" for the charities. Besides that evidence, it was unclear how, or to what extent, the teacher was involved in the making or selling of the campaign-official products featuring her mittens.As further proof to debunk claims that she had ceased all mitten-making, the teacher on Jan. 27 announced that she had partnered with entities including Darn Tough Socks to make socks inspired by the viral mittens, and the following day she said she was in the process of another project ""to get Bernie Mittens for ALL.""""Im not opening a mitten factory or quitting my job as a second grade teacher! However, I am going to choose a new adventure on the side,"" Ellis said on her official website and GoFundMe page. ""Never fear  I will make more mittens, but I won't be selling them for myself. I will be donating them to Vermont Charities to help them fundraise and make up for the funds lost due to the pandemic."""
Did the greatest number of jobs in February 2021 come from the 'Waiters and Bartenders' sector?,['Some online observers critical of U.S. President Joe Biden sought to undercut a broadly positive employment update in March 2021.'],"In March 2021, new employment figures showed that the U.S. economy added 379,000 jobs in February, the first full month of Joe Biden's presidency. The news was greeted with cautious optimism, with the Wall Street Journal reporting that the gains had ""set up a stronger recovery"" for the spring of 2021, and The Washington Post reporting that the figures had ""surpassed analysts' estimates."" Politico wrote that: Wall Street Journal Washington Post Politico U.S. employers added a robust 379,000 jobs last month, the most since October and a sign that the economy is strengthening as confirmed viral cases drop, consumers spend more and states and cities ease business restrictions.The February gain marked a sharp pickup from the 166,000 jobs that were added in January and a loss of 306,000 in December. Yet it represents just a fraction of the roughly 10 million jobs that were lost to the pandemic. On social media, other observers  in particular those more broadly opposed to Biden  sought to undercut the significance of the jobs figures, claiming that a large majority of the increased employment came in one sector, namely food and beverage services. On Twitter, the libertarian economics blog Zerohedge wrote: wrote Of the 379K jobs added, 286K were waiters and bartenders.   The stockbroker and financial commentator Peter Schiff tweeted: tweeted 75% of the 379k jobs ""created"" in Feb. were waiters and bartenders returning to work. Since many restaurants and bars that closed will never reopen there's a limit to how long this can last... The right-wing British blog Guido Fawkes tweeted: tweeted ""US economic recovery sees 379,000 jobs added this week, 286,000 were waiters and bartenders. God bless America and cheers!"" Those figures were accurately stated, although ""waiters and bartenders"" was a reductive description of the occupations in question. As a result, we're issuing a rating of ""true."" The standard measure of job growth is ""total nonfarm payroll employment, seasonally adjusted,"" a metric that is collated and published by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), each month. On March 5, the BLS published figures for the preceding month, February 2021, writing that: ""Total nonfarm payroll employment rose by 379,000 in February..."" In effect, this means that there were 379,000 more jobs in the United States in February than there were in January. published The BLS provides in-depth breakdowns of job gains or losses, and unemployment, including details on the demographic and sectoral contours of each month's data. According to the same set of figures, the ""leisure and hospitality"" sector gained 355,000 of the 379,000 total new jobs in February (Summary Table B).  Summary Table B Of those, 285,900 jobs were specifically in ""food services and drinking places"" (Table B-1). That's the source of the ""286K"" figure presented by Zerohedge. Those 285,900 jobs made up 75.4% of the total number of new jobs added in February, the percentage figure provided by Schiff in his tweet. Table B-1 However, the ""food services and drinking places"" subsector is made up of more than just ""waiters and bartenders."" The following is how that subsector is defined in the official North American Industry Classification System: defined Industries in the Food Services and Drinking Places subsector prepare meals, snacks, and beverages to customer order for immediate on-premises and off-premises consumption. There is a wide range of establishments in these industries. Some provide food and drink only; while others provide various combinations of seating space, waiter/waitress services and incidental amenities, such as limited entertainment. The industries in the subsector are grouped based on the type and level of services provided. The industry groups are full-service restaurants; limited-service eating places; special food services, such as food service contractors, caterers, and mobile food services; and drinking places. The BLS figures for February 2021 don't specify the proportion of those 285,900 jobs composed of specific occupations, but it's highly unlikely they were all ""waiters and bartenders."" In 2019, the most recent year for which figures are available, the following was the breakdown of occupations within the ""food services and drinking places subsector"": breakdown As can be seen from those figures, ""waiters and waitresses"" made up less than one-third of workers within that subsector. If the distribution of occupations was even broadly similar among the 285,900 new ""food services and drinking places"" jobs added in February, then it would appear highly unlikely that even a majority of those 285,900 new jobs were made up of ""waiters and bartenders"" alone. ",['economy'],True,"In March 2021, new employment figures showed that the U.S. economy added 379,000 jobs in February, the first full month of Joe Biden's presidency. The news was greeted with cautious optimism, with the Wall Street Journal reporting that the gains had ""set up a stronger recovery"" for the spring of 2021, and The Washington Post reporting that the figures had ""surpassed analysts' estimates."" Politico wrote that:On Twitter, the libertarian economics blog Zerohedge wrote:The stockbroker and financial commentator Peter Schiff tweeted:The right-wing British blog Guido Fawkes tweeted:The standard measure of job growth is ""total nonfarm payroll employment, seasonally adjusted,"" a metric that is collated and published by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), each month. On March 5, the BLS published figures for the preceding month, February 2021, writing that: ""Total nonfarm payroll employment rose by 379,000 in February..."" In effect, this means that there were 379,000 more jobs in the United States in February than there were in January.The BLS provides in-depth breakdowns of job gains or losses, and unemployment, including details on the demographic and sectoral contours of each month's data. According to the same set of figures, the ""leisure and hospitality"" sector gained 355,000 of the 379,000 total new jobs in February (Summary Table B). Of those, 285,900 jobs were specifically in ""food services and drinking places"" (Table B-1). That's the source of the ""286K"" figure presented by Zerohedge. Those 285,900 jobs made up 75.4% of the total number of new jobs added in February, the percentage figure provided by Schiff in his tweet.However, the ""food services and drinking places"" subsector is made up of more than just ""waiters and bartenders."" The following is how that subsector is defined in the official North American Industry Classification System:The BLS figures for February 2021 don't specify the proportion of those 285,900 jobs composed of specific occupations, but it's highly unlikely they were all ""waiters and bartenders."" In 2019, the most recent year for which figures are available, the following was the breakdown of occupations within the ""food services and drinking places subsector"":"
"Were 10,000 Camels Scheduled to Be Killed in Australia Amid Water Shortages?",['Multiple websites and social media memes lamented a population-control strategy announced by authorities in South Australia amid drought and extreme heat in January 2020.'],"In January 2020, readers asked us about the accuracy of reports that authorities in Australia had announced their intention to cull (kill) around 10,000 camels due to the pressure the animals were placing on drinking water supplies.  For example, on Jan. 7, the Weird World Facebook page posted a widely shared meme that contained the following text: meme ""More than 10,000 camels to be killed because they drink too much water. Feral camels in South Australia are set to be killed in a bid to stop them drinking too much water as droughts and fires ravage the country. More than 10,000 camels will be shot by professional shooters in helicopters starting Wednesday.""   Also on Jan. 7, the London Evening Standard published a story with a headline similar to that contained in the meme: ""Over 10,000 Australian Camels to Be Shot Because They Drink Too Much Water."" The article reported that: story ""Over 10,000 camels will be shot from helicopters to stop them drinking water in drought ravaged South Australia. Professional shooters will move in on Wednesday, after orders from Aboriginal leaders in the Anangu Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara lands (AYP). The culling, expected to take about five days, follows complaints from locals about animals looking for any available water source, including tanks and taps in properties."" Similar stories, with similar headlines, were published by the Independent, the Daily Mail, and IndiaTimes.com. Those reports, and the Weird World meme, were broadly accurate, though the specific claim that ""more than"" 10,000 camels would be culled as part of the plan appears to have been contradicted by a local official who said the number would be between 5,000 and 10,000. They also failed to mention that a small number of wild horses would be targeted in the kill, as well. Independent Daily Mail IndiaTimes.com The APY local government authority, in the state of South Australia, announced the cull in a Jan. 6 news release that read, in part ""There will be a feral animal kill across the APY lands. Feral animals, but specifically camels, are the primary target ... The cull (kill) will occur the week of 8th January, 2020, when the aerial operations will commence (expected to go over five days)."" news release In a supplementary news release published the following day, APY officials explained the reasoning behind the cull: news release The region's first major cull of feral animals is in urgent response to threats posed to communities by an increase in the number of feral camels, and some feral horses, due to drought and extreme heat. Thousands of feral camels are emerging from an arid landscape and moving into communities looking for water, while doing significant damage to infrastructure and housing, and creating serious safety hazards.  Traditional owners, who have been widely consulted about the cull, have reported extremely large groups of camels and other feral animals in and around communities and in specific hot spots across the APY Lands. The APY Executive Board of Management held an urgent meeting on December 11 about the impact of feral animals on communities and pastoral operations, and approved a resolution for an aerial cull of camels and other feral animals across the APY Lands.  ... Richard King, APY's general manager, said traditional owners recognized the need to manage feral owners, despite a camel cull presenting a spiritual conflict for some indigenous groups, because of serious risks to community safety and damage to important economic, natural and cultural assets. ""There is extreme pressure on remote Aboriginal communities in the APY Lands and their pastoral operations as the camels search for water,"" Mr. King said.  ""The dire situation is compounded by dry conditions, animal welfare issues, threats to communities, scarce water supplies, health and environmental impacts, the destruction of country, loss of food supplies and endangerment of travellers on the Stuart Highway and across the APY Lands. Given ongoing dry conditions and the large camel congregations threatening all of the main APY communities and infrastructure, immediate camel control is needed."" Separately, APY's General Manager Richard King told CBS News that the number of camels being targeted in the cull was between 5,000 and 10,000  a range that somewhat contradicts the claim, repeated in several news articles, that ""more than"" or ""over"" 10,000 camels were to be killed. If the number ends up being 10,000, those reports will transpire to be rather accurate. However, according to King, the number could be as low as half of that figure, a detail noted by none of the articles or the meme mentioned above. CBS News Hennessey, Ted. ""Over 10,000 Australian Camels to Be Shot From Helicopters Because They Drink Too Much Water.""
 The Evening Standard. 7 January 2020. Osborne, Samuel. ""Australia: More Than 10,000 Camels to Be Shot Because They Drink Too Much Water.""
 The Independent. 7 January 2020. Wilkie, Kelsey. ""Shooters Will Cull More Than 10,000 Australian Camels From the Air Tomorrow...""
 The Daily Mail. 6 January 2020. Chauhan, Shreya. ""Solution to Bushfires? Australia to Kill 10,000 Camels Because 'They Drink Too Much Water.'""
 IndiaTimes.com. 7 January 2020. Anangu Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara Local Authority. ""Media Statement -- There Will Be a Feral Animal Kill Across the APY Lands.""
 6 January 2020. Anangu Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara Local Authority. ""Media Statement -- Feral Camel Control Operation Launches on APY Lands.""
 7 January 2020. Lewis, Sophie. ""Up to 10,000 Thirsty Camels Will Be Shot and Killed During Major Australian Drought.""
 CBS News. 7 January 2020.",['asset'],True,"For example, on Jan. 7, the Weird World Facebook page posted a widely shared meme that contained the following text:Also on Jan. 7, the London Evening Standard published a story with a headline similar to that contained in the meme: ""Over 10,000 Australian Camels to Be Shot Because They Drink Too Much Water."" The article reported that:Similar stories, with similar headlines, were published by the Independent, the Daily Mail, and IndiaTimes.com. Those reports, and the Weird World meme, were broadly accurate, though the specific claim that ""more than"" 10,000 camels would be culled as part of the plan appears to have been contradicted by a local official who said the number would be between 5,000 and 10,000. They also failed to mention that a small number of wild horses would be targeted in the kill, as well.The APY local government authority, in the state of South Australia, announced the cull in a Jan. 6 news release that read, in part ""There will be a feral animal kill across the APY lands. Feral animals, but specifically camels, are the primary target ... The cull (kill) will occur the week of 8th January, 2020, when the aerial operations will commence (expected to go over five days).""In a supplementary news release published the following day, APY officials explained the reasoning behind the cull:Separately, APY's General Manager Richard King told CBS News that the number of camels being targeted in the cull was between 5,000 and 10,000  a range that somewhat contradicts the claim, repeated in several news articles, that ""more than"" or ""over"" 10,000 camels were to be killed. If the number ends up being 10,000, those reports will transpire to be rather accurate. However, according to King, the number could be as low as half of that figure, a detail noted by none of the articles or the meme mentioned above."
Did Nikita Khrushchev Say 'We'll Keep Feeding You Small Doses of Socialism'?,['The Soviet leader allegedly boasted that Americans would suddenly waken to find they lived under Communism.'],"An article of faith among U.S. conservatives of the Cold War era stated that the Soviets aimed to destroy America from within by promoting a program of ""creeping socialism,"" by which they meant the gradual replacement of democratic, free-market institutions with centralized government control. Never mind that the communists themselves subscribed to a different version of the end of free-market economies, namely Marx's theory that capitalism contained the seeds of its own destruction, an end which he argued was inevitable and would culminate in a socialist revolution. theory Regardless, conservative icons such as Ronald Reagan and Barry Goldwater saw creeping socialism in every piece of progressive legislation that came around the pike, from Roosevelt's New Deal to Medicare to LBJ's Great Society social-welfare programs of the mid-1960s. They further claimed that at least one Soviet leader, Nikita Khrushchev, had explicitly announced the regime's intent to export ""small doses"" of socialism to the U.S. in a statement he allegedly made in 1959. Reagan was fond of quoting this supposed pronouncement in speeches he gave as a crusader for conservative causes before launching his own political career later in the '60s. This instance is from an address he delivered in 1961: address The communists are supremely confident of victory. They believe that you and I, under the constant pressure of the Cold War, will one by one give up our democratic traditions and principles and customs. Only temporarily, of course, but only temporarily we will turn to totalitarian tactics and methods just for the purpose of opposing the enemy. And then they cynically believe we will one day awake to find that we have, in adopting these tactics, become so much like the enemy that the causes for conflict have disappeared between us. Three and a half months before his last visit to this country, Nikita Khrushchev said, ""We can't expect the American people to jump from capitalism to communism but we can assist their elected leaders in giving them small doses of socialism until one day they will awaken to find they have communism."" Variants of this passage also appeared in newspaper opinion columns, letters to the editor, and even political ads portraying Democratic Party candidates as enemies of freedom. This example is from the Muncie, Indiana, Star Press of 5 November 1960:   Fast-forwarding to some 56 years later, we find the same quote being deployed against Democrats of today, only now in the preferred venue of social media: ""giving Americans small doses of socialism until they suddenly awake to find they have communism.""-Nakita Khrushchev pic.twitter.com/mQVfhYvaNo pic.twitter.com/mQVfhYvaNo  Susan Minor (@susanminor41) April 14, 2016 April 14, 2016 The authenticity of the quote was questioned practically from the get-go, however. In 1962, Sen. Lee Metcalf (D-Montana) assailed it as ""a fabrication, attributed to the leader of the Communist Party, (which) arouses Americans against their elected officials."" Metcalf told the Los Angeles Times that the quote was being circulated by organizations including the far-right John Birch Society, which operated a bookstore called Poor Richard's Book Shop in Hollywood: [Metcalf] said the statement has been printed on post cards distributed by Coast Federal Savings & Loan Assn. and Poor Richard's Book Shop, both of Los Angeles, but that the Central Intelligence Agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Library of Congress have all been unable to verify the quotation. Metcalf said such material leads readers ""to believe that their President, their senators, their representatives, their judges and local officials are Communist stooges. Thus a lie is used to perpetrate a greater lie."" The Times reported that the president of Coast Federal Savings & Loan, Joe Crail, claimed responsibility for printing the postcards but admitted he couldn't authenticate the quote and said the campaign had been discontinued for that reason. Similarly, Sen. Morris K. Udall (D-Arizona) recruited the Library of Congress to verify the authenticity of the statement attributed to Khrushchev and shared the results in the 10 May 1962 issue of The New Republic: issue ""We have searched the Legislative Reference Service files, checked all the standard reference works on quotations by Khrushchev, and consulted with the Slavic division of the Library of Congress, the Department of State, and the US Information Agency, in an attempt to determine the authenticity of this quotation. From none of these sources were we able to produce evidence that Khrushchev actually made such a statement."" All that supposedly changed four years later when a witness came forward to claim that Khrushchev had uttered those very words in his presence. Ezra Taft Benson, who served two terms as President Eisenhower's Secretary of Agriculture and would later head the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, said in a 1966 address at Brigham Young University (BYU) that Khrushchev made the statement during a one-on-one discussion the two had in September 1959: address I have talked face-to-face with the godless Communist leaders. It may surprise you to learn that I was host to Mr. Khrushchev for a half day, when he visited the United States. Not that Im proud of it -- I opposed his coming then and I still feel it was a mistake to welcome this atheistic murderer as a state visitor. But according to President Eisenhower, Khrushchev had expressed a desire to learn something of American agriculture, and after seeing Russian agriculture I can understand why. As we talked face-to-face, he indicated that my grandchildren would live under Communism. After assuring him that I expected to do all in my power to assure that his, and all other grandchildren, would live under freedom, he arrogantly declared, in substance: You Americans are so gullible. No you wont accept Communism outright, but well keep feeding you small doses of socialism until youll finally wake up and you find you already have Communism. We wont have to fight you. Well so weaken your economy until you fall like over-ripe fruit into our hands. Such a meeting did occur, documents show, but Benson's 1966 account of their exchange on communism raises more questions than it answers. Benson had cited versions of the same quote on more than one occasion prior to 1966 without claiming that Khrushchev said it in his presence. Like Ronald Reagan routinely did during the same period, Benson told audiences that the Soviet premier made the remark before, not during, his 1959 visit to the United States. Benson presented it as follows in an August 1961 commencement address at BYU (from a report in the Provo Daily Herald, emphasis added): The Communist strategy, said the speaker, was laid down by Nikita Khrushchev three weeks before he visited the United States when he was quoted as making this statement: ""We cannot expect the Americans to jump from capitalism to communism, but we can assist their elected leaders in giving Americans small doses of socialism, until they suddenly awake to find they have communism."" ""For years LDS Church leaders have warned against such a development, Elder Benson said. He introduced the quote more or less the same way in a book he wrote the following year (1962) called The Red Carpet: Socialism -- The Royal Road to Communism (emphasis added): A few months before coming to the United States Khrushchev is reported to have said: ""We cannot expect the Americans to jump from capitalism to communism, but we can assist their elected leaders in giving Americans small doses of socialism, until they suddenly awake to find they have communism."" The three different versions of the story don't jibe. Did Khrushchev utter the remark three weeks before visiting the U.S., a few months before, or did he utter it during a face-to-face meeting with Benson on U.S. soil? Why did Benson write in 1962 (three years after Khrushchev's visit) that the Soviet premier was ""reported"" to have said it? Why was there no mention before 1966 of Khrushchev's saying it to his face? Unfortunately, Ezra Taft Benson died in 1994, so we can't ask him. Nor, as far as we know, has any third-party witness to the alleged exchange ever come forward. Far from settling the question of whether Khrushchev really vowed to slip Americans ""small doses of socialism,"" Benson's conflicting stories leave the authenticity of the remark very much in doubt. We should also mention, in passing, that U.S. conservatives were sounding alarms about Americans being plied with ""small doses of socialism"" long before Khrushchev attained the premiership of the Soviet Union. This is National Association of Manufacturers President Claude A. Putnam speaking in April 1950 (as reported in the Times Herald of Olean, New York): Socialism ""is being foisted on the American people piecemeal,"" says Claude A. Putnam of Keene, N.H., president of the National Association of Manufacturers. Putnam, who spoke here, warned that an ""all-powerful government is a menace to freedom."" The American people ""are being given small doses of socialism, disguised as social gains and gifts of something for nothing,"" he declared. If we've learned nothing else in the roughly 60 years of its existence, the durability of the Khrushchev quote shows that a politically charged statement needn't be authenticated to serve its purpose as a partisan cudgel. As if to prove the point, the quote was tweeted out to 70,000 followers as recently as February 2018 by none other than Michael Reagan, Ronald Reagan's son: We cannot expect the Americans to jump from capitalism to communism, but we can assist their elected leaders in giving Americans small doses of socialism, until they suddenly awake to find they have communism.""-- Nikita Khrushchev  Michael Reagan (@ReaganWorld) February 18, 2018 February 18, 2018 Benson, Ezra Taft.  ""Our Immediate Responsibility.""
  Latter Day Conservative.  25 October 1966. Jeffries, Stuart.  ""Karl Marx's Guide to the End of Capitalism: A Primer.""
  The Guardian.  20 October 2008. Reagan, Ronald.  ""Encroaching Control.""
  The Reagan Speech Preservation Society.  30 March 1961. Udall, Morris K.  ""Khrushchev Could Have Said It.""
  The New Republic.  7 May 1962. The Daily Herald.  ""542 Receive Degrees at BYU Rites.""
  27 August 1961. The Los Angeles Times.  ""Right-Wingers Hit on 'Quote' by Khrushchev.""
  9 March 1962. Times Herald.  ""Keene Warns Against Spread of Socialism.""
  14 April 1950.",['economy'],NEI,"Never mind that the communists themselves subscribed to a different version of the end of free-market economies, namely Marx's theory that capitalism contained the seeds of its own destruction, an end which he argued was inevitable and would culminate in a socialist revolution.They further claimed that at least one Soviet leader, Nikita Khrushchev, had explicitly announced the regime's intent to export ""small doses"" of socialism to the U.S. in a statement he allegedly made in 1959. Reagan was fond of quoting this supposed pronouncement in speeches he gave as a crusader for conservative causes before launching his own political career later in the '60s. This instance is from an address he delivered in 1961:""giving Americans small doses of socialism until they suddenly awake to find they have communism.""-Nakita Khrushchev pic.twitter.com/mQVfhYvaNo Susan Minor (@susanminor41) April 14, 2016Similarly, Sen. Morris K. Udall (D-Arizona) recruited the Library of Congress to verify the authenticity of the statement attributed to Khrushchev and shared the results in the 10 May 1962 issue of The New Republic:All that supposedly changed four years later when a witness came forward to claim that Khrushchev had uttered those very words in his presence. Ezra Taft Benson, who served two terms as President Eisenhower's Secretary of Agriculture and would later head the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, said in a 1966 address at Brigham Young University (BYU) that Khrushchev made the statement during a one-on-one discussion the two had in September 1959: Michael Reagan (@ReaganWorld) February 18, 2018"
Is Brian May from Queen an Astrophysicist?,"[""His guitar skills aren't the only thing that's out of this world.""]","In July 2015, many online viewers were intrigued by a meme reporting that Brian May, the lead guitarist for the band Queen, is also an astrophysicist.  While Brian May's educational history is certainly no secret, interest in the rock legend's other life as an astrophysicist was renewed when the musician visited the team behind NASA's New Horizons interplanetary space probe to discuss results from the probe's recent fly-by of Pluto: visited New Horizons  As lead guitarist for the legendary rock group Queen, Brian May has spent an entire career in the spotlight. But May traded the music for his other passion  science  and spent some time backstage with the New Horizons team as it dived into the first results from the Pluto flyby. May, who has a doctorate in astrophysics, was awed by the opportunity to meet the team and sift through images and other Pluto system data in real time. And he'll have other opportunities down the road, as mission principal investigator Alan Stern added May as a New Horizons science collaborator. May also wrote about his time with the New Horizon's team in a blog post  on his web site dated 20 July 2015: blog post  I had an unforgettable 3 days with the amazing New Horizons team. Im still 'coming down. Alan Stern, leader of the Science Team at APL in Laurel, Maryland, personally made sure I was treated like one of the family, as a collaborator, and I felt privileged to the nth degree. I was, of course, as always, obsessed with finding stereoscopic opportunities while I was there, and the Gods of the Underworld must have been with me, because I was there when the first 2 by 2 mosaic full-planet picture was downloaded from the probe, and assembled into exactly the required highish res partner to the iconic last-look photo which preceded the final fly-by. Baseline must be a few hundred thousand miles, but Ill need to check that. Of course the New Horizons guys were already doing serious science on this image as it arrived, but I was able to assemble the two images to make the most satisfying stereo view I can ever remember making. I got some help making some prints on site, so I was able to show this 3-D to the entire team through the lenses of some OWLS I took over. So this is definitely the first REAL high quality stereo image of Pluto in history. And we can say its officially NH approved ! No fiddling this time. The right image is the last-look photo from 15th July, and the left image is the two-by-two downloaded from NH on the 17th. All I did was fine-adjust the orientations to match up, and match up the colouring by eye.  According to May's official biography, he was working toward his PhD in astrophysics when he put his education on hold to go on tour with Queen after the group's ""popularity first exploded."" In 2007, more than 30 years after May left school to pursue a career as a musician, he turned in his 48,000-word thesis for the Imperial College, London: biography thesis It's been the longest gap year ever. It was a tough decision back then to leave my studies for music. I'm so proud to be here today. Astronomy has always interested me. I used to love sitting at home and watching Sir Patrick Moore on the Sky at Night."" https://youtu.be/E-zurr9PHKg In terms of educated rock guitarists, music fans may also recall that Tom Scholz, founder of the popular band Boston, holds a master's degree in mechanical engineering from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and worked for Polaroid Corporation as a senior product design engineer prior to hitting it big in the music world. Tom Scholz",['interest'],True,"While Brian May's educational history is certainly no secret, interest in the rock legend's other life as an astrophysicist was renewed when the musician visited the team behind NASA's New Horizons interplanetary space probe to discuss results from the probe's recent fly-by of Pluto:May also wrote about his time with the New Horizon's team in a blog post  on his web site dated 20 July 2015:According to May's official biography, he was working toward his PhD in astrophysics when he put his education on hold to go on tour with Queen after the group's ""popularity first exploded."" In 2007, more than 30 years after May left school to pursue a career as a musician, he turned in his 48,000-word thesis for the Imperial College, London:In terms of educated rock guitarists, music fans may also recall that Tom Scholz, founder of the popular band Boston, holds a master's degree in mechanical engineering from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and worked for Polaroid Corporation as a senior product design engineer prior to hitting it big in the music world."
Is there a 'Secret Tax Credit' that covers fifty percent of journalists' pay?,"['Spoiler alert: The news media do not write, regulate, or pass legislation.']","As the federal government debated the contents of the high-profile Build Back Better infrastructure bill in late fall 2021, social media memes portrayed what were said to be elements of the legislation. One such claim asserted that a journalism tax credit would allocate funds of up to half of a journalist's salary, or a maximum of $50,000 annually. Some media publications and social media users inaccurately reflected the contents of the bill and how the tax credit actually works. One such report came in September 2021 from the right-leaning publication The Daily Signal, which claimed that the media hid a secret in the $3.5 trillion spending bill. The massive, bloated $3.5 trillion spending bill has so much pork that fiscal hawks could eat it for weeks. One piece that hasn't received much attention yet is a special journalism tax credit equal to 50% of the salary of each journalist, up to $50,000 per journalist annually. Yes, that's correct; your tax dollars would be paying 50% of the salary of many journalists, whether you like their reporting or not. First, such claims are misleading. The news media do not write, regulate, or pass legislation, and therefore could not hide additional funds in a spending bill. It is true that in fall 2021, two pieces of legislation, each introduced in the House and Senate, aimed to create a tax credit that would incentivize local news subscriptions and advertising, as well as credit local publications that employed journalists for a limited time, up to a certain amount. However, the legislation was ultimately excluded from the infrastructure spending bill, and memes depicting its core components are somewhat misleading. As we have previously reported, just because legislation is introduced does not mean that it will be passed and enforced. Furthermore, the bill language as presented above was not included in the high-profile Build Back Better (BBB) infrastructure bill that has been at the heart of a congressional stop-and-go debate. In short, similar language was introduced in the BBB, but the tax credit was not included in its final passage. A tax credit is a dollar-for-dollar reduction of income tax owed. If approved, that credit would essentially lower the income tax owed by local newsrooms. As is the case with most legislation, the bill was not as cut-and-dry as the meme made it out to be and was instead made up of three major components that were outlined in detail by the Nieman Journalism Lab. The three points were summarized in a letter issued by the office of the U.S. Senate by Sen. Maria Cantwell, a Democrat from Washington, who co-sponsored the bill. There were differences between the House and Senate versions of the bill. Below is the language for the House's H.R. 3940, the Local Journalism Sustainability Act, which was introduced in June 2021. This bill allows individual and business taxpayers to claim tax credits for the support of local newspapers and media. Specifically, individual taxpayers may claim an income tax credit of up to $250 for a local newspaper subscription. The bill also allows local newspaper employers a payroll tax credit for wages paid to an employee for service as a local news journalist, and certain small businesses a tax credit for local newspaper and media advertising expenses. That version of the bill did not move past the House Committee on Ways and Means and was ultimately dropped; but it was proposed again by the Senate in November 2021 under S.2434, as reported by Poynter at the time. It read: This bill allows individual taxpayers a tax credit of up to $250 in any taxable year for subscriptions to one or more local newspapers for the taxpayer's personal use. It also allows a local news journalist employer a payroll credit for wages paid to local news journalists. The bill allows certain small businesses a tax credit for amounts paid for advertising in a local newspaper or through a broadcast of a radio or television station serving a local community. Roughly speaking, the credit would have cost around $1 billion in the first year, and as the News Media Alliance pointed out, the bipartisan legislation was only available to local news organizations with 51% or more of their audience in a state or single area within a 200-mile radius of the news operation. Regardless, neither body passed the legislation. We also read through the text of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, which passed Congress in December 2021 and has since become law. A word search revealed that there was no mention of journalism, and nearly all mentions of the word media referred to ways in which the government could conduct advertising or outreach. Although some publications mischaracterized the contents of the proposed legislation and failed to mention that it was not passed by Congress, it is true that the bill, as it was introduced, included allocating a tax credit to, at least in part, subsidize the salaries of some local journalists. As such, we have rated this claim as a mixture.",['funds'],NEI,"Some media publications and social media users inaccurately reflected the contents of the bill and exactly how the tax credit works.One such report came in September 2021, by the right-leaning publication The Daily Signal, which claimed that the media hid a secret in $3.5 trillion spending bill.A tax credit is a dollar-for-dollar reduction of income tax owed. If approved, that credit would essentially lower the income tax owed by local newsrooms. As is the case with most legislation, the bill was not as cut-and-dry as the meme made it out to be and was instead made up of three major components that were outlined in detail by the Nieman Journalism Lab. The three points were summarized in a letter issued by the office of the U.S. Senate by Sen. Maria Cantwell, a Democrat from Washington, who co-sponsored the bill.There were differences between the House and Senate versions of the bill. Below is the language for the House's H.R. 3940, the Local Journalism Sustainability Act, which was introduced in June 2021.That version of the bill did not move past the House Committee on Ways and Means and was ultimately dropped; but it was proposed again by the Senate in November 2021 under S.2434., reported by Poynter at the time. It read:Roughly speaking, the credit would have cost around $1 billion in the first year, and as News Media Alliance pointed out, the bipartisan legislation was only available to local news organizations with 51% or more of its audience in a state or single area within a 200-mile radius of the news operation. Regardless, neither body passed the legislation.We also read through the text of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, which passed Congress in Dec 2021 and has since become law. (The entire bill can be viewed here and here.) A word search revealed that there was no mention of journalism, and nearly all mentions of the word media referred to ways in which the government could conduct advertising or outreach, like the example below: Screengrab/Govtracks.org"
"Did the Bush, Clinton, and Obama Funeral Party Trash Air Force One?","['""Please return your seats to an upright position and clean up the kitchen and bathrooms.""']","On December 6, 2018, an article was published by the WeAreTheLLOD website, part of the ""Last Line of Defense"" network of junk news sites, reporting that former presidents George W. Bush, Bill Clinton, and Barack Obama trashed Air Force One after the funeral of former president George H.W. Bush. The article claimed that President Trump was gracious enough to loan his personal airplane to the Bush family to transport the deceased President George H.W. Bush back home to Kennebunkport, Maine. They invited all the other past presidents, including Barack Obama. In return, the grieving family allegedly showed their appreciation by leaving the plane a mess and vandalizing the bathroom and kitchen. This was not a genuine news article, as WeAreTheLLOD.com and the rest of the Last Line of Defense network have a long history of publishing misinformation. The article also included several obvious hints about its satirical nature. For example, the label ""Dead People and Satire with Hot Green Chili"" can be seen below the article's title. The website banner features the tagline ""Information You Probably Shouldn't Trust,"" and the footer states that the site was paid for by the ""liberal trolls of America."" Additionally, all of the hyperlinks in this article lead to unrelated content. For instance, where the text references the alleged legal terms ""hapneus corpum and juris prumidential,"" it links to a Google Translation page for the sentence: ""Because they don't exist and are possibly the dumbest things ever conceived."" Eagleton, Flagg. ""BREAKING: Bush, Clinton, Obama Funeral Party Trashes Air Force One."" WeAretheLLOD.com. December 6, 2018.",['loan'],False,"On 6 December 2018, an article reporting that former presidents George W. Bush, Bill Clinton, and Barack Obama trashed Air Force One after the funeral of former president George H.W. Bush was published by the WeAreTheLLOD website, which is part of the ""Last Line of Defense"" network of junk news sites:This was not a genuine news article, as WeAreTheLlod.com and the rest of the Last Line of Defense network are junk news sites that have a long history of publishing misinformation."
Facebook Scammers Seize On Gas Monkey Garage Giveaway,['The best tip to avoid scams on Facebook is to always look for the official and trustworthy verified badge next to the page name.'],"On May 24, 2022, Facebook scammers seized on a real giveaway from Richard Rawlings' Gas Monkey Garage, which was once affiliated with the ""Fast N' Loud"" reality television series. The show aired its final episodes in 2020. Facebook Richard Rawlings Gas Monkey Garage Fast N' Loud It's true that the official and verified Facebook page for Rawlings' Gas Monkey Garage was promoting a giveaway for $200,000. In order to enter, users simply needed to purchase products on the company's website. page However, scammers reposted videos about the giveaway from the official Facebook page to their own accounts. The scammers' posts instructed potential victims to visit a potentially malicious website that asked them to send money through the Stash finance app in order to claim a supposed prize. One of the scammers' posts showed a video of Rawlings talking about the real Gas Monkey Garage giveaway. That video was downloaded and reposted by a scammer's account named Nyong Desi (facebook.com/uygdvuidfhvyfdgviushv):  It read as follows and included three steps, which we've seen in many scams before: Nyong Desi ????????????? ???????-??????? 2022 CONGRATULATIONS for those of you who have received comments from me have been selected as winners???Step 1 = Like and ShareStep 2 = Coments ""Done""Step 3 = Register here? (link removed) ? to receive my prize. And the Gift will be sent after you successfully register (this is authentic and official) God bless you Good Luck The edit history for the post above showed that it was originally created on Jan. 30, 2022 as a giveaway scam involving PlayStation 5 game consoles and $10,000. It was edited on the morning of May 24 in order to change it to the Gas Monkey Garage giveaway scam. PlayStation 5 We visited the website that was displayed in the scammers' posts. In addition to asking users to send the scammers money through the Stash finance app, it also claimed that they had already won $10,000. Of course, this was all misleading. asking Our best tip to avoid these kinds of scams is to always look for the verified badge next to Facebook page names. If it's a big brand name and there's no verified badge, it might be a scam. scams verified badge In sum, the official Gas Monkey Garage Facebook page truly was holding a real giveaway. However, scammers sought to capitalize on the giveaway by downloading and then reposting several videos that showed Rawlings talking in order to trick potential victims into losing money. For further reading, this story might remind some readers of a similar Facebook scam we reported on in the past for the ""Diesel Brothers"" reality television series. reported on",['finance'],False,"On May 24, 2022, Facebook scammers seized on a real giveaway from Richard Rawlings' Gas Monkey Garage, which was once affiliated with the ""Fast N' Loud"" reality television series. The show aired its final episodes in 2020.It's true that the official and verified Facebook page for Rawlings' Gas Monkey Garage was promoting a giveaway for $200,000. In order to enter, users simply needed to purchase products on the company's website.The edit history for the post above showed that it was originally created on Jan. 30, 2022 as a giveaway scam involving PlayStation 5 game consoles and $10,000. It was edited on the morning of May 24 in order to change it to the Gas Monkey Garage giveaway scam.We visited the website that was displayed in the scammers' posts. In addition to asking users to send the scammers money through the Stash finance app, it also claimed that they had already won $10,000. Of course, this was all misleading.Our best tip to avoid these kinds of scams is to always look for the verified badge next to Facebook page names. If it's a big brand name and there's no verified badge, it might be a scam.For further reading, this story might remind some readers of a similar Facebook scam we reported on in the past for the ""Diesel Brothers"" reality television series."
Is a Ukraine Pavilion Coming to EPCOT at Disney World?,['A routine review of content labeled satire.'],"In early March 2022, as Russia continued its invasion of Ukraine, Uncle Walt's Insider published an article positing that the Walt Disney World Resort theme park known as EPCOT would soon be adding a Ukraine pavilion to the World Showcase attraction. Russia invasion of Ukraine article Walt Disney World Resort EPCOT Ukraine However, this was satire. The beginning of the article referenced Bob Chapek, who is the chief executive officer for The Walt Disney Company: Bob Chapek The Walt Disney Company Ukraine Pavilion coming to EPCOT They probably shouldn't build it next to the Russia Pavilion. WORLD SHOWCASE LAGOON, FL  Bob ""Bob"" Chapek has announced that he intends to bring a new country to EPCOT: Ukraine! Chapek probably said this in a phone call with our own Uncle Walt. EPCOT ""As I was counting money with the news playing in the background, I suddenly had this great and innovative idea come to mind. I phoned up the boys in Glendale, and after a quick discussion we have decided to allow Ukraine to join the host of other nations around the World Showcase Lagoon!"" The story also said that the Ukraine pavilion at EPCOT would feature ""a brand new ride"" called ""Escape from Chernobyl"" and even took a humorous jab at Chapek's intelligence. Ukraine EPCOT Chernobyl As noted above, this article was not a factual recounting of real-life events. It originated from a silly and lighthearted website that aims to write fun and interesting fiction for its loyal readers. Uncle Walt's Insider describes its output as being ""loving"" and satirical in nature, as follows: describes ""While we all love Disney, the company really likes to control its own image and doesnt always look kindly on anything that might detract from it  like a satire site that occasionally takes loving jabs at it."" Disney The website also showed the following disclaimer on a policies page linked below the story about the Ukraine pavilion coming to EPCOT: page Ukraine EPCOT ""All events, persons, and companies depicted herein, including Disney, Walt Disney, and The Disney Company, are fictitious, and any similarity to actual persons, living, dead or otherwise, or to actual firms, is coincidental. Really. The same goes for any similarities to actual facts."" Walt Disney  Fireworks light up the night sky at EPCOT in 2014. (Courtesy: Jeff Krause/Flickr)  Jeff Krause/Flickr While the article from Uncle Walt's Insider was simply just humorous satire, we did find that a handful of social media users had mentioned the idea of having a Ukraine pavilion at EPCOT. One person seemed to hint at wanting a special place for the country to be created inside the theme park: Ukraine EPCOT hint at  Another tweet conveyed the same sort of message: conveyed  Others had the idea for something to be set up inside the park for charitable purposes: idea charitable purposes  TheDisneyBlog.com even tweeted the following, saying: ""It is becoming clear that EPCOT needs to add Ukraine to the World Showcase"": TheDisneyBlog.com tweeted EPCOT Ukraine  We found several past references to the possibility of a Ukraine pavilion being created in EPCOT. Ukraine EPCOT In 2003, a forum user on the wdwmagic.com message boards posted: ""Did You Hear the One About EPCOT's Ukranian Pavilion?"" wdwmagic.com posted The thread on the forum mentioned an old article that came from the Ukrainian Weekly publication. While the story link from 1996 was no longer accessible in 2022, we found that it had been archived by Archive.org: Ukrainian Weekly it had been archived Archive.org Ukrainian pavilion idea advances at Disney World's EPCOT Center by Natalia Warren LAKE BUENA VISTA, Fla. - Jason Harper, president of the Ukrainian Project Fund recently met with George Kalogridis, executive vice-president of EPCOT Center at Walt Disney World, to further discuss plans for the proposed Ukrainian Pavilion. EPCOT Walt Disney World As a result of the meeting, Mr. Kalogridis added Ukraine to a list that includes two other countries vying for the site between the Chinese and German pavilions. Mr. Kalogridis also gave Mr. Harper the go-ahead to discuss the pavilion project with other Walt Disney Company officials. Ukraine ... Besides architectural sketches of Ukrainian-style buildings, a drawing for a roller coaster ride, and photos of souvenirs, the proposal includes a videotape of Ukrainian dancing, provided by the Rusalka Dance Company of Winnipeg, which also has lent its name in part to the proposed sit-down restaurant, Club Rusalka. In an earlier agreement, the Canadian dance ensemble had agreed to perform twice a year to raise funds for the UPF Ukrainian Pavilion project and to appear live for future corporate proposal events. We also stumbled upon the following snippet from The San Francisco Examiner that had been published 30 years before Russia's invasion of Ukraine. The writer appeared to joke about the idea of a pavilion for Russia or Ukraine coming to EPCOT: snippet The San Francisco Examiner Russia's invasion of Ukraine Russia Ukraine EPCOT  This story was published on March 8, 1992. (Courtesy: The San Francisco Examiner)  While Russia and Ukraine do not have pavilions in EPCOT, the website for Walt Disney World Resort lists the 11 countries that do. They include Mexico, Norway, China, Germany, Italy, the United States, Japan, Morocco, France, the United Kingdom, and Canada: Russia Ukraine EPCOT website Join us on an inspiring journey through one of the most unique areas in any Disney theme parkWorld Showcase. The World Showcase: DestiNations Discovered tour is a fascinating 4.5-hour walking excursion through 11 ""countries"" and 4,000 years of history, culture, and food. From the streets of Paris to the Bavarian countryside, guests can immerse themselves in the architecture, landscapes, streetscapes, attractions, shops, and restaurants of 11 themed pavilionseach staffed by actual citizens from these countries. World Showcase began as a personal passion of Walt Disney, who envisioned an Experimental Prototype Community of Tomorrow (EPCOT), a global community where visiting guests could assimilate the sights and sounds of the world. According to the Disney bloggers known as The Mouselets, EPCOT once announced pavilions for Spain, Israel, and Equatorial Africa. However, those plans never came to fruition. The Mouselets  The Germany pavilion at the World Showcase at EPCOT. (Courtesy: Darcy/Flickr)  Darcy/Flickr On Feb. 25, right after Russia began its invasion of Ukraine, Disney's Voices of Liberty appeared to sing a song for Ukraine in EPCOT's America Gardens Theatre. The tune was ""Let There Be Peace On Earth."" The post included the hashtag, ""#prayforukraine"": Voices of Liberty sing a song   In sum, the rumor about a Ukraine pavilion coming to EPCOT's World Showcase originated from a satirical website. It's unclear what countries might be added in the future to the Disney World property. Ukraine Disney World",['funds'],False,"In early March 2022, as Russia continued its invasion of Ukraine, Uncle Walt's Insider published an article positing that the Walt Disney World Resort theme park known as EPCOT would soon be adding a Ukraine pavilion to the World Showcase attraction.The beginning of the article referenced Bob Chapek, who is the chief executive officer for The Walt Disney Company:WORLD SHOWCASE LAGOON, FL  Bob ""Bob"" Chapek has announced that he intends to bring a new country to EPCOT: Ukraine! Chapek probably said this in a phone call with our own Uncle Walt.The story also said that the Ukraine pavilion at EPCOT would feature ""a brand new ride"" called ""Escape from Chernobyl"" and even took a humorous jab at Chapek's intelligence.As noted above, this article was not a factual recounting of real-life events. It originated from a silly and lighthearted website that aims to write fun and interesting fiction for its loyal readers. Uncle Walt's Insider describes its output as being ""loving"" and satirical in nature, as follows:""While we all love Disney, the company really likes to control its own image and doesnt always look kindly on anything that might detract from it  like a satire site that occasionally takes loving jabs at it.""The website also showed the following disclaimer on a policies page linked below the story about the Ukraine pavilion coming to EPCOT:""All events, persons, and companies depicted herein, including Disney, Walt Disney, and The Disney Company, are fictitious, and any similarity to actual persons, living, dead or otherwise, or to actual firms, is coincidental. Really. The same goes for any similarities to actual facts."" Fireworks light up the night sky at EPCOT in 2014. (Courtesy: Jeff Krause/Flickr)While the article from Uncle Walt's Insider was simply just humorous satire, we did find that a handful of social media users had mentioned the idea of having a Ukraine pavilion at EPCOT. One person seemed to hint at wanting a special place for the country to be created inside the theme park:Another tweet conveyed the same sort of message:Others had the idea for something to be set up inside the park for charitable purposes:TheDisneyBlog.com even tweeted the following, saying: ""It is becoming clear that EPCOT needs to add Ukraine to the World Showcase"":We found several past references to the possibility of a Ukraine pavilion being created in EPCOT.In 2003, a forum user on the wdwmagic.com message boards posted: ""Did You Hear the One About EPCOT's Ukranian Pavilion?""The thread on the forum mentioned an old article that came from the Ukrainian Weekly publication. While the story link from 1996 was no longer accessible in 2022, we found that it had been archived by Archive.org:LAKE BUENA VISTA, Fla. - Jason Harper, president of the Ukrainian Project Fund recently met with George Kalogridis, executive vice-president of EPCOT Center at Walt Disney World, to further discuss plans for the proposed Ukrainian Pavilion.As a result of the meeting, Mr. Kalogridis added Ukraine to a list that includes two other countries vying for the site between the Chinese and German pavilions. Mr. Kalogridis also gave Mr. Harper the go-ahead to discuss the pavilion project with other Walt Disney Company officials.We also stumbled upon the following snippet from The San Francisco Examiner that had been published 30 years before Russia's invasion of Ukraine. The writer appeared to joke about the idea of a pavilion for Russia or Ukraine coming to EPCOT: This story was published on March 8, 1992. (Courtesy: The San Francisco Examiner)While Russia and Ukraine do not have pavilions in EPCOT, the website for Walt Disney World Resort lists the 11 countries that do. They include Mexico, Norway, China, Germany, Italy, the United States, Japan, Morocco, France, the United Kingdom, and Canada:According to the Disney bloggers known as The Mouselets, EPCOT once announced pavilions for Spain, Israel, and Equatorial Africa. However, those plans never came to fruition. The Germany pavilion at the World Showcase at EPCOT. (Courtesy: Darcy/Flickr)On Feb. 25, right after Russia began its invasion of Ukraine, Disney's Voices of Liberty appeared to sing a song for Ukraine in EPCOT's America Gardens Theatre. The tune was ""Let There Be Peace On Earth."" The post included the hashtag, ""#prayforukraine"":In sum, the rumor about a Ukraine pavilion coming to EPCOT's World Showcase originated from a satirical website. It's unclear what countries might be added in the future to the Disney World property."
"Fifteen years ago, the assets of the six largest banks in this country totaled 17 percent of GDP ... The assets of the six largest banks in the United States today total 63 percent of GDP.",[],"Sen. Sherrod Brown of Ohio is pushing a proposal to cap the sizes of large banks. He appeared on ABC News'This Weekwith Jake Tapper to talk about that, as well as Democratic efforts to pass financial reform.Let me give you one statistic, if I could, Jake, Brown said. Fifteen years ago, the assets of the six largest banks in this country totaled 17 percent of GDP, 17 percent of GDP. The assets of the six largest banks in the United States today total 63 percent of GDP... We've got to deal with risk to be sure, but we've got to deal with the size of these banks, because if one of these banks is in serious trouble, it will have such a ripple effect on the whole economy. So we simply can't let them get this big and have this kind of economic power over Main Street, over a small business in Canton, Ohio, or a worker -- a manufacturing plant in Dayton. I mean, we just can't let this happen.Some very smart people disagree on Brown's point that big banks resist regulation by reason of their sheer mass.People likeSimon Johnson, the former chief economist of the International Monetary Fund, urge measures that would limit the size of the biggest banks. Meanwhile, people likePaul Krugman, the Nobel Prize-winningNew York Timescolumnist, say that breaking up the banks isn't necessary to avert the next meltdown if the proper regulations are put in place.We were interested in Brown's statistic though: That 15 years ago the top six banks' assets totaled 17 percent of GDP, while today that's 63 percent.Brown's staff said he got the numbers from13 Bankers:The Wall Street Takeover and the Next Financial Meltdown, a book by Johnson and James Kwak, that describes the financial crisis and advocates steps for reform, including limits on the size of banks. Johnson also cited the number in an article in theNew Republic, co-written with Peter Boone, thatcriticizedPresident Barack Obama for not pushing rules that are tougher on big banks.The numbers are a fairly straightforward calculation. You take the bank's total assets, such as loans, cash and securities. (Remember that to banks, a loan is an asset, since they make money off loans.) Then you divide by GDP, which is gross domestic product, and is the total economic output for a country during a given year. Last year, the U.S. gross domestic product was $14.3 trillion.Johnson's book lists the six biggest banks of 2009 as Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup, Wells Fargo, Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley.The numbers in the book looked right to us, but we wanted to find an outside expert to confirm it. Researchers at the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia agreed to run the numbers to see if they got the same thing.Sure enough, they found the same thing. The figures were off by a few percentage points because the researchers were able to use numbers from the fourth quarter of 2009 and compared them with the same quarter in 1994. Johnson's book cites numbers from the third quarter.Here's the information the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia sent us:Assets (in billions), Dec. 31, 2009Bank of America Corp. - 2,224.5JP Morgan Chase - 2,032.0Citigroup - 1,856.6Wells Fargo - 1,243.6Goldman Sachs - 849.3Morgan Stanley - 771.5Total 8,977.5Nominal GDP 14.453.8Percentage 62.1%Assets (in billions), Dec. 31, 1994Citicorp - 250.5BankAmerica Corp. - 215.5Chemical Banking Corp. - 171.4Nationsbank Corp. - 169.6JP Morgan - 154.9Chase Manhattan - 114.0Total 1,075.9Nominal GDP 7,248.2Percentage 14.8%A couple of experts we asked about these numbers noted that Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley were for years categorized as investment banks, and would not have been counted in the 1994 numbers. That changed in 2008 at the height of the financial crisis, when the two firms becamebank holding companiesso they could borrow from the Federal Reserve. The underlying point, though -- that there has been significant consolidation in the banking industry -- remains true, they said.Brown said, Fifteen years ago, the assets of the six largest banks in this country totaled 17 percent of GDP ... The assets of the six largest banks in the United States today total 63 percent of GDP. Independent sources and experts confirm that, so we rate his statement True.","['National', 'Economy', 'Financial Regulation', 'Regulation', 'This Week - ABC News']",True,"Sen. Sherrod Brown of Ohio is pushing a proposal to cap the sizes of large banks. He appeared on ABC News'This Weekwith Jake Tapper to talk about that, as well as Democratic efforts to pass financial reform.Let me give you one statistic, if I could, Jake, Brown said. Fifteen years ago, the assets of the six largest banks in this country totaled 17 percent of GDP, 17 percent of GDP. The assets of the six largest banks in the United States today total 63 percent of GDP... We've got to deal with risk to be sure, but we've got to deal with the size of these banks, because if one of these banks is in serious trouble, it will have such a ripple effect on the whole economy. So we simply can't let them get this big and have this kind of economic power over Main Street, over a small business in Canton, Ohio, or a worker -- a manufacturing plant in Dayton. I mean, we just can't let this happen.Some very smart people disagree on Brown's point that big banks resist regulation by reason of their sheer mass.People likeSimon Johnson, the former chief economist of the International Monetary Fund, urge measures that would limit the size of the biggest banks. Meanwhile, people likePaul Krugman, the Nobel Prize-winningNew York Timescolumnist, say that breaking up the banks isn't necessary to avert the next meltdown if the proper regulations are put in place.We were interested in Brown's statistic though: That 15 years ago the top six banks' assets totaled 17 percent of GDP, while today that's 63 percent.Brown's staff said he got the numbers from13 Bankers:The Wall Street Takeover and the Next Financial Meltdown, a book by Johnson and James Kwak, that describes the financial crisis and advocates steps for reform, including limits on the size of banks. Johnson also cited the number in an article in theNew Republic, co-written with Peter Boone, thatcriticizedPresident Barack Obama for not pushing rules that are tougher on big banks.The numbers are a fairly straightforward calculation. You take the bank's total assets, such as loans, cash and securities. (Remember that to banks, a loan is an asset, since they make money off loans.) Then you divide by GDP, which is gross domestic product, and is the total economic output for a country during a given year. Last year, the U.S. gross domestic product was $14.3 trillion.Johnson's book lists the six biggest banks of 2009 as Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup, Wells Fargo, Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley.The numbers in the book looked right to us, but we wanted to find an outside expert to confirm it. Researchers at the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia agreed to run the numbers to see if they got the same thing.Sure enough, they found the same thing. The figures were off by a few percentage points because the researchers were able to use numbers from the fourth quarter of 2009 and compared them with the same quarter in 1994. Johnson's book cites numbers from the third quarter.Here's the information the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia sent us:Assets (in billions), Dec. 31, 2009Bank of America Corp. - 2,224.5JP Morgan Chase - 2,032.0Citigroup - 1,856.6Wells Fargo - 1,243.6Goldman Sachs - 849.3Morgan Stanley - 771.5Total 8,977.5Nominal GDP 14.453.8Percentage 62.1%Assets (in billions), Dec. 31, 1994Citicorp - 250.5BankAmerica Corp. - 215.5Chemical Banking Corp. - 171.4Nationsbank Corp. - 169.6JP Morgan - 154.9Chase Manhattan - 114.0Total 1,075.9Nominal GDP 7,248.2Percentage 14.8%A couple of experts we asked about these numbers noted that Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley were for years categorized as investment banks, and would not have been counted in the 1994 numbers. That changed in 2008 at the height of the financial crisis, when the two firms becamebank holding companiesso they could borrow from the Federal Reserve. The underlying point, though -- that there has been significant consolidation in the banking industry -- remains true, they said.Brown said, Fifteen years ago, the assets of the six largest banks in this country totaled 17 percent of GDP ... The assets of the six largest banks in the United States today total 63 percent of GDP. Independent sources and experts confirm that, so we rate his statement True."
"Rhode Island has the second highest per enrollee (Medicaid) cost of any state in the country, which is 60 percent higher than the national average.",[],"In an effort to bring Rhode Island's budget under control, Gov. Gina Raimondo is hoping to rein in the cost of Medicaid. She has proposed cutting $88 million from the states $2.7-billion Medicaid spending in the next fiscal year and has created a task force to reinvent the program. During theMarch 13, 2015 tapingof WPRI-TV's Newsmakers program, Raimondo argued that the costs of the joint state and federal program that provides health insurance to the very poor are extraordinarily high in the state. You have to remember, she said, Rhode Island has the second highest per enrollee [Medicaid] cost of any state in the country, which is 60 percent higher than the national average. So we have to do a better job. It's just not sustainable. She madea similar statementon Rhode Island Public Radio. Paying, on average, 60 percent more for anything seems pretty scandalous. We decided to see if the typical cost of a Rhode Island Medicaid recipient was really that much higher than average, and whether per-patient costs were actually lower in 48 other states. The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation is a reliable source of data on health issues. We got a state-by-state tally oftotal state and federal Medicaid spendingfor the 2013 fiscal year and divided it by the number ofpeople in each state on Medicaid in December 2013in hopes of getting a rough estimate. By that back-of-the-envelope method, Rhode Island ranked fifth, not second, with all the New England states except New Hampshire in the top 10. The cost was 39 percent above the national average. But that's using 12 months of expenses and one-month enrollment totals.Laura Snyder, a senior policy analyst with Kaiser, said that's an apples-to-oranges mix. When we asked Raimondo's office for the source of her numbers, her spokeswoman cited Kaiser as well, specifically a page that directly ranksMedicaid spending per enrollee by state, although it doesn't list actual total spending or enrollment. And it's from  the 2011 fiscal year. Nonetheless, on that list, Rhode Island, at $9,247 per enrollee, does indeed rank second. Only Alaska, at $9,474, spent more. In addition, per enrollee spending in Rhode Island was 60 percent higher than the $5,790 U.S. average. So, by that ranking, Raimondo is correct on both counts. We asked why newer numbers aren't available. Snyder said annual enrollment statistics by state are slow to come out from the federal government, so the 2011 data are the most recent available. Because we wondered if state rankings fluctuate significantly from year to year -- and might be significantly different in 2012, 2013 and 2014 -- we asked Kaiser to see its rankings from some previous years. They gave us data going back to 2000. It turns out that our standing has bounced around a bit, but not a lot. For example, Rhode Island ranked fifth in 2010 and 2009, but ranked first in 2007. Our ruling Raimondo said, Rhode Island has the second highest per enrollee [Medicaid] cost of any state in the country, which is 60 percent higher than the national average. But in making her statement on one of the central elements in her proposed budget, Raimondo didnt note that the numbers were from the 2011 year. Granted, those are the most recent statistics available, according to Kaiser. But a lot can happen in four years. Because the statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information, we rule itMostly True. (If you have a claim youd likePolitiFact Rhode Islandto check, email us at[email protected]. And follow us on Twitter: @politifactri.)","['Rhode Island', 'Economy', 'Federal Budget', 'Health Care', 'Medicaid', 'Poverty', 'Public Health', 'Regulation', 'State Budget', 'States', 'Taxes']",True,"During theMarch 13, 2015 tapingof WPRI-TV's Newsmakers program, Raimondo argued that the costs of the joint state and federal program that provides health insurance to the very poor are extraordinarily high in the state.She madea similar statementon Rhode Island Public Radio.The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation is a reliable source of data on health issues. We got a state-by-state tally oftotal state and federal Medicaid spendingfor the 2013 fiscal year and divided it by the number ofpeople in each state on Medicaid in December 2013in hopes of getting a rough estimate.By that back-of-the-envelope method, Rhode Island ranked fifth, not second, with all the New England states except New Hampshire in the top 10. The cost was 39 percent above the national average. But that's using 12 months of expenses and one-month enrollment totals.Laura Snyder, a senior policy analyst with Kaiser, said that's an apples-to-oranges mix.When we asked Raimondo's office for the source of her numbers, her spokeswoman cited Kaiser as well, specifically a page that directly ranksMedicaid spending per enrollee by state, although it doesn't list actual total spending or enrollment. And it's from  the 2011 fiscal year.Because the statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information, we rule itMostly True.(If you have a claim youd likePolitiFact Rhode Islandto check, email us at[email protected]. And follow us on Twitter: @politifactri.)"
Was Donald Trump Fined for 'Stealing' Money Intended for Veterans?,['Social media posts and memes badly misrepresented the facts surrounding the November 2019 resolution of a high-profile lawsuit against the president.'],"In November 2019, we received multiple inquiries about the accuracy of claims that U.S. President Donald Trump had been fined $2 million by a New York court because he was found to have ""stolen"" charitable donations intended for military veterans. For example, former Democratic Virginia State Senate candidate Qasim Rashid tweeted on several occasions in November 2019 that Trump had ""stolen"" $2.8 million in charitable donations from veterans and that he had admitted as much in court: ""The President stole $2.8M in charity from Veterans & spent it on himself & admits to his crime in court documents. As you speak of honor & service, where is your accountability of a President who trampled on both? Why are you silent, Rep @RobWittman? #VeteransDay"" One of Rashid's tweets was later reposted in the form of a meme by the Facebook page Act.tv. Another widely shared meme claimed, ""It is a fact that draft dodger Trump stole charitable cash donations that were meant for our veterans."" These social media posts and memes grossly misrepresented the facts surrounding a November 2019 settlement agreement between the New York Attorney General and the Donald J. Trump Foundation, Trump himself, and his children Ivanka and Eric. Trump did not ""steal"" charitable donations intended for veterans, nor did he admit as much in court. All the donations intended for veterans' charities ended up going to veterans' charities. However, Trump's 2016 presidential campaign did direct and benefit from the manner in which many of those donations were distributed to the charities. The claims were related to a lawsuit brought by the New York Attorney General's office in June 2018 against the Trump Foundation, the president, and Ivanka and Eric Trump in their capacity as board directors of the charity. In her June 2018 petition to the state's Supreme Court, then-New York Attorney General Barbara Underwood wrote: ""For more than a decade, the Donald J. Trump Foundation has operated in persistent violation of state and federal law governing New York State charities. This pattern of illegal conduct by the Foundation and its board members includes improper and extensive political activity, repeated and willful self-dealing transactions, and failure to follow basic fiduciary obligations or to implement even elementary corporate formalities required by law."" One of the examples of ""improper political activity"" cited in the lawsuit related to a January 2016 fundraiser that the Trump Foundation and Trump's presidential election campaign jointly operated. In January 2016, days before the Iowa caucuses, Trump complained of unfair treatment by Fox News anchor Megyn Kelly and announced he would be boycotting the next Republican primary debate and instead host a fundraiser for veterans' charities in Iowa. The event raised around $5.6 million, with roughly half going to the Trump Foundation and half going directly to specific veterans' charities. The Trump campaign directed the distribution of funds to recipient charities, and Trump himself repeatedly presented checks at campaign rallies and more broadly used the distribution of funds to boost his presidential campaign. On the basis of those allegations, Underwood requested several outcomes, including asking the court to ""dissolve the Foundation for its persistently illegal conduct, enjoin its board members from future service as a director of any not-for-profit authorized by New York law, obtain restitution and penalties, and direct the Foundation to cooperate with the Attorney General in the lawful distribution of its remaining assets to qualified charitable entities."" The parties to the lawsuit spent around a year negotiating a settlement. In December 2018, for example, all sides agreed that the Foundation would be dissolved and its assets distributed to a list of mutually agreed charities. In November 2019, the New York Supreme Court published the final settlement. As part of that settlement, Trump, his children, and the Foundation stipulated to a set of facts, among them the following section related to the Iowa veterans fundraiser: The website for the Iowa Fundraiser, DonaldTrumpForVets.com, was developed by campaign personnel and, with the agreement of the Foundation, featured the name of the Foundation at the top of the home page and informed visitors that ""the Donald J. Trump Foundation is a 501 (c)(3) nonprofit organization""; The campaign planned, organized, and paid for the Iowa Fundraiser, with administrative assistance from the Foundation; and the campaign directed the timing, amounts, and recipients of the Foundation's grants to charitable organizations supporting military veterans. The Iowa Fundraiser raised approximately $5.6 million in donations for veterans' groups, of which $2.823 million was contributed to the Foundation; the balance was contributed by donors directly to various veterans' groups. At campaign events in Iowa on January 30, January 31, and February 1, 2016, Mr. Trump personally displayed presentation copies of Foundation checks to Iowa veterans' groups. On May 31, 2016, at a campaign press conference, Mr. Trump announced the grants the Foundation made to veterans' groups with the proceeds of the Iowa Fundraiser and, on or about the same day, the campaign posted on its website a chart identifying the grant recipients. The New York Attorney General's office objected to the way in which the Trump Foundation had been used to advance the interests of the Trump campaign, and especially the way in which the campaign dictated how more than half of the funds were to be distributed, with Trump at times personally handing out checks at campaign rallies. The Attorney General's Office did not object on the grounds that Trump, his children, or his foundation had stolen or kept the money. Indeed, in an order accompanying the November 2019 settlement, New York Supreme Court Justice Saliann Scarpulla wrote that: ""The Attorney General has argued that I should award damages for waste of the entire $2,823,000 that was donated directly to the Foundation at the Fundraiser. In opposition, Mr. Trump notes that the Foundation ultimately disbursed all of the funds to charitable organizations and that he has sought to resolve consensually this proceeding. As stated above, I find that the $2,823,000 raised at the Fundraiser was used for Mr. Trump's political campaign and disbursed by Mr. Trump's campaign staff, rather than by the Foundation, in violation of [New York law]. However, taking into consideration that the funds did ultimately reach their intended destinations, i.e., charitable organizations supporting veterans, I award damages on the breach of fiduciary duty/waste claim against Mr. Trump in the amount of $2,000,000, without interest, rather than the entire $2,823,000 sought by the Attorney General."" Trump was ordered to pay $2 million to a list of agreed-upon charities as damages for the waste incurred by the fact that his political campaign orchestrated and benefited from distributing around $2.8 million in donations to veterans' groups. (That $2 million in damages was separate from the roughly $1.7 million the Trump Foundation had already agreed to distribute to various charities as part of the resolution dissolving the Foundation.) Neither Trump, nor his children, nor his charity were found to have ""stolen"" or kept the funds, and so none ""admitted"" to such actions. The New York Supreme Court explicitly acknowledged that all the funds raised from the January 2016 Iowa event did ultimately end up with veterans' groups. The irony in those claims was that it was, in fact, the manner in which the Trump Foundation and Trump campaign colluded in distributing the donations to veterans' charities that landed the president in hot water, not his having ""stolen"" the donations.",['funds'],NEI,"For example, former Democratic Virginia State Senate candidate Qasim Rashid tweeted on several occasions in November 2019 that Trump had ""stolen"" $2.8 million in charitable donations from veterans, and that he had admitted as much in court:Why are you silent Rep @RobWittman?#VeteransDay https://t.co/rGi9fT0AsP Qasim Rashid, Esq. (@QasimRashid) November 11, 2019One of Rashid's tweets was later reposted in the form of a meme by the Facebook page Act.tv. (The meme was later deleted):The claims were related to a lawsuit brought by the New York Attorney General's office in June 2018 against the Trump Foundation, the president, and Ivanka and Eric Trump, in their capacity as board directors of the charity. We've written about the case in detail in a previous fact check.In her June 2018 petition to the state's Supreme Court, then-New York Attorney General Barbara Underwood wrote:In January 2016, days before the Iowa caucuses, Trump complained of unfair treatment by Fox News anchor Megyn Kelly and announced he would be boycotting the next Republican primary debate and instead host a fundraiser for veterans' charities in Iowa. The parties to the lawsuit spent around a year negotiating a settlement. In December 2018, for example, all sides agreed that the Foundation would be dissolved and its assets distributed to a list of mutually agreed charities. In November 2019, the New York Supreme Court published the final settlement. As part of that settlement between the parties, Trump, his children and the Foundation stipulated to (agreed upon) a set of facts, among them the following section related to the Iowa veterans fundraiser:Indeed, in an order accompanying the November 2019 settlement, New York Supreme Court Justice Saliann Scarpulla wrote that:"
Hawker Beechcraft,['Did the U.S. government unfairly exclude Hawker Beechcraft from bidding to supply military aircraft for Afghanistan?'],"Claim:  The U.S. government unfairly excluded Hawker Beechcraft from bidding to supply military aircraft for Afghanistan. Examples:  [Collected via e-mail, December 2011] ""Any president whose actions so consistently refute his own words must have deep contempt for the intelligence of the American public."" The obama administration told U.S. owned Hawker Beechcraft earlier this week they are being excluded from bidding on the US Air Force contract for a light attack aircraft. That leaves Brazilian owned Embraer as the likely recipient of the lucrative deal. I found this one hard to believe so I did a little research. It was tough because this was completely ignored by the main stream media.  This is a double slap in the face of the United States. At a time when jobs, the economy, and security are the most critical priorities for our country, the Obama administration decides to send a defense contract to a foreign owned company. This has to be the stupidest thing this administration has done to date. This is not just a dumb decision, it is a perfect example of why this president is such a poor leader. He talks about wanting jobs. He says we need to force companies to repatriate billions of dollars that Americans keep overseas. He wants to raise taxes so he can spend billions on stimulus that does nothing to stimulate anything. And when it's time to act, he sends our tax dollars overseas at the expense of American jobs and income for an American company. This is nothing more than a Chicago-style political pay back; but this time it is at the expense of our national security. How much more damage will obama be allowed to do in the next 14 months? One of the lead stories in the media this week blasted congress for insider trading. If this contract goes to Embraer it will be a huge pay off to another George Soros company. When will the 4th estate do it's constitutionally protected job and expose the real obama to the American people?   Origins:   On 30 December 2011, the U.S. Department of Defense announced that it had awarded a $355 million contract to Sierra Nevada Corp. (SNC) for 20 light air-support/single-engine turboprop aircraft that will serve as both trainers and ground-attack planes for Afghanistan's air force.  Wichita-based aircraft manufacturer Hawker Beechcraft (HBDC) had hoped that their AT-6 aircraft, an armed version of their T-6 trainer which is currently used by the U.S. military, would be chosen for the contract, but the U.S. Air Force (USAF) excluded the AT-6 from the running, leaving the A-29 Super Tucano built by Sierra Nevada Corp. in partnership with Brazil-based Embraer as the lone eligible supplier. Hawker Beechcraft Corp. has since filed suit against the U.S. government over the exclusion, maintaining that the Air Force had not provided them with sufficient detail about the reasons behind their exclusion and that Embraer had been unfairly favored: The suit alleges the exclusion was ""arbitrary and capricious"" and seeks to prevent the government from awarding a contract until Beechcraft can make its case in court. ""This is yet another example of the Air Force's lack of transparency throughout this competition,"" said Bill Boisture, Hawker Beechcraft chairman and CEO, in a statement. ""With this development, it now seems even clearer that the Air Force intended to award the contract to Embraer from early in this process."" ""We think we were wrongfully excluded from the competition,"" Boisture said. ""We don't understand the basis for the exclusion, and frankly, we think we've got the best airplane. ""So we're going to take every avenue available to us to make sure our product is fully evaluated and recognized for what it is. There are several issues here that just, frankly, don't make sense."" The Air Force maintains that the process was fair, that Hawker Beechcraft was excluded because ""multiple deficiencies and significant weaknesses found in HBDC's proposal make it technically unacceptable and results in unacceptable mission capability risk,"" and that the company failed to respond to its notice of exclusion in time to request a debriefing or file a protest: respond Lt. Col. Wesley Miller, an Air Force spokesman, said the contest ""was conducted in accordance with all applicable laws and regulations"" and that the evaluation of the aircraft ""was fair, open and transparent."" In dismissing Hawker Beechcraft Corp from the competition, the Air Force found Hawker Beechcraft's bid ""technically unacceptable,"" one that would result in an ""unacceptable mission capability risk.""  The Air Force said the company missed a three-day deadline to file a request for a debriefing and a 10-day deadline to file a protest. It is not possible at this point to definitively determine why the USAF excluded Hawker Beechcraft from the Light Aircraft Support (LAS) bidding, as ongoing litigation prevents the Air Force from releasing information regarding the competition, but according to industry observers the primary issue behind Hawker Beechcraft's disqualification was that the LAS contract called for a non-developmental, production-ready aircraft, and Hawker Beechcraft's AT-6 was still a developmental aircraft.   observers According to SNC's own statement on the issue: statement In its Request for Proposal, the Air Force specifically sought a non-developmental, in-production aircraft so that warfighters in-theater could have an advanced solution quickly and so that American taxpayers would not have to pay development costs. The plane proposed by SNC's competitor is a developmental aircraft that is not in production and has never been used for light air support or any other purpose. The AT-6 is a developmental aircraft.  With only two prototypes in existence, it has never been in production. In contrast, the aircraft selected by the Air Force and to be provided by SNC, Embraer's A-29 Super Tucano, is a light air support aircraft that is currently in use with six air forces around the world.   Unlike the AT-6, the A-29 Super Tucano has more than seven years of real-world combat and training experience behind it.  This means that its operational costs are known and that all costly development issues related to weapons load, maneuverability and operations have already been worked out.  Only the A-29 Super Tucano has actually flown in combat.  More significantly, only the A-29 was built from the ground up to perform counterinsurgency and light air support operations.  The A-29 is larger in size allowing it to make full use of the 1,600-hp engine without power limitations due to torque.  It sits higher off the ground and has a broader stance, increasing stability on unprepared airfields.  The A-29's longer tail section increases longitudinal stability and provides exceptional accuracy for the delivery of weapons.  Only the A-29 delivery system is specifically designed with the five NATO hard points for external stores, translating into maximum operational flexibility for the war fighters in the theater.  The AT-6 carries no munitions in its native configuration. This is a critical difference.  The A-29 also is munitions-certified with over 130 operational external load configurations.  The AT-6 is not yet munitions-certified. In February 2012, the Air Force announced it was canceling the contract with Sierra Nevada Corp. pending an investigation of the award: General Donald Hoffman, commander of the Air Force Materiel Command, has started an investigation, Jennifer Cassidy, an Air Force Spokeswoman, said. She said she didn't know whether the contract would be re-opened for competition and didn't elaborate on the reason for the cancellation. ""While we pursue perfection, we sometimes fall short, and when we do we will take corrective action,"" Michael B. Donley, the Air Force secretary, said in a statement. ""Since the acquisition is still in litigation, I can only say that the Air Force Senior Acquisition Executive, David Van Buren, is not satisfied with the quality of the documentation supporting the award decision."" The awarding of the Air Force contract to a partner of Brazil-based Embraer did not necessarily mean that all the jobs connected with the contract would be sent overseas, as Embraer said that its partner, Nevada-based Sierra Nevada Corp., would build the turboprops in Jacksonville, Florida, if it won the contract: The A-29 Super Tucano will be built in America.  Embraer will make the plane at a new production facility in Jacksonville, Fla.  Over 88 percent of the dollar value of the A-29 Super Tucano comes from components supplied by U.S. companies or countries that qualify under the Buy America Act. No new jobs are being created in Brazil as a result of this contract. Despite the claim made in the example text reproduced above that the subject of Hawker Beechcraft's exclusion was ""completely ignored by the mainstream media,"" it has in fact received widespread news coverage in a variety of media sources, including at least five of the nine highest-circulation newspapers in the U.S. (The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, the San Jose Mercury News, the New York Post, and the Chicago Tribune). widespread Also, we found no evidence to support the claim that ""If this contract goes to Embraer it will be a huge pay off to another George Soros company,""  as we turned up no information indicating that George Soros holds an ownership stake in Embraer.  The closest connection we found between George Soros and Embraer seems to be that the former is one of the leading shareholders in China's Hainan Airlines Group (HNA), and HNA bought ERJ-145 jets from Harbin Embraer, a partnership between Embraer and the Harbin Aircraft Manufacturing Corporation of Harbin, China. However, that connection makes Soros a customer of Embraer, not an owner, and therefore does not put him in a position to profit from the awarding of an Air Force contact to Embraer. shareholders Last updated:  5 March 2012    Hodge, Nathan.  ""Hawker Beechcraft Sues Over Air Force Bidding.""   The Wall Street Journal.  28 December 2011.    Hodge, Nathan.  ""Embraer Hits Defense Barrier.""   The Wall Street Journal.  11 January 2012.    Ivory, Danielle.  ""Air Force Cancels Contract to Sierra After Hawker Protest.""   San Francisco Chronicle.  1 March 2012.    McMillin, Molly.  ""Hawker Requests GAO Review of Air Force Deal.""   The Wichita Eagle.  22 November 2011.    McMillin, Molly.  ""Hawker Beechcraft Files Suit Over Air Force Contract.""   The Wichita Eagle.  28 December 2011.    Associated Press.  ""Hawker Beechcraft Sues Over Air Force Contract.""   28 December 2011.    Associated Press.  ""Air Force Temporarily Halts Work After Hawker Beechcraft Lawsuit.""   The Washington Post.  5 January 2012.",['taxes'],NEI,"The Air Force maintains that the process was fair, that Hawker Beechcraft was excluded because ""multiple deficiencies and significant weaknesses found in HBDC's proposal make it technically unacceptable and results in unacceptable mission capability risk,"" and that the company failed to respond to its notice of exclusion in time to request a debriefing or file a protest:It is not possible at this point to definitively determine why the USAF excluded Hawker Beechcraft from the Light Aircraft Support (LAS) bidding, as ongoing litigation prevents the Air Force from releasing information regarding the competition, but according to industry observers the primary issue behind Hawker Beechcraft's disqualification was that the LAS contract called for a non-developmental, production-ready aircraft, and Hawker Beechcraft's AT-6 was still a developmental aircraft.  According to SNC's own statement on the issue:Despite the claim made in the example text reproduced above that the subject of Hawker Beechcraft's exclusion was ""completely ignored by the mainstream media,"" it has in fact received widespread news coverage in a variety of media sources, including at least five of the nine highest-circulation newspapers in the U.S. (The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, the San Jose Mercury News, the New York Post, and the Chicago Tribune).Also, we found no evidence to support the claim that ""If this contract goes to Embraer it will be a huge pay off to another George Soros company,""  as we turned up no information indicating that George Soros holds an ownership stake in Embraer.  The closest connection we found between George Soros and Embraer seems to be that the former is one of the leading shareholders in China's Hainan Airlines Group (HNA), and HNA bought ERJ-145 jets from Harbin Embraer, a partnership between Embraer and the Harbin Aircraft Manufacturing Corporation of Harbin, China. However, that connection makes Soros a customer of Embraer, not an owner, and therefore does not put him in a position to profit from the awarding of an Air Force contact to Embraer."
"According to the statement, Ronald Reagan rescinded the largest tax cut ever implemented and increased taxes after revenues fell short of projections.",[],"Stephen Colbert has intervieweda slew ofpresidential candidates in the first weeks of his new job hosting CBSThe Late Show, including Jeb Bush, Donald Trump, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders and Texas Sen. Ted Cruz. His time with Cruz on Sept. 21 stood out for a fact-filled back and forth about a major Republican role model, President Ronald Reagan. Colbert asked Cruz if he could agree with Reagans support of amnesty for undocumented immigrants and record of raising taxes amid budget shortfalls. Cruz said of course not before pivoting to Reagans most conservative accomplishments, one being that he signed the largest tax cut in history and spurred economic growth. You know, when Reagan came in, from 1978 to 1982, economic growth averaged less than 1 percent a year. Theres only one other four-year period where thats true. Thats true from 2008 to 2012, Cruz said. Colbert jumped in, saying But when conditions changed in the country, he reversed his worlds largest tax cut and raised taxes when revenues did not match the expectations. So its a matter of compromising. PolitiFact explored Cruzs point about economic growth inanother fact-check. We wondered if Colberts retort was on the money or overstated. (Its our first fact-check ofColbertin his new role  and the first one in five years, period.) Did Reagan really shift course on tax cuts when the growth stopped? A CBS press contact did not return an email for comment. Reagans tax cut As Cruz said, the Gipper really did cut taxes  with the help of Congress  in his first year as president. The largest tax cut in history that Cruz mentioned is in reference to the Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981, a $38 billion phased-in cut ($99 billion in 2015 dollars). Put in the way that economists prefer to discuss tax cuts, it represented 1.91 percent of the countrys gross domestic product. This law included across-the-board cuts of about 30 percent to statutory income tax rates. As Colbert said, Reagan raised taxes, too. Two laws, one in 1982 and another in 1984, were especially dramatic. These laws generally raised taxes by removing tax loopholes, not by raising the tax rate, said Dean Baker, a liberal economist and co-founder of the Center for Economic and Policy Research. Still, Baker said, the loopholes were big ones. Reagans tax increases 1982:The most significant tax increase Reagan signed was also the first. The Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982 (yes, another law with a very sexy name) increased taxes by almost 1 percent of GDP. The 1982 tax increase was probably the largest peacetime tax increase in American history, said economist Bruce Bartlett, who advised Reagan on domestic policy and then worked as Treasury deputy assistant secretary for economic policy in the George H.W. Bush administration. (An analysis by Jerry Tempalski, an analyst in the Office of Tax Analysis with the U.S. Department of the Treasury,agrees.) This law was driven by pressure to attack the federal budget deficit, as well as the impression that Reagans tax-cutting was partially responsible for lower-than-expected tax revenues. Bartlett, who reviewed Reagans tax record forTax Notesin 2011, cited aTreasury estimatethat the 1982 law raised taxes by almost 1 percent of GDP, or about $150 billion in modern dollars. Specifically, it rolled back some but not all of the 1981 tax cut for writing off equipment, and it repealed 1981 safe harbor leasing provisions, said Stephen J. Entin, senior fellow at the Tax Foundation and former deputy assistant secretary for economic policy in the Reagan administration. 1983:A law Reagan signed in 1983 aimed to keep Social Security afloat by increasing payroll taxes and taxing Social Security benefits for some high-earners. This cost $24.6 billion, or almost $50 billion in 2015 dollars, through 1988, according to an administrationestimate. 1984:The Deficit Reduction Act that Reagan signed rolled back part of the 1981 cut on buildings, Entin said, with the idea that Congress would enact spending cuts. But many of those cuts were either never enacted or were later restored, Entin said. This led to $25 billion in tax receipts. Reagan also signed tax increases in 1985, 1986, 1987 and 1988 (as well as a couple other laws with revenue reductions). So where does that leave Reagans tax record on the whole? Its mixed. On one hand, revenues were lower as ashare of GDPin his last year in office (17.6 percent of GDP in 1988) compared to the year before he took office (18.5 percent of GDP in 1980), according to the White House Office of Management and Budget. However, the thrust of the 1981 tax cut that Cruz touted on Colberts show didnt prove to have lasting effects on the whole. A 2006 Treasury Departmentanalysisoffers another view of the plunge after the 1981 law and the subsequent changes that wound it back. Reagans staff tallied up the effect of major legislation on tax receipts over his tenure for his final budget proposal (page 4-4). The 1981 tax cuts comprised most of the total $275 billion in tax relief, but the other side of the ledger listed $133 billion in cumulative tax increases. Thus, Reagan took back about half the 1981 tax cut with subsequent tax increases, Bartlett wrote. Our ruling Responding to Cruzs assertion that Reagan signed the largest tax cut in history, Colbert said he reversed it and raised taxes when revenues did not match the expectations. Legislation that Reagan signed over his time in office and raised taxes did not completely reverse the 1981 Economic Recovery Tax Act. But the broader point Colbert makes is on point. Reagan agreed to raise taxes to deal with budget deficits, even if he wasnt enthusiastic about it. We rate the claim Mostly True.","['Taxes', 'PunditFact']",True,"PolitiFact explored Cruzs point about economic growth inanother fact-check. We wondered if Colberts retort was on the money or overstated. (Its our first fact-check ofColbertin his new role  and the first one in five years, period.)The 1982 tax increase was probably the largest peacetime tax increase in American history, said economist Bruce Bartlett, who advised Reagan on domestic policy and then worked as Treasury deputy assistant secretary for economic policy in the George H.W. Bush administration. (An analysis by Jerry Tempalski, an analyst in the Office of Tax Analysis with the U.S. Department of the Treasury,agrees.)Bartlett, who reviewed Reagans tax record forTax Notesin 2011, cited aTreasury estimatethat the 1982 law raised taxes by almost 1 percent of GDP, or about $150 billion in modern dollars.1983:A law Reagan signed in 1983 aimed to keep Social Security afloat by increasing payroll taxes and taxing Social Security benefits for some high-earners. This cost $24.6 billion, or almost $50 billion in 2015 dollars, through 1988, according to an administrationestimate.On one hand, revenues were lower as ashare of GDPin his last year in office (17.6 percent of GDP in 1988) compared to the year before he took office (18.5 percent of GDP in 1980), according to the White House Office of Management and Budget.A 2006 Treasury Departmentanalysisoffers another view of the plunge after the 1981 law and the subsequent changes that wound it back.Reagans staff tallied up the effect of major legislation on tax receipts over his tenure for his final budget proposal (page 4-4). The 1981 tax cuts comprised most of the total $275 billion in tax relief, but the other side of the ledger listed $133 billion in cumulative tax increases."
Hillary Clinton reduced her tax bill by giving $1 million to herself through the Clinton Foundation.,['Accusations that Hillary Clinton padded her own pockets by deducting charitable donations to the Clinton Foundation appear to be baseless.'],"An Internet meme circulating during the final weeks of the 2016 presidential campaign purported to reveal financial trickery on the part of Democratic contender Hillary Clinton, who allegedly deducted $1 million from her 2015 income tax return after donating it ""to herself"" via contributions to the Clinton Foundation. Assuming that this information came from the candidate's 2015 tax filing (released to the public earlier this year), we went to verify the accuracy of the claims. Our findings were as follows: 1. The return was a joint filing for both Hillary and William J. Clinton. 2. Their shared charitable donations totaled $1,042,000: $42,000 to Desert Classic Charities and $1 million to the Clinton Family Foundation. 3. Declaring an amount, say $1 million, as a charitable donation only reduces your taxable income; it doesn't mean your ""tax bill"" is reduced by that amount. 4. The Clinton Family Foundation is a separate entity from the Clinton Foundation. Inside Philanthropy describes the Clinton Family Foundation as ""a traditional private foundation that serves as the vehicle for the couple's personal charitable giving."" It has neither staff nor offices. 5. According to Inside Philanthropy, the Clinton Family Foundation regularly disburses contributions to numerous different charities (one of which is, in fact, the Clinton Foundation). Digging into the Clinton Family Foundation's 2014 tax return reveals that they made around $3.8 million in grantmaking and held approximately $5.3 million in assets. Of total grantmaking in 2014, $1.8 million went to the Clinton Foundation, just under half of total giving. However, in 2013, the Clintons gave $1.8 million through their personal foundation, with only around a fifth of that money going to the Clinton Foundation, roughly the same share as in 2012. So where have all the other gifts gone? The short answer is to many different places. In 2014, the Clintons donated money to 70 nonprofits through their foundation. The picture looked similar the year before, with many grants falling in the range of $5,000 to $25,000. Recipients of the Clintons' generosity via the Clinton Family Foundation in 2014 ranged from the School of American Ballet to the Arkansas Children's Hospital Foundation to Wellesley College to the Elie Wiesel Foundation for Humanity. The foundation's 2015 tax filing has not yet been made public, so we don't have an accounting of the organizations to which the $1 million contributed by the Clintons that year was disbursed. Regarding the apparent assumption that any monies donated to the Clinton Foundation simply end up in the Clintons' own pockets, we refer readers, once again, to Inside Philanthropy, which describes the actual work the foundation does, and to the charity rating service Charity Navigator, which gives the Clinton Foundation an overall score of 94.74 points out of 100 in terms of its financials, accountability, and transparency.",['accountability'],False,"On the assumption that this information came from the candidate's 2015 tax filing (released to the public earlier this year), that's where we went to verify the accuracy of the claims. Our findings were these:2. Their shared charitable donations totaled $1,042,000: $42,000 to Desert Classic Charities and $1 million to the Clinton Family Foundation.4. The Clinton Family Foundation is a separate entity from the Clinton Foundation. Inside Philanthropy describes the Clinton Family Foundation as ""a traditional private foundation that serves as the vehicle for the couple's personal charitable giving."" It has neither staff nor offices. Digging into the Clinton Family Foundation's 2014 tax return reveals that they did around $3.8 million in grantmaking and held some $5.3 million in assets. Of total grantmaking in 2014, $1.8 million went to the Clinton Foundation, just under half of total giving. Recipients of the Clintons' largesse via the Clinton Family Foundation in 2014 ranged from the School of American Ballet to the Arkansas Childrens Hospital Foundation to Wellesley College to the Elie Wiesel Foundation for Humanity.Regarding the apparent assumption that any monies donated to the Clinton Foundation simply end up in the Clintons' own pockets, we refer readers, once again, to Inside Philanthropy, which describes the actual work the foundation does, and to the charity rating service Charity Navigator, which gives the Clinton Foundation an overall score of 94.74 points out of 100 in terms of its financials, accountability, and transparency."
Poll to Legalize Marijuana,['President Obama will legalize marijuana if one million people call a designated phone number?'],"Claim:  President Obama will legalize marijuana if one million people call a designated phone number.  Examples:  [Collected via e-mail, April 2009] Comment: I got a text message this morning saying that Obama would legalize marijuana if it had 1 million supporters. We are supposed to call a phone number to record a vote - phone number 973.409.3274 and press pound - haven't done it, just wanted to check first.   Origins:  With good reason, many people are now wary that any unsolicited e-mail or text message urging them to call an unfamiliar phone number is some form of hoax or scam.  The message reproduced above, claiming that President Obama will legalize marijuana if one million supportive phone calls areplaced to a designated number, is an example of such wariness  many people who have received it are skeptical that it's on the level.  Although the message isn't quite literally true, neither is it really a hoax or a scam. scam The phone number 973-409-3274 is one of many operated by Humor Hotlines, the company that offers such novelty services as the ""Rejection Hotline,"" the ""Bad Breath Notification Number,"" and ""The Pissed Off Poet.""  This particular number connects callers  Humor Hotlines to the ""Marijuana Legalization Endorsement Line,"" which plays a 30-second recorded message about controversies regarding the legalization of marijuana and then urges the caller to press the pound key (#) if he or she supports the concept of ""legalizing marijuana to help save the economy.""  The recording states that once a million endorsements have been received, a proposal for the legalization of marijuana will be presented to President Obama and the U.S. Congress. As far as we have been able to ascertain, the Marijuana Legalization Endorsement Line is not a ""scam"" in the sense that calling it does not result in hidden or exorbitant fees being charged to the caller's bill.  It isn't true that ""Obama will legalize marijuana"" if the number collects one million supporters, though; merely that a proposal for such will supposedly be created and presented if the phone number records one million positive responses.  We note, however, that this phone poll has no more power to affect anything than any other public petition does, and there are no guarantees that the President or Congress would even see the resultant proposal, As well, President Obama does not have the authority to single-handedly legalize marijuana throughout the United States; such an act would require the overturning of a variety of state and federal laws. Last updated:  5 May 2009 ",['economy'],False,"Origins:  With good reason, many people are now wary that any unsolicited e-mail or text message urging them to call an unfamiliar phone number is some form of hoax or scam.  The message reproduced above, claiming that President Obama will legalize marijuana if one million supportive phone calls areplaced to a designated number, is an example of such wariness  many people who have received it are skeptical that it's on the level.  Although the message isn't quite literally true, neither is it really a hoax or a scam.The phone number 973-409-3274 is one of many operated by Humor Hotlines, the company that offers such novelty services as the ""Rejection Hotline,"" the ""Bad Breath Notification Number,"" and ""The Pissed Off Poet.""  This particular number connects callers "
Is Biden suggesting a 3% federal tax on properties?,['The Democratic presidential candidate has not proposed a 3% property tax.'],"During the 2020 U.S. presidential campaign, social media postings repeatedly warned readers that Democratic candidate Joe Biden was planning to impose a 3% federal tax on the value of homes, in addition to any property taxes homeowners were already paying. However, this warning about a Biden-backed federal property tax was unfounded. Property taxes in the U.S. are set and collected at the state, county, and city levels, and the announced Biden Tax Plan includes nothing that could be construed as imposing an additional federal property tax on privately owned homes. The Tax Foundation, an independent tax policy nonprofit, summarizes the Biden tax plan as including the following primary elements applicable to individuals (rather than businesses): it imposes a 12.4 percent Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance (Social Security) payroll tax on income earned above $400,000, evenly split between employers and employees. This would create a donut hole in the current Social Security payroll tax, where wages between $137,700, the current wage cap, and $400,000 are not taxed. It reverts the top individual income tax rate for taxable incomes above $400,000 from 37 percent under current law to the pre-Tax Cuts and Jobs Act level of 39.6 percent. It taxes long-term capital gains and qualified dividends at the ordinary income tax rate of 39.6 percent on income above $1 million and eliminates the step-up in basis for capital gains taxation. It caps the tax benefit of itemized deductions to 28 percent of value for those earning more than $400,000, which means that taxpayers earning above that income threshold with tax rates higher than 28 percent would face limited itemized deductions. It restores the Pease limitation on itemized deductions for taxable incomes above $400,000. It phases out the qualified business income deduction (Section 199A) for filers with taxable income above $400,000. It expands the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) for childless workers aged 65 and older and provides renewable-energy-related tax credits to individuals. It expands the Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit (CDCTC) from a maximum of $3,000 in qualified expenses to $8,000 ($16,000 for multiple dependents) and increases the maximum reimbursement rate from 35 percent to 50 percent. For 2021 and as long as economic conditions require, it increases the Child Tax Credit (CTC) from a maximum value of $2,000 to $3,000 for children 17 or younger, while providing a $600 bonus credit for children under 6. The CTC would also be made fully refundable, removing the $2,500 reimbursement threshold and 15 percent phase-in rate. It reestablishes the First-Time Homebuyers Tax Credit, which was originally created during the Great Recession to help the housing market. Biden's homebuyers credit would provide up to $15,000 for first-time homebuyers. It expands the estate and gift tax by restoring the rate and exemption to 2009 levels. Similar analyses of Biden's tax plan by other entities include no mention of a federal property tax.",['dividend'],False,"However, this warning about a Biden-backed federal property tax was specious. Property taxes in the U.S. are set and collected at the state, county, and city levels, and the announced Biden Tax Plan includes nothing that could be remotely construed as imposing an additional federal property tax on privately-owned homes.The Tax Foundation, an independent tax policy nonprofit, summarizes the Biden tax plan as including the following primary elements applicable to individuals (rather than businesses):Similar analysis of Biden's tax plan by other entities include no mention of a federal property tax."
'Whole Foods Market Research' Secret Shopper Email Is a Scam,['The U.S. Federal Trade Commission first warned about this scam in 2020.'],"In October 2022, we received reader mail about a ""Whole Foods Market Research"" scam. The scam arrives in the form of an email, text, or mailed letter, claiming that the recipient has been chosen to be a secret shopper for Whole Foods Market. The goal of the scammer is to get the recipient to deposit a check into their bank account. However, unbeknownst to the recipient, the check is fake. The scammer quickly tasks the recipient with buying gift cards and then providing the identifying details on the front and back. Alternatively, the scammer might ask the recipient to initiate a wire transfer or money order to send back a partial amount of the funds from the check. The scammer claims that the recipient can keep a portion of the funds for their work. However, again, the check is fake, so recipients are spending their own money to buy gift cards for the scammers. We reviewed one example of this scam that arrived as an email. It came from wholefoodsmarketresearchllc@gmail.com, which was not an official Whole Foods email address. It claimed to come from a person named Jerry A. Wallace, a purported human resources (HR) representative. A previous version of this scam named Wallace as a ""project manager,"" according to scampulse.com. We found no evidence of a person with this name being a real employee of Whole Foods. The original email, which contained several misspellings of store names, read as follows: wholefoodsmarketresearchllc@gmail.com wrote: Attn: (name removed) You submitted your information to one of our recruitment agencies to work as a Whole Foods Market Research representative. Your details have been verified, and you have been shortlisted as one of our representatives. Here is your unique I.D. number MS6953; your details have been stored in our database. Our company has recently been contracted to conduct a quality survey on Target, King Soopers, Walmart Stores, Best Buy, Post Office, CVS, Rite Aid, eBay, Kmart, Pizza Hut, Kroger, Walgreen, Dillons, or 7-Eleven, etc. We have shortlisted a few representatives from various states and cities to visit any of the stores listed above randomly, to buy merchandise and share their experience via our feedback Checklist/Assessment form. You will receive an envelope containing a Cashier's Check and the Instructions Letter. The Checklist/Assessment Form will be sent/attached to your mail. Please signify your interest with a Yes, I'm Ready. Thank you. Best Regards, Whole Foods Market Research HR Personnel: Jerry A. Wallace Cell: (216) 239-2582 We called the phone number listed in the email. After several rings, a voice message was played that said, ""The TextNow subscriber you are trying to reach is not available. Please leave your message after the tone."" The U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) previously published a full report on this scam back in 2020. People spotted signs of a fake check scam in the bogus Whole Foods secret shopper offer (which was from a scammer, not really Whole Foods). That's when someone sends you a check and convinces you to deposit it and quickly send them money. In this scam, the recruiter would send shoppers a check for more than $2,000, and they would: 1. Cash or deposit the check immediately. 2. Buy gift cards with most of the money. 3. Keep about $450 as their pay. 4. Scratch the coating off the gift cards to show the PIN codes. 5. Send pictures of the cards' front and back (with the codes) to the recruiter. If anyone ever tells you to deposit a check, withdraw money, and send it to someone, that's a scam. When the check later turns out to be fake, the bank will want the money back. And if anyone tells you to go buy gift cards and share the PIN numbers, that's a scam, too. Once the scammer has the PIN, they also have all the money from the cards. The FTC said this scam can be reported at ReportFraud.ftc.gov. They also added, ""If you already cashed a fake check and sent money to a scammer, find out how to report to gift card, wire transfer, and money order businesses."" In sum, both we and the FTC advise consumers not to respond to any emails, texts, or mailed letters that invite recipients to work as a secret shopper for ""Whole Foods Market Research.""",['interest'],False,"We reviewed one example of this scam that arrived as an email. It came from wholefoodsmarketresearchllc@gmail.com, which was not an official Whole Foods email address. It claimed to come from a person named Jerry A. Wallace, a purported human resources (HR) representative. A previous version of this scam named Wallace as a ""project manager,"" according to scampulse.com. We found no evidence of a person with this name being a real employee for Whole Foods.The U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) previously published a full report on this scam back in 2020:People spotted signs of a fake check scam in the bogus Whole Foods secret shopper offer (which was from a scammer, not really Whole Foods). Thats when someone sends you a check and convinces you to deposit it and quickly send them money. In this scam, the recruiter would send shoppers a check for more than $2,000 and they would:The FTC said this scam can be reported at ReportFraud.ftc.gov. They also added, ""If you already cashed a fake check and sent money to a scammer, find out how to report to gift card, wire transfer, and money order businesses."""
Was Charles Lieber Arrested for Selling the COVID-19 Coronavirus to China?,['The arrest of a Harvard professor fueled conspiracy theories about the COVID-19 coronavirus disease outbreak in 2020.'],"Editor's Note: On Dec. 22, 2021, Charles Lieber was convicted of making false statements to federal authorities about his involvement with the Chinese government and for failing to report foreign financial accounts to the IRS. You can read more about Lieber's case here. The original story continues below.  read more about Lieber's case here On Jan. 28, 2020, Harvard professor Charles Lieber was arrested and charged with making a materially false statement to federal authorities about receiving funding from China. arrested Lieber's arrest was big news in academic circles; but after internet users noticed that the alleged funding was coming from a university in Wuhan, China, the center of an outbreak of a new coronavirus, wild speculation went viral and unfounded connections were drawn between Lieber and a conspiracy theory that the coronavirus was a lab-made bioweapon.  wild speculation unfounded connections         A viral Facebook post took it further, relaying more details about Lieber's arrest and making use of some conveniently placed scare quotes: post In case you missed it, today, Federal Agents arrested Dr. Charles Lieber, chair of Harvard University's Department of Chemistry and Chemical Biology, with lying to the Department of Defense about secret monthly payments of $50,000.00 paid by China and receipt of millions more to help set up a chemical/biological Research laboratory in China. Also arrested were two Chinese Students working as research assistants, one of whom was actually a lieutenant in the Chinese Army, the other captured at Logan Airport as he tried to catch a flight to China - smuggling 21 vials of ""Sensitive Biological Samples"" according to the FBI. Oh, almost forgot. The research lab the good professor had helped set up? Its located at the Wuhan University of Technology. Wuhan China is ground zero to the potentially global pandemic known as the Coronaviruswhich is both spreading rapidly and killing people. This is Stephen Coonts international spy novel stuff happening in real life - and it has barely made the news. The claims made in this Facebook post are generally true. Lieber was truly arrested in January 2020 for lying to federal agents about funding he had allegedly received from China. However, Lieber's arrest was not connected to the coronavirus and there's no evidence to support claims that this disease was a human-made bioweapon. Let's take a closer look and separate the facts from the rumors in this case. In short: Lieber was arrested for lying to authorities about his involvement with a Chinese government program to recruit and cultivate scientific talent.  Lieber was the Chair of the Department of Chemistry and Chemical Biology at Harvard University and the Principal Investigator of the Lieber Research Group. Because this group had received grant funding from National Institutes of Health (NIH) and Department of Defense (DOD), Lieber was required to disclose any funding he received from foreign governments or entities that could lead to a conflict of interest.  The Department of Justice (DOJ) alleges in its complaint that Lieber became a ""strategic scientist"" at Wuhan University in 2011 and that he was a contractual participant in China's Thousand Talents Plan, a government program aimed at recruiting and cultivating high-level scientific talent. The DOJ says that Lieber was arrested for lying to investigators about his involvement in this program and his affiliations with WUT: DOJ Chinas Thousand Talents Plan is one of the most prominent Chinese Talent recruit plans that are designed to attract, recruit, and cultivate high-level scientific talent in furtherance of Chinas scientific development, economic prosperity and national security. These talent programs seek to lure Chinese overseas talent and foreign experts to bring their knowledge and experience to China and reward individuals for stealing proprietary information. Under the terms of Liebers three-year Thousand Talents contract, WUT paid Lieber $50,000 USD per month, living expenses of up to 1,000,000 Chinese Yuan (approximately $158,000 USD at the time) and awarded him more than $1.5 million to establish a research lab at WUT. In return, Lieber was obligated to work for WUT ""not less than nine months a year"" by ""declaring international cooperation projects, cultivating young teachers and Ph.D. students, organizing international conference[s], applying for patents and publishing articles in the name of"" WUT. The complaint alleges that in 2018 and 2019, Lieber lied about his involvement in the Thousand Talents Plan and affiliation with WUT. On or about, April 24, 2018, during an interview with investigators, Lieber stated that he was never asked to participate in the Thousand Talents Program, but he wasnt sure how China categorized him. In November 2018, NIH inquired of Harvard whether Lieber had failed to disclose his then-suspected relationship with WUT and Chinas Thousand Talents Plan. Lieber caused Harvard to falsely tell NIH that Lieber had no formal association with WUT after 2012, that WUT continued to falsely exaggerate his involvement with WUT in subsequent years, and that Lieber is not and has never been a participant in Chinas Thousand Talents Plan. In short: The DOJ announced three separate arrests in January 2020. The first was Lieber. The second involved Yanqing Ye, a lieutenant in the Chinese army accused of stealing U.S. research. And third was Zaosong Zheng, who stole 21 vials of biological research. While these three arrests all involve people lying about their ties to China, they took place at different universities and are not related.  On Jan. 28, 2020, the DOJ announced the arrests of three different individuals in three separate cases related to China.  announced Dr. Charles Lieber, 60, Chair of the Department of Chemistry and Chemical Biology at Harvard University, was arrested this morning and charged by criminal complaint with one count of making a materially false, fictitious and fraudulent statement. Lieber will appear this afternoon before Magistrate Judge Marianne B. Bowler in federal court in Boston, Massachusetts. Yanqing Ye, 29, a Chinese national, was charged in an indictment today with one count each of visa fraud, making false statements, acting as an agent of a foreign government and conspiracy. Ye is currently in China. Zaosong Zheng, 30, a Chinese national, was arrested on Dec. 10, 2019, at Bostons Logan International Airport and charged by criminal complaint with attempting to smuggle 21 vials of biological research to China. On Jan. 21, 2020, Zheng was indicted on one count of smuggling goods from the United States and one count of making false, fictitious or fraudulent statements. He has been detained since Dec. 30, 2019. Yanqinq Ye, a lieutenant of the Peoples Liberation Army (PLA), the armed forces of the Peoples Republic of China and member of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), reportedly lied about being a ""student"" on her visa in order to attend Boston University. The DOJ alleges that Ye conducted research and assessed military websites while studying at BU's Department of Physics, Chemistry and Biomedical Engineering and sent U.S. documents and information to China. Zaosong Zheng was arrested at Logan Airport as he was attempting to smuggle 21 vials of biological research that he allegedly stole from Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston.  In short: Cancer cells.  As news of Zheng's arrest circulated on social media, some made the unfounded claim that these vials of ""biological research"" were somehow connected to the coronavirus. According to The New York Times, however, these vials contained cancer cells: The New York Times Inside his checked luggage, wrapped in a plastic bag and then inserted into a sock, the officers found what they were looking for: 21 vials of brown liquid  cancer cells  that the authorities say Mr. Zheng, 29, a cancer researcher, took from a laboratory at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center. While some conspiracy theorists assumed that Zheng's plan involved a bio-weapon, Zheng told authorities that he planned on using the samples to further his career: Under questioning, court documents say, Mr. Zheng acknowledged that he had stolen eight of the samples and had replicated 11 more based on a colleagues research. When he returned to China, he said, he would take the samples to Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hospital and turbocharge his career by publishing the results in China, under his own name. In short: There is no evidence that coronavirus was human-made and several leading researchers have debunked this notion.  While this conspiracy theory has started to receive some mainstream attention (it was even pushed by Republican Sen. Tom Cotton), there is no evidence to support this claim.  In fact, several researchers have debunked this claim, calling it illogical and noting that the current evidence indicates that the coronavirus mutated naturally. debunked Trevor Bedford of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle stated at the American Association for the Advancement of Science meeting in Seattle that There is no evidence whatsoever of genetic engineering that we can find. The evidence we have is that the mutations [in the virus] are completely consistent with natural evolution. stated Two more researchers gave statements to The Washington Post: The Washington Post Theres absolutely nothing in the genome sequence of this virus that indicates the virus was engineered, said Richard Ebright, a professor of chemical biology at Rutgers University. The possibility this was a deliberately released bioweapon can be firmly excluded. Vipin Narang, an associate professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, said it is highly unlikely the general population was exposed to a virus through an accident at a lab. We dont have any evidence for that, said Narang, a political science professor with a background in chemical engineering. Its a skip in logic to say its a bioweapon that the Chinese developed and intentionally deployed, or even unintentionally deployed, Narang said In short: No. Lieber's arrest (as well as the two other cases) was related to economic and academic espionage. There's no indication that Lieber's research, arrest, or connection to China was related to the spread of the coronavirus. Lieber was arrested in January 2020 for allegedly working with a university in China to further the country's recruitment and development of scientific talent. While Lieber was reportedly working with a lab in Wuhan, China (it should be noted that Lieber allegedly started working with the Wuhan University of Technology 9 years before there would be an outbreak of coronavirus in the area), there's no evidence to suggest that this is anything more than a coincidence.  Lieber's arrest, as well as the two other cases brought by the DOJ in January 2020, dealt with an academic battle between the U.S. and China. Lieber was allegedly working with a Chinese recruitment program, Ye was allegedly attempting to steal United States research and documents, and Zheng's was attempting to steal biological samples. FBI Boston Division Special Agent in Charge Joseph R. Bonavolonta said in a statement that all three of these cases dealt with ""economic espionage"" and China's attempts to steal trade secrets: statement Chinas goal, simply put, is to replace the United States as the worlds leading superpower, and theyre breaking the law to get there. Massachusetts is a target-rich environment with world-class academic institutions, research facilities, hospitals, cleared defense contractors, and start-ups. And each and every one of them are in danger of having their research, development, and investments stolen right out from under them. The ruling Communist Party of the PRC wants what we have so they can get the upper hand on us. And while we are still confronted with traditional spies seeking our state secrets, often working under diplomatic cover, or posing as everyday citizens, I can tell you China is also using what we call non-traditional collectors such as professors, researchers, hackers and front companies. All three individuals charged today are manifestations of the China threat ... Make no mistake, the ruling Communist Party of the Peoples Republic of China is highly strategic in their approach, and we are deeply concerned about American innovation, research, and cutting-edge technologies ending up in the wrong hands ... Economic espionage and the theft of trade secrets significantly hurts our academic institutions, businesses, jobs, and consumers, resulting in hundreds of billions of dollars in losses every year. While some may find these arrests to be suspect, the Department of Justice made no mention of coronavirus or biological warfare in their complaints. Cookson, Clive.  ""Coronavirus Was Not Genetically Engineered in a Wuhan lab, Says Expert.""
  Financial Times.  13 February 2020. Stevenson, Alexandra.  ""Senator Tom Cotton Repeats Fringe Theory of Coronavirus Origins.""
  The New York Times.  17 February 2020. U.S. Department of Justice.  ""Harvard University Professor and Two Chinese Nationals Charged in Three Separate China Related Cases.""
  28 January 2020. Shaw, Jonathan.  ""Stolen Research: Chinese Scientist Is Accused of Smuggling Lab Samples.""
  Harvard Magazine.  28 January 2020. Barry, Ellen.  ""Stolen Research: Chinese Scientist Is Accused of Smuggling Lab Samples.""
  The New York Times.  31 December 2020. Barry, Ellen.  ""U.S. Accuses Harvard Scientist of Concealing Chinese Funding.""
  The New York Times.  28 January 2020. Updated [22 December 2021]: Editor's note added after Lieber was convicted of making false statements to federal authorities about his involvement with the Chinese government and for failing to report foreign financial accounts to the IRS.",['investment'],False,"Editor's Note: On Dec. 22, 2021, Charles Lieber was convicted of making false statements to federal authorities about his involvement with the Chinese government and for failing to report foreign financial accounts to the IRS. You can read more about Lieber's case here. The original story continues below. On Jan. 28, 2020, Harvard professor Charles Lieber was arrested and charged with making a materially false statement to federal authorities about receiving funding from China.Lieber's arrest was big news in academic circles; but after internet users noticed that the alleged funding was coming from a university in Wuhan, China, the center of an outbreak of a new coronavirus, wild speculation went viral and unfounded connections were drawn between Lieber and a conspiracy theory that the coronavirus was a lab-made bioweapon.    A viral Facebook post took it further, relaying more details about Lieber's arrest and making use of some conveniently placed scare quotes:The DOJ says that Lieber was arrested for lying to investigators about his involvement in this program and his affiliations with WUT:On Jan. 28, 2020, the DOJ announced the arrests of three different individuals in three separate cases related to China. As news of Zheng's arrest circulated on social media, some made the unfounded claim that these vials of ""biological research"" were somehow connected to the coronavirus. According to The New York Times, however, these vials contained cancer cells:In fact, several researchers have debunked this claim, calling it illogical and noting that the current evidence indicates that the coronavirus mutated naturally.Trevor Bedford of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle stated at the American Association for the Advancement of Science meeting in Seattle that There is no evidence whatsoever of genetic engineering that we can find. The evidence we have is that the mutations [in the virus] are completely consistent with natural evolution.Two more researchers gave statements to The Washington Post:FBI Boston Division Special Agent in Charge Joseph R. Bonavolonta said in a statement that all three of these cases dealt with ""economic espionage"" and China's attempts to steal trade secrets:"
"Did a BLM Organizer Say, 'I Don't Care If Someone Decides to Loot'?","['Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot said of the looting, This is not legitimate First Amendment-protected speech ... This was straight-up felony, criminal conduct.']","After the police shooting of 20-year-old Latrell Allen in Chicago's Englewood community on the afternoon of Aug. 9, 2020, unrest in that city extended through that night and into the early morning hours of the following day, with looters hitting some stores in Chicagos wealthiest shopping district on North Michigan Avenue. Latrell Allen extended The following evening, members of the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement held a solidarity rally in that city with some of the people who had been arrested for looting the night before. Shortly after those events, social media users began circulating a meme stemming from that event, quoting a ""BLM leader & organizer"" named Ariel Atkins as saying, ""I don't care if someone decides to loot, because that makes sure that person eats or has clothes. Anything they want to take, they can, because these businesses have insurance"":  That was an accurate quote, according to Chicago NBC affiliate WMAQ-TV, who reported on the Aug. 10 event: reported Members of Black Lives Matter held a solidarity rally on Monday night [August 10] with the more than 100 individuals who were arrested after a night of looting and unrest in Chicago. The rally was held at the South Loop police station where organizers say those individuals are currently being held in custody. I dont care if someone decides to loot a Gucci or a Macys or a Nike store, because that makes sure that person eats, Ariel Atkins, a BLM organizer, said. That makes sure that person has clothes. Black Lives Matter Chicago organized the rally after overnight unrest throughout the city, with police saying that more than 100 individuals were taken into custody for a variety of offenses, including looting. That is reparations, Atkins said. Anything they wanted to take, they can take it because these businesses have insurance. Atkins said essentially the same thing a few days later, when she was interviewed by Chicago NPR station WBEZ on the subject of ""why she supports looting"": interviewed A lot of people are really attacking our pages. Theyre like, Oh, you support the looters. And yeah, we do, 100%. Thats reparations. And like however people choose to protest, especially if it was definitely in line with what happened with the shooting, which would be powerful to see people reacting ... without organizers just being like, Were angry and this is what were gonna do. Were gonna take the power back. I feel like these stores, these Macys, these Guccis, the PNC Banks, theyre not here for us. The city puts way more money and investment into spending time and protecting their spaces and making sure that they exist. And yet our people are constantly being pushed out of the city ... Unemployment is incredibly high, like we are in an incredible situation, and the fact that anybody gives a s*** about these businesses over what is happening in this city right now and the pain that people are in and the suffering that is taking place, I dont care. I will support the looters till the end of the day. If thats what they need to do in order to eat, then thats what youve got to do to eat .... The whole idea of criminality is based on racism anyway, because criminality is punishing people for things that they have needed to do to survive or just the way that society has affected them with white supremacist B.S. So its like her deciding what is criminal and what isnt. WMAQ-TV [Chicago].  ""Black Lives Matter Holds Rally Supporting Individuals Arrested in Chicago Looting Monday.""
  10 August 2020. Black, Curtis. &nbps; ""Latrell Allen Police Shooting Exposes Gaps in Body Camera and Foot Pursuit Policies.""
  The Chicago Reporter.  14 August 2020. Yoon-Ji Kang, Esther.  ""Officers Disrespected Englewood Residents Following Police Shooting, Activists Say.""
  WBEZ [Chicago].  10 August 2020. Wildeboer, Rob and Chip Mitchell.  ""Officers Disrespected Englewood Residents Following Police Shooting, Activists Say.""
  WBEZ [Chicago].  12 August 2020.",['insurance'],True,"After the police shooting of 20-year-old Latrell Allen in Chicago's Englewood community on the afternoon of Aug. 9, 2020, unrest in that city extended through that night and into the early morning hours of the following day, with looters hitting some stores in Chicagos wealthiest shopping district on North Michigan Avenue.That was an accurate quote, according to Chicago NBC affiliate WMAQ-TV, who reported on the Aug. 10 event:Atkins said essentially the same thing a few days later, when she was interviewed by Chicago NPR station WBEZ on the subject of ""why she supports looting"":"
Did Trump Tweet That South Dakota Should Close Its Border with California?,['A fake tweet fooled some.'],"Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And, please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease.  fighting Find out Read Submit Become a Founding Member CDC WHO In early July 2020, social media users shared a purported screen shot of a tweet that was made to look like it had been written by U.S. President Donald Trump. The tweet called on South Dakota to ""keep there [sic] border with California closed!""   Trump did travel to South Dakota to give a speech at Mount Rushmore on July 3, but he did not post the above tweet, which incorrectly states that the states of South Dakota and California share a border. The purported tweet doesn't appear on Trump's Twitter timeline on July 4, 2020, nor does it appear in a database that collects Trump's tweets or an archive that stores his deleted tweets. database archive Because we found no evidence that Trump posted the above tweet, we rate this claim ",['share'],False,"Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And, please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease. The purported tweet doesn't appear on Trump's Twitter timeline on July 4, 2020, nor does it appear in a database that collects Trump's tweets or an archive that stores his deleted tweets."
"Although California has the sixth largest economy in the world, we also have one of the highest poverty rates in the nation.",[]," Before announcing his bid for California governor in November 2016,Antonio Villaraigosasaid he went up and down this state on a listening tour. The former mayor of Los Angeles said he witnessed markers of the states economic vitality and also its extreme poverty. What I saw was two Californias, Villaraigosa said at theforum, hosted on June 6, 2017 in San Francisco by the Public Policy Institute of California. Villaraigosa then made a statement that included two bold claims PolitiFact California has examined individually in the past. What people dont realize about California is that although we have the sixth largest economy in world, we have one of the highest poverty rates in the nation, Villaraigosa said at the event. Villaraigosa makes his claim at about the 6:45 minute mark in this video by the Public Policy Institute of California. Well revisit our analysis on those claims below. First, heres some background on Villaraigosa and the 2018 California governors race. Governors race Villaraigosa is amongseveral prominent Democratscompeting in 2018 to succeed Jerry Brown as governor. Others already announced include California TreasurerJohn Chiang; Delaine Eastin, the states former superintendent for public instruction; andGavin Newsom, the states current lieutenant governor. Republican candidates include State AssemblymanTravis Allenof Orange County; John Cox, a venture capitalist from San Diego County and Rosie Grier, a Hall of Fame professional football player. Apollreleased in June 2017 showed a tightening race. Newsom was in the lead among all candidates, with 22 percent support from likely voters. Villaraigosa had 17 percent support, up from his 11 percent three months earlier. As part of ourTracking The Truthseries, PolitiFact California is fact-checking claims in the 2018 governors race. Tracking the Truth: Hear a claim you want fact-checked? Email us at[email protected], tweet us@CAPolitiFactor contact us onFacebook. Weve already checked one of Villaraigosas statements at the June 6, 2017 forum. He made theFalse claimthat California is currently home to one-quarter of the nations 300 poorest cities. He mischaracterized the results of astudy, which relied on data from 2013, when many of the states cities had not yet recovered from the Great Recession. Today, many of those same cities have experienced strong economic improvement. Sixth largest economy in the world? Turning to Villaraigosas bold claim involving the economy and poverty, well start by checking the first part: that California has the sixth largest economy in the world. This is a talking point California leaders love to make on national and international stages. We fact-checked this hypothetical comparison of the states economy against that of nations in July 2016 when State Senate LeaderKevin de Lenmade the same assertion at the Democratic National Convention. We rated itMostly Truebased on Californias 2.4 trillion GDP in 2015, which ranked sixth behind the United States, China, Japan, Germany and the United Kingdom and slightly above France and Brazil. The rankings came from the Brown Administration, which analyzed figures from the International Monetary Funds World Economic Outlook Database. The claim missed a completely True rating because it ignored Californias sky high cost of living and Silicon Valleys outsized role in the states economic growth, which speaks to Villaraigosas description of unequal economies across the state. In a separate set of rankings, the California Legislative Analysts Office, adjusting for the states high cost of living, reported in 2016 that the states GDP ranking dropped to 11th in the world. That placed it just below France and just above Mexico. The Brown Administration, not including cost of living, recently updated theGDP rankings for 2016. Californias now $2.60 trillion GDP remained in the sixth spot, though it was just a tick behind the United Kingdoms $2.62 trillion economy. Villaraigosas statement is accurate, but needs the same clarification about the states high cost of living. One of the highest poverty rates? The second part of Villaraigosas claim is that California has one of the highest poverty rates. We interpreted this to mean compared with other states in the nation. We know the state has struggled mightily with poverty. As an example, we ratedTruea claim by Republican Assembly Leader Chad Mayes in January that California has the highest poverty rate in the nation when comparing states and considering cost-of-living. At 20.6 percent, Californias poverty rate in 2015 was well above the national average of 15.1 percent, according to a U.S. Census Bureau report that factors in cost-of-living. Floridas 19 percent poverty rate ranked second. Unlike Mayes statement on poverty, however, Villaraigosas claim makes no mention of cost-of-living. Ignoring this factor, California would have the 17th highest poverty rate, not the first, according to the census bureau. Villaraigosas statement needs this key clarification. Our ruling Antonio Villaraigosa recently claimed California has the sixth largest economy in the world and one of the highest poverty rates in the nation. The facts show Villaraigosa was correct on both points. He omitted, however, the key point that Californias high cost-of-living drags down its economic output and accelerates its poverty. The candidate for governors statements would benefit from this additional information. We rate Villaraigosas claim Mostly True. MOSTLY TRUE The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information.","['Economy', 'Poverty', ""The 2018 California Governor's Race"", 'California']",True,"Before announcing his bid for California governor in November 2016,Antonio Villaraigosasaid he went up and down this state on a listening tour.What I saw was two Californias, Villaraigosa said at theforum, hosted on June 6, 2017 in San Francisco by the Public Policy Institute of California.Villaraigosa is amongseveral prominent Democratscompeting in 2018 to succeed Jerry Brown as governor. Others already announced include California TreasurerJohn Chiang; Delaine Eastin, the states former superintendent for public instruction; andGavin Newsom, the states current lieutenant governor.Republican candidates include State AssemblymanTravis Allenof Orange County; John Cox, a venture capitalist from San Diego County and Rosie Grier, a Hall of Fame professional football player.Apollreleased in June 2017 showed a tightening race. Newsom was in the lead among all candidates, with 22 percent support from likely voters. Villaraigosa had 17 percent support, up from his 11 percent three months earlier.As part of ourTracking The Truthseries, PolitiFact California is fact-checking claims in the 2018 governors race.Tracking the Truth: Hear a claim you want fact-checked? Email us at[email protected], tweet us@CAPolitiFactor contact us onFacebook.Weve already checked one of Villaraigosas statements at the June 6, 2017 forum. He made theFalse claimthat California is currently home to one-quarter of the nations 300 poorest cities. He mischaracterized the results of astudy, which relied on data from 2013, when many of the states cities had not yet recovered from the Great Recession. Today, many of those same cities have experienced strong economic improvement.We fact-checked this hypothetical comparison of the states economy against that of nations in July 2016 when State Senate LeaderKevin de Lenmade the same assertion at the Democratic National Convention.We rated itMostly Truebased on Californias 2.4 trillion GDP in 2015, which ranked sixth behind the United States, China, Japan, Germany and the United Kingdom and slightly above France and Brazil. The rankings came from the Brown Administration, which analyzed figures from the International Monetary Funds World Economic Outlook Database.The Brown Administration, not including cost of living, recently updated theGDP rankings for 2016. Californias now $2.60 trillion GDP remained in the sixth spot, though it was just a tick behind the United Kingdoms $2.62 trillion economy.We know the state has struggled mightily with poverty. As an example, we ratedTruea claim by Republican Assembly Leader Chad Mayes in January that California has the highest poverty rate in the nation when comparing states and considering cost-of-living."
Are Lukoil Gas Stations 'Russian Owned'?,"[""Americans outraged by Russia's invasion of Ukraine called for a boycott of Lukoil gas stations in the U.S. ""]","During Russia's invasion of Ukraine in early 2022, American social media users enthusiastically shared posts that called for a boycott of Lukoil gas stations on the East Coast, on the basis that they were Russian owned. As one very widely shared tweet summarized: social media users enthusiastically shared posts called boycott Russian summarized ""#BoycottRussia. Lukoil gas is Russian owned.""   wrote ""Fill your tank elsewhere. Lukoil is a Russian multinational corporation headquartered in Moscow. Their CEO, Vagit Alekperov, is a Russian oligarch worth an estimated $19.6 billion. Lukoil gas stations are all over PA, NJ and NY."" These posts undoubtedly contained a significant element of truth. Lukoil is indeed a large Russian-headquartered multinational petroleum and natural gas producer, with a U.S. subsidiary that oversees a network of gas stations, primarily in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and New York. Moreover, the company's billionaire president, Vagit Alekperov, has ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin. has ties However, Lukoil typically does not operate those U.S. gas stations itself. Rather, it operates on a franchise basis, meaning any successful boycott of Lukoil-branded gas stations would likely have a negligible effect on the parent company or its billionaire president, but could prove financially devastating for dozens of U.S. franchise owners and their hundreds of local employees. In brief, Lukoil itself might be ""Russian owned,"" but its U.S. gas stations are U.S.-operated and locally staffed. As such, we're issuing a rating of ""Mixture."" Lukoil emerged from the dissolving Soviet Union in the early 1990s, and entered the American market a decade later. According to the company's website, Lukoil acquired the American company Getty Oil in 2000, taking over and rebranding its existing network of gas stations. the company's website The first Lukoil-branded gas station was opened in the Chelsea neighborhood of Manhattan in September, 2003. Notably, the grand opening was attended by Putin himself  who was in the U.S. at that time for talks with then-President George W. Bush. In the photograph below, Putin can be seen outside the Manhattan Lukoil, with Alekperov to his right, and U.S. Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., to his left: attended by Putin himself  Russian President Vladimir Putin (C) and Lukoil President Vagit Alekperov (L) listen as U.S. Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY) (R) gestures as he speaks about U.S.-Russian relations during the opening of Lukoil's gasoline station September 26, 2003 in the Chelsea neighborhood of New York City. Lukoil, a Russian oil company, acquired Getty Petroleum Marketing Inc. and its 1,300 stations in November 2000. (Photo by Stephen Chernin/Getty Images)  At the time, Lukoil was reported to have taken over Getty's existing network of 1,300 gas stations, but by 2022, the number of Lukoil-branded gas stations in the United States had declined to around 230  most, if not all, located in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and New York.  Importantly, most  if not all  of those gas stations are operated as franchises. Franchising is a popular business model in the United States, with the best-known examples being fast food restaurants such as McDonald's and convenience stores like 7-Eleven.  popular business model in the United States Roughly speaking, the franchisee (local entrepreneur) pays the franchisor (main company) some fees: typically an up-front franchise fee, and regular royalties  usually a percentage cut of their income from sales. In return, the franchisor gives the franchisee the right to operate a business using their well-known brand, for a defined period of time, usually several years. The company might also provide advice or assistance with logistics, advertising, marketing, and so on. The local entrepreneur is also contractually obliged to operate the business in accordance with certain prescribed methods, customer service models, and so on. Lukoil  or more specifically, Lukoil North America, a Delaware-registered LLC with an address in Moorestown, New Jersey offers three-year leases to franchisees in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and New York. In fact, as of March 2, the company's website listed for lease 13 different gas station sites in those states: Lukoil North America, a Delaware-registered LLC 13 different gas station sites   offer to lease"" document The aforementioned Bidder is submitting the below rental offer to lease the LUKOIL branded service station listed above, and is prepared to enter into an Agreement with LNA for the lease of the same, subject to the conditions specified below. The lease term is generally three (3) years, however a longer term can be approved, at LNA's discretion, provided a sufficient site improvement or supply commitment is made to justify a longer term.   Google post ""LUKOIL gas stations in the United States are independently owned and operated by local business owners who are members of the communities they serve, and 100% of the gasoline and diesel fuel sold is sourced from American oil refiners."" Snopes asked Lukoil for details on the exact number of Lukoil-branded gas stations in the United States, and the number of those operated on a franchise basis, if not all. We also asked for precise details about the company's revenue from franchise fees, royalties and/or rent paid by U.S. franchisees, but we did not receive a response in time for publication.  However, Lukoil's 2021 financial results, which were published on March 2, gave an indication of the relatively small role of U.S. gas station revenue in the company's overall income, most of which stems from oil and gas exploration and production inside Russia. Lukoil's 2021 financial results In 2021, according to Lukoil, the company had total sales of 9.4 trillion rubles ($88 billion), and its earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA) were 1.4 trillion rubles ($13 billion). Of that $13 billion, just 8.3% ($1 billion) was made up of ""refining, marketing and distribution"" outside Russia. Although a more detailed breakdown is not available, it is reasonable to suppose that income related specifically to U.S. gas stations made up an even smaller fraction of that $1 billion, given that Lukoil refines, markets, and distributes petroleum in several other countries throughout the world.  It's also not clear whether, in the event of an effective widespread boycott of U.S. Lukoil-branded gas stations, franchisees would still be obliged to continue paying fees and rent to Lukoil North America even if they had no income from gas or convenience store sales. Therefore, a successful boycott could require financial devastation  if not ruination  among many dozens of local entrepreneurs in the United States, as well as sudden unemployment for their hundreds of workers, in order to achieve what would be only a very small financial impact on the Russian parent company, or its bosses in Moscow.  On March 3, Lukoil's board of directors issued a statement in which they expressed their ""deepest concerns about the tragic events in Ukraine,"" and called for an immediate end to the conflict and a ""lasting ceasefire."" issued a statement Maass, Peter. The Triumph of the Quiet Tycoon. The New York Times, 1 Aug. 2004. NYTimes.com, https://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/01/magazine/the-triumph-of-the-quiet-tycoon.html. PRESS RELEASE MARCH 02, 2022 LUKOIL RELEASES FINANCIAL RESULTS UNDER IFRS FOR 2021 PJSC LUKOIL Today Released Its Audited Consol. https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache%3AnFU75r0Wkh4J%3Ahttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.lukoil.com%2Fapi%2Fpresscenter%2Fexportpressrelease%3Fid%3D577486+&cd=7&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us. Accessed 3 Mar. 2022. Updated [March 4, 2022]: Added reference to the Lukoil board of directors March 3 statement about the Russian invasion of Ukraine. ",['taxes'],NEI,"During Russia's invasion of Ukraine in early 2022, American social media users enthusiastically shared posts that called for a boycott of Lukoil gas stations on the East Coast, on the basis that they were Russian owned. As one very widely shared tweet summarized:These posts undoubtedly contained a significant element of truth. Lukoil is indeed a large Russian-headquartered multinational petroleum and natural gas producer, with a U.S. subsidiary that oversees a network of gas stations, primarily in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and New York. Moreover, the company's billionaire president, Vagit Alekperov, has ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin.Lukoil emerged from the dissolving Soviet Union in the early 1990s, and entered the American market a decade later. According to the company's website, Lukoil acquired the American company Getty Oil in 2000, taking over and rebranding its existing network of gas stations.The first Lukoil-branded gas station was opened in the Chelsea neighborhood of Manhattan in September, 2003. Notably, the grand opening was attended by Putin himself  who was in the U.S. at that time for talks with then-President George W. Bush. In the photograph below, Putin can be seen outside the Manhattan Lukoil, with Alekperov to his right, and U.S. Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., to his left: Russian President Vladimir Putin (C) and Lukoil President Vagit Alekperov (L) listen as U.S. Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY) (R) gestures as he speaks about U.S.-Russian relations during the opening of Lukoil's gasoline station September 26, 2003 in the Chelsea neighborhood of New York City. Lukoil, a Russian oil company, acquired Getty Petroleum Marketing Inc. and its 1,300 stations in November 2000. (Photo by Stephen Chernin/Getty Images)Importantly, most  if not all  of those gas stations are operated as franchises. Franchising is a popular business model in the United States, with the best-known examples being fast food restaurants such as McDonald's and convenience stores like 7-Eleven. Lukoil  or more specifically, Lukoil North America, a Delaware-registered LLC with an address in Moorestown, New Jersey offers three-year leases to franchisees in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and New York. In fact, as of March 2, the company's website listed for lease 13 different gas station sites in those states:However, Lukoil's 2021 financial results, which were published on March 2, gave an indication of the relatively small role of U.S. gas station revenue in the company's overall income, most of which stems from oil and gas exploration and production inside Russia.On March 3, Lukoil's board of directors issued a statement in which they expressed their ""deepest concerns about the tragic events in Ukraine,"" and called for an immediate end to the conflict and a ""lasting ceasefire."""
Says Donald Trumps proposed tax treatment of hedge fund managers makes the current loophole even worse.,[],"Hillary Clinton is attacking DonaldTrumps tax plan, saying it actually benefits the hedge fund managers Trump had promised to cut down to size. Now, before releasing his plan, Trump said, Hedge fund guys are getting away with murder. And he added, Theyll pay more,  Clinton said. Then his plan came out. And it actually makes the current loophole even worse. It gives hedge-fund managers a special tax rate thats lower than what many middle-class families pay, Clinton continuedin the June 21, 2016, speech. And I did have to look twice because I didnt believe it. Under Donald Trumps plan, these Wall Street millionaires will pay a lower tax rate than many working people. Trumps plan does roll back one high-profile advantage for hedge fund partners. Is Clinton right to say they still come out ahead? Trump took an aggressive position on tax rates for hedge fund managers during his fight for the Republican nomination. In an interview with CBS in August, Trumpcalledthem paper pushers who did not build this country. In a Republicandebatein September, Trump said his tax plan would make them pay more. The hedge fund guys wont like me as much as they like me right now. I know them all, but theyll pay more, Trump said. After the Republican debate, Trump released the outline of histax plan. Trumps plan eliminates the so-called carried interest tax loophole, which allows general partners in private investment firms (including most hedge fund managers) to treat some of their income as income from investments, or capital gains, subject to a top tax rate of 23.8 percent, instead of the much higher tax rate for ordinary income (43.4 percent). Under Trumps plan, income from carried interest would no longer be treated as capital gains. Tax rates for ordinary income tops out at 25 percent under Trumps plan. This looks like a hike in line with Trumps promises. Except. Along with private equity and venture capital funds, many hedge funds are structured as partnerships. Under Trumps plan, income through a business partnership is taxed at a rate of no more than 15 percent, significantly less than the 23.8 percent they previously paid, according to ananalysisof Trumps tax plan from the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center. Eliminating the carried interest loophole actually helps these hedge fund managers under Trumps plan. If carried interest was still treated as capital gains, it could be taxed at the top rate for capital gains in the plan (20 percent), higher than the fixed 15 percent tax for partnership income. Trumps plan presents the discounted rate for partnership income as a way to help the small businesses that are the true engine of our economy. It also helps large businesses and wealthy financiers who structure their businesses as partnerships, including the hedge funds managers he attacked in his campaign. Clinton also said that rates for hedge fund managers would be lower than for middle-class families under Trumps plan. Defining the middle class can be tricky, but in thePew Research Centers rangeof $42,000 to $125,000 for a household of three in 2014, a substantial number of middle-class households would make enough to qualify for a marginal tax rate of more than 15 percent if Trumps plan were enacted. Not all of these people would pay more than 15 percent overall, according to Bob Williams at the Tax Policy Center, and it would be difficult to say how many middle-income people would pay more than hedge fund managers once the many different variables involved played out. But some would, Williams wrote in an email. In May,Politicoreportedthat the Trump campaign had engaged two economists to craft a new tax plan. The Trump campaign has not confirmed whether they plan to re-write their tax plan, and did not respond toPoliticosrequest for comment. The tax plan announced in September remains on Trump's website, and is the basis of this article. The Trump campaign did not respond to our request for comment on this article. Our ruling Clinton said Trumps proposed tax rate for hedge fund managers makes the current loophole even worse. She has a point. By setting a lower tax rate for income from business partnerships, Trumps tax plan would benefit many hedge fund managers. Though the plan would cut tax rates for middle-class families as well, the cuts that would apply to most hedge fund managers are steeper and their resulting tax rate is lower. Trump promised that his tax plan would roll back advantages for hedge fund managers. Instead, in most cases, it would improve their position. We rate the statement True.","['National', 'Taxes']",True,"Hillary Clinton is attacking DonaldTrumps tax plan, saying it actually benefits the hedge fund managers Trump had promised to cut down to size.It gives hedge-fund managers a special tax rate thats lower than what many middle-class families pay, Clinton continuedin the June 21, 2016, speech. And I did have to look twice because I didnt believe it. Under Donald Trumps plan, these Wall Street millionaires will pay a lower tax rate than many working people.Trump took an aggressive position on tax rates for hedge fund managers during his fight for the Republican nomination. In an interview with CBS in August, Trumpcalledthem paper pushers who did not build this country. In a Republicandebatein September, Trump said his tax plan would make them pay more.After the Republican debate, Trump released the outline of histax plan.Along with private equity and venture capital funds, many hedge funds are structured as partnerships. Under Trumps plan, income through a business partnership is taxed at a rate of no more than 15 percent, significantly less than the 23.8 percent they previously paid, according to ananalysisof Trumps tax plan from the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center.Clinton also said that rates for hedge fund managers would be lower than for middle-class families under Trumps plan. Defining the middle class can be tricky, but in thePew Research Centers rangeof $42,000 to $125,000 for a household of three in 2014, a substantial number of middle-class households would make enough to qualify for a marginal tax rate of more than 15 percent if Trumps plan were enacted.In May,Politicoreportedthat the Trump campaign had engaged two economists to craft a new tax plan. The Trump campaign has not confirmed whether they plan to re-write their tax plan, and did not respond toPoliticosrequest for comment. The tax plan announced in September remains on Trump's website, and is the basis of this article."
Was it Donald Trump who ferried stranded troops using his personal aircraft?,['A story that Donald Trump personally sent out an airplane to transport hundreds of stranded U.S. Marines home is based on inaccurate information.'],"In May 2016, syndicated talk radio host Sean Hannity aired an item claiming that Donald Trump had sent a plane to give 200 stranded U.S. Marines a much-needed ride home after Operation Desert Storm in 1991. When Corporal Ryan Stickney and 200 of his fellow Marines prepared to return to their families after Operation Desert Storm in 1991, a logistics error forced them to turn to a surprising source for a ride home: Donald J. Trump. Today, Stickney would like to say ""thank you."" Stickney, a squad leader in a TOW company of a Marine reserve unit based in Miami, FL, spent approximately six months in Saudi Arabia during the Gulf War between 1990 and 1991. Upon his unit's return to the United States, the former Marine says the group spent several weeks decompressing at Camp Lejeune in North Carolina before heading back to Miami. Stickney recalls being told that a mistake had been made within the logistics unit and that an aircraft wasn't available to take the Marines home on their scheduled departure date. This, according to Stickney, is where Donald Trump comes in. ""The way the story was told to us was that Mr. Trump found out about it and sent the airline down to take care of us. And that's all we knew ... I remember asking, 'Who is Donald Trump?' I truly didn't know anything about him,"" the former Marine said. Corporal Stickney snapped a photo to remember the day. The story came up several times during the course of the 2016 presidential campaign (Cpl. Stickney even told it in person at a Trump rally), but skeptics questioned its validity despite a statement from the Trump campaign allegedly confirming it: ""The Trump campaign has confirmed to Hannity.com that Mr. Trump did indeed send his plane to make two trips from North Carolina to Miami, Florida, to transport over 200 Gulf War Marines back home. No further details were provided."" The few details we do have about Trump's alleged participation don't, in fact, add up. We can confirm, based on military records, that the 209-member Anti-Tank (TOW) Company, part of the 8th Tank Battalion for Operation Desert Shield, deployed to Camp LeJeune, North Carolina, from their home base in Miami on 26 November 1990. We can also confirm that the company deployed from Camp LeJeune to Saudi Arabia on 22 December, served throughout the combat phase of Operation Desert Storm (from 17 January to 28 February 1991), and returned to North Carolina in April. A command chronology of the deployment notes that a ""Cpl. Stickney"" was among those receiving certificates of commendation. We can also confirm, via a 23 April 1991 article from the Sun-Sentinel, that a series of flight delays stalled the company's homecoming to Miami on 22 April, but that they finally did arrive home after being split across two separate flights. Stickney's photograph shows that he arrived on a plane marked ""Trump,"" but it also proves something else: that even if Trump did send the plane, it wasn't his private jet. That Trump didn't send the pictured plane at all was something noted by a sharp-eyed reader, who wrote to us to note: First, that's not Trump's private 727 jet; it's one of the jets in the Trump Shuttle fleet. I wondered if maybe Trump's jet back in those days was painted differently, so I researched his private jet as of April 1991. I found that Trump was deep in the red financially and having to liquidate assets, one of which was his personal 727. The sale of that jet was finalized in the first week of May 1991, making it highly unlikely he was also flying reservists around while discussing the sale at the end of April. The markings of the plane in Stickney's photo match those of the Trump Shuttle fleet, so the question becomes: Did Trump himself send a Trump Shuttle to retrieve the stranded Marines, or was it procured some other way? To arrive at an answer, it's necessary to go into a bit of the history of Trump Shuttle. A July 2015 article in NYC Aviation detailed Trump's short-lived airline industry involvement, beginning with an entirely separate carrier, Eastern Air Shuttle, which he immediately rebranded with his own name. CEO Frank Lorenzo began selling off assets, including the prized Shuttle operation. Donald Trump placed a winning bid for the Shuttle, its aircraft, and landing slots at LaGuardia and National for $380 million, financed through no less than 22 banks. The newly branded Trump Shuttle took to the skies on June 7, 1989. Timing is everything in business, and unfortunately for Trump, he entered the airline game at the wrong time. The U.S. entered an economic recession in the late '80s, leading many corporations to cut back on business travel. In addition, tensions in the Middle East leading up to the first Gulf War caused oil prices to spike. This one-two punch was devastating for the airline industry and led to the demise of several airlines, including Eastern and Pan Am. Given these circumstances, the Trump Shuttle lost money, and with Trump continuing to accumulate debt in his other ventures, it was becoming increasingly difficult to pay back the loans taken to purchase the airline. In September 1990, Trump defaulted on his loan, and control of the airline went back to the banks led by Citibank. Given that the bankers, not Donald Trump, owned Trump Shuttle from September 1990 until it was sold to U.S. Air in 1996, Trump wasn't in a position to send the planes anywhere, much less on a spur-of-the-moment Marine transport mission. So who did? As it turns out, the U.S. military itself chartered the flights—a common practice in the day, according to an 11 August 2016 report by The Washington Post: Lt. Gen. Vernon J. Kondra, now retired, was in charge of all military airlift operations. He said that relying on commercial carriers freed up the military cargo aircraft for equipment transport. Kondra's notes on the flight are declassified and available online and show a contract for Trump Shuttle to ""move troops in [the] continental United States"" during the 1990-91 timeframe. There are several references to a 1990-91 contract for Trump Shuttle to carry personnel across the United States, between the East and West Coasts, on a standard LaGuardia-Dover-Charleston-Travis-Chord-Kelly-Dover-LaGuardia run. ""It worked very well, and the crews loved it, and really thought that we'd done something special for them,"" Kondra recalled in the oral history. ""It was a helluva lot better than using 141s [cargo craft], which we could use for something else."" But Kondra said that the notion that Trump personally arranged to help the stranded soldiers made little sense. ""I certainly was not aware of that. It does not sound reasonable that it would happen like that. It would not fit in with how we did business. I don't even know how he would have known there was a need."" So the real story underlying the claim that Donald Trump personally sent his jet to pick up stranded soldiers and return them to the U.S. is that the military paid to charter a plane from an airline Trump no longer owned in order to bring those service personnel home.",['debt'],False,"In May 2016, syndicated talk radio host Sean Hannity aired an item claiming that Donald Trump had sent a plane to give 200 stranded U.S. marines a much-needed ride home after Operation Desert Storm in 1991:The story came up several times during the course of the 2016 presidential campaign (Cpl. Stickney even told it in person at a Trump rally), but skeptics questioned its validity despite a statement from the Trump campaign allegedly confirming it: ""The Trump campaign has confirmed to Hannity.com that Mr. Trump did indeed send his plane to make two trips from North Carolina to Miami, Florida to transport over 200 Gulf War Marines back home. No further details were provided.""We can confirm, based on military records, that the 209-member Anti-Tank (TOW) Company, part of the 8th Tank Battalion for Operation Desert Shield, deployed to Camp LeJeune, North Carolina, from their home base in Miami on 26 November 1990. And we can confirm that the company deployed from Camp LeJeune to Saudi Arabia on 22 December, served throughout the combat phase of Operation Desert Storm (from 17 January to 28 February 1991), and returned to North Carolina in April. A command chronology of the deployment notes that a ""Cpl. Stickey"" was among those receiving certificates of commendation.We can also confirm, via a 23 April 1991 article from the Sun-Sentinel, that a series of flight delays stalled the company's homecoming to Miami on 22 April, but that they finally did arrive home after split across two separate flights. Stickney's photograph shows that he arrived on a plane marked ""Trump,"" but it also proves something else: that even if Trump did send the plane, it wasn't his private jet.First, thats not Trumps private 727 jet; its one of the jets in the Trump Shuttle fleet. I wondered if maybe Trumps jet back in those days was painted differently, so I researched his private jet as of April 1991. I found that Trump was deep in the red, financially, and having to liquidate assets, one of which was his personal 727. The sale of that jet was finalized in the first week of May 1991, making it highly unlikely he was also flying reservists around while discussing the sale at the end of April.To arrive at an answer, it's necessary to go into a bit of the history of Trump Shuttle. A July 2015 article in NYC Aviation detailed Trump's short-lived airline industry involvement, beginning with an entirely separate carrier, Eastern Air Shuttle, which he immediately rebranded with his own name:Lt. Gen. Vernon J. Kondra, now retired, was in charge of all military airlift operations. He said that relying on commercial carriers freed up the military cargo aircraft for equipment transport.Kondra's notes on the flight are declassified and available online and show a contract for Trump Shuttle to ""move troops in [the] continental United States"" during the 1990-91 timeframe:"
Who is responsible for the rise in the debt?,['A chart from 2011 compared changes in the U.S. national debt over the last several presidencies.'],"Debt is typically a major campaign issue in elections, from the municipal level all the way up to the office of the President of the United States. Candidates tout their accomplishments in balancing budgets or reducing government debt as examples of fiscal prudence while pointing to increased debts during their opponents' administrations as indicators of profligate and wasteful spending of taxpayers' money. The chart reproduced above, which was posted to the Flickr account of House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, attempts to reverse conventional political stereotypes by portraying recent Republican presidents as responsible for significant increases in the national debt, while showing recent Democratic presidents as responsible for much lower increases in the level of debt. As a first step in evaluating this chart, we must determine the applicable definition of ""debt."" In general, the term ""public debt"" (or ""debt held by the public"") refers to money borrowed by the government through the issuance and sale of securities, government bonds, and bills. It includes federal debt held by all investors outside of the federal government, including individuals, corporations, state or local governments, the Federal Reserve banking system, and foreign governments. Another form of debt is ""intragovernmental debt"" (or ""debt held by government accounts""), which refers to money that the government has borrowed from itself, such as when the U.S. government invests money from federal savings programs like Medicare and the Social Security trust fund by purchasing its own treasury securities. A variety of names have been applied to the total of these two forms of debt, including ""gross federal debt,"" ""total public debt,"" and ""national debt."" Although this chart is labeled as presenting a ""percent increase in public debt,"" it actually uses figures corresponding to the total described as ""gross federal debt"" above (i.e., a combination of debt held by the public and debt held by government accounts, rather than just the former). We checked the numbers in this chart by using (for pre-1993 years) the U.S. Treasury's Monthly Statement of the Public Debt (MSPD), noting the total debt reported as of January 31 of each relevant year, and (for 1993 onwards) the Treasury's The Debt to the Penny and Who Holds It application, noting the total debt reported as of Inauguration Day of each relevant year. From these records, we gleaned the following information: Ronald Reagan: Took office January 1981. Total debt: $848 billion. Left office January 1989. Total debt: $2,698 billion. Percent change in total debt: +218%. George H.W. Bush: Took office January 1989. Total debt: $2,698 billion. Left office January 20, 1993. Total debt: $4,188 billion. Percent change in total debt: +55%. Bill Clinton: Took office January 20, 1993. Total debt: $4,188 billion. Left office January 20, 2001. Total debt: $5,728 billion. Percent change in total debt: +37%. George W. Bush: Took office January 20, 2001. Total debt: $5,728 billion. Left office January 20, 2009. Total debt: $10,627 billion. Percent change in total debt: +86%. Barack Obama: Took office January 20, 2009. Total debt: $10,627 billion. Total debt (as of the end of April 2011): $14,288 billion. Percent change in total debt: +34%. As far as raw numbers go, the chart is reasonably accurate (although our calculations produced a somewhat higher debt increase for Ronald Reagan than reported). That said, we must consider how valuable these numbers are; whether by themselves they present a reasonable comparative measure of presidential fiscal responsibility. In that regard, one could find several aspects to take issue with: the chart isn't a true comparison of equals, as it includes three presidents who served two full terms (Reagan, Clinton, and George W. Bush), a president who served one term (George H.W. Bush), and a president who served half a term (Obama). Obviously, the longer a president holds office, the greater the opportunity for him to influence the debt, and certainly (barring a radical change in current circumstances) the increase reported for Barack Obama would be considerably higher by the time he left office. All presidents come into office with policies and budgets that were put into place by their predecessors in the White House and Congress, and they all pass the same along to their successors when they leave office. Therefore, determining how much of the change in debt that occurs during a given president's administration is actually the result of his actions (rather than the consequence of factors over which he had little or no influence) would require a much more complex analysis than the one presented here. Which is the best measure of debt for this purpose: public debt, intragovernmental debt, or a combination of the two? As noted in the General Accounting Office's FAQ on Federal Debt, they represent rather different concepts: Debt held by the public approximates current federal demand on credit markets. It represents a burden on today's economy, and the interest paid on this debt represents a burden on current taxpayers. Federal borrowing from the public absorbs resources available for private investment and may put upward pressure on interest rates. Further, debt held by the public is the accumulation of what the federal government borrowed in the past and is reported as a liability on the balance sheet of the government's consolidated financial statements. In contrast, debt held by government accounts (intragovernmental debt) and the interest on it represent a claim on future resources. This debt performs largely an internal accounting function. Special federal securities credited to government accounts (primarily trust funds) represent the cumulative surpluses of these accounts that have been lent to the general fund. These transactions net out on the government's consolidated financial statements. Debt issued to government accounts does not affect today's economy and does not currently compete with the private sector for available funds in the credit market. Are plain percentage changes in the national debt level a useful figure, or do they need to be placed in context to have relevance? Some would argue, for example, that the Debt-to-GDP ratio is a better measure of economic health relative to the national debt than raw debt figures alone, and a chart that tracked the change in that ratio over the last several presidencies would paint a significantly different picture of debt levels than the one displayed above. All in all, this is a case of relatively accurate information that is of marginal value due to a lack of proper comparative context.",['economy'],True,"The chart reproduced above, which was posted to the Flickr account of House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, attempted to reverse conventional political stereotypes by portraying recent Republican presidents as responsible for huge increases in the national debt, while showing recent Democratic presidents as responsible for much lower increases in the level of debt.  Although this chart is labeled as presenting a ""percent increase in public debt,"" it actually uses figures corresponding to the total described as ""gross federal debt"" above (i.e., a combination of debt held by the public and debt held by government accounts, rather than just the former).  We checked the numbers in this chart by using (for pre-1993 years) the U.S. Treasury's Monthly Statement of the Public Debt (MSPD), noting the total debt reported as of January 31 of each relevant year, and (for 1993 onwards) the Treasury's The Debt to the Penny and Who Holds It application, noting the total debt reported as of Inauguration Day of each relevant year. Which is the best measure of debt for this purpose: public debt, intragovernmental debt, or a combination of the two?  As noted in the General Accounting Office's FAQ on Federal Debt, they represent rather different concepts: Are plain percentage changes in the national debt level a useful figure, or do they need to be placed in context to have relevance?  Some would argue, for example, that the Debt-to-GDP ratio is a better measure of economic health relative to the national debt than raw debt figures alone, and a chart which tracked the change in that ratio over the last several presidencies would paint a significantly different picture of debt levels than the one displayed above."
'Clear Button' Fraud,"[""Do gasoline purchasers who fail to press the 'Clear' button on gas pumps after refueling risk additional charges on their credit/debit cards?""]"," Claim:  Gasoline purchasers who fail to press the ""Clear"" button on gas pumps after refueling risk additional charges appearing on their credit/debit cards.  Examples:  [Collected via e-mail, May 2008] Jim just told me about something that happened to one of his coworkers.  She used her credit/debit card to purchase gas at the pump (like most of us do). She received her receipt like normal. However, when she checked her statement, there were 2 $50 charges added in addition to her purchase. Upon investigation, she found out that because she did not press the 'clear' button on the pump, the employee inside the store was able to use her card to purchase his/her own gas!  To keep this from happening, after you get your receipt, you must press the 'CLEAR' button or your information will be stored until the next customer inserts their card. Be sure to tell all your friends/family so that this doesn't happen to them!  [Collected via e-mail, February 2010] A friend just told me about something that happened to one of his coworkers. She used her credit/debit card to purchase gas at the pump (like most ofus do).She received her receipt like normal. However, when she checked her statement, there were 2  $50.00 charges added in addition to her purchase.  Upon investigation, she found out that because she did not press the 'clear' button on the pump, the employee inside the store was able to use her card to purchase his/her own gas! To keep this from happening, after you get your receipt, you must press the 'CLEAR' button or your information will be stored until the next customer inserts their card. Be sure to tell all your friends/family so that this doesn't happen to them. I had never noticed the clear button but I gotgas the other day and sure enough it is there.  I shall be using it from now on. Origins:  This heads-up about pressing the 'clear' button after purchasing gasoline at a pump using a credit or debit card began appearing in inboxes in early May 2008.  Those in the know say there's nothing to this notion that pressing the 'clear' button after refueling will safeguard the pump's user from having his credit card accessed by future users, or indeed, have any other effect. As W. Michael Hardin, an employee of Dresser Wayne, a manufacturer of gas station fuel dispensing units, says: ""If a fuel dispenser is operating in its normal mode, the way it was designed to work, your transaction is complete as soon as you hang  up the nozzle.  There is no need to do anything else at that point or press any buttons.  If for some reason you hang up the nozzle incorrectly, and the transaction does not complete, a receipt will not be printed, which would be an indication that something is wrong.""   In other words, a properly functioning gas pump will conclude its transaction when its nozzle is returned to its cradle. There is no magic to be had from pressing the 'clear' button: a gas pump that is working the way it should will have already closed the transaction by that point, and a misfunctioning one isn't going to be prompted into righting itself by your mashing the 'clear' button a few times.  Look instead to your receipt. That the pump dispensed one after you recradled the gas nozzle is a sign that all went well. If a receipt does not present itself, a trip inside the gas station to discuss the matter with the clerk on duty is in order. Some have been taken in by the false alert, such as the Arapahoe County Sheriff's Office which was moved to post the warning on its web site. (That office did subsequently post a retraction which set the matter straight.) retraction While some dishonest gas station employees have run additional charges through customers' credit and debit cards, this form of crime is usually a matter of the miscreants' charging some cards two or more times to cover for other fuel purchases paid in cash (which was pocketed by the thieving employees, with the false charges laid against the credit or debit cards of victims used to account for the decrease in the station's fuel inventory). In May 2008, two employees of a gas station in Hopatcong, New Jersey, were caught and charged with theft for attempting to run such a scheme. However, a far more likely threat to the sanctity of one's credit or debit card at a gas station is posed by those who, during the process of refueling their own vehicles, surreptitiously affix 'skimmers' to card-reading mechanisms at gas pumps. (Skimmers collect data from the magnetic strips of cards, information which is later copied to counterfeit cards and used to empty bank accounts or to run up charges against credit accounts.) After installing the skimmers, the thieves quietly withdraw and return later to retrieve their data-enriched devices. Should you discover you've been the victim of any sort of credit or debit card fraud, contact your bank immediately.  The sooner you can get in touch with them, and the more information you can provide about where you used the now-compromised card, the better. Regarding debit cards, keep in mind that they do not afford users the same level of protection against fraud that credit cards do. As a general precaution, make it your practice to examine your checking account history and balance several times a month rather than waiting for a statement to arrive in the mail. Report lost cards or suspected unauthorized use immediately. (Generally, the faster you report an incorrect or fraudulent charge, the less you will be liable for.)  Consider using credit cards instead of debit cards whenever possible because it is often easier to get unauthorized charges reversed from such instruments. Also, having the problem isolated to your credit card rather than your debit card means not having to deal with the headache of bounced checks during the time it takes to get the matter straightened out. Barbara ""credit where credit's due"" Mikkelson Last updated:   19 June 2014    Moszczynski, Joe.  ""Four More Step Up in Gas Station Credit Scam.""   The [Newark] Star-Ledger.  15 May 2008  (p. 41).",['credit'],False,"Some have been taken in by the false alert, such as the Arapahoe County Sheriff's Office which was moved to post the warning on its web site. (That office did subsequently post a retraction which set the matter straight.)"
California has the sixth largest economy on planet Earth.,[],"UPDATE: Since publication, California's economy has moved up to the fifth largest in the world, according to data from the U.S. Department of Commerce and reported in May 2018 in the Sacramento Bee. Its 2017 GDP was $2.747 trillion, surpassing the United Kingdom's $2.625 trillion GDP. State Senate leader Kevin de León spotlighted California's economic and social achievements during his speech this week at the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia. The Democrat from Los Angeles touted the state's newly established $15 per hour minimum wage, efforts to keep college affordable, and California's hundreds of thousands of clean energy jobs. ""We've made unprecedented progress in every area,"" de León told a cheering crowd. ""And when we elect Hillary Clinton as our next president, I know that our progress will be America's progress."" The state senator then repeated a talking point California leaders love to make on national and international stages about the size of the state's economy: ""These are the progressive policies that have made California the sixth largest economy on planet Earth,"" de León said. We won't wade into the debate over whether progressive or other policies have positioned the state's economy on such a high perch. But we will examine the provocative claim of California being the sixth largest economy on planet Earth by itself. State Senate leader Kevin de León makes this claim at the 1:45 minute mark in this video. Our research shows that state leaders have made this hypothetical comparison for years, examining California's gross domestic product against nations across the globe. With nearly 40 million people, the state has a larger population than many countries. It also boasts a diverse set of industries, from technology to tourism and entertainment. In June, Gov. Jerry Brown's administration released figures showing California, with a GDP of more than $2.4 trillion in 2015, had jumped two spots in these unique world rankings, ahead of France and Brazil, and into sixth place behind the United Kingdom. First on the list is the United States, followed by China, Japan, and Germany. California's place on the list has fluctuated over time; it had been 10th as recently as 2012 due to the effects of the financial and housing slumps. The rankings use International Monetary Fund data. California is the only state on the list of nations. Experts have said California's rise in the rankings reflects its strong economic growth compared with the rest of the world. They have cited Silicon Valley's continued tech boom as a critical factor. ""It speaks to California doing relatively well in a sluggish global economy,"" Jeff Michael, director of the University of the Pacific's Center for Business and Policy Research, told the Sacramento Bee in June. A more complex picture emerges from de León's statement, made in a short 4-minute speech, which did not include much context. When adjusting for the state's high cost of living, California's GDP ranking drops to 11th in the world, according to the California Legislative Analyst's Office. A tweet on June 14, 2016, from California's nonpartisan Legislative Analyst's Office noted this. Carson Bruno, who studies California policy at the conservative Hoover Institution, says there's a lot missing from the sixth largest economy claim. ""In California, housing costs more; electricity and gas cost more; and even most goods and services cost more than the national average,"" he wrote in a post on RealClearMarkets.com. ""In many respects, California's cost of living is much more like a Western European nation than it is like the rest of the U.S."" The widely reported global rankings ignore this reality. De León's spokesman did not respond to a request for comment. Our rating: State Senate leader Kevin de León recently claimed at the Democratic National Convention that California has the sixth largest economy on planet Earth. This hypothetical comparison rests on California's $2.4 trillion GDP, which moved slightly above that of France and Brazil in 2015 to sixth in the world. The ranking, and de León's statement, however, ignore California's sky-high cost of living and Silicon Valley's role in the state's economic growth. The state's GDP drops several places when adjusted for cost of living. De León's statement, while accurate, could have used this additional information or clarification. We rate his claim Mostly True. MOSTLY TRUE: The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information. Click here for more on the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check. Share the Facts Widget Embed.","['Economy', 'Housing', 'California']",True,"UPDATE: Since publication, Californias economy moved up to the fifth largest in the world, according to data by the U.S. Department of Commerce and reported in May 2018 in theSacramento Bee. Its 2017 GDP was $2.747 trillion, surpassing the United Kingdoms $2.625 trillion GDP.In June, Gov. Jerry Browns administrationreleased figuresshowing California, with a GDP of more than $2.4 trillion in 2015 had jumped two spots in these unique world rankings ahead of France and Brazil and into sixth place behind the United Kingdom.It speaks to California doing relatively well in a sluggish global economy, Jeff Michael, director of the University of the Pacifics Center for Business and Policy Research,told the Sacramento Beein June.In California, housing costs more; electricity and gas cost more; and even most goods and services cost more than the national average, he wrote in apost on RealClearMarkets.com. In many respects California's cost of living is much more like a Western European nation than it is like the rest of the U.S. The widely reported global rankings ignore this reality.Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check.Share the Facts Widget Embed"
"Did Lowe's Donate $25M to Minority-Owned Businesses, While Home Depot Founder Gave to Trump?",['A meme comparing political involvement of the home improvement chains left out some context.'],"In early June 2020, a meme comparing two popular U.S. home improvement chains spread across social media:   The facts presented are true, but some context was missing. It's true that Lowe's has created a $25 million grant for minority-owned small businesses trying to reopen after being forced to close due to the COVID-19 coronavirus disease pandemic. As CNBC reported on May 20, 2020: grant CNBC reported Lowes is dishing out the funds to help small businesses, especially home improvement professionals, in need of masks, personal protective equipment and other supplies to operate safely. The new funds follow $340 million of support the home improvement retailer provided for Covid-19 response activities in the first quarter. These are going to be minority businesses and other businesses that are now starting to reopen, CEO Marvin Ellison told CNBCs Jim Cramer in a Mad Money interview. So we just want to continue to not only run a good business but also be a great corporate citizen in all of the communities that we operate in. It is also true that Home Depot co-founder Bernie Marcus donated $7 million to U.S. President Donald Trump's 2016 campaign. He vowed to again support Trump in his 2020 run against presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden.  donated Marcus, a philanthropist who gives billions of dollars away to various causes, is generally a large-ticket financial supporter of Republican politicians and organizations. But he also retired from his position as Home Depot's company chairman in 2002. (Home Depot's other co-founder, Arthur Blank, who is also retired from the company, appears to donate primarily to Democrats.) gives appears to The Home Depot political action committee on the other hand has contributed a total of $1,495,000 to both Democratic and Republican federal candidates in 2020, with 44% of those contributions going to Democrats and 56% to Republicans, according to the campaign transparency tracking tool Open Secrets. both Meantime the political action committee for Lowe's donated a total of $540,500 to federal candidates in both parties, with 30% going to Democrats and 70% to Republicans, per Open Secrets. Political action committees (PACs) associated with corporations are separate organizations that are funded by employees or owners of the company (but not the company itself). These PACs donate money to political candidates and organizations they believe to be ""aligned with their financial goals,"" explains Open Secrets. explains Given the meme leaves out important context about political contributions and Marcus' current involvement with Home Depot, we rate this claim ""true."" Clifford, Tyler.  ""Lowes Funds $25 Million in Grants to Help Minority Businesses Reopen; CEO Challenges Other Executives to Do Our Part.'""
  CNBC.  20 May 2020. Kempner, Matt.""Atlanta Billionaire Plans to Give Almost All of It Away.""
  Atlanta Journal-Constitution.  30 June 2019. Evers-Hillstrom, Karl.""Why Corporate PACs Have an Advantage.""
 Open Secrets.14 February 2020. Updated to include political contribution information about Home Depot's other co-founder, Arthur Blank.",['funds'],True,"It's true that Lowe's has created a $25 million grant for minority-owned small businesses trying to reopen after being forced to close due to the COVID-19 coronavirus disease pandemic. As CNBC reported on May 20, 2020:It is also true that Home Depot co-founder Bernie Marcus donated $7 million to U.S. President Donald Trump's 2016 campaign. He vowed to again support Trump in his 2020 run against presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden. Marcus, a philanthropist who gives billions of dollars away to various causes, is generally a large-ticket financial supporter of Republican politicians and organizations. But he also retired from his position as Home Depot's company chairman in 2002. (Home Depot's other co-founder, Arthur Blank, who is also retired from the company, appears to donate primarily to Democrats.)The Home Depot political action committee on the other hand has contributed a total of $1,495,000 to both Democratic and Republican federal candidates in 2020, with 44% of those contributions going to Democrats and 56% to Republicans, according to the campaign transparency tracking tool Open Secrets.Political action committees (PACs) associated with corporations are separate organizations that are funded by employees or owners of the company (but not the company itself). These PACs donate money to political candidates and organizations they believe to be ""aligned with their financial goals,"" explains Open Secrets."
Boeing 797,"['Viral image dating from 2006 purports to show a new Boeing ""797"" blended-wing airliner.']","Although Boeing may someday introduce a commercial airliner designated with the number 797, and although the company's Phantom Works (advanced research and development) unit may have researched the potential of blended-wing-body (BWB) aircraft design for military applications, Boeing is not currently developing a blended-wing aircraft for commercial use, nor does the image displayed below represent any aircraft (or prototype thereof) designed or produced by that company: Phantom Works researched BWB   Boeing to take on Airbus with (1000 seat) giant 797 Blended Wing plane Boeing is preparing a 1000 passenger jet that could reshape the Air travel industry for the next 100 years. The radical Blended Wing design has been developed by Boeing in cooperation with the NASA Langley Research Centre.The mammoth plane will have a wing span of 265 feet compared to the 747s 211 feet,and is designed to fit within the newly created terminals used for the 555 seat Airbus A380, which is 262 feet wide.The new 797 is in direct response to the Airbus A380 which has racked up 159 orders, but has not yet flown any passengers. Boeing decide to kill its 747X stretched super jumbo in 2003 after little interest was shown by airline companies, but has continued to develop the ultimate Airbus crusher 797 for years at its Phantom Works research facility in Long Beach, Calif. The Airbus A380 has been in the works since 1999 and has accumulated $13 billion in development costs, which gives Boeing a huge advantage now that Airbus has committed to the older style tubular aircraft for decades to come. There are several big advantages to the blended wing design, the most important being the lift to drag ratio which is expected to increase by an amazing 50%, with overall weight reduced by 25%, making it an estimated 33% more efficient than the A380, and making Airbuss $13 billion dollar investment look pretty shaky. High body rigidity is another key factor in blended wing aircraft, It reduces turbulence and creates less stress on the air frame which adds to efficiency, giving the 797 a tremendous 8800 nautical mile range with its 1000 passengers flying comfortably at mach .88 or 654 mph (+-1046km/h) cruising speed another advantage over the Airbus tube-and-wing designed A380s 570 mph (912 km/h)The exact date for introduction is unclear, yet the battle lines are clearly drawn in the high-stakes war for civilian air supremacy. This image is a conceptual picture from a Popular Science article about the future of aviation (one which proved so popular that it was made available for purchase in poster form) and has been circulated since at least early 1996 in fictitious articles proclaiming it to be Boeing's response to competition from the Airbus A380 in the commercial airliner business. articles A Boeing company blog produced by Randy Baseler, former vice president of marketing for Boeing Commercial Airplanes, tackled this subject back in November 2006: tackled From Boulder, Colorado, Walter brings up a topic we frequently get questioned about: the ""blended wing"" concept. Earlier this year an image of a blended wing ""797"" made the rounds of the Internet, and got speculation swirling that Boeing has this in the works. Is there any truth to the emails showing a blended wing 1,000-passenger concept that is dubbed a Boeing 797? Makes sense that the airline industry would head this direction some day, but it just sounds too good to be true! Yes, too good to be true, indeed, Walter. Someone was having a bit of fun with PhotoShop perhaps. Boeing is not planning to build a 1,000 passenger commercial airplane dubbed the ""797,"" based on the blended wing body (BWB) concept or any other futuristic concept. It's certainly not in our commercial market forecast, which goes out for 20 years. We think the commercial airplane market favors point-to-point routes, and we're developing the 787 as the perfect match to help meet that demand. Glen, from Warrington, Pennsylvania brings up the same subject: Is there a blended wing in the works? Are there floor plans of it? No, not for a commercial airplane. But having said that, I should point out that Boeing Phantom Works, the company's advanced research and development group, tells me it is conducting research on the BWB concept with NASA and the U.S. Air Force. They're working to better understand what they describe as the BWB's ""fundamental edge-of-the-envelope flight dynamics"" and structural characteristics. The Air Force is interested in the BWB concept for its potential as a flexible, long-range, high-capacity military aircraft. As part of the research, Phantom Works has built a scale model for wind-tunnel testing of the concept's low-speed flying characteristics. There also are plans to flight-test the scale model next year. In 2017, Boeing released a teaser image at the Paris Air Show hyping a medium-range, ""middle-market airplane"" under development that industry observers unofficially christened ""Boeing 797,"" but that was neither the real name of the aircraft nor did the visualization include a blended-wing design. image Baseler, Randy.  ""Air Mail.""
  Randy's Journal.  1 November 2006. Ostrower, Jon.  ""World Gets First Peek at Boeing '797.'""
  CNN Money.  20 June 2017. Boeing.  ""Boeing to Begin Ground Testing of X-48B Blended Wing Body Concept.""
 27 October 2006. NewTechSpy.  ""Boeing to Take on Airbus with (1,000 Seat) Giant 797 Blended Wing Plane.""
  24 April 2006.",['investment'],False,"Although Boeing may someday introduce a commercial airliner designated with the number 797, and although the company's Phantom Works (advanced research and development) unit may have researched the potential of blended-wing-body (BWB) aircraft design for military applications, Boeing is not currently developing a blended-wing aircraft for commercial use, nor does the image displayed below represent any aircraft (or prototype thereof) designed or produced by that company:This image is a conceptual picture from a Popular Science article about the future of aviation (one which proved so popular that it was made available for purchase in poster form) and has been circulated since at least early 1996 in fictitious articles proclaiming it to be Boeing's response to competition from the Airbus A380 in the commercial airliner business.A Boeing company blog produced by Randy Baseler, former vice president of marketing for Boeing Commercial Airplanes, tackled this subject back in November 2006:In 2017, Boeing released a teaser image at the Paris Air Show hyping a medium-range, ""middle-market airplane"" under development that industry observers unofficially christened ""Boeing 797,"" but that was neither the real name of the aircraft nor did the visualization include a blended-wing design."
Is John Dillinger's Penis on Display at the Smithsonian?,"[""Someone should start a museum to house all the non-existent things that thousands of people have sworn they've seen.""]","One of the more bizarre celebrity legends is the claim that notorious bank robber John Dillinger was not only the proud possessor of an unusually large penis, but that this portion of his anatomy was removed post-mortem and put on display at one of the Smithsonian museums in Washington, D.C. (Some versions state that the receiving institution was not the Smithsonian but the Armed Forces Medical Museum, which is on the grounds of the Walter Reed Medical Center in Washington.) That the Smithsonian denies having (or ever having had) this piece of classic Americana in their collection is part of the game, of course. (An auxiliary portion of the legend is that Smithsonian docents, upon being asked where Mr. Dillinger's organ can be found, will not deny its presence in the collection but will fabricate an excuse as to why it is not currently on display.) How and when this rumor got started is unknown. No documentary evidence indicates that Dillinger was renowned for either his sexual prowess or his possession of a prodigious member during his lifetime. It is often claimed that the photograph below, taken in the circus-like atmosphere of the Cook County morgue after the elusive bank robber was finally gunned down by FBI agents outside the Biograph theater in Chicago on 22 July 1934, begat the legend of the pickled penis:  The bulge in the center of the photo (Dillinger's arm) was supposedly mistaken by contemporary viewers of fuzzy newspaper photos for his penis, thus starting the tale of an incredibly well-endowed John Dillinger. (How he managed to die in a fully erect state was a question the public either didn't ponder or else attributed to some rather strange misunderstandings about the process of rigor mortis.) We doubt this explanation of the rumor's genesis because the legend does not seem to have begun circulating until many years after the photograph was first published in newspapers, and it doesn't account for how the famous phallus supposedly came to be housed in one of America's premier museums (other than that, because it was an extraordinary anatomical specimen, somebody who felt that it belonged in a museum somewhere happily donated it). How the organ was surreptitiously severed also remains unexplained; presumably the undertaker who prepared the body for burial in Indiana would have noticed the mutilation and reported it to one of Dillinger's relatives before the funeral. Our psychological take on the rumor? Consider that Dillinger was the FBI's Public Enemy #1 after committing a string of flamboyant bank robberies, continually eluding capture, and boasting that no jail could hold him (and proving the latter by escaping from the Lake County Jail in Crown Point, Indiana, on 3 March 1934, reportedly bluffing his way out with a wooden replica of a gun). After Dillinger held up a few more banks and raided a Warsaw, Indiana, police station in the following months, the FBI was finally tipped off to his presence at the Little Bohemia Lodge in northern Wisconsin. The raid on the lodge by J. Edgar Hoover's vaunted FBI was an embarrassing disaster: agents opened fired on a carful of innocent lodge visitors (killing one), an agent was shot to death by Baby Face Nelson (who then escaped in an FBI automobile), and Dillinger himself once again eluded capture. Although the FBI finally caught up with and killed the infamous gangster in Chicago a few months later (with the assistance of Anna Sage, the ""lady in red"" who tipped off local police to Dillinger's presence and agreed to lead him into a trap), he had given Hoover and the FBI a black eye, leading them on a extended merry chase across the Midwest and humiliating them by escaping yet again when they had him cornered. What better revenge for Hoover than a symbolic emasculation, especially considering that it was a woman whom the FBI finally used to lure Dillinger to his death? Spread the word that Public Enemy #1 had been interred sans penis, and that his manhood had been put on display for all to see right across town from FBI headquarters in Washington, D.C. It's an unlikely explanation, but a satisfying one. Sightings:  Look for Kevin and his buddies to refer to this legend in an episode of television's The Wonder Years (""Heartbreak"", original air date 23 January 1991). Also, in the 2003 film The Recruit, one character offers his romantic interest a day of tourist activities in Washington, suggesting they ""Look at John Dillinger's penis; I swear to God it's in the Smithsonian."" The Recruit In the 1988 Jay McInerney's novel Story of My Life, we found this: ""I remember I read somewhere that outlaw guy John Dillinger had one that was about a foot and a half long and it's preserved in the Smithsonian or someplace. Now that's what I call the Washington Monument."" Leccese, Michael.  ""Looking for Mr. Dillinger.""
  Washington Tribune.  April 1980. McInerney, Jay.  Story of My Life.
  Canada: McClelland and Stewart, 1988.  ISBN 0-7710-5452-1  (p. 140). Morgan, Hal and Kerry Tucker.  Rumor!
  New York: Penguin Books, 1984.  ISBN 0-14-007036-2  (pp. 28-29). Nash, Jay Robert and John Offen.  Dillinger: Dead or Alive?
  Chicago: H. Regnery Co., 1970.",['interest'],False,"Sightings:  Look for Kevin and his buddies to refer to this legend in an episode of television's The Wonder Years (""Heartbreak"", original air date 23 January 1991). Also, in the 2003 film The Recruit, one character offers his romantic interest a day of tourist activities in Washington, suggesting they ""Look at John Dillinger's penis; I swear to God it's in the Smithsonian."""
Obama's stance on the debt limit,"['In 2006, did Barack Obama speak out against raising the debt limit?']","   Claim:  In 2006, U.S. Senator Barack Obama spoke out against raising the U.S. government debt limit.   Example:  [Collected via e-mail, July 2011]   'The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the US Government can not pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government's reckless fiscal policies. Increasing America's debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that ""the buck stops here."" Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better.'    Origins:  In 2006, while serving his first term as a freshman U.S. senator from Illinois, Barack Obama made the remarks attributed to him above during discussion in the U.S. Senate prior to the call for votes on raising the debt limit. The full text of his remarks in the Senate on 16 March 2006 are:     The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can't pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government's reckless fiscal policies.    Over the past 5 years, our federal debt has increased by $3.5 trillion to $8.6 trillion. That is ""trillion"" with a ""T."" That is money that we have borrowed from the Social Security trust fund, borrowed from China and Japan, borrowed from American taxpayers. And over the next 5 years, between now and 2011, the President's budget will increase the debt by almost another $3.5 trillion.    Numbers that large are sometimes hard to understand. Some people may wonder why they matter. Here is why: This year, the Federal Government will spend $220 billion on interest. That is more money to pay interest on our national debt than we'll spend on Medicaid and the State Children's Health Insurance Program. That is more money to pay interest on our debt this year than we will spend on education, homeland security, transportation, and veterans benefits combined. It is more money in one year than we are likely to spend to rebuild the devastated gulf coast in a way that honors the best of America.    And the cost of our debt is one of the fastest growing expenses in the Federal budget. This rising debt is a hidden domestic enemy, robbing our cities and States of critical investments in infrastructure like    bridges, ports, and levees; robbing our families and our children of critical investments in education and health care reform; robbing our seniors of the retirement and health security they have counted on. Every dollar we pay in interest is a dollar that is not going to investment in America's priorities. Instead, interest payments are a significant tax on all Americans  a debt tax that Washington doesn't want to talk about. If Washington were serious about honest tax relief in this country, we would see an effort to reduce our national debt by returning to responsible fiscal policies.    But we are not doing that. Despite repeated efforts by Senators Conrad and Feingold, the Senate continues to reject a return to thecommonsense Pay-go rules that used to apply. Previously, Pay-go rules applied both to increases in mandatory spending and to tax cuts. The Senate had to abide by the commonsense budgeting principle of balancing expenses and revenues. Unfortunately, the principle was abandoned, and now the demands of budget discipline apply only to spending. As a result, tax breaks have not been paid for by reductions in Federal spending, and thus the only way to pay for them has been to increase our deficit to historically high levels and borrow more and more money. Now we have to pay for those tax breaks plus the cost of borrowing for them. Instead of reducing the deficit, as some people claimed, the fiscal policies of this administration and its allies in Congress will add more than $600 million in debt for each of the next 5 years. That is why I will once again cosponsor the Pay-go amendment and continue to hope that my colleagues will return to a smart rule that has worked in the past and can work again.    Our debt also matters internationally. My friend, the ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee, likes to remind us that it took 42 Presidents 224 years to run up only $1 trillion of foreign-held debt. This administration did more than that in just 5 years. Now, there is nothing wrong with borrowing from foreign countries. But we must remember that the more we depend on foreign nations to lend us money, the more our economic security is tied to the whims of foreign leaders whose interests might not be aligned with ours.    Increasing America's debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that ""the buck stops here.'' Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better.    I therefore intend to oppose the effort to increase America's debt limit.    The shortened quote now attributed to him is a verbatim capture of the opening and closing paragraphs of his remarks of 16 March 2006. (The Senate vote held later that day on a resolution to increase the debt limitpassed by a 52-48 margin, with Senator Obama voting against it.) passed President Obama has undergone a change of position regarding raising the debt limit. In a 15 April 2011 Good Morning America interview, President Obama said this of his reasons for doing so:     Last updated:  7 October 2013    Congressional Record.  ""Remarks by Sen. Barack Obama.""    16 March 2006.   Farley, Robert.  ""Obama Says Reagan Raised Debt Ceiling 18 Times; George W. Bush 7 Times.""    St. Petersburg Times.  26 July 2011.   Stephanopoulos, George.  ""President Obama One-on-One.""    Good Morning America.  15 April 2011.   Werner, Erica.  ""WH: Obama Regrets Vote Against Raising Debt Limit.""    Associated Press.  11 April 2011.          ",['finance'],True,"The shortened quote now attributed to him is a verbatim capture of the opening and closing paragraphs of his remarks of 16 March 2006. (The Senate vote held later that day on a resolution to increase the debt limitpassed by a 52-48 margin, with Senator Obama voting against it.)"
Dispensation Decoy,[''],"FACT CHECK Did the Obama administration deliberately and unexpectedly release Abdul Shalabi from detention at Guantanamo Bay while the news media were distracted by the Pope's visit to the U.S.?   Claim: The Obama administration deliberately and unexpectedly released Abdul Shalabi from detention at Guantanamo Bay while the news media were distracted by the Pope's visit to the U.S.   : WHAT'S  Guantanamo detainee Abdul Shalabi was repatriated to Saudi Arabia on 22 September 2015, the day on which Pope Francis arrived in Washington, D.C. WHAT'S   Abdul Shalabi's release was sudden and unexpected, and it occurred under the radar of the news media due to coverage of the Pope's visit. Example:  [Collected via e-mail, September 2015] Rumor has it that while the pope was in DC that POTUS released Abdul Shalabi from Gitmo.   Did Obama really release Abdul Shalabi will everyone was watching the pope in DC? Origins:  Pope Francis' ""Apostolic Journey to the United States of America"" that began on 22 September 2015 marked the pontiff's first visit to the U.S. On 24 September 2015, the web site of former one-term congressman and conservative political commentator Allen B. West published a blog post with the clickbait headline of ""While the Media Obsessed Over the Pope, Look What Obama Just Did"" that asserted: While Pope Francis was in Washington smooching with the president and giving speeches about global warming, income inequality and the evils of capitalism (while being ominously silent about the persecution and slaughter of his Christian brethren around the world), the Obama administration released Abdul Shalabi from the Guantanamo Bay detainment center. That Shalabi was released yesterday as the country was focused on Pope Francis arrival in the United States could well be the administration's most blatant ""Look, over theresquirrell!!"" [sic] moment ever. The very idea that this man who worked side-by-side with Osama bin Laden can somehow be ""rehabilitated"" to no longer want to kill infidels, and, be rehabbed by the Muslim government of an Islamic nation  is beyond laughable. What does Obama think hes going to do there now, train to become a valet? Take up needlepoint? Oh, I know, maybe open a bakery and make cakes for gay weddings. The excerpt quoted above suggests that Shalabi's release was unexpected and deliberately coordinated so as to go unnoticed during media coverage of Pope Francis' arrival in Washington D.C. However, Shalabi's release was neither unexpected, nor was it ignored by the media. A widely-reproduced Associated Press article published three months earlier had announced that Shalabi, who had been on a nine-year hunger strike, had been approved for release from Guantanamo by a government review board: article A prisoner who has been on a nine-year hunger strike to protest his confinement at the U.S. base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, can now return to his native Saudi Arabia, a government review board said. The Periodic Review Board, which has been re-evaluating dozens of Guantanamo prisoners previously deemed too dangerous to release, said in a statement published on its website that Abdul Rahman Shalabi can be released to take part in a Saudi government rehabilitation program for militants and would be subject to monitoring afterward. Shalabi began a hunger strike in 2005. He and another prisoner, who since has been released, maintained the protest longer than any others held at the base. Court records show Shalabi occasionally consumed food but also dropped to as little as 101 pounds (46 kilograms). His lawyer told the review board in April [2015] that prison officials had fed him with a nasogastric tube daily for nine years. The U.S. now holds 116 men at Guantanamo, including 52 cleared for transfer or release. Similarly, an 8 August 2015 New York Post article reported that Shalabi was due to be released soon (partly to care for his mother): article Take detainee Abdul Shalabi. His lawyers in June pleaded that the former bin Laden bodyguard was sufficiently reformed and wanted only to reunite with his family in Saudi Arabia and take care of his ailing mother. The board subsequently agreed Shalabi was no longer a significant threat to the security of the United States, and rubber-stamped his release  even though the al Qaeda operative conspired with Khalid Sheikh Mohammed while plotting the 9/11 attacks from Karachi, Pakistan. Shalabi also was said to have trained at al Qaeda camps to participate in a suicide attack or deployment to the West. The UK newspaper The Guardian also reported on Shalabi's then-pending release on 13 August 2015, and the claim that ""the media"" ignored Shalabi's release in favor of Papal visit coverage conflicted with the 22 September 2015 publication in the New York Times of an article reporting that: reported Although a six-agency task force decided in 2009 that Mr. Shalabi was too dangerous to release, a parolelike panel called the Periodic Review Board, consisting of representatives from the same six agencies, decided in June [2015] that he could now be safely repatriated to Saudi Arabia. In a statement explaining its reasoning, the board said Mr. Shalabi had terrorist-related activities and connections in the past, but said it was confident that the Saudi governments rehabilitation program and its ability to monitor former detainees would mitigate the risks. The board also cited the fact that Mr. Shalabis nephew, who was repatriated from Guantnamo in President George W. Bushs second term and went through the Saudi rehabilitation program, has apparently lived quietly ever since. Mr. Shalabi appeared before the board at a hearing in April [2015]. He asked that his statements not be made public. But a lawyer helping to represent him, Julia Tarver-Mason Wood, told the board that he just wanted to settle down, get married and have a family of his own, and put the past behind him. The New York Times wasn't the only high-profile U.S. news outlet to cover Shalabi's release, as a 22 September 2015 Reuters piece also announced the imminent transfer of Shalabi to Saudi Arabia. piece As noted above, it was a review board comprising officials from several different military, legal, and intelligence agencies who recommended Shalabi's repatriation to Saudi Arabia, as explained on the Department of Defense Periodic Review Secretariat's web site: explained The Periodic Review Board (PRB) is a body comprised of senior officials from the Departments of Defense, Homeland Security, Justice, and State; the Joint Staff; and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence that will review whether continued detention of particular individuals held at Guantanamo remains necessary to protect against a continuing significant threat to the security of the United States.  Articles published three months in advance of Shalabi's repatriation acknowledged that (despite his never having been charged with a crime) he had links to Osama bin Laden al-Qaida and had ""not been cleared of wrongdoing"": Shalabi, 39, was among the first prisoners taken to Guantanamo in January 2002. He was never charged with a crime but the government said he had been a bodyguard for Osama bin Laden and had links to the external operations chief for al-Qaida, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who is facing trial by military commission at Guantanamo. The board, which was created by the administration of President Barack Obama in 2011 as part of the effort to close the prison at Guantanamo, did not clear Shalabi of wrongdoing and said it ""acknowledges the detainees past terrorist-related activities."" So while it's true that Abdul Shalabi was transferred from Guantanamo to Saudi Arabia on 22 September 2015, the formal decision to do so was made well in advance of the Pope's September 2015 visit to the U.S., and news of Shalabi's hearing, review, and release was reported by major news outlets (inside and outside the United States) both before and during the event.  Last updated: 25 September 2015 First published:  25 September 2015",['income'],True,"The excerpt quoted above suggests that Shalabi's release was unexpected and deliberately coordinated so as to go unnoticed during media coverage of Pope Francis' arrival in Washington D.C. However, Shalabi's release was neither unexpected, nor was it ignored by the media. A widely-reproduced Associated Press article published three months earlier had announced that Shalabi, who had been on a nine-year hunger strike, had been approved for release from Guantanamo by a government review board:Similarly, an 8 August 2015 New York Post article reported that Shalabi was due to be released soon (partly to care for his mother):The UK newspaper The Guardian also reported on Shalabi's then-pending release on 13 August 2015, and the claim that ""the media"" ignored Shalabi's release in favor of Papal visit coverage conflicted with the 22 September 2015 publication in the New York Times of an article reporting that:The New York Times wasn't the only high-profile U.S. news outlet to cover Shalabi's release, as a 22 September 2015 Reuters piece also announced the imminent transfer of Shalabi to Saudi Arabia.As noted above, it was a review board comprising officials from several different military, legal, and intelligence agencies who recommended Shalabi's repatriation to Saudi Arabia, as explained on the Department of Defense Periodic Review Secretariat's web site:"
Is Wayfair Trafficking Children Via Overpriced Items?,"[""The claim that Wayfair is trafficking children is based almost entirely on one person's confusion over an expensive cabinet.""]","In July 2020, some social media users accused the furniture store Wayfair of trafficking children. This gravely serious accusation was not based on police reports, firsthand accounts, financial records, or deep investigative reporting. Rather, it was based on the fact that some items on Wayfair were listed at exorbitant prices compared to other, similar items. This rumor appears to have originated on the ""conspiracy"" section of Reddit on July 9, 2020. That post noted that Wayfair was selling utility closets from WFX that were priced at more than $10,000, and offered child trafficking as a possible explanation. That post, like so many other conspiracy theories, offered this notion as a mere possibility and said that it would be stomach churning ""if ... true.""  post  Is it possible Wayfair involved in Human trafficking with their WFX Utility collection? Or are these just extremely overpriced cabinets? (Note the names of the cabinets) this makes me sick to my stomach if its true :( This post led to other users combing the Wayfair website in search of other oddities. One Twitter user, for instance, found a set of pillows and shower curtains that were listed for $9,999. As similar items on the website were listed for only $99, this person assumed that the only logical explanation was that the higher priced item was being used to traffic children. The Twitter user wrote:  wrote If you search bungalow rose a bunch of shower curtains and pillows show up priced at $9,999. Wayfair is fucking trafficking children what the FUCK Same with other things. They all have big price jumps to like 10 grand. Wayfair also supplies the furniture at ICE detention centers, where children are going MISSING from Generally speaking, the images showing expensive cabinets and large price differentials on pillows, shower curtains, and other items on Wayfair's website are real. However, it takes quite a leap in logic to arrive at the conclusion that this is evidence that the store is engaged in child trafficking. In fact, the more we pondered this claim, the more nonsensical it appeared. Would a large business really use their official website to allow people to purchase children online? As these items are available to anyone with internet access, wouldn't it be possible for someone to accidentally become involved in child trafficking? Why would a child trafficking operation use a method that would be so easy to track?  This claim is largely based on the idea that $10,000 is simply too expensive for a cabinet, and that there has to be some other explanation  child trafficking  to justify its cost. In a statement to Newsweek, however, Wayfair noted that these were industrial grade cabinets, and that they had been accurately priced. Wayfair said that they temporarily removed these items, as the accompanying descriptions did not accurately explain the reason for the price point. Wayfair told Newsweek in a statement: Newsweek ""There is, of course, no truth to these claims. The products in question are industrial grade cabinets that are accurately priced. Recognizing that the photos and descriptions provided by the supplier did not adequately explain the high price point, we have temporarily removed the products from site to rename them and to provide a more in-depth description and photos that accurately depict the product to clarify the price point."" We reached out to Wayfair for more information about the expensive pillows and shower curtains, but have yet to receive a response.  As this rumor circulated on social media, people chimed in with additional ""evidence"" of Wayfair's supposedly nefarious activities. For instance, some claimed that searching for the stock keeping unit number (SKU) associated with these items preceded by the term ""src usa"" on the Russian search engine Yandex returned images of young female children. This is, bizarrely, true. However, searching for just about any random string of numbers preceded by the src usa returns similar results. It's possible that these search results are connected to the Russian image hosting website ""Imgsrc,"" which has previously hosted child pornography images. We reached out to Yandex for more information about these search results, and will update this article accordingly. previously hosted Others claimed that these products carried the names of children who had gone missing. One cabinet, for instance, appeared on Wayfair as the ""Anabel 5-shelf storage unit."" This, according to proponents of this theory, corresponded with an Anabel Wilson who had gone missing in Kansas. While this may seem suspicious to those seeking a pattern, it should be noted that there were more than 400,000 entries for missing juveniles in the FBIs National Crime Information Center in 2019. In other words, the fact that some of these product names were the same as the first names of children who had gone missing could easily be nothing more than a coincidence. Anabel Wilson 400,000 missing juveniles Furthermore, some of the missing children cases this theory attempted to connect to Wayfair have already been solved. The ""Alyvia"" shelf, for example, was supposedly connected to Alyvia Navarro. This autistic child went missing at the age of 3 in 2013 and, unfortunately, was found dead shortly after she went missing, having drowned in a nearby pond.  Alyvia Navarro. On July 13, 2020, proponents of this theory started sharing a mugshot of a man in a Wayfair shirt and claimed that he had recently been arrested as part of a trafficking ring.   This is a genuine photograph of Fredrick Walker Jr. who was arrested on June 21, 2020, during a prostitution sting in Barnesville, Georgia. However, those sharing this image as ""proof"" of this Wayfair conspiracy theory failed to mention that this person was just one of nearly two dozen people who were arrested during this sting, that none of the other people arrested were wearing Wayfair shirts, that news reports about the arrest made no mention about any connection to the store, and that there's no evidence that the victims in this case were children.  arrested two dozen people news reports The claim that Wayfair is trafficking children is based almost entirely on one person's confusion over an expensive cabinet. This conspiracy theory, like so many conspiracy theories, started with a wild and unfounded assumption that would be sickening if it were actually true. As of this writing, absolutely no credible evidence has been offered to back up this accusation.  But the conspiracy theory did have real impact. According to a July 20 press release from Polaris, its National Human Trafficking Hotline (1-888-373-7888) received such an ""extreme volume"" of reports related to this rumor (none of which contained information beyond what was already reported online) that it struggled to respond to other calls from people potentially in need. The statement encouraged callers to learn more about ""what human trafficking really looks like."" press release what human trafficking really looks like Know Your Meme.  ""Wayfair Human Trafficking Conspiracy.""
  10 July 2020. Whalen, Andrew.  ""Kids Shipped in Armoires? The Person Who Started the Wayfair Conspiracy Speaks.""
  Newsweek.  10 July 2020. National Criminal Justice Reference Service.  ""Special Feature: Missing Children.""   Retrieved 15 July 2020.  Goldman, Russel.  ""Half of All Autistic Kids Will Run Away, Tragedy Often Follows.""
  ABC News.  1 May 2013. Lawless, Annette.  ""MISSING IN KANSAS: Anabel Wilson.""
  KAKE.  26 February 2020. Gilbert, Ben. &bsp; ""A US Soldier Working at Mar-a-Lago Uploaded Photos of an Underage Girl to a Russian Website  A Closer Look at the Site Reveals a Horrific Underworld.""
  Business Insider.  28 September 2019. Hansen, Zachary.  ""24 Arrested in Metro Atlanta Prostitution Sting; Human Trafficking Victim Rescued.""
  AJC.  22 June 2020. The Georgia Gazette.  ""21 Charged With Prostitution, Pimping After Two-Day Sting at Newnan Springhill Suites.""
  25 June 2020. ABC News.  ""Missing Children in America: Unsolved Cases.""
  7 May 2013. Polaris Project.  ""Polaris Statement on Wayfair Sex Trafficking Claims.""
  20 July 2020. Updated [10 July 2020]: Added information about product names.  Updated [14 July 2020]: Added information about Yandex search results and a new iteration of this claim involving a man in a Wayfair shirt.  Correction [15 July 2020]: The original article cited outdated statistics about the number of children who go missing every year. The article has been updated with more accurate numbers from the FBI.  Updated [23 July 2020]: Added statement on ""extreme volume"" of calls to National Human Trafficking Hotline.",['returns'],False,"This rumor appears to have originated on the ""conspiracy"" section of Reddit on July 9, 2020. That post noted that Wayfair was selling utility closets from WFX that were priced at more than $10,000, and offered child trafficking as a possible explanation. That post, like so many other conspiracy theories, offered this notion as a mere possibility and said that it would be stomach churning ""if ... true."" The Twitter user wrote:Wayfair told Newsweek in a statement:As this rumor circulated on social media, people chimed in with additional ""evidence"" of Wayfair's supposedly nefarious activities. For instance, some claimed that searching for the stock keeping unit number (SKU) associated with these items preceded by the term ""src usa"" on the Russian search engine Yandex returned images of young female children. This is, bizarrely, true. However, searching for just about any random string of numbers preceded by the src usa returns similar results. It's possible that these search results are connected to the Russian image hosting website ""Imgsrc,"" which has previously hosted child pornography images. We reached out to Yandex for more information about these search results, and will update this article accordingly.Others claimed that these products carried the names of children who had gone missing. One cabinet, for instance, appeared on Wayfair as the ""Anabel 5-shelf storage unit."" This, according to proponents of this theory, corresponded with an Anabel Wilson who had gone missing in Kansas. While this may seem suspicious to those seeking a pattern, it should be noted that there were more than 400,000 entries for missing juveniles in the FBIs National Crime Information Center in 2019. In other words, the fact that some of these product names were the same as the first names of children who had gone missing could easily be nothing more than a coincidence.Furthermore, some of the missing children cases this theory attempted to connect to Wayfair have already been solved. The ""Alyvia"" shelf, for example, was supposedly connected to Alyvia Navarro. This autistic child went missing at the age of 3 in 2013 and, unfortunately, was found dead shortly after she went missing, having drowned in a nearby pond. This is a genuine photograph of Fredrick Walker Jr. who was arrested on June 21, 2020, during a prostitution sting in Barnesville, Georgia. However, those sharing this image as ""proof"" of this Wayfair conspiracy theory failed to mention that this person was just one of nearly two dozen people who were arrested during this sting, that none of the other people arrested were wearing Wayfair shirts, that news reports about the arrest made no mention about any connection to the store, and that there's no evidence that the victims in this case were children. But the conspiracy theory did have real impact. According to a July 20 press release from Polaris, its National Human Trafficking Hotline (1-888-373-7888) received such an ""extreme volume"" of reports related to this rumor (none of which contained information beyond what was already reported online) that it struggled to respond to other calls from people potentially in need. The statement encouraged callers to learn more about ""what human trafficking really looks like."""
Passing Fancy,"['Article contrasts observances of the deaths of Ed McMahon, Farrah Fawcett, and Michael Jackson.']","Claim:  Article contrasts observances of the passings of Ed McMahon, Farrah Fawcett, and Michael Jackson.  Example:  [Collected via e-mail, July 2009] Ed McMahon died this week. He was a great entertainer, but prior to his stage accomplishments he was a distinguished Marine Corps fighter pilot in WWII earning six Air Medals and attaining the rank of Colonel. He was discharged in 1946 and was later promoted to the rank of Brigadier General in the CA Air National Guard. Farrah Fawcett died this week after a long career in Hollywood as an actress. After she was diagnosed with cancer, she became an activist for cancer treatment and devoted her last remaining years encouraging people to seek treatment. She documented her plight on film and used it to encourage others to stay positive and upbeat despite their diagnosis and suffering. Michael Jackson died this week. He was perhaps one of the greatest singers of modern time. He will also be remembered for his eccentric lifestyle that included sleeping with a chimpanzee, living in a carnival-like atmosphere at Neverland, his fascination with Peter Pan, and his numerous masks and costumes. He also admitted to finding pleasure sleeping with young boys and paying out millions of dollars in settlements to the families of these boys despite being acquitted by a court on one allegation of sexual molestation. QUESTION - Which of the above did the House of Representatives declare a moment of silence for today? (Hint - It wasn't the first two.) QUESTION - Which of the above's family received a personal note of condolence from President Obama? (Hint - It wasn't the first two.) Need we say more? Variations:  A later version of this item included the following bit about actor Karl Malden (who died on 1 July 2009): Karl Malden died this week after a long career in Hollywood as an actor. He also served in the US Air Force during WWII and also served on the US Postal Service committee to review and recommend commemorative stamps.  In 2005, the US House of Representatives authorized the US Postal Service to rename a Los Angeles post office the Karl Malden Postal Station. Origins:  The entertainment world suffered a triple shock at the end of June 2009, when television personality Ed McMahon passed away on the 23rd of that month, a loss followed two days later by the deaths of both actress Farrah Fawcett and singer Michael Jackson.   It is true that Ed McMahon was a veteran, a decorated U.S. Marine Corps pilot who served his country during both World War II and the Korean War.  It is also true that after Farrah Fawcett was diagnosed with cancer in 2006, she became ""an outspoken advocate for early detection and  treatment of cancer"" and ""worked tirelessly to raise the profile of this disease,"" bravely allowing herself to be filmed for the harrowing Farrah's Story, a documentary that chronicled her grim fight against cancer in order to ""make viewers aware of the need for testing and research."" Farrah's Story It is also true that neither of these celebrities was honored in their passing with the observance of a moment of silence in the U.S. Congress, and that (as far as we know) neither's family was the recipient of a personal note of condolence from the President.  In contrast, the day after Michael Jackson's death, the House of Representatives observed a moment of silence in the entertainer's honor, and a few days later senior presidential adviser David Axelrod stated that President Obama had written to the Jackson family and ""shared his feelings"" with them. observed stated However, many would take exception to the implication that Michael Jackson was merely an eccentric entertainer who, unlike Ed McMahon and Farrah Fawcett, did nothing (outside of his art) to benefit society and make him (as) worthy of the honors and recognition he received at his passing.  Michael Jackson left behind a substantial philanthropic legacy, having contributed for over twenty-five years to a long, long list of charities through donations of his time, money, and other forms of support.  As the Los Angeles Times Michael Jackson left a philanthropic legacy almost as large as his cultural one. In all the financial and personal turmoil that characterized his latter years, it was easy to lose sight of the fact that he was a pioneer not only in popular music but also in charitable fundraising within the entertainment industry. Jackson, like his close friend Elizabeth Taylor, was one of the first entertainers to enlist in the fight against AIDS/HIV, and he went on to contribute and raise hundreds of millions of dollars to help sick children, set up scholarship funds, and to find new ways for entertainers to raise money and awareness for causes. He also helped set the standard of generosity for other entertainers, particularly pop stars. His song ""We Are the World,"" which he co-wrote with Lionel Richie in 1985 to help combat famine in Africa, was instrumental in changing the way rock stars generate funds for the causes to which they're devoted. Before the financial woes that haunted him in recent years, Jackson was one of the industry's most formidable philanthropists.  Jackson's estate is expected to generate hundreds of millions of dollars more over the years to come. If the will currently being treated by the courts as valid is sustained, it appears that at least 20% of the income on the trust that Jackson directed his executors establish will go to charity. A detailed list of Michael Jackson's many charitable efforts can be found here. here Last updated:  9 July 2009    Gerstein, Josh.  ""Obama Sends Condolence Letter to Jackson Family.""   Politico.  28 June 2009.    Koppelman, Alex.  ""On House Floor, A Moment of Silence for Michael Jackson.""   Salon.  26 June 2009.    O'Neil, Tom.  ""Farrah Fawcett's TV Cancer Confession May Be Emmy-Worthy.""   Los Angeles Times.  7 May 2009.    Ventre, Michael.  ""'Farrah's Story' a Tale of Inner Strength.""   msnbc.com.  22 May 2009.",['income'],False,"treatment of cancer"" and ""worked tirelessly to raise the profile of this disease,"" bravely allowing herself to be filmed for the harrowing Farrah's Story, a documentary that chronicled her grim fight against cancer in order to ""make viewers aware of the need for testing and research.""It is also true that neither of these celebrities was honored in their passing with the observance of a moment of silence in the U.S. Congress, and that (as far as we know) neither's family was the recipient of a personal note of condolence from the President.  In contrast, the day after Michael Jackson's death, the House of Representatives observed a moment of silence in the entertainer's honor, and a few days later senior presidential adviser David Axelrod stated that President Obama had written to the Jackson family and ""shared his feelings"" with them.A detailed list of Michael Jackson's many charitable efforts can be found here."
Did every Democrat vote against a 2.8 percent increase in Social Security COLA?,"[""Social Security cost of living allowances are established by formula and don't require Congressional approval.""]","In mid-October 2018, Facebook users shared an inaccurate meme asking, ""Were any of you aware that ALL the Democrats voted AGAINST the 2.8% Social Security cost of living increase?"" No Democrats, or any other legislators for that matter, voted for or against the 2.8 percent cost of living allowance (COLA) increase that Social Security recipients will see beginning in 2019. Since 1975, COLA increases have kicked in automatically and are based on changes in the consumer price index, a figure calculated by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Here's how the Social Security Administration has summarized the history of COLA increases: Most people are aware that there are annual increases in Social Security benefits to offset the corrosive effects of inflation on fixed incomes. These increases, now known as Cost of Living Allowances (COLAs), are such an accepted feature of the program that it is difficult to imagine a time when there were no COLAs. But in fact, when Ida May Fuller received her first $22.54 benefit payment in January of 1940, this would be the same amount she would receive each month for the next 10 years. For Ida May Fuller and the millions of other Social Security beneficiaries like her, the amount of that first benefit check was the amount they could expect to receive for life. It was not until the 1950 Amendments that Congress first legislated an increase in benefits. Current beneficiaries had their payments recomputed, and Ida May Fuller, for example, saw her monthly check increase from $22.54 to $41.30. These recomputations were effective for September 1950 and appeared for the first time in the October 1950 checks. A second increase was legislated for September 1952. Together, these two increases almost doubled the value of Social Security benefits for existing beneficiaries. From that point on, benefits were increased only when Congress enacted special legislation for that purpose. In 1972, legislation changed the law to provide, beginning in 1975, for automatic annual cost-of-living allowances (i.e., COLAs) based on the annual increase in consumer prices. No longer do beneficiaries have to await a special act of Congress to receive a benefit increase, and no longer does inflation drain value from Social Security benefits. The latest increase will affect 62 million Social Security and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) recipients starting in January 2019. It's the largest increase since 2012, when beneficiaries saw a 3.6 percent boost.",['income'],False,"No Democrats, or any other legislators for that matter, voted for or against the 2.8 percent cost of living allowance (COLA) increase that Social Security recipients will see beginning in 2019. Since 1975, COLA increases have kicked in automatically and are based on changes in the consumer price index, a figure calculated by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.Here's how the Social Security Administration has summarized the history of COLA increases:In 1972 legislation the law was changed to provide, beginning in 1975, for automatic annual cost-of-living allowances (i.e., COLAs) based on the annual increase in consumer prices. No longer do beneficiaries have to await a special act of Congress to receive a benefit increase and no longer does inflation drain value from Social Security benefits.The latest increase will affect 62 million Social Security and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) recipients starting in January 2019. It's the largest increase since 2012, when beneficiaries saw a 3.6 percent boost."
Does Photo Show Last Queen of Mongolia Before Execution?,"['A viral tweet and a Reddit post on r/pics purported to show ""the last photo of the last queen of Mongolia, just before she was killed in 1938.""']","A viral tweet posted on Jan. 23, 2022, claimed to show ""the last photo taken of Genepil, the last Queen of Mongolia, moments before she was executed as part of the Stalinist repressions in Mongolia in 1938."" In our research, we soon found that this caption was inaccurate. tweet The picture in question showed two men pointing guns at a woman in a field:  The tweet was shared tens of thousands of times.  The first picture on the left side of the tweet was not in question. According to various sources, the close-up photograph was believed to perhaps show Genepil posing in Mongolia in the 1920s. (We also found references to the notion that her appearance inspired the costume design for the character Queen Amidala in ""Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace."") various sources references notion Two days after the viral tweet, a Reddit user posted the same photograph of the men with pointed guns and claimed it showed ""The last photo of the last queen of Mongolia, just before she was killed in 1938"": posted same photograph  The Reddit thread was upvoted nearly 50,000 times in the first few hours after it was posted.  One Reddit user asked in a comment: ""Do you have a source for this photo that you could share? I don't think I've ever seen this photo of Genepil. Very interesting."" comment Twitter and Reddit users mentioned a Wikipedia entry for Genepil as their source. The Wikipedia page cited two sources for the line that mentioned her death. They were watson.ch (German) and ugluu.mn (Mongolian). Neither of these two sources mentioned the picture of the two men pointing guns at a woman who was said to be Genepil. Wikipedia entry for Genepil watson.ch ugluu.mn Buried deep in the replies to the viral tweet was a clue. ""Sources claim it's from a movie called '  ,'"" @pacific_blues tweeted. After we did a little digging, we found that the tweet was correct. tweeted  Without this tip, we may not have found the answer to debunk the claim from Reddit and Twitter.  We found the full version of the Mongolian-language film on Facebook. According to the closing credits, it was released in the year 2000 and appeared to have been shot in Mongolia. The title, ""  ,"" was roughly translated to mean, ""The Last Queen of the King."" The picture that was said to be ""the last photo of the last queen of Mongolia"" was simply a screenshot from the 1:55:24 mark in the movie: on Facebook  This scene takes place at the end of ""  ."" The three characters continue walking into the direction of the sun before the movie fades to black. The character is not shot onscreen.  According to a synopsis on mongol-kino.mn, the story was indeed about Genepil. Roughly translated into English, it reads: ""A historical tragedy about the last emperor of Mongolia, Genenpil, the queen of the 8th Jebtsundamba. The last emperor, Eight Bogd Tseenpil, was renamed the Great Fairy and renamed Genenpil."" (Several references described her as a former queen consort, which may have been more accurate.) mongol-kino.mn Jet Set Times previously published that Genepil was believed to have been ""shot and killed at the age of 33 when she was five months pregnant"" after being ""charged with conspiring with the Japanese."" She and her father were executed, according to the reporting. (We were unable to definitively confirm various details about her life, as her name didn't appear to show up in many history books.) published In sum, no, a viral picture did not show the last photograph before the last queen of Mongolia was executed in 1938. While records do show that Genepil was killed in 1938, the photograph in question was a screenshot from a movie that was released in the year 2000.",['share'],False,"A viral tweet posted on Jan. 23, 2022, claimed to show ""the last photo taken of Genepil, the last Queen of Mongolia, moments before she was executed as part of the Stalinist repressions in Mongolia in 1938."" In our research, we soon found that this caption was inaccurate. The tweet was shared tens of thousands of times.The first picture on the left side of the tweet was not in question. According to various sources, the close-up photograph was believed to perhaps show Genepil posing in Mongolia in the 1920s. (We also found references to the notion that her appearance inspired the costume design for the character Queen Amidala in ""Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace."")Two days after the viral tweet, a Reddit user posted the same photograph of the men with pointed guns and claimed it showed ""The last photo of the last queen of Mongolia, just before she was killed in 1938"": The Reddit thread was upvoted nearly 50,000 times in the first few hours after it was posted.One Reddit user asked in a comment: ""Do you have a source for this photo that you could share? I don't think I've ever seen this photo of Genepil. Very interesting.""Twitter and Reddit users mentioned a Wikipedia entry for Genepil as their source. The Wikipedia page cited two sources for the line that mentioned her death. They were watson.ch (German) and ugluu.mn (Mongolian). Neither of these two sources mentioned the picture of the two men pointing guns at a woman who was said to be Genepil.Buried deep in the replies to the viral tweet was a clue. ""Sources claim it's from a movie called '  ,'"" @pacific_blues tweeted. After we did a little digging, we found that the tweet was correct. Without this tip, we may not have found the answer to debunk the claim from Reddit and Twitter.We found the full version of the Mongolian-language film on Facebook. According to the closing credits, it was released in the year 2000 and appeared to have been shot in Mongolia. The title, ""  ,"" was roughly translated to mean, ""The Last Queen of the King."" The picture that was said to be ""the last photo of the last queen of Mongolia"" was simply a screenshot from the 1:55:24 mark in the movie: This scene takes place at the end of ""  ."" The three characters continue walking into the direction of the sun before the movie fades to black. The character is not shot onscreen.According to a synopsis on mongol-kino.mn, the story was indeed about Genepil. Roughly translated into English, it reads: ""A historical tragedy about the last emperor of Mongolia, Genenpil, the queen of the 8th Jebtsundamba. The last emperor, Eight Bogd Tseenpil, was renamed the Great Fairy and renamed Genenpil."" (Several references described her as a former queen consort, which may have been more accurate.)Jet Set Times previously published that Genepil was believed to have been ""shot and killed at the age of 33 when she was five months pregnant"" after being ""charged with conspiring with the Japanese."" She and her father were executed, according to the reporting. (We were unable to definitively confirm various details about her life, as her name didn't appear to show up in many history books.)"
Is This a Picture of Christine Blasey Ford in 1982?,"['A picture said to be one of a 15-year-old Christine Blasey Ford has been proffered as ""evidence"" that Brett Kavanaugh did not sexually assault her.']","Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, the Palo Alto University professor who testified before Congress in September 2018 that Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh had sexually assaulted her while they were both in high school in the 1980s, was the focus of a number of baseless and false rumors spread in an attempt to tarnish her credibility.  number baseless false rumors spread attempt tarnish credibility One of the more disturbing smear campaigns centered an alleged photograph of Ford from 1982 that was shared along with comments insinuating that she was too physically unattractive for a handsome young man such as Brett Kavanaugh to target for sexual assault: A number of individuals also shared this fake photograph alongside a genuine image of Brett Kavanaugh from his high school yearbook in order to strengthen their flawed argument that ""handsome"" Brett would never assault ""ugly"" Ford: shared yearbook   This comparison did not a use a real photograph of Christine Blasey Ford, but nonetheless it was widely shared on Twitter, Facebook, internet forums and web sites along with comments claiming that it was ""proof"" of Kavanaugh's innocence as he would never sexually assault someone who was ""ugly"": comments claiming proof innocence sexually assault This is Dr. Ford in 1982. I am going to go ahead and say this proves that she is lying. Christine Blasey ford in 1982. Proof positive Kavanaugh is innocent! Im pretty sure no one was banging this chick in 1982. #justsaying #christineblaseyford #kavanaugh #metoo Christine Blasey Ford in 1982. She must have been fending off men with a stick. ??????? This was Christine Blasey Ford in 1982. Theres NOT enough beer on the planet.... Christine Blasey Ford in 1982. Proof positive Kavanaugh is innocent! This is Christine Blasey Ford in 1982 , I think she was delusional, "" some thing did happen to her ! But not with who she dreamed up ! These pictures are of Christine Blasey Ford the paid accuser and Judge Brett Kavanaugh from 1982, is confirmation of his innocence ... I don't think Brett would have been 1000 miles close to where Christine Blasey Ford was. What say you all? This picture was also shared by Lanny Lancaster, the Cabarrus County (North Carolina) GOP chairman, with the caption:  This is the alleged sexual assault victim. Wow. Lancaster defended his decision to share the photograph to the News Observer, arguing that he was simply trying to show that the media's portrayal of Ford was inaccurate: caption News Observer I didnt say anything. I just said this is her picture. Basically, the media is distorting the facts on this lady. Everything shes said is made up. She has no evidence whatsoever. I support that theory, Lancaster said. Lancaster said he takes issue with how the news media is portraying Fords early life. The media wants you to think she was a beautiful young lady who was on her way home from the tennis courts ...  Lancaster said. I just wanted you to see the real person. I wanted people to see that this is really her. The problem with the argument implied here is twofold. First, sexual assaulters targets victims based on factors other than physical appearance. The notion that physical attractiveness of the victim is a primary criterion in such attacks is a myth that perpetuates the harmful notion that it is a woman's fault for being assaulted: myth Myth: Only certain kinds of people get raped. It cannot happen to me. FACT: Rapists act without considering their victim's physical appearance, dress, age, race, gender, or social status. Assailants seek out victims who they perceive to be vulnerable. The Orange County Rape Crisis Center has worked with victims from infancy to ninety-two years of age and from all racial and socioeconomic backgrounds. Myth: Women incite men to rape. FACT: Research has found that the vast majority of rapes are planned. Rape is the responsibility of the rapist alone. Women, children and men of every age, physical type and demeanor are raped. Opportunity is the most important factor determining when a given rapist will rape. Second, this photograph does not show Christine Blasey Ford, in 1982 or in any other year. This picture is one of an as-yet unidentified person which has been used for various memes ever since it first appeared on the internet in ""Bad Yearbook"" and ""Bad Family Photo"" galleries around 2011. Blasey Ford's name was never attached to this photograph until September 2018, when internet trolls began to claim so without evidence in order to tarnish her credibility. Bad Yearbook Bad Family Photo Here are genuine images of Christine Blasey Ford taken from her 1982 and 1984 yearbooks:    WorldWideInterweb.com.  ""The 100 Worst Yearbook Photos of All Time.""
  22 August 2012. Fallon, Brian.  ""Why the FBI Should Investigate 'Boofing.'""
  Politico.  1 October 2018. Specht, Paul.  ""NC Republican Leader Uses Photo to Mock Christine Blasey Ford. Its Not Her.""
  News Observer.  3 October 2018.",['share'],False,"Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, the Palo Alto University professor who testified before Congress in September 2018 that Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh had sexually assaulted her while they were both in high school in the 1980s, was the focus of a number of baseless and false rumors spread in an attempt to tarnish her credibility. A number of individuals also shared this fake photograph alongside a genuine image of Brett Kavanaugh from his high school yearbook in order to strengthen their flawed argument that ""handsome"" Brett would never assault ""ugly"" Ford:This comparison did not a use a real photograph of Christine Blasey Ford, but nonetheless it was widely shared on Twitter, Facebook, internet forums and web sites along with comments claiming that it was ""proof"" of Kavanaugh's innocence as he would never sexually assault someone who was ""ugly"":This picture was also shared by Lanny Lancaster, the Cabarrus County (North Carolina) GOP chairman, with the caption:  This is the alleged sexual assault victim. Wow. Lancaster defended his decision to share the photograph to the News Observer, arguing that he was simply trying to show that the media's portrayal of Ford was inaccurate:The problem with the argument implied here is twofold. First, sexual assaulters targets victims based on factors other than physical appearance. The notion that physical attractiveness of the victim is a primary criterion in such attacks is a myth that perpetuates the harmful notion that it is a woman's fault for being assaulted:This picture is one of an as-yet unidentified person which has been used for various memes ever since it first appeared on the internet in ""Bad Yearbook"" and ""Bad Family Photo"" galleries around 2011. Blasey Ford's name was never attached to this photograph until September 2018, when internet trolls began to claim so without evidence in order to tarnish her credibility."
American homeownership rate in Q2 2016 was 62.9% - lowest rate in 51yrs.,[],"Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump has often used economic statistics to attack President Barack Obamas administration, and he did the same following the Democratic National Convention. American homeownership rate in Q2 2016 was 62.9% - lowest rate in 51yrs, TrumptweetedJuly 30, 2016. WE will bring back the 'American Dream! We havent fact-checked Trump on this particular statistic before, so we took a look at the data. On the numbers The homeownership rate isdefinedas the proportion of occupied households actually owned by those living there. A Census Bureaureportreleased last week contains Trumps 62.9 percent figure, referring to the non-seasonally-adjusted homeownership rate. Trumps tweet referred toFederal Reserve Economic Datafrom the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis. His math checks out  the homeownership rate (again not seasonally adjusted) was last this low in 1965, 51 years ago. As the graph shows, the rate grew steadily since 1995, reaching a 69 percent peak in 2005. But it has been in decline ever since. Otherstudiespaint a similar picture, such as one finding the share of first-time home buyers in 2015 was 32 percent, the lowest since 1987. So Trumps data is accurate, but there are some caveats. Demographic trends Experts told us millennials are largely to blame for the dropping homeownership rate, but its as much their lifestyle preferences as it is a sign of a poor economy. Many millennials graduated college at the onset of the 2008 recession, meaning more people chose to live with their parents, said Adam DeSanctis, economic issues media manager at the National Association of Realtors. Onesurveyidentified rising student and credit card debt, as well as difficulties saving for down payments, as key deterrents. At the same time, lifestyle choices  such as marrying later in life, going to college and having fewer children  all contribute to lower levels of homeownership, DeSanctis said. Jed Kolko, an independent housing economist,arguesthat lifestyle shifts, not financial variables, are primarily responsible for more youth living with their parents. Many millennials have expressed little desire to own a home, said Byron Studdard, a financial adviser at Studdard Financial, which focuses on estate and retirement planning. Witnessing the financial crisis and their parents difficulties paying off their mortgages, as well as general desire to be mobile, serve as deterrents. Studdard also cautioned against comparisons to 1965, because that was a different generation that was more likely than millennials to view homeownership as the first step to prosperity. Im not sure the homeownership rate is necessarily going to be a good indicator of if America is great again, like it was when we had the World War II generation, Studdard explained. How big a problem is it? While the falling homeownership rate is not a positive, economists we spoke to disagreed on how problematic it was. In aNew York Timesarticle, Kolko wrote that the homeownership rate is misleading because it fails to capture renters. He said the headship rate  the percent of adults heading a household  is a better figure that captures both owners and renters. Increases in the headship rate still stimulates household construction, he said. That rate, according to the Census Bureaus 2015 Current Population Survey, has been going up as of 2013. Slight decreases in owner-occupied households were outpaced by increases in renter households, said Ralph McLaughlin, chief economist at Trulia, a company providing real estate information for buyers and sellers. Yet renter-households still boost demand for construction and other goods, he said. The comparative benefits of renting versus owning a home are still disputed, said Aaron Terrazas, a senior economist at Zillow, an online real estate database company. On the other hand, DeSanctis said the low homeownership rate poses problems for the American economy. Owning a home has typically been a major source of investment for the middle class, and renting does not fulfill the same investment function. As a result, the country has become more unequal in recent years as rising home values have benefitted current homeowners greatly at a time more people are renting and facing escalating rental prices each year, he said. He said Trump has a point in identifying the troubles people have buying a home, especially as rising rental rates and housing prices surpass income gains. The biggest housing losses immediately after the recession affected middle-aged adults, Terrazas said. Our ruling Trump said homeownership is at its lowest since 1965. The numbers back him up. However, there are some caveats. Some of the decline is due to lifestyle, and not economic, changes. In addition, experts told us the housing market is not in as dire straits as one statistic suggests. On balance, we rate this claim Mostly True.","['National', 'Economy', 'Housing']",True,"American homeownership rate in Q2 2016 was 62.9% - lowest rate in 51yrs, TrumptweetedJuly 30, 2016. WE will bring back the 'American Dream!The homeownership rate isdefinedas the proportion of occupied households actually owned by those living there. A Census Bureaureportreleased last week contains Trumps 62.9 percent figure, referring to the non-seasonally-adjusted homeownership rate.Trumps tweet referred toFederal Reserve Economic Datafrom the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis. His math checks out  the homeownership rate (again not seasonally adjusted) was last this low in 1965, 51 years ago.Otherstudiespaint a similar picture, such as one finding the share of first-time home buyers in 2015 was 32 percent, the lowest since 1987.Many millennials graduated college at the onset of the 2008 recession, meaning more people chose to live with their parents, said Adam DeSanctis, economic issues media manager at the National Association of Realtors. Onesurveyidentified rising student and credit card debt, as well as difficulties saving for down payments, as key deterrents.At the same time, lifestyle choices  such as marrying later in life, going to college and having fewer children  all contribute to lower levels of homeownership, DeSanctis said. Jed Kolko, an independent housing economist,arguesthat lifestyle shifts, not financial variables, are primarily responsible for more youth living with their parents.In aNew York Timesarticle, Kolko wrote that the homeownership rate is misleading because it fails to capture renters."
Did 41 Senators 'Vote to Let Babies Scream Until They Die If Born Alive'?,['U.S. Senate Bill 311 provoked widely shared social media posts that targeted Democratic and Independent senators in 2020. '],"In the summer of 2020, Snopes readers asked us to look into the accuracy of social media posts that claimed to list the names of 41 U.S. Senators who had ""voted to let babies scream until they die if born alive."" social media posts   The meme referred to Senate Bill 311 (SB 311), which was introduced in the Senate in January 2019 by Sen. Ben Sasse, R-Neb. The non-partisan Congressional Research Service summary of the legislation reads as follows:  summary This bill establishes requirements for the degree of care a health care practitioner must exercise in the event a child is born alive following an abortion or attempted abortion. A health care practitioner who is present must (1) exercise the same degree of care as reasonably provided to another child born alive at the same gestational age, and (2) immediately admit the child to a hospital. The bill also requires a health care practitioner or other employee to immediately report any failure to comply with this requirement to law enforcement. A person who violates the requirements is subject to criminal penalties  a fine, up to five years in prison, or both. Additionally, an individual who intentionally kills or attempts to kill a child born alive is subject to prosecution for murder. The bill bars the criminal prosecution of a mother of a child born alive for conspiracy to violate these provisions, for being an accessory after the fact, or for concealment of felony. A woman who undergoes an abortion or attempted abortion may file a civil action for damages against an individual who violates this bill. The text of SB 311 can be read in full here. It's true that Democratic and Independent senators did vote to block that bill's progress, but the above-displayed Facebook meme leaves out crucial context  federal and state laws already provide protections for babies born alive after abortions  and obscure the stated reasons for those votes, an essential component of any evaluation of a legislative vote. Overall, we rate the meme's core claim as ""false.""  here The proposed ""Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act"" has been stuck in the Senate since February 2019, despite efforts by Republicans to revive it in February 2020. The bill has not been forwarded to any Senate committee, and Republicans have failed on two occasions to obtain the votes necessary to advance the legislation through the Senate.  Those two votes, in February 2019 and February 2020, were on motions of cloture. A motion of cloture is, roughly speaking, a proposal signed by at least 16 senators to close debate on a particular bill. At first glance, that might suggest that those in favor of the cloture motion are opposed to the content of the legislation itself, but in fact, ""invoking cloture"" is a way to advance a bill's progress in the Senate by pushing through the debate stage and arriving at a full-Senate vote on the legislation itself. Cloture is a key mechanism for breaking a filibuster in the Senate.  February 2019 February 2020 motion of cloture filibuster On most matters, a cloture motion must be agreed to by 60% of senators, which usually means 60 votes (except in cases where a Senate seat is temporarily vacant). In the 2019 vote, only 53 members voted ""Yea,"" and in 2020 that number was 56  below the 60-vote threshold on each occasion. It's worth noting that the Senate has not yet voted on whether to pass SB 311 itself, so a vote in favor of a motion for cloture should not be conflated with a vote in favor of the substance of the legislation. However, it is reasonable to assume, in general, that senators who voted to push SB 311 through to the next stage towards enactment were also in favor of enacting the bill itself, and those who voted against the cloture motions were doing so in order to halt the legislation's progress because they opposed its contents. This assumption is borne out in the partisan contours of the 2019 and 2020 cloture votes: On both occasions, no Republican voted against the motion, and only Democrats voted against it (including Independent Sens. Angus King of Maine and Bernie Sanders of Vermont, who both caucus with the Democrats). On both occasions, three Democrats crossed the floor and voted in favor of the cloture motions: Sens. Bob Casey of Pennsylvania, Joe Manchin of West Virginia, and Doug Jones of Alabama.  2019 2020 The exact claim in the Facebook meme is somewhat confusing. The caption refers to 41 senators, but the list contains 44 names. In February 2019, all 44 of the senators listed in the meme voted against the Republican cloture motion. However, in February 2020, 41 of them voted against the cloture motion, with the remaining three not voting (Sens. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, and Sanders). So it's not clear to which vote the meme refers. However, on each occasion the wording of the cloture motion and the question put to senators was identical, so the distinction is only a formal one. was identical In evaluating whether the Democratic senators listed in the meme did, in fact, ""vote to let babies scream until they die if born alive,"" it is necessary to assess the reasons for their votes against cloture motions and the effect of the failure of the cloture motions.  It hardly needs to be said, but neither the bill itself, nor any statements made by the Democratic senators who opposed it, contained any mention of ""babies screaming until they die."" So in voting against the progress of SB 311, no senator was explicitly voting in order to bring about that outcome, in those terms. Rather, that phrase was a characterization of the effect of the votes, which originated from the creator of the Facebook meme.  By voting against the cloture motions, the senators halted the progress of a bill that, if enacted, would mean that federal law required health care practitioners to provide the same life-saving treatments and interventions for a baby born alive after a failed abortion (including admitting the baby to a hospital) as they are currently required to provide to babies born alive under other circumstances. The bill would also mean that health care practitioners would be required, under federal law, to report to law enforcement if they became aware that someone else had violated those requirements. Any health practitioner convicted of failing to fulfill those requirements, or failing to report someone else's violation, would be liable to be fined and/or imprisoned for up to five years. SB 311 would also mean that a person found to have intentionally killed a baby born alive after a failed abortion would be liable to conviction and punishment under the federal prohibition against murder.  prohibition Does this mean that by preventing the passage of SB 311 Democratic senators were allowing health care practitioners to lawfully let babies die, without rendering aid, if they are born alive after a failed abortion? Not really.  Federal law already explicitly states that babies born alive, regardless of the circumstances, are human persons and should be treated as such in the context of criminal law. The Born-Alive Infants Protection Act was signed into law by U.S. President George W. Bush in 2002. It states that: states (a) In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the words person, human being, child, and individual, shall include every infant member of the species homo sapiens who is born alive at any stage of development. As used in this section, the term born alive"", with respect to a member of the species homo sapiens, means the complete expulsion or extraction from his or her mother of that member, at any stage of development, who after such expulsion or extraction breathes or has a beating heart, pulsation of the umbilical cord, or definite movement of voluntary muscles, regardless of whether the umbilical cord has been cut, and regardless of whether the expulsion or extraction occurs as a result of natural or induced labor, cesarean section, or induced abortion. This means that intentionally killing a baby born alive can be, and is, prosecuted as murder, since the baby is defined under the 2002 act as a human person. In principle, it also means that doctors and nurses have the same professional, legal, and ethical responsibility to babies born alive after failed abortions as they do to babies born alive in other circumstances.  The 2002 law does not include an explicit, affirmative duty of care for health care practitioners and does not stipulate any penalties for failing to provide appropriate care. However, many individual states do. Based on research originally published by the anti-abortion Family Research Council, Snopes checked legislation in all 50 states and found that, as of Aug. 20, 2020, 34 states have laws that explicitly either: affirm the equal right to medical care of a baby born alive after an abortion; or assert an affirmative legal obligation for medical practitioners to provide care; or set out criminal penalties for failing to provide care; or all of the above provisions. A full list of each state's ""born alive"" abortion laws, including links to the original legislation, can be found here.  published here (Note: At the time of the first cloture vote in February 2019, the number of states with ""born alive"" abortion laws was 33. West Virginia's Senate passed the state's own Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act on Feb. 10, 2020, and Gov. Jim Justice signed it into law on March 2, 2020. By the time the U.S. Senate had its second cloture motion on Feb. 25, 2020, Justice had already vowed to sign the West Virginia law, meaning the number of states with ""born alive"" abortion laws was imminently about to become 34.) passed signed vowed The effect of the decision to block the progress of SB 311 through the U.S. Senate was to preserve the legal status quo around the country, namely that: two-thirds of states already had laws offering various levels of protection for babies born alive after failed abortions, and various levels of criminal penalties set out for health care practitioners who fail to provide care for them; and that federal law already recognized that babies born alive after failed abortions should be treated as human persons in the context of criminal law. This significantly undermines the Facebook meme's claim that the 44 senators had voted to allow babies to be left to die if they are born alive after a failed abortion, because that it isn't the case in most states. However, passing SB 311 would mean that there would be no ambiguity about the criminal implications and consequences of the 2002 law. Under SB 311, federal law would unequivocally set out a legal duty of care and a reporting obligation for health care professionals, as well as specific criminal penalties. While the 2002 law empowered states to enact their own ""born alive"" abortion laws, and 34 states have opted to do just that, 16 states have not, and SB 311 would introduce a ""born alive"" abortion law that would apply uniformly throughout the entire country. By voting to block the progress of SB 311, the Democratic and Independent senators did undoubtedly prevent that outcome from becoming much more likely.  In evaluating whether voting against the cloture motions on SB 311 meant the 44 senators were voting to allow babies born alive after abortion to simply die without medical aid, it is also necessary to examine the reasons why the senators voted the way they did.  In general, the Democratic senators who gave statements about their votes on SB 311 said that they had opposed the passage of the bill because they felt it was unnecessary in light of existing law and because they felt it inappropriately criminalized health care practitioners and interfered in the doctor-patient relationship. None said they had voted against the cloture motions in order to allow babies to be left to die or expressed indifference about that outcome. Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia, for example, wrote, ""We should not unnecessarily create new federal crimes and penalties to punish behavior that is already illegal under existing state and federal laws."" Sen. Ben Cardin of Maryland wrote, ""It has always been illegal to kill or harm a newborn infant, and this bill had nothing to do with that. Instead, this bill would have subjected medical professionals to unprecedented criminal liability and inappropriately comes between a woman and her doctor. wrote wrote Sen. Mazie Hirono of Hawaii said SB 311 was ""a solution in search of a problem,"" adding, ""Contrary to what the proponents of this bill argue, it is and has always been a crime to harm or kill newborn babies. And people guilty of this crime can already be charged and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law."" said Speaking from the floor of the Senate, Sen. Tammy Duckworth of Illinois emphasized the fact that abortions that take place late enough for a fetus to show vital signs overwhelmingly occur in the context of a late diagnosis of a fetal abnormality that will, in short order, prove fatal. She stated that her reason for opposing SB 311 was that it would exacerbate the suffering of parents in such scenarios and force health care practitioners to attempt medical interventions that they know to be futile. stated ... Imagine the heartbreak of going to the doctor one day and learning that theres no chance your baby will survive that theres no hope your baby girl will ever speak her first word or take her first step  Or that delivering her would put your own life at risk, leaving your firstborn to grow up without a mother. These are the types of scenarios that lead to the heart-wrenching decision to terminate a pregnancy later on. As the mom of two little girls, I cant begin to fathom that kind of pain. And yet today, some on the other side of the aisle are trying to use those parents' suffering for political advantage  making worst-case scenarios like these all the more difficult by pushing a bill aimed to criminalize reproductive care no matter the cost. If it becomes law, this bill would force doctors to perform ineffective, invasive procedures on fetuses born with fatal abnormalities  even if its against the best interests of the child. Even if it goes against recommended standards of care and they know it wouldnt extend or improve the babys life. Even if it would prolong the suffering of the families  forcing women to endure added lasting trauma ... making one of the worst moments in their lives somehow even more painful. If physicians refuse, theyd be punished ... sentenced to up to five years in prison. In February 2019, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the American College of Nurse-Midwives co-signed a letter to U.S. Senators, urging them to vote against SB 311 for similar reasons to those given by Duckworth and others, writing: letter ""It [S. 311] injects politicians into the patient-provider relationship, disregarding providers training and clinical judgment and undermining their ability to determine the best course of action with their patients."" Late-term abortions are exceedingly rare. In 2016, the most recent year for which data was available, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reported that just 1.2% of abortions took place after 21 weeks' gestational age. reported Deaths involving babies born alive after an abortion are even rarer. According to CDC data, just 143 newborn deaths were recorded as resulting from spontaneous or induced terminations of pregnancy between 2003 and 2014, a period during which more than 49 million live births took place. The CDC advised that the figure of 143 might be an understatement, but also stated that two-thirds of those newborn deaths involved a ""maternal complication or one or more congenital anomalies,"" which corroborates the claims of Duckworth and others.  data Sasse, Ben. ""S. 311 -- Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act.""
 U.S. Senate. 31 January 2019. Davis, Christopher M. ""Invoking Cloture in the Senate.""
 Congressional Research Service. 6 April 2017. Congressional Research Service. ""Filibusters and Cloture in the Senate.""
 7 April 2017. Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School. ""U.S. Code, Title 18, Part I, Chapter 51, Section 1111 -- Murder.""
 Accessed 20 August 2020. Chabot, Steve. ""H.R. 2175 -- Born Alive Infants Protection Act of 2002.""
 U.S. House of Representatives. 5 August 2002. Family Research Council. ""Pro-Life Laws in the States -- Born-Alive Protections.""
 Accessed 20 August 2020. PBS/The Associated Press. ""West Virginia Senate Passes 'Born Alive' Abortion Bill.""
 10 February 2020. Justice, Jim. ""Governor Speaks on 'Protecting Abortion Survivors.'""
 The Point Pleasant Register. 14 February 2020. Kaine, Tim. ""Kaine Statement on S. 311.""
 25 February 2020. Cardin, Ben. ""Cardin Statement on the Born Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act.""
 26 February 2019. Hirono, Mazie. ""Hirono, Murray, and Colleagues Denounce Latest Republican Attack on a Womans Right to Choose in Remarks on the Senate Floor""
 25 February 2019. Duckworth, Tammy. ""Minutes Before Vote, Duckworth Pushes Senate to Reject Latest Anti-Choice, Anti-Doctor GOP Bill.""
 25 February 2019. Jatlaoui, Tara et al. ""Abortion Surveillance -- United States, 2016.""
 U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 29 November 2019. National Center for Health Statistics. ""Mortality Records with Mention of International Classification of Diseases-10 code P96.4 (Termination of Pregnancy): United States, 2003-2014.""
U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 11 April 2016. Robertson, Lori. ""The Facts on the Born-Alive Debate.""
 Factcheck.org. 4 March 2019.",['liability'],False,"In the summer of 2020, Snopes readers asked us to look into the accuracy of social media posts that claimed to list the names of 41 U.S. Senators who had ""voted to let babies scream until they die if born alive.""The meme referred to Senate Bill 311 (SB 311), which was introduced in the Senate in January 2019 by Sen. Ben Sasse, R-Neb. The non-partisan Congressional Research Service summary of the legislation reads as follows: The text of SB 311 can be read in full here. It's true that Democratic and Independent senators did vote to block that bill's progress, but the above-displayed Facebook meme leaves out crucial context  federal and state laws already provide protections for babies born alive after abortions  and obscure the stated reasons for those votes, an essential component of any evaluation of a legislative vote. Overall, we rate the meme's core claim as ""false."" Those two votes, in February 2019 and February 2020, were on motions of cloture. A motion of cloture is, roughly speaking, a proposal signed by at least 16 senators to close debate on a particular bill. At first glance, that might suggest that those in favor of the cloture motion are opposed to the content of the legislation itself, but in fact, ""invoking cloture"" is a way to advance a bill's progress in the Senate by pushing through the debate stage and arriving at a full-Senate vote on the legislation itself. Cloture is a key mechanism for breaking a filibuster in the Senate. This assumption is borne out in the partisan contours of the 2019 and 2020 cloture votes: On both occasions, no Republican voted against the motion, and only Democrats voted against it (including Independent Sens. Angus King of Maine and Bernie Sanders of Vermont, who both caucus with the Democrats). On both occasions, three Democrats crossed the floor and voted in favor of the cloture motions: Sens. Bob Casey of Pennsylvania, Joe Manchin of West Virginia, and Doug Jones of Alabama. The exact claim in the Facebook meme is somewhat confusing. The caption refers to 41 senators, but the list contains 44 names. In February 2019, all 44 of the senators listed in the meme voted against the Republican cloture motion. However, in February 2020, 41 of them voted against the cloture motion, with the remaining three not voting (Sens. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, and Sanders). So it's not clear to which vote the meme refers. However, on each occasion the wording of the cloture motion and the question put to senators was identical, so the distinction is only a formal one.The bill would also mean that health care practitioners would be required, under federal law, to report to law enforcement if they became aware that someone else had violated those requirements. Any health practitioner convicted of failing to fulfill those requirements, or failing to report someone else's violation, would be liable to be fined and/or imprisoned for up to five years. SB 311 would also mean that a person found to have intentionally killed a baby born alive after a failed abortion would be liable to conviction and punishment under the federal prohibition against murder. Federal law already explicitly states that babies born alive, regardless of the circumstances, are human persons and should be treated as such in the context of criminal law. The Born-Alive Infants Protection Act was signed into law by U.S. President George W. Bush in 2002. It states that:Based on research originally published by the anti-abortion Family Research Council, Snopes checked legislation in all 50 states and found that, as of Aug. 20, 2020, 34 states have laws that explicitly either: affirm the equal right to medical care of a baby born alive after an abortion; or assert an affirmative legal obligation for medical practitioners to provide care; or set out criminal penalties for failing to provide care; or all of the above provisions. A full list of each state's ""born alive"" abortion laws, including links to the original legislation, can be found here. (Note: At the time of the first cloture vote in February 2019, the number of states with ""born alive"" abortion laws was 33. West Virginia's Senate passed the state's own Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act on Feb. 10, 2020, and Gov. Jim Justice signed it into law on March 2, 2020. By the time the U.S. Senate had its second cloture motion on Feb. 25, 2020, Justice had already vowed to sign the West Virginia law, meaning the number of states with ""born alive"" abortion laws was imminently about to become 34.)Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia, for example, wrote, ""We should not unnecessarily create new federal crimes and penalties to punish behavior that is already illegal under existing state and federal laws."" Sen. Ben Cardin of Maryland wrote, ""It has always been illegal to kill or harm a newborn infant, and this bill had nothing to do with that. Instead, this bill would have subjected medical professionals to unprecedented criminal liability and inappropriately comes between a woman and her doctor.Sen. Mazie Hirono of Hawaii said SB 311 was ""a solution in search of a problem,"" adding, ""Contrary to what the proponents of this bill argue, it is and has always been a crime to harm or kill newborn babies. And people guilty of this crime can already be charged and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.""Speaking from the floor of the Senate, Sen. Tammy Duckworth of Illinois emphasized the fact that abortions that take place late enough for a fetus to show vital signs overwhelmingly occur in the context of a late diagnosis of a fetal abnormality that will, in short order, prove fatal. She stated that her reason for opposing SB 311 was that it would exacerbate the suffering of parents in such scenarios and force health care practitioners to attempt medical interventions that they know to be futile.In February 2019, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the American College of Nurse-Midwives co-signed a letter to U.S. Senators, urging them to vote against SB 311 for similar reasons to those given by Duckworth and others, writing:Late-term abortions are exceedingly rare. In 2016, the most recent year for which data was available, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reported that just 1.2% of abortions took place after 21 weeks' gestational age.Deaths involving babies born alive after an abortion are even rarer. According to CDC data, just 143 newborn deaths were recorded as resulting from spontaneous or induced terminations of pregnancy between 2003 and 2014, a period during which more than 49 million live births took place. The CDC advised that the figure of 143 might be an understatement, but also stated that two-thirds of those newborn deaths involved a ""maternal complication or one or more congenital anomalies,"" which corroborates the claims of Duckworth and others. "
Was a bill passed by Pelosi that enabled her husband to earn millions by selling USPS property?,['A meme circulating on Facebook appears to be a rehash of another version from 2013.'],"In late August 2020, readers inquired about a meme circulating on Facebook that claimed falsely that U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi had rigged legislation to help her husband benefit financially from selling off property belonging to the U.S. Postal Service.   The meme's text reads: This is Paul Pelosi (aka, Nancys Husband). He owns Financial Leasing Services LLC, a San Francisco based Real Estate and Venture Capitalist Firm. His net worth is 120 million. Why is this important? His wife sits on the House Appropriations committee. This committee appropriates funds to the United States Postal Service ( and others). Why is this important? Easy. She passed a bill to sell off 9 billion dollars ( yes 9 BILLION WITH a [smile emoji] worth of FEDERALLY OWNED POST OFFICE PROPERTY AND AWARDED THE THE CONTRACT TO, none other, Financial Leasing Services LLC. Her husbands firm. Why is this important? The commissions rate was set at 9%. That is almost a 1 BILLION dollar contract. If thats not enough, lets look at the new stimulus package. Nancy wants 25 billion in the stimulus package for the postal service where only 1.25 billion goes to making sure voting ballots are legit. The other 23.5 billion is going to upgrading the facilities so they are more attractive to potential buyers for her husbands firm. Corrupt to the core. It's true that Speaker Pelosi's husband Paul Pelosi owns and operates Financial Leasing Services, a San Francisco-based investment company. Financial disclosures in 2018, the most recent available, show Speaker Pelosi's estimated net worth to be $114 million. owns estimated But Speaker Pelosi doesn't sit on the House Appropriations Committee. Her spokesman Drew Hammill told us by email she hasn't been on the committee since 2002. Furthermore, we found no evidence that a bill to sell off $9 billion-worth of federally-owned U.S. Postal Service property exists. doesn't sit It's true that the U.S. House of Representatives passed a bill that would, if signed into law, provide $25 billion to shore up the Postal Service and rectify delays in mail delivery service, but it doesn't allocate $1.25 billion toward ""making sure voting ballots are legit."" The funding was originally on the table during negotiations over a coronavirus stimulus package, but those negotiations broke down. Whether the stand-alone Postal Service funding bill will be signed into law by U.S. President Donald Trump seems unlikely. bill originally unlikely The meme seems to be a rehash of a similar one that dates back to 2013  except in that case the subject of the claim was Richard Blum, the husband of U.S. Sen. Diane Feinstein, D-Calif., who like Pelosi hails from San Francisco. similar one Mikkelson, David.  ""Did Dianne Feinstein Get Her Husbands Company a USPS Contract?""   Snopes. 23 April 2013. Rayome, Alison DeNisco.  ""What the New USPS Bill Means for the Next Stimulus Package.""   CNET.  24 August 2020. Pramuk, Jacob.  ""House Passes Bill to Put $25 Billion Into USPS and Reverse Changes Amid Uproar.""   CNBC.  22 August 2020. Henney, Megan.  ""How Much Money is Nancy Pelosi Worth?""   Yahoo! News.  17 July 2020. Wildermuth, John.  ""Pelosi's Husband Prefers a Low Profile.""   San Francisco Chronicle.  1 January 2007.",['investment'],False,"It's true that Speaker Pelosi's husband Paul Pelosi owns and operates Financial Leasing Services, a San Francisco-based investment company. Financial disclosures in 2018, the most recent available, show Speaker Pelosi's estimated net worth to be $114 million.But Speaker Pelosi doesn't sit on the House Appropriations Committee. Her spokesman Drew Hammill told us by email she hasn't been on the committee since 2002. Furthermore, we found no evidence that a bill to sell off $9 billion-worth of federally-owned U.S. Postal Service property exists.It's true that the U.S. House of Representatives passed a bill that would, if signed into law, provide $25 billion to shore up the Postal Service and rectify delays in mail delivery service, but it doesn't allocate $1.25 billion toward ""making sure voting ballots are legit."" The funding was originally on the table during negotiations over a coronavirus stimulus package, but those negotiations broke down. Whether the stand-alone Postal Service funding bill will be signed into law by U.S. President Donald Trump seems unlikely.The meme seems to be a rehash of a similar one that dates back to 2013  except in that case the subject of the claim was Richard Blum, the husband of U.S. Sen. Diane Feinstein, D-Calif., who like Pelosi hails from San Francisco."
"A nation established by brilliant minds, yet managed by fools.","['Did a list of ""A Country Founded by Geniuses but Run by Idiots"" entries originate with comedian Jeff Foxworthy?']","Collected via email, 2013: A Country Founded by Geniuses but Run by Idiots Attributed to Jeff Foxworthy: If you can get arrested for hunting or fishing without a license, but not for entering and remaining in the country illegally  you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots. If you have to get your parents permission to go on a field trip or to take an aspirin in school, but not to get an abortion  you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots. If you MUST show your identification to board an airplane, cash a check, buy liquor, or check out a library book and rent a video, but not to vote for who runs the government  you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots. If the government wants to prevent stable, law-abiding citizens from owning gun magazines that hold more than ten rounds, but gives twenty F-16 fighter jets to the crazy new leaders in Egypt  you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots. If, in the nations largest city, you can buy two 16-ounce sodas, but not one 24-ounce soda, because 24-ounces of a sugary drink might make you fat  you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots. If an 80-year-old woman or a three-year-old girl who is confined to a wheelchair can be strip-searched by the TSA at the airport, but a woman in a burka or a hijab is only subject to having her neck and head searched  you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots. If your government believes that the best way to eradicate trillions of dollars of debt is to spend trillions more  you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots. If a seven-year-old boy can be thrown out of school for saying his teacher is ""cute,"" but hosting a sexual exploration or diversity class ingrade school is perfectly acceptable  you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots. If hard work and success are met with higher taxes and more government regulation and intrusion, while not working is rewarded with Food Stamps, WIC checks, Medicaid benefits, subsidized housing, and free cell phones  you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots. If the governments plan for getting people back to work is to provide incentives for not working, by granting 99 weeks of unemployment checks, without any requirement to prove that gainful employment was diligently sought, but couldnt be found  you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots. If you pay your mortgage faithfully, denying yourself the newest big-screen TV, while your neighbor buys iPhones, time shares, a wall-sized do-it-all plasma screen TV and new cars, and the government forgives his debt when he defaults on his mortgage  you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots. If being stripped of your Constitutional right to defend yourself makes you more ""safe"" according to the government  you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots. What a country! How about we give God a reason to continue blessing America! The above-referenced list of entries detailing ""A Country Founded by Geniuses But Run by Idiots"" was widely circulated via the internet in early 2013 with an ""Attributed to Jeff Foxworthy"" tag at its head, leading many to believe it was actually the work of that nationally famous comedian. Jeff Foxworthy However, othen than its basic ""If you ... you might be ..."" pattern that mimics Jeff Foxworthy's popular ""You might be a redneck"" routines, this item bears little resemblance to anything produced by Foxworthy: his comedic material is typically affectionate and self-deprecating and involves poking fun at his own milieu; his brand of humor is much more apolitical and non-partisan than the list reproduced above. (Nonetheless, Jeff's name has been falsely attached to other similar political pieces that have little in common with the tenor and substance of his comedy material.) attached Jeff's brother, Jay, confirmed for us that this material was not written by his sibling. The original compiler of this list appears to be Fritz Edmunds, who posted it to his ""Politically True"" blog back on Feb. 3, 2013 (albeit with a disclaimer noting that ""some of the ideas were from an email that did not contain any copyright""). Politically True As usual, the list has seen numerous alterations in the process of being passed around the Internet, and several of the entries appearing in earlier versions have since dropped off: If the only school curriculum allowed to explain how we got here is evolution, but your government stops a $15 million construction project to keep a rare spider from evolving to extinction  you might live in a country founded by geniuses and run by idiots. If your government believes that using steroids or other drugs will ruin your life, but throwing you in prison for years will not  you might live in a country founded by geniuses and run by idiots. If children are forcibly removed from parents who discipline them with spankings while children of addicts are left in filth and drug infested homes  you might live in a country founded by geniuses and run by idiots. If your government believes that the way to make a school of unarmed children safe is to pass another law, this time with the illusion that three 10-round magazines in a rifle is safer than a 30-round magazine  you might live in a country founded by geniuses and run by idiots. The phrase ""founded by geniuses and run by idiots"" appears to be a variant of a similar statement that appeared in Herman Wouk's 1951 novel ""The Caine Mutiny"": ""The Navy is a master plan designed by geniuses for execution by idiots."" In the 1954 film of the same name, the line was rendered, ""The first thing you've got to learn about this ship is that she was designed by geniuses to be run by idiots."" <!-- Sources:    Metz, Ken.  ""It's Never Wise to Insult the Police Officer.""   The Bath County News-Outlook.  30 August 2007.--> Update [Aug. 2, 2022]: Updated SEO and title.",['taxes'],False,"The above-referenced list of entries detailing ""A Country Founded by Geniuses But Run by Idiots"" was widely circulated via the internet in early 2013 with an ""Attributed to Jeff Foxworthy"" tag at its head, leading many to believe it was actually the work of that nationally famous comedian.However, othen than its basic ""If you ... you might be ..."" pattern that mimics Jeff Foxworthy's popular ""You might be a redneck"" routines, this item bears little resemblance to anything produced by Foxworthy: his comedic material is typically affectionate and self-deprecating and involves poking fun at his own milieu; his brand of humor is much more apolitical and non-partisan than the list reproduced above. (Nonetheless, Jeff's name has been falsely attached to other similar political pieces that have little in common with the tenor and substance of his comedy material.)Jeff's brother, Jay, confirmed for us that this material was not written by his sibling. The original compiler of this list appears to be Fritz Edmunds, who posted it to his ""Politically True"" blog back on Feb. 3, 2013 (albeit with a disclaimer noting that ""some of the ideas were from an email that did not contain any copyright"")."
Did Nostradamus Predict the World Will Fall After a 'Feeble Man' Rules?,['Nostradamus has been credited with accurately predicting dozens of historical events.'],"A four-line poem, also known as a quatrain, allegedly written by 16th-century philosopher Michel de Nostradamus, described predictions of a future plague that would fall upon the world. Some assumed that this so-called plague referred to the COVID-19 pandemic, which Snopes has previously debunked. The alleged quatrain went on to describe a feeble man who was set to rule the western world with a Jezebel after the plague. According to Snopes readers, renditions of this poem appeared to suggest that this man and Jezebel either referred to U.S. President Donald Trump or President-elect Joe Biden, depending on the person sharing the poem. In the end, this foolish ruler will cause the great eagle—presumably the United States—to suffer and fall. The meme below circulated in early 2021. It is unclear where this quatrain originated or who the original poster was. Nostradamus, who was also a French physician, first published Les Prophéties in 1555. It is thought that his collection of poems, which are compiled in ten sets of verses of 100 quatrains each, contains mythological and astrological predictions for the future world. In the centuries that followed his original publication, he has remained prominent in modern popular culture, often among internet users who share fabricated predictions falsely attributed to him. Nostradamus is credited with accurately predicting many historical events, according to Rare Books Digest. Although many of his poems are largely vague and could apply to a number of events, some of his predictions do come eerily close to actual occurrences. However, the meme in question does not appear to make that list. A look through The Compleat Works of Nostradamus did not reveal any mention of a Jezebel or a feeble man. While the word ""plague"" was mentioned more than 30 times in the Nostradamus text, there is no instance where it occurs alongside the same wording as in the meme. Furthermore, it is also important to note that the quatrains written by Nostradamus do not follow chronological order. So, while they may be broken down into what the author considered to be centuries, these do not directly translate to the century in which any prediction was anticipated to occur.",['credit'],False,"A four-line poem, also known as a quatrain, allegedly written by 16th-century philosopher Michel de Nostradamus described predictions of a future plague that would fall upon the world. (Some assumed that this so-called plague referred to the COVID-19 pandemic, which Snopes has previously debunked here.)It is unclear where this quatrain originated from or who the original poster was. Nostradamus, who was also a French physician, first published Les Prophties in 1555. It is thought that his collection of poems, which are compiled in 10 sets of verses of 100 quatrains each, contain mythological and astrological predictions for the future world. In the centuries that followed his original publication, he has remained prominent in modern popular culture, often among internet users who share fabricated predictions falsely attributed to him.Nostradamus is credited with accurately predicting many historical events, according to Rare Books Digest. And though many of his poems are largely vague and could apply to a number of events, some of his predictions do come eerily close to actual events.But the meme in question does not appear to make that list. A look through The Compleat Works of Nostradamus did not reveal any mention of a jezebel or a feeble man. And though the word plague was mentioned more than 30 times in the Nostradamus text, there is no instance where it occurs alongside the same wording as in the meme."
"Over 80 percent of our trade deficit today is with countries that are not trade agreement partners, that are not level playing fields for the United States.",[],"U.S. Rep. Kevin Brady, R-The Woodlands, spoke last month in support of creating an Emergency Trade Deficit Commission while expressing his hopes for congressional ratification of trade agreements with South Korea, Panama, and Colombia. ""The world has changed,"" Brady said on the House floor on July 28. ""It's not enough to simply buy American; we have to sell American, sell our products, goods, and services throughout this world."" In fact, over 80 percent of our trade deficit today is with countries that are not trade agreement partners and do not provide a level playing field for the United States; that's why we push hard for those agreements. The 80 percent figure startled a reader who urged us to review it; we were happy to oblige. Some background: In June, the U.S. trade deficit reached nearly $50 billion, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. Exports in June totaled $150.5 billion, while imports amounted to $200.3 billion. According to the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, the United States has free-trade agreements—meaning neither country imposes trade restrictions such as tariffs—with 17 nations, which together account for 34 percent of U.S. imports and exports. The countries are Israel, Canada, Mexico, Jordan, Chile, Singapore, Australia, Morocco, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Honduras, Guatemala, Bahrain, the Dominican Republic, Costa Rica, Oman, and Peru. Through participation in the World Trade Organization, the United States has agreements permitting some restrictions with many nations. These include export powerhouses such as China, which, from January through June 2010, was the leading exporter to the United States, with $161 billion in exported goods, according to the Census Bureau. China was followed in the exports-to-USA category by Canada, Mexico, and Japan. Regarding Brady's more than 80 percent breakout, Joe Kafchinski, a bureau statistician, stated that from January through June, 13 percent of the nation's trade deficit involved countries that have free-trade agreements with the United States—meaning 87 percent of the deficit was with nations without such agreements. Next, we wondered about Brady's assertion that those agreements serve to level the playing field with other countries, trade-wise, and thus reduce the U.S. trade deficit. The National Association of Manufacturers claims that free-trade agreements ease the export of American goods: ""Free trade agreements (FTAs) account for nearly one-half of U.S. manufactured goods exports,"" the association states on its website. They lower the price of consumer goods in the United States as well as the costs U.S. businesses pay for imported materials. Bilateral deals also open foreign markets to U.S. goods, increasing employment in those export sectors. The manufacturers note that the Census Bureau reports that over the past two years, U.S. manufacturers had a $50 billion surplus with their counterparts in FTA partner countries. Conversely, during the same time period, the U.S. trade deficit in manufactured goods with the rest of the world was an astounding $820 billion. Put another way, the group states that 95 percent of the nation's manufactured-goods deficit is with nations that do not have free-trade agreements with the United States. For labor's perspective, we contacted Jeff Vogt, a global economic policy specialist for the AFL-CIO. Vogt stated that China's 2001 entry into the WTO drove up the U.S. deficit with non-free-trade nations. Regardless of which countries account for the deficit, Vogt said, the imbalance is a problem because the domestic economy benefits more from exports than imports. Vogt shared a March 2010 report by the nonpartisan Economic Policy Institute, which focuses on the economic needs of low- and middle-income Americans. The report states that the U.S. trade deficit with China increased by $186 billion between 2001 and 2008. Rapidly growing imports of computer and electronic parts (including computers, parts, semiconductors, and audio-video equipment) accounted for more than 40 percent of the surge, the report says, with deficits in advanced technology products responsible for 27 percent of the U.S.-China deficit. Additionally, according to the report, the growth of the deficit contributed to the loss of 627,700 U.S. jobs in computer and electronic products, along with other hard-hit industrial sectors, including apparel and accessories (150,200 jobs), miscellaneous manufactured goods (136,900), and fabricated metal products (108,700). However, trade agreements are not the only factors behind the deficit with China. The report identifies a major cause as currency manipulation. Unlike other currencies, the Chinese yuan does not fluctuate freely against the dollar, giving Chinese-made goods an artificial price advantage overseas. In June 2010, China's central bank announced that it would allow the yuan to fluctuate more, but the value of the yuan has since increased by less than 1 percent, according to a news report posted online this week by FinanceAsia. Robert Scott, an economist at the nonpartisan Economic Policy Institute in Washington, cautioned against presuming that free-trade agreements benefit the United States, stating that this depends in part on whether the other nation is as developed as the United States and has open markets. For instance, the U.S. runs a trade deficit with its free-trade neighbor Mexico, he noted, dominated by a flow of manufacturing plants to the less-developed country. Free-trade agreements, Scott argued, are designed to make the world safe for multinationals to outsource production indefinitely. In a July 1 article on the institute's website that criticized the proposed trade agreement with South Korea as foolish, Scott wrote: ""History shows that such trade deals lead to rapidly growing trade deficits and job loss in the United States."" Clearly, there is a difference of opinion on whether free-trade agreements are beneficial in relation to the growing U.S. trade deficit, as Brady asserts. However, the key statistic in Brady's statement holds true. In fact, he understates the share of our trade deficit with nations that do not have free-trade agreements with the U.S. We rate Brady's statement as Mostly True.","['Trade', 'Texas']",True,"Free-trade agreements, Scott said, are designed to make the world safe for multinationals to outsource production forever. And in aJuly 1article on the institute's website that criticized the proposed trade agreement with South Korea as foolish, Scott wrote: History shows that such trade deals lead to rapidly growing trade deficits and job loss in the United States."
Did a Waitress 'Run to the Manager' After Serving a Cop?,"['The story of a waitress, a cop, and a generous tip was seized on and dramatized by a viral content website.']","On Feb. 15, 2019, a pregnant waitress in her third trimester received a generous $100 tip after serving lunch to a cop. It happened at the Lamp Post Diner in Clementon, New Jersey. A Voorhees County police officer had ordered a lunch that cost less than $9. He paid his bill and left the diner before the waitress, Courtney English, was shown the receipt by the hostess. The story ended up being reported by local and national news media. NJ.com reported that the tip ""brought her to tears"": local national reported As Courtney English worked the lunch crowd Friday at the Lamp Post Diner, she got to chatting with customers about the upcoming birth of her first child. English is nearly eight months pregnant and has been working at the Gloucester Township diner to save as much money as possible before her daughter arrives. What happened next brought her to tears. A police officer dining on a salad at a nearby table must have overheard the conversation, she said. When he left to pay the bill, the anonymous officer included a $100 tip on the $8.75 check, along with a simple note: ""Enjoy your first. You will never forget it. This was all true. Then a viral content website seized on the story for profit. The person or people behind the website HouseDiver, which claimed to be managed from Israel, dramatized the tale of kindness into a 71-page slideshow-style article. Most of the pages contained about three sentences each. Since at least January 2021, the HouseDiver article was advertised on the Taboola advertising platform with a misleading headline: ""Pregnant Waitress Charges Cop $9 For Lunch, Moments Later She Runs To The Manager."" Another ad read: ""[Pic] Heavily Pregnant Waitress Runs To Her Boss In Tears After Seeing What Cop Left Next To Bill.""   The strategy behind HouseDiver's 71-page article was known as advertising ""arbitrage."" The goal for the website was to make more money on the ads displayed on each of the 71 pages than it cost to run the initial ad that lured readers to the story in the first place. HouseDiver appeared to have located a number of pictures of English and her child, who was born weeks after English received the $100 tip. The viral content website used multiple photographs of her child without her permission. We contacted English, who was eager to set the record straight. We asked her if she had seen the misleading and dramatized version of the story. ""I came across all of that too and was very upset,"" English said. She confirmed to us that she did not ""run to the manager."" Further, she said that the story's writers ""came up with some really outlandish things"" and that much of it was ""over-exaggerated."" We also notified her that it appeared pictures of her and her child had been used without her permission. ""Definitely without my permission,"" she said. Honestly, I just find it inappropriate that pictures I didnt give permission to be used are all over the internet. Pictures of my minor child are being shared with false information and I just feel its an invasion of our privacy, as well as I didnt consent to it. As for the real story of the waitress, the cop, and the $100 tip, Courtney English's father, Brian, shared his thoughts in a Facebook post. It read, in part: waitress Facebook post What a wonderful person to not only leave a VERY generous tip, but a lovely message. I don't know you Mr. Police Officer, but you made my little girl cry, and made her year. Thank you. I always had the utmost respect for officers, but you went above and beyond not just an officer, but a beautiful human being. God Bless. We provided information to English regarding how she can report the advertisement to the Taboola advertising platform. We also directed her to the contact page for housediver.com, the website that hosted her child's pictures without her permission. For further reading, we have previously reported on a similar instance of a viral content website seizing on another true story about something that was hidden in a necklace. previously reported Snopes debunks a wide range of content, and online advertisements are no exception. Misleading ads often lead to obscure websites that host lengthy slideshow articles with lots of pages. It's called advertising ""arbitrage."" The advertiser's goal is to make more money on ads displayed on the slideshow's pages than it cost to show the initial ad that lured them to it. Feel free to submit ads to us, and be sure to include a screenshot of the ad and the link to where the ad leads. submit ads to us",['profit'],NEI,"The story ended up being reported by local and national news media. NJ.com reported that the tip ""brought her to tears"":As for the real story of the waitress, the cop, and the $100 tip, Courtney English's father, Brian, shared his thoughts in a Facebook post. It read, in part:For further reading, we have previously reported on a similar instance of a viral content website seizing on another true story about something that was hidden in a necklace.Snopes debunks a wide range of content, and online advertisements are no exception. Misleading ads often lead to obscure websites that host lengthy slideshow articles with lots of pages. It's called advertising ""arbitrage."" The advertiser's goal is to make more money on ads displayed on the slideshow's pages than it cost to show the initial ad that lured them to it. Feel free to submit ads to us, and be sure to include a screenshot of the ad and the link to where the ad leads."
Does Chick-fil-A Pay a $17 Starting Wage?,"['Company spokesperson: ""Chick-fil-A restaurants are individually owned and operated, so wage decisions are made at the local level."" ']","A photograph supposedly showing a help-wanted bulletin featuring a starting wage of $16.50 for a position at a Chick-fil-A restaurant was widely circulated on Facebook in August 2019: Facebook This single photograph of this lone sign led some viewers to believe that a starting wage of $16.50 was available at all Chick-fil-A locations. But that isn't the case.  For starters, the sign notes that this wage is ""based on position and availability."" In other words, this wage isn't available to all new hires. Furthermore, Chick-fil-A restaurants are individually owned, meaning wages vary depending on location. While some Chick-fil-A franchises may offer similar wages to those featured on this sign, the wage is not a company-wide policy.  This photograph was taken at a Chick-Fil-A in Pleasanton, California. In July 2019, this Chick-fil-A location posted a similar flyer to their Facebook page: This isn't the only Chick-fil-A restaurant that is offering close to $17 an hour. Another Chick-fil-A restaurant in Sacramento, California, raised its starting wage to $17 hour. raised its starting wage Eric Mason, owner of the Sacramento Chick-fil-A, told a television station in June 2019 that he was hoping to attract ""hospitality professionals"" with his new wage offer. television station According to a CBS News report: report The owner of a Chick-fil-A location in Sacramento, California, calls it a ""living wage."" In Eric Mason's view, that would be $17 or $18 an hour, which is what he vows he'll be paying his workers, starting Monday, June 4. The rate represents a sizable increase for employees now making $12 to $13 an hour. ""As the owner, I'm looking at it big-picture and long-term,"" Mason told a local news station. ""What that does for the business is provide consistency, someone that has relationships with our guests, and it's going to be building a long-term culture."" While at least two Chick-fil-A restaurants are truly offering starting wages close to $17 an hour, this pay is not available at all Chick-fil-A locations. According to Payscale, a company that surveys employees and employers for information about wages, the average hourly rate for a Chick-fil-A employee is about $10 an hour.  Payscale A spokesperson for the company told us that because Chick-fil-A restaurants are individually owned, franchise owners set their own wages: Chick-fil-A restaurants are individually owned and operated, so wage decisions are made at the local level. With that said, Chick-fil-A strives to create a compelling employment value proposition including competitive wages, leadership development opportunities and scholarships. In fact, since 1973, Chick-fil-A has helped 53,000 Team Members attend college through a total investment of $75 million in scholarships. While the wage mentioned on the above-displayed sign does not apply to all Chick-fil-A locations or positions, the company truly does offer ""scholarship opportunities."" The company writes on its website: website We offer college scholarship opportunities and tuition discounts Chick-fil-A, Inc. recognizes and appreciates the tremendous talent and capabilities of Team Members working at their local Chick-fil-A restaurants. To help invest in their futures, Chick-fil-A restaurant Team Members can apply for college scholarships, as well as receive tuition discounts at dozens of universities across the U.S. Wang, Frances.  ""Sacramento Chick-Fil-A Hiring 'Hospitality Professionals' for $17 an Hour.""
  ABC 10.  26 March 2018. Gibson, Kate.  ""Chick-fil-A Store Owner Raises Minimum Wage to $17 an Hour 'Living Wage.'""
  CBS News.  7 June 2019. Updated [18 September 2019]: Added statement from Chick-fil-A and information about the origins of the photograph. ",['investment'],False,"A photograph supposedly showing a help-wanted bulletin featuring a starting wage of $16.50 for a position at a Chick-fil-A restaurant was widely circulated on Facebook in August 2019:This single photograph of this lone sign led some viewers to believe that a starting wage of $16.50 was available at all Chick-fil-A locations. But that isn't the case.This isn't the only Chick-fil-A restaurant that is offering close to $17 an hour. Another Chick-fil-A restaurant in Sacramento, California, raised its starting wage to $17 hour.Eric Mason, owner of the Sacramento Chick-fil-A, told a television station in June 2019 that he was hoping to attract ""hospitality professionals"" with his new wage offer.According to a CBS News report:While at least two Chick-fil-A restaurants are truly offering starting wages close to $17 an hour, this pay is not available at all Chick-fil-A locations. According to Payscale, a company that surveys employees and employers for information about wages, the average hourly rate for a Chick-fil-A employee is about $10 an hour. The company writes on its website:"
Communication from the employer,['Employer issued letter to employees that any further taxes on his business will result in his shutting it down?'],"Claim: An employer issued a missive to his employees stating that any additional taxes on his business would result in his shutting the company down. 

To All My Valued Employees,

There have been some rumblings around the office about the future of this company, and more specifically, your jobs. As you know, the economy has changed for the worse and presents many challenges. However, the good news is this: The economy doesn't pose a threat to your jobs. What does threaten your jobs, however, is the changing political landscape in this country. Of course, as your employer, I am forbidden to tell you whom to vote for—it is against the law to discriminate based on political affiliation, race, creed, religion, etc. Please vote for whom you think will serve your interests best. However, let me share some facts that might help you decide what is in your best interest.

First, while it is easy to spew rhetoric that casts employers against employees, you must understand that for every business owner, there is a backstory. This backstory is often neglected and overshadowed by what you see and hear. Sure, you see me park my Mercedes outside. You've seen my big home at last year's Christmas party. I'm sure all these flashy icons of luxury conjure up some idealized thoughts about my life. However, what you don't see is the backstory. I started this company 12 years ago. At that time, I lived in a 300-square-foot studio apartment for three years. My entire living space was converted into an office so I could put forth 100% effort into building a company that would eventually employ you. My diet consisted of Ramen Pride noodles because every dollar I spent went back into this company. I drove a rusty Toyota Corolla with a defective transmission. I didn't have time to date. Often, I stayed home on weekends while my friends went out drinking and partying. In fact, I was married to my business—hard work, discipline, and sacrifice. Meanwhile, my friends got jobs. They worked 40 hours a week, made a modest $50K a year, and spent every dime they earned. They drove flashy cars, lived in expensive homes, and wore fancy designer clothes. Instead of hitting Nordstrom's for the latest hot fashion item, I was trolling through the Goodwill store, extracting any clothing item that didn't look like it was birthed in the '70s. My friends refinanced their mortgages and lived a life of luxury. I, however, did not. I put my time, my money, and my life into a business with a vision that someday I too would be able to afford these luxuries my friends supposedly had.

So, while you physically arrive at the office at 9 a.m., mentally check in at about noon, and then leave at 5 p.m., I don't. There is no ""off"" button for me. When you leave the office, you are done, and you have a weekend all to yourself. I, unfortunately, do not have that freedom. I eat, sleep, and breathe this company every minute of the day. There is no rest. There is no weekend. There is no happy hour. Every day, this business is attached to my hip like a one-year-old special-needs child. You, of course, only see the fruits of that labor—the nice house, the Mercedes, the vacations... you never realize the backstory and the sacrifices I've made.

Now, the economy is falling apart, and I, the guy who made all the right decisions and saved his money, have to bail out all the people who didn't. The people who overspent their paychecks suddenly feel entitled to the same luxuries that I earned and sacrificed a decade of my life for. Yes, business ownership has its benefits, but the price I've paid is steep and without wounds. Unfortunately, the cost of running this business and employing you is starting to eclipse the threshold of marginal benefit, and let me tell you why: I am being taxed to death, and the government thinks I don't pay enough. I have state taxes, federal taxes, property taxes, sales and use taxes, payroll taxes, workers' compensation taxes, unemployment taxes, and taxes on taxes. I have to hire a tax man to manage all these taxes, and then guess what? I have to pay taxes for employing him. Government mandates, regulations, and all the accounting that goes with it now occupy most of my time. On October 15th, I wrote a check to the U.S. Treasury for $288,000 for quarterly taxes. You know what my ""stimulus"" check was? Zero. Nada. Zilch. 

The question I have is this: Who is stimulating the economy? Me, the guy who has provided 14 people with good-paying jobs and serves over 2,200,000 people per year with a flourishing business? Or the single mother sitting at home, pregnant with her fourth child, waiting for her next welfare check? Obviously, the government feels the latter is the economic stimulus of this country. The fact is, if I deducted (read: stole) 50% of your paycheck, you'd quit, and you wouldn't work here. I mean, why should you? That's nuts. Who wants to be rewarded with only 50% of their hard work? Well, I agree, which is why your jobs are in jeopardy. 

Here is what many of you don't understand: to stimulate the economy, you need to stimulate what runs the economy. Had the government suddenly mandated that I didn't need to pay taxes, guess what? Instead of depositing that $288,000 into the Washington black hole, I would have spent it, hired more employees, and generated substantial economic growth. My employees would have enjoyed the wealth of that tax cut in the form of promotions and better salaries. But you can forget it now. When you have a comatose man on the verge of death, you don't defibrillate and shock his thumb, thinking that will bring him back to life, do you? Or do you defibrillate his heart? Business is at the heart of America and always has been. To restart it, you must stimulate it, not kill it. Suddenly, the power brokers in Washington believe the masses of America are the essential drivers of the American economic engine. Nothing could be further from the truth, and this is the type of change you can keep.

So where am I going with all this? It's quite simple. If any new taxes are levied on me or my company, my reaction will be swift and simple: I will fire you. I will fire your co-workers. You can then plead with the government to pay for your mortgage, your SUV, and your child's future. Frankly, it isn't my problem anymore. Then, I will close this company down, move to another country, and retire. You see, I'm done. I'm done with a country that penalizes the productive and gives to the unproductive. My motivation to work and to provide jobs will be destroyed, and with it, my citizenship. While tax cuts to 95% of America sound great on paper, don't forget the backstory: If there is no job, there is no income to tax. A tax cut on zero dollars is zero. 

So, when you make the decision to vote, ask yourself who understands the economics of business ownership and who doesn't. Whose policies will endanger your job? Answer those questions, and you should know who might be the one capable of saving your job. While the media wants to tell you, ""It's the economy, stupid,"" I'm telling you it isn't. If you lose your job, it won't be at the hands of the economy; it will be at the hands of a political hurricane that swept through this country, steamrolled the Constitution, and changed its landscape forever. If that happens, you can find me in the South Caribbean, sitting on a beach, retired, and with no employees to worry about.

Signed,  
Your Boss",['economy'],False,"Origins:  In the ramp-up towards the 2008 Presidential election and in its wake, a number of anonymous ""Here's how you, the ones who voted for him, will directly suffer from a Barack Obama presidency"" missives landed in inboxes everywhere. One such was putatively from a hard-working and generous grandfather telling his beloved liberal granddaughter that her support for Obama meant Grandpa was no longer going to be in a position to help her financially. Another was supposedly penned by CEO to his 140 employees informing them that thanks to the new taxes now surely headed his way, he'd have to lay off a few of them, so he was starting with those whose cars sported Obama bumper stickers.""The response to the missive falsely attributed to him prompted Michael Crowley to pen his own letter on the plight of the small business owner, which can be read here.In October 2012, David Siegel, the founder and CEO of Westgate Resorts, sent a modified version of this letter to all of his employees. He based his missive on that much-circulated 2008 piece, saying of his offering: ""I did use the letter that had circulated before as a guideline, but I changed it [to fit my circumstances]. It speaks the truth and it gives [employees] something to think about when they go to the polls."" "
Obama Places Limits on Church Services,['Rumor: President Obama has limited churches to offering twice-monthly services.'],"Claim: President Obama has limited churches to offering twice-monthly services. Example: [Collected via Twitter, April 2015] Is this true about Obama? Is he really making people go to church two times a month instead of four times? Origins: On April 8, 2015, the News Examiner website published an article reporting that President Obama had limited churches to offering twice-monthly services in order to ensure Americans worked harder. The article stated, ""At a press conference today, President Barack Obama announced he would be implementing a new law changing the current monthly four-week church services down to two times a month. Obama says during these rough economic times it is crucial to take drastic measures so Americans can work harder and pray less. These changes are set to take place on May 1st of this year, and analysts expect this move to increase the economy by more than 40%. Americans tend to work hard and pray harder. I'm asking them to make these changes for the good of the country during these hard times. If things don't work out within six months, we can always switch back to the old way, but for now, let's give this a solid shot and see where it takes us. These are crucial times, my friends, and we must stick together as a country if we are going to succeed. If you have any questions about President Obama's new two-week church schedule that will be taking place on May 1st, a hotline has been set up to answer all your questions at (785) 273-0325."" President Obama could not have made any such announcement, as he has no authority to limit church services, and any attempt to do so would be an obvious violation of the First Amendment's protections of religious freedom. The referenced article was just another hoax from the News Examiner, a fake news site started by Paul Horner, the former lead writer for the similarly fake National Report website, after Facebook implemented a crackdown on the posting of hoax articles that virtually destroyed the latter site's reach. Previous hoaxes from the same site include the false claim that the world's first head transplant was successfully performed in South Africa in April 2015. The ""hotline"" phone number provided in the article is actually that of the infamous Westboro Baptist Church. Last updated: April 14, 2015.",['economy'],False,"Origins:   On 8 April 2015, the News Examiner web site published an article reporting that President Obama had limited churches to offering twice-monthly services in order to ensure Americans worked harder:President Obama could not have made any such announcement, as he has no authority to limit church services, and any attempt to do so would be an obvious violation of the First Amendment's protections of religious freedom.  The referenced article was a just another hoax from the News Examiner, a fake news site started by Paul Horner, the former lead writer for the similarly fake National Report web site, after Facebook implemented a crackdown on the posting of hoax articles that virtually destroyed the latter site's reach.  Previous hoaxes from the same site include the false claim that the world's first head transplant was successfully performed in South Africa in April 2015. "
Tampon Tax,"['Most states maintain a ""tampon tax,"" meaning the products are not exempt from state sales tax.']","A tax on feminine hygiene products (also known as a ""tampon tax"")was notnew by the time social media interest in the topic appeared inMay 2016, but ascreenshot published by the page ""Women's Rights News"" contributed the buzz: screenshot    The image originated with a 15 January 2016 interview between YouTube personality Ingrid Nilsen and President Barack Obama. The ""I don't know anyone who has a period who thinks it's a luxury"" comment was made by Nilsen, not the President: interview   The topic was already steadily popular.NYMag.compublished an article on 29 April 2016thatexplored social media interest in the tampon tax: article Pads and tampons have made political headlines in every single month of this year. In January, lawmakers in California, Utah, Virginia, and Michigan introduced anti-tampon-tax bills. They were mostly sponsored by women (shout out to Delegate Mark Keam in Virginia, though!). Notably, in each of those states, except California, the mostly Democratic sponsors are vastly outnumbered in their Republican-heavy legislatures. Also in January, the tampon tax made headlines when Obama learned about it while the camera was rolling, and declared he thought the tax was unfair. Then, in February, similar bills were introduced in Illinois, Wisconsin, and New York. In March, the city of Chicago dropped its tampon tax, and a class-action lawsuit brought by women in Ohio and New York state added pressure to stop taxing periods. In April, the New York Senate unanimously passed the tampon tax bill. This is an astounding amount of national legislative momentum for an issue that was long considered to be womens private, shameful burden. Its no coincidence that efforts to end the tampon tax have cropped up alongside viral art projects, new businesses, and digital campaigns to destigmatize menstruation. The tampon tax is the perfect of-the-moment issue for lawmakers who want to signal their support for women  and take a stance on inequality. Ending the tax, which promises practical benefits for low-income women, is low-hanging fruit for legislators in liberal states. A widely circulated June 2015 map created byFusion illustrated the tampon tax with color coding. Most statestaxed feminine hygiene products, excepta few that had either specific exemptions orno sales tax at all: map   Minnesota, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Massachusetts, and Maryland specifically did not tax[PDF] feminine hygiene products. Alaska, Oregon, Montana, New Hampshire, and Delaware do not have sales tax on any items (including tampons). The rest ofthe states maintained atax on such products.One outlier was the state of New York, which moved in April 2016 to abolish the tax: tax moved The Republican-led Senate on Monday unanimously passed a bill exempting feminine hygiene products from sales tax, two months after the debate over the so-called tampon tax reached Albany. The bill, sponsored by freshman Sen. Sue Serino, a Republican from Hyde Park, passed with 58 votes. The vote on the Senate floor took about one minute, just enough time for at least one period joke. It is a way of providing some tax relief to women everywhere, young girls in particular, Sen. Diane Savino said, thanking the bill sponsor. But on behalf of women of a certain age everywhere, I would love to offer a friendly amendment and ask for a rebate program, Senator Serino. But I know it would probably bankrupt the state.   Lawmakers in Michigan expressed interest in advancing a similar initiative, and the city of Chicago (but not the state of Illinois) axed the tax. On 12 April 2016, MarketWatch reported somemomentum both in and outside the U.S. to end the additional charges: Michigan Chicago reported The issue has made it onto the agenda in about 10 states, seven of which introduced the legislation, including New York (though Utahs never made it out of committee) and three, South Carolina, Tennessee and Illinois, that recently debated it. It has also gone international, with France cutting the sales tax in late 2015 and the European Union taking a stance on the issue this year. In May 2016, the majority of the 40 states with a tampon tax retained it (although New York was on its way to tax-free status for feminine hygiene products). By and large, social media tampon tax claims were accurate. To be clear, tampons weren't taxed at a special or higher rate than other taxable items  they simply were subject to sales tax in general.  Coughlin, Sarah.  ""Chicago Removes Its Tampon Tax & The State Of New York Is On Its Way To Doing The Same.""
Refinery29.  13 April 2016. Court, Emma.  ""New York Is The Latest State To Scrap Tampon Tax.""
MarketWatch.  12 April 2016. Friedman, Ann.  ""How Ending The Tampon Tax Became Viral Legislation.""
NYMag The Cut.  29 April 2016. Hillin, Taryn.  ""These Are The U.S. States That Tax Women For Having Periods.""
Fusion.  3 June 2015. Larimer, Sarah.  ""The 'Tampon tax,' Explained.""
Washington Post.  8 January 2016. Miller, Faith.  ""Why Two Senators Want To Get Rid Of Michigan's 'Tampon Tax.'""
WILX.  14 April 2016. Velasquez, Josefa.  ""Senate Unanimously Passes Bill Eliminating 'Tampon Tax.'""
Politico New York.  11 April 2016.",['income'],True,"A tax on feminine hygiene products (also known as a ""tampon tax"")was notnew by the time social media interest in the topic appeared inMay 2016, but ascreenshot published by the page ""Women's Rights News"" contributed the buzz:The image originated with a 15 January 2016 interview between YouTube personality Ingrid Nilsen and President Barack Obama. The ""I don't know anyone who has a period who thinks it's a luxury"" comment was made by Nilsen, not the President:The topic was already steadily popular.NYMag.compublished an article on 29 April 2016thatexplored social media interest in the tampon tax:A widely circulated June 2015 map created byFusion illustrated the tampon tax with color coding. Most statestaxed feminine hygiene products, excepta few that had either specific exemptions orno sales tax at all:Minnesota, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Massachusetts, and Maryland specifically did not tax[PDF] feminine hygiene products. Alaska, Oregon, Montana, New Hampshire, and Delaware do not have sales tax on any items (including tampons). The rest ofthe states maintained atax on such products.One outlier was the state of New York, which moved in April 2016 to abolish the tax:Lawmakers in Michigan expressed interest in advancing a similar initiative, and the city of Chicago (but not the state of Illinois) axed the tax. On 12 April 2016, MarketWatch reported somemomentum both in and outside the U.S. to end the additional charges:"
Is Russia Building an 'Immigrant Village' for Conservative Americans and Canadians?,['The claim was made by a well-connected Russian immigration lawyer. '],"In May 2023, several American publications asserted that a ""special village"" for conservative Americans and Canadians was in development. Vice News described the potential village as a ""MAGA colony."" The New Republic reported that ""Russian authorities"" were apparently planning the creation of of ""a special village outside Moscow dedicated to conservative-minded Americans and Canadians."" described reported   (The New Republic) A Russian immigration lawyer named Timur Beslangurov, who owns the domain name movetorussia.ru, is responsible for the claim. He has provided no concrete evidence the project is happening, but he made the assertion at the 11th St. Petersburg International Legal Forum, an event in which ""representatives of the Russian and foreign legal community, business, and government [...] discussed the role and place of law in the modern world."" Legal Forum State-run Russian media outlet RIA Novosti, a sponsor of the forum, ran a story about his remarks on May 11, 2023. Beslangurov claimed that tens of thousands of people wanted to move to Russia and that the project would be (or had been) financed by future settlers of the village and was approved by a regional government (via Google translate): a story A village will be built in the Moscow region for Americans and Canadians who want to immigrate to Russia, said Timur Beslangurov, a partner at the law firm VISTA Immigration, which provides assistance in obtaining Russian documents. [...] According to Beslangurov, tens of thousands of people would like to move to Russia - foreigners without Russian roots. According to him, although the project is financed by future settlers, the approval of the regional government was required. The project, he claimed, would begin sometime in 2024. As reported by Novosti, these westerners want to move to to avoid the ""radical values"" of their home countries and return to their Christian roots (via Google translate): reported The reason is the inculcation of radical values: today they have 70 genders, it is not known what will happen next. Many normal people emigrate, including considering Russia, but are faced with huge bureaucratic problems of Russian migration legislation, the lawyer explained. According to him, among those wishing to move there are also traditional Catholics who very strongly believe in the prophecy that Russia will remain the only Christian country in the world. Outside of these lofty statements made at a Kremlin-backed legal conference, Beslangurov has not provided any evidence of the project's reality. In May 2023, he told Vice News he had no information to give them: told VICE News contacted Beslangurov asking for further information on the reported project, and to speak with some of the hundreds of potential Western immigrants he said existed to help verify his claims, but he replied that he wasnt able to provide further information at this stage. By email, Snopes asked Beslangurov if any progress had been made on the village and if plans to begin construction in 2024 were on track. ""Yes, we are working to make this happen,"" he responded.  Beslangurov is not a ""Russian authority,"" but a private lawyer who provides services for foreigners who wish to move to Russia. While he is evidently well connected, he is not an official voice of the Russian government. According to his Linkedin profile, he does ""work closely with the federal agencies and the members and committees involved in the development of laws,"" however. profile Beslangurov's statements echo similar statements made by the Kremlin seemingly geared at western conservatives. The New Republic wrote that ""Beslangurovs remarks [...] mirror the broader posturing of Russias government as traditional in comparison to the Wests supposed loose liberalism."" wrote Beslangurov has regularly been cited on issues related to immigration to Russia and expatriate life in the international press. In 2022, he argued to the Daily Beast that ""nothing good would happen"" with western sanctions against Russia in response to their invasion of Ukraine and that the move would push Russia closer to China and India. In early 2023, his name appeared in an Indian outlet where he promoted a golden visa program aimed at recruiting Indian investors with offers of Russian residency. argued promoted Because no Russian ""authority"" is actively part of this project, and because the one person responsible for making the claim has thus far declined to provide evidence to support it, Snopes rates it Unproven. Chaudhury, Dipanjan Roy. Russian Golden Visa: Russian Gov Aims to Lure Indian Investors with New Residency Program. The Economic Times, 29 Jan. 2023. The Economic Times - The Times of India, https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/nri/migrate/russian-golden-visa-russian-gov-lures-indian-investors-with-new-residency-program/articleshow/97419768.cms. Hume, Tim. Russia Wants to Build a MAGA Colony for US Conservatives, Lawyer Claims. Vice, 12 May 2023, https://www.vice.com/en/article/xgwdew/russia-maga-colony. Kirsch, Noah. In Tears: Hollywoods Messy Breakup With Russias Weeping Elite. The Daily Beast, 3 Mar. 2022. www.thedailybeast.com, https://www.thedailybeast.com/celebrity-insider-bob-van-ronkel-on-hollywoods-messy-breakup-with-russias-oligarchs. Recap of the 11th St. Petersburg International Legal Forum. https://legalforum.info/en/news/itogi-xi-peterburgskogo-mezhdunarodnogo-juridicheskogo-foruma/. Accessed 19 Jan. 2024. Thakker, Prem, et al. Russia Wants to Build a Safe Space for Conservative Americans to Move To. The New Republic, 1 Nov. 2022. The New Republic, https://newrepublic.com/post/172710/russia-build-safe-space-conservative-americans-move. ,  .       .   , 20230511T1229, https://realty.ria.ru/20230511/derevnya-1871001155.html. Update [Jan. 20, 2024]: Added comment from Beslangurov.",['finance'],NEI,"In May 2023, several American publications asserted that a ""special village"" for conservative Americans and Canadians was in development. Vice News described the potential village as a ""MAGA colony."" The New Republic reported that ""Russian authorities"" were apparently planning the creation of of ""a special village outside Moscow dedicated to conservative-minded Americans and Canadians.""A Russian immigration lawyer named Timur Beslangurov, who owns the domain name movetorussia.ru, is responsible for the claim. He has provided no concrete evidence the project is happening, but he made the assertion at the 11th St. Petersburg International Legal Forum, an event in which ""representatives of the Russian and foreign legal community, business, and government [...] discussed the role and place of law in the modern world.""State-run Russian media outlet RIA Novosti, a sponsor of the forum, ran a story about his remarks on May 11, 2023. Beslangurov claimed that tens of thousands of people wanted to move to Russia and that the project would be (or had been) financed by future settlers of the village and was approved by a regional government (via Google translate):The project, he claimed, would begin sometime in 2024. As reported by Novosti, these westerners want to move to to avoid the ""radical values"" of their home countries and return to their Christian roots (via Google translate):Outside of these lofty statements made at a Kremlin-backed legal conference, Beslangurov has not provided any evidence of the project's reality. In May 2023, he told Vice News he had no information to give them:Beslangurov is not a ""Russian authority,"" but a private lawyer who provides services for foreigners who wish to move to Russia. While he is evidently well connected, he is not an official voice of the Russian government. According to his Linkedin profile, he does ""work closely with the federal agencies and the members and committees involved in the development of laws,"" however.Beslangurov's statements echo similar statements made by the Kremlin seemingly geared at western conservatives. The New Republic wrote that ""Beslangurovs remarks [...] mirror the broader posturing of Russias government as traditional in comparison to the Wests supposed loose liberalism.""Beslangurov has regularly been cited on issues related to immigration to Russia and expatriate life in the international press. In 2022, he argued to the Daily Beast that ""nothing good would happen"" with western sanctions against Russia in response to their invasion of Ukraine and that the move would push Russia closer to China and India. In early 2023, his name appeared in an Indian outlet where he promoted a golden visa program aimed at recruiting Indian investors with offers of Russian residency."
"Was a Dog Elected Mayor of Rabbit Hash, Kentucky?",['An unincorporated community in Kentucky has elected a dog as its mayor for the fourth time in a row.'],"In June 2017, multiple news outlets reported that a small Kentucky town called Rabbit Hash had elected a dog as its mayor. As straightforward as this reporting may seem, there are multiple layers to the story. news reported We'll start with the most obvious question. Was a Dog Elected Mayor of Rabbit Hash, Kentucky? Yes. Although this is more of a title-only sort of position that doesn't come with any mayoral powers. In November 2016, the town elected a two-year-old American pit bull terrier named Brynn (who also goes by the name Brynneth Pawltro) as its ""unofficial"" mayor: elected Brynn With barks and tail-wagging aplenty, the fourth canine mayor of Rabbit Hash surveys the city she will soon take charge of. In a landslide victory Brynn was chosen to guard the steps of the General Store. The 2-year-old pit bull won the election by more than 1,000 votes. Brynn will govern Rabbit Hash, a quaint historical district nestled on the shores of the Ohio River. She will take office after the i-dog-uration in February 2017, a year after a fire destroyed most of the Rabbit Hash General Store. How does a dog become mayor?  Rabbit Hash is a small unincorporated area in Boone County, Kentucky. As such, it doesn't have much of a need for a formal mayor.  There is a longstanding tradition of electing nonhuman mascots as the town's mayor, which started in 1998 when the Rabbit Hash Historical Society held an ""election"" in order to raise funds to restore a church. The Historical Society charged a dollar to vote in the election, which resulted in the election of a dog named ""Goofy Borneman"" as the town's very first mayor: election mayor Mayor Goofy Borneman was the first elected mayor of Rabbit Hash. Born of unknown parentage and adopted in 1985 by the Borneman/Calhoun family of Rabbit Hash, Goofy was raised as any local dog-resident of the town. His early years were happy ones, playing with the Bornemans son, Mike Calhoun. According to Mike, it was the standard boy-dog relationship with Goofy a constant companion for Mike as they traveled up and down Lower River Road. While Mike was in school, Goofy would still take the familiar path between his home and the Rabbit Hash General Store visiting neighbors and eating any scraps along the way. In his adolescence, Goofy ran into trouble. Lounging in the road proved to be a dangerous past-time as he was hit by cars more than once. He also had a stinky reputation and fell into trouble with his owner, Ed Borneman, when Goofy was allegedly found to be poaching town chickens. In his older years, Goofy settled down and was content to remain on the straight and narrow. In June 1998, upon Boone County, Kentuckys bicentennial celebration, the Rabbit Hash mayors race was announced. Although initially open to anyone in the area, only humans entered the race. After Jane and Randy Cochran entered their black Labrador Retriever, Herb, in the race, the Borneman family, finding that everyone in the town already held a relationship with their aging dog, Goofy, decided to enter him. The charisma of the Borneman family and the notorious reputation of Goofy led to a triumphant result as Goofy beat out famed woodcarver Crazy Clifford Pottorf and fellow four-legger Herb Cochran. Goofy died in office, and was succeeded by a black lab named Junior. When Junior died, the town elected a red and white border collie named Lucy Lou, who left office in 2015 to ""embark"" on a tongue-in-cheek run for United States President: Junior Lucy Lou embark The question Mayor Lucy Lou is most asked is, How does a DOG become mayor? Her answer: As with politics in every corner of the earth, the candidate with the most money wins. In Rabbit Hash, were just honest about it. Anyone of any age can vote, you can vote as many times as you like, and we encourage drinking at the polls. Lucy Lous executive staff have been heard to say on more than one occasion, We bought that election fair and square! Does Rabbit Hash elect other animals? The election in Rabbit Hash is largely a fundraiser for the Rabbit Hash Historical Society. Although the town has only elected canine mayors since its first election in 1998, it is not exclusive to dogs. Other animals, including humans, have entered the race: The competition was stiff. ""There was a cat, the chicken, a donkey, a little boy,"" Bamforth said. Brynneth took them all down without much more than a bark. Believe it or not, the pooch is the fourth dog mayor to be unleashed on the city. Does Mayor Brynneth Pawltro have a staff? Although previous mayors of Rabbit Hash were the sole figures within their administrations, the Rabbit Hash Historical Society announced that two of this year's runner-ups, Bourbon and Lady, would serve as ambassadors for the town: BRYNN is the new Mayor of Rabbit Hash Kentucky!!! In an unprecedented move, the Rabbit Hash Historical Society has given official positions to the 1st and 2nd runner ups, Bourbon and Lady, as Ambassadors to Rabbit Hash. In the case that the official mayor is unavailable for an event or obligation, the Ambassadors will fill in. Here is the official tally: Brynn: 3367Bourbon: 2336Lady: 1621Higgins: 495Stella: 400Walter: 397Bossy: 216Louis: 76Izacc: 53 Mayor Lucy Lou said that she has has been honored to serve for the past 8 years. Through the course of a tense evening of voting she sniffed the butts of all the candidates and has given her approval to the Mayor elect, Brynn. She looks forward to working with the new mayor and the Ambassadors as Rabbit Hash strives to restore the General Store. Brynn also has an owner. 23-year-old Jordie Bamforth, who is studying to be a veterinarian, adopted Brynn as a puppy. She said that one of the reasons she wanted to enter to the race was to dispel rumors about pit bulls being aggressive: adopted   Bamforth told reporters: Brynn has declared to be peaceful with any human or animal that comes through Rabbit Hash, especially the cats. Brynn does like to chase the cats around here, but has pledged to refrain from it as much as possible. How much money was raised during the election? The mayoral race in Rabbit Hash is used to raise funds for the town's Historical Society, which then uses the money on various projects around the town. This year, the money will be used to help rebuild and restock the town's general store, which was destroyed in a fire:   store destroyed Bobbi Kayser, secretary of the Rabbit Hash Historical Society and mom of current Mayor Lucy Lou, said the election raised more than $8,900 for the historical society. The money will go toward the restoration of the Rabbit Hash General Store. Although we are so blessed to have had so many corporate donations and benefits in our name, we still have not reached the original estimated goal to complete the project, Kayser said. The General Store is looking nearly perfect, but that comes at a cost of nearly $400,000. The store should be open by September 2017. Brynneth Pawltro could not be immediately reached for comment. Rabbit Hash Historical Society.  ""Current Mayor - Brynn.""
  Retrieved 28 June 2017. Sutter, Chris.  ""For the Fourth Time, Small Kentucky Town Elects a Dog as Mayor.""
 WDRB.  23 June 2017. Hadley, Greg.  ""A Dog is Now the Mayor of a Small Kentucky Town. And Shes Not Even the First One.""
 Brandenton.  24 June 2017. Brookbank, Sarah.  ""Rabbit Hash Mayor-Elect Preaches Peace and Love.""
 Cincinnati.com  16 November 2016.",['funds'],True,"In June 2017, multiple news outlets reported that a small Kentucky town called Rabbit Hash had elected a dog as its mayor. As straightforward as this reporting may seem, there are multiple layers to the story.Yes. Although this is more of a title-only sort of position that doesn't come with any mayoral powers. In November 2016, the town elected a two-year-old American pit bull terrier named Brynn (who also goes by the name Brynneth Pawltro) as its ""unofficial"" mayor:There is a longstanding tradition of electing nonhuman mascots as the town's mayor, which started in 1998 when the Rabbit Hash Historical Society held an ""election"" in order to raise funds to restore a church. The Historical Society charged a dollar to vote in the election, which resulted in the election of a dog named ""Goofy Borneman"" as the town's very first mayor:Goofy died in office, and was succeeded by a black lab named Junior. When Junior died, the town elected a red and white border collie named Lucy Lou, who left office in 2015 to ""embark"" on a tongue-in-cheek run for United States President:Brynn also has an owner. 23-year-old Jordie Bamforth, who is studying to be a veterinarian, adopted Brynn as a puppy. She said that one of the reasons she wanted to enter to the race was to dispel rumors about pit bulls being aggressive:The mayoral race in Rabbit Hash is used to raise funds for the town's Historical Society, which then uses the money on various projects around the town. This year, the money will be used to help rebuild and restock the town's general store, which was destroyed in a fire: "
Tide Detergent Thefts,['Are U.S. stores experiencing a rash of thefts of Tide brand laundry detergent?'],"Example:  [Collected via e-mail, March 2012] Are people stealing Tide to pay for drugs and is it an epidemic?   Origins:  On 12 March 2012, The Daily, an iPad publication, reported on a ""Grime Wave"": a rash of store thefts of Tide brand laundry detergent that had left law enforcement officials across the country puzzled.  According to the report, some cities were setting up special task forces to stop Tide theft, retailers were taking special security precautions to protect their Tide, and one Minnesota man stole $25,000 worth of the product before recently being caught.  The proffered reasons behind the Tide crime wave were that laundry detergent is a household staple with a relatively high price ($10 to $20 a bottle) which is easily resold to consumers (or other stores), that it's impossible to track, and that Tide is the most recognizable and popular of detergent brands.   reported One portion of the Daily report linked the Tide-stealing spree to the drug trade and left some readers wondering whether the article was intended as satire: Most thieves load carts with dozens of bottles, then dash out the door. Many have getaway cars waiting outside. ""These are criminals coming into the store to steal thousands of dollars of merchandise,"" said Detective Harrison Sprague of the Prince Georges County, Md., Police Department, where Tide is known as ""liquid gold"" among officers. He and other law enforcement officials across the country say Tide theft is connected to the drug trade. In fact, a recent drug sting turned up more Tide than cocaine. ""We sent in an informant to buy drugs. The dealer said, 'I don't have drugs, but I could sell you 15 bottles of Tide,'"" Sprague told The Daily. ""Upstairs in the drug dealer's bedroom was about 14 bottles of Tide laundry soap. We think [users] are trading it for drugs."" Police in Gresham, Ore., said most Tide theft is perpetrated by ""users feeding their habit."" ""They'll do it right in front of a cop car  buying heroin or methamphetamine with Tide,"" said Detective Rick Blake of the Gresham Police Department. ""We would see people walking down the road with six, seven bottles of Tide. They were so blatant about it."" The following day, FoxNews.com (which is owned by the same parent corporation as The Daily) questioned the article, reporting that evidence supporting claims of an alleged nationwide rise in Tide detergent theft appeared to be scant: reporting While police acknowledge that name-brand household items are commonly swiped from store shelves, authorities in at least two states referenced by [The Daily] say they have not seen a specific rise in stolen Tide detergent. Lt. Matt Swenke of the West St. Paul Police Department in Minnesota referenced one case of a man suspected of stealing $25,000 worth of Tide detergent from a Walmart in West St. Paul over a 15-month period. He said the man, identified as 53-year-old Patrick Costanzo, was seen on surveillance video stocking up his  surveillance video shopping cart with various items, including Tide, and walking out of the store without paying. But, Swenke said, ""We haven't noticed anything in terms of this being a rising problem."" He said of the five major retailers in the West St. Paul area, only one store  Walmart  came forward to police about thousands of dollars of missing Tide inventory believed to have been taken by Costanzo.  ""As of yet, we have not been contacted by any of our larger retail establishments,"" Swenke told FoxNews.com. ""I don't know any other jurisdictions in Minnesota that have had that volume."" Authorities in Kentucky also backed away from the claim that Tide theft is on the rise. Lt. Shannon Smith of the Somerset Police Department recalled a case from 2011 in which three individuals were charged with shoplifting from Cincinnati-based Kroger stores as well as from a local Walmart. Smith says the alleged shoplifters made off with several items, including Tide detergent, and then sold them on the black market to small, privately-owned stores. [H]e stressed that Tide theft, in particular, is no more widespread in the Somerset area than theft of other popular household items. Retailers, meanwhile, also are denying reports of a new spike in stolen Tide products. ""We are not experiencing a 'wave' of Tide thefts,"" CVS/pharmacy public relations director Mike DeAngelis wrote. Other mainstream news outlets who followed up on the story reported instances of thieves' pilfering Tide detergent from stores, but in many of those cases the shoplifters were caught stealing a variety of household goods, not just Tide.  Some outlets however, reported information along the lines of the The Daily's original article.  For example, an Associated Press account stated: ""We've seen organized retail crime, or the theft of goods for profit, resale or barter, for many years now,"" said Joseph LaRocca, senior adviser on asset protection for the National Retail Federation. LaRocca said that Tide had not shown up previously on lists of the most commonly targeted items, but that several retailers told him this week it has been a problem. In Prince George's County, police said they learned from informants, undercover officers and other sources that drug dealers encourage their customers to pay with shoplifted Tide instead of cash. ""I'm out of marijuana right now, but when I get re-upped I'll hook you up if you can get me 15 bottles of Tide,"" one dealer was quoted as telling an informant, according to police. Surveillance videos from a Safeway in Bowie, Md., showed crews of two or three people entering the store, loading up shopping carts and rushing outside, where they loaded the detergent into a waiting car. Police made nearly 30 arrests when they broke up the theft ring last fall. Employees at a Duane Reade drugstore inside New York City's Penn Station said that a few weeks ago, a man walked in with a suitcase and filled it up with bottles of Tide. He was caught on a security camera and detained. Several retailers were tightlipped about the problem. A Safeway spokesman said only that Tide thefts aren't unique to the chain's stores. A Target representative said the company is aware of the issue and encouraging stores to be vigilant. Last updated:  15 March 2012    Corbin, Cristina.  ""Police Say Reports of Nationwide Spike in Tide Thefts Doesn't Wash.""   FoxNews.com.  13 March 2012.    Nestel, M.L.  ""Grime Wave.""   The Daily.  12 March 2012.    Nuckols, Ben.  ""Thieves Rolling Tide Detergent Out of Stores.""   Associated Press.  14 March 2012.",['asset'],NEI,"Origins:  On 12 March 2012, The Daily, an iPad publication, reported on a ""Grime Wave"": a rash of store thefts of Tide brand laundry detergent that had left law enforcement officials across the country puzzled.  According to the report, some cities were setting up special task forces to stop Tide theft, retailers were taking special security precautions to protect their Tide, and one Minnesota man stole $25,000 worth of the product before recently being caught.  The proffered reasons behind the Tide crime wave were that laundry detergent is a household staple with a relatively high price ($10 to $20 a bottle) which is easily resold to consumers (or other stores), that it's impossible to track, and that Tide is the most recognizable and popular of detergent brands.  The following day, FoxNews.com (which is owned by the same parent corporation as The Daily) questioned the article, reporting that evidence supporting claims of an alleged nationwide rise in Tide detergent theft appeared to be scant:Lt. Matt Swenke of the West St. Paul Police Department in Minnesota referenced one case of a man suspected of stealing $25,000 worth of Tide detergent from a Walmart in West St. Paul over a 15-month period. He said the man, identified as 53-year-old Patrick Costanzo, was seen on surveillance video stocking up his "
"Certainly! Kandiss Taylor's campaign slogan is 'JESUS, GUNS, AND BABIES'.",['The Georgia governor hopeful launched her Paint Georgia Taylor Red Bus Tour in February 2022.'],"Curious about how Snopes' writers verify information and craft their stories for public consumption? We've collected some posts that help explain how we do what we do. Happy reading, and let us know what else you might be interested in knowing. Political hopeful Kandiss Taylor, who is vying to be elected Georgia governor, launched her campaign tour on February 17, 2022, and quickly became a trending Twitter topic after the GOP candidate was pictured alongside the words ""Jesus, guns, babies."" The campaign slogan appears to have been first made prominent by political analyst Arieh Kovler, who said on Twitter that the phrase was a hell of a campaign slogan. A look at Taylor's official website proved that her campaign slogan indeed read ""Jesus, guns, and babies,"" with the added verbiage ""morality over money!"" A scroll through the South Georgia native's website also showed that she has served as an educator in the public school system for 19 years as a third-grade teacher, school counselor, testing coordinator, student-services coordinator, and homeless liaison. ""The welfare, education, and safety of our children are of utmost importance to me. I want to see the focus of our government move to issues that matter and impact our daily life. It's time to move away from the manipulation of special interest groups. Money and power have no place in influencing our public servants,"" wrote Taylor. According to her website, those issues include a pro-life platform centered around gun rights, election reform, immigration, the economy, and education. Her website further stated: ""She is passionate about the working class, mental health, less government overreach, education, small business growth, gun rights, our farmers, the economy, right to life, and election integrity. Put simply, Jesus, Guns, and Babies!"" When asked what made her decide to run, she responded, ""I can't complain about what is going on if I'm not willing to do something about it. The Governor's budget is 60% education, and who better to clean things up than a public school educator who knows where and what to cut!"" Taylor took to social media on February 17 to announce her three-day campaign launch, ""The Paint Georgia Red Bus Tour,"" which features her ""Jesus, guns, babies"" slogan painted in bold letters outside of her campaign vehicle. As of this writing, tour dates past February 19 were not made public. Snopes contacted Taylor for further elaboration on her campaign platform. We will update the article accordingly if we hear back.",['economy'],True,"Curious about how Snopes' writers verify information and craft their stories for public consumption? We've collected some posts that help explain how we do what we do. Happy reading and let us know what else you might be interested in knowing.Political hopeful Kandiss Taylor, who is vying to be elected Georgia governor, launched her campaign tour on Feb. 17, 2022, and quickly shot up as a trending twitter topic after the GOP candidate was pictured alongside the words, Jesus, guns, babies. The campaign slogan appears to have been first made prominent by political analyst Arieh Kovler, who said on Twitter that the phrase was a hell of a campaign slogan. A look on Taylors official website proved that her campaign slogan indeed read, Jesus, guns, and babies with the added verbiage, morality over money!  Screengrab/kandisstaylor.comTaylor took to social media on Feb. 17 to announce her three-day campaign launch, The Paint Georgia Red Bus Tour, which features her Jesus, guns, babies slogan painted in bold letters outside of her campaign vehicle. As of this writing, tour dates past Feb. 19 were not made public."
Meet Maine's New Governor: Paul LePage,"[""Maine Governor Paul LePage is making New Jersey's Chris Christie look like an enabler. He isn't afraid to say what he thinks!""]","Claim: Article describes incidents in the administration of Maine governor Paul LePage. Example: [Collected via e-mail, April 2012] Meet Maine's New Governor. In case you haven't heard about this guy before, his name will stick in your mind! The new Maine Governor, Paul LePage, is making New Jersey's Chris Christie look like an enabler. He isn't afraid to say what he thinks. Judging by the comments, every time he opens his mouth, his popularity goes up. He brought down the house at his inauguration when he shook his fist toward the media box and said, ""You're on notice! I've inherited a financially troubled state to run. Observe... cover what we do... but don't whine if I don't waste time responding to your every whim just for your amusement."" During his campaign for governor, he was talking to commercial fishermen who are struggling because of federal fisheries rules. They complained that Obama brought his family to Bar Harbor and Acadia National Park for a long Labor Day holiday and found time to meet with union leaders, but wouldn't talk to the fishermen. LePage replied, ""I'd tell him to go to hell and get out of my state."" The lame stream media crucified LePage, but he jumped 6 points in the pre-election poll. The Martin Luther King incident was a political sandbag, which brought him national exposure. The 'lame stream' media crucified him, but word on the street is very positive. The NAACP specifically asked LePage to spend MLK Day visiting black inmates at the Maine State Prison. He told them that he would meet with all inmates, regardless of race, if he were to visit the prison. The NAACP balked and then put out a news release claiming falsely that he refused to participate in any MLK events. He read it in the paper for the first time the next morning while being driven to an event and went ballistic because none of the reporters had called him for comment before running the NAACP release. He arrived at that event and said in front of a TV camera, ""If they want to play the race card on me, they can kiss my ass,"" and he reminded them that he has an adopted black son from Jamaica and that he attended the local MLK Breakfast every year that he was mayor of Waterville. (He started his morning there on MLK Day.) He then stated that there's a right way and a wrong way to meet with the governor, and he put all special interests on notice that press releases, media leaks, and all demonstrations would prove to be the wrong way. He said any other group that acted like the NAACP could expect to be at the bottom of the governor's priority list! He then did the following, and judging from local radio talk show callers, his popularity increased even more: The state employees union complained because he waited until 3 P.M. before closing state offices and facilities and sending non-emergency personnel home during the last blizzard. The prior governor would often close offices for the day with just a forecast before the first flakes. (Each time the state closes for snow, it costs the taxpayers about $1 million in wages for no work in return.) LePage was CEO of the Marden's chain of discount family bargain retail stores before being elected as governor. He noted that state employees getting off work early could still find lots of retail stores open to shop. So, he put the state employees on notice by announcing: ""If Marden's is open, Maine is open!"" He told state employees: ""We live in Maine in the winter, for heaven's sake, and should know how to drive in it. Otherwise, apply for a state job in Florida!"" Governor LePage symbolizes what America needs: refreshing politicians who aren't self-serving and who exhibit common sense. Origins: Paul LePage is the Republican governor of Maine who was elected to that office in 2010 after serving eight years as the mayor of Waterville. Prior to his stint as Waterville's mayor, LePage was general manager of Marden's Surplus and Salvage, a discount chain with 14 stores throughout the state of Maine. Shortly after LePage took office as governor in January 2011, the laudatory piece about him reproduced above began circulating on the Internet; we found its salient points to be a mixture of varying degrees of truthfulness as described below: Paul LePage. He brought down the house at his inauguration when he shook his fist toward the media box and said, ""You're on notice! I've inherited a financially troubled state to run. Observe ... cover what we do ... but don't whine if I don't waste time responding to your every whim just for your amusement."" Although this inaugural statement attributed to Governor LePage is widely quoted on Internet sites, it doesn't appear in either the transcript or the video recording of his inaugural address. Perhaps he said it at some other point during his inaugural day ceremonies, but we haven't yet been able to find a source documenting that he did. transcript video. During his campaign for governor, he was talking to commercial fishermen who are struggling because of federal fisheries rules. They complained that Obama brought his family to Bar Harbor and Acadia National Park for a long Labor Day holiday and found time to meet with union leaders, but wouldn't talk to the fishermen. LePage replied, ""I'd tell him to go to hell and get out of my state."" While on the campaign trail in September 2010, LePage did make a comment to a group of fishermen about how he would ""tell Obama to go to hell,"" although an Associated Press account of the incident gives it a somewhat different context: Republican gubernatorial candidate Paul LePage told a group of fishermen at a GOP forum that he won't be afraid to tell President Barack Obama to ""go to hell."" LePage [said] that he regretted the words he chose in the small coastal town of Brooksville but that he wasn't backing down in his criticism of the administration for what he describes as free-spending, anti-business policies. LePage was responding to a question when he made the remark about Obama, which was captured by a Democratic Party aide who was videotaping the event. ""As your governor, you're going to be seeing a lot of me on the front page, saying 'Governor LePage tells Obama to go to hell,'"" LePage said to applause. LePage's remark was part of a longer discussion of issues at the fishermen's forum. Dennis Blodgett, the town's GOP committee chairman, said much of the discussion focused on ""too many federal regulations being crammed down our throats."" The NAACP specifically asked LePage to spend MLK Day visiting black inmates at the Maine State Prison. He told them that he would meet with all inmates, regardless of race, if he were to visit the prison. He arrived at that event and said in front of a TV camera, ""If they want to play the race card on me, they can kiss my ass."" In January 2011, some news accounts reported that Governor LePage had declined an NAACP invitation to attend an NAACP-sponsored Martin Luther King Day event which included a meeting with black inmates at the Maine State Prison, with the governor stating that he would meet with all prisoners or none at all, and telling the organization to ""kiss my butt"" when they responded that his proposal was unacceptable: Maine Governor Paul LePage declined an NAACP invitation to attend Martin Luther King Day events. He'll be attending a funeral of a state trooper. The NAACP didn't like that and questioned his support for them. LePage responded ... uhm ... pretty clearly. They are a",['interest'],NEI,"Origins:  Paul LePage is the Republican governor of Maine who was elected to that office in 2010 after serving eight years as the mayor of Waterville.  Prior to his stint as Waterville's mayor, LePage was general manager of Marden's Surplus and Salvage, a discount chain with 14 stores throughout the state of Maine.  Shortly after LePage took office as governor in January 2011 the laudatory piece about him reproduced above began circulating on the Internet; we found its salient points to be a mixture of varying degrees of truthfulness as described below: Although this inaugural statement attributed to Governor LePage is widely quoted on Internet sites, it doesn't appear in either the transcript or the video recording of his inaugural address.  Perhaps he said it some other point during his inaugural day ceremonies, but we haven't yet been able to find a source documenting that he did."
Was Barack Obama the First Ex-President to 'Publicly Speak Against' His Successor?,['Is there truly anything that has never been done before in U.S. politics?'],"In the lead-up to the 2018 U.S. midterm elections, an old meme re-emerged on social media which claimed that former president Barack Obama had displayed an unprecedented level of partisanship and opportunism in his criticisms of President Donald Trump, in that Obama was ""the first ex president to publicly speak against a successor"" re-emerged social media   The meme was actually an edited form of an earlier version which first emerged on social media in 2017. The original included only the phrase ""First Ex President to Publicly Speak Against a Successor"": 2017 The claim, that no ex-president before Barack Obama ever publicly criticized his immediate successor is false. There is ample historical evidence of ex-presidents doing just that. Here are a few instances: Barack Obama The 44th president offered what were widely perceived as thinly-veiled criticisms of President Donald Trump when he spoke in Johannesburg, South Africa, in July 2018, railing against what he called ""strongman politics,"" whereby ""those in power seek to undermine every institution or norm that gives democracy meaning."" He also criticized ""far-right parties"" with a platform of ""protectionism and closed borders"" as well as ""barely-hidden racial nationalism."" perceived Speaking at the University of Illinois in September, Obama criticized Trump by name, saying he was a ""symptom, not a cause"" of an effort by powerful elites to engender fear and division in the face of social change and progress: Obama had declined to openly attack Trump for the first 18 months of his presidency, following what, in his University of Illinois speech, he called the ""wise American tradition of ex-presidents gracefully exiting the political stage."" Obama said he had changed his mind because, in his view, the 2018 mid-term elections represented ""one of those pivotal moments when every one of us, as citizens of the United States, need to determine just who it is that we are, just what it is that we stand for."" speech Bill Clinton In July 2007, the 42nd president took aim at the administration of his successor, George W. Bush, in its handling of the Iraq war, telling Good Morning America's Diane Sawyer ""There is no military victory here"" and criticizing Bush for attempting to filibuster Congressional efforts to bring about a withdrawal of troops: took aim efforts George H.W. Bush Although George H.W. Bush had a general policy of not speaking publicly against his successor, the 41st president did just that more than once while campaigning for Republican candidates during the 1994 mid-term elections. The Daily Oklahoman newspaper reported that Bush Sr. had offered a stinging counter-attack against Clinton during a visit to the state capital on 4 November 1994: reported Saying he was breaking his policy against criticizing President Clinton, former President George Bush said Friday in Oklahoma City he was tired of his Democratic successor criticizing Republicans ... Bush told the crowd ... that Clinton was stumping about blaming Republicans in Congress ""for his demise or things that weren't going right."" ""He blames us and he is wrong. I'm so tired of it,"" Bush told about 5,000 noisy GOP supporters at Oklahoma Christian University of Sciences and Arts. ""I think America is a little tired of it."" During a Republican rally in Omaha, Nebraska, the same week, Bush attacked Clinton for having ""the nerve"" to blame the GOP for ""his own failures,"" the Pittsburgh Post-Gazettereported: reported Former President George Bush broke a self-imposed silence yesterday and attacked President Clinton for taking credit for the U.S. economic recovery. Bush has been stumping for Republican candidates in the Mid-west this week. ""He has the nerve to blame Republicans for his own failures and the shortcomings of the Democratic Congress,"" the former president told a crowd of about 1,500 people in Omaha. In 1999, during the Monica Lewinsky scandal and Clinton's impeachment by the U.S. House of Representatives, Bush even appeared to accuse his successor of behaving in a way which demonstrated a lack of respect for the U.S. presidency, as the Associated Press reported: reported Former President Bush thinks Bill Clinton lacks respect for the presidency, but Bush predicts the country will bounce back after Clinton's impeachment trial ends. ""I have tried to stay out of all the Washington mess,"" Bush said Saturday at the end of a keynote address to the Safari Club International's 27th annual hunters' convention. ""But I must confess I have been deeply concerned by what appears to be a lack of respect for the office I was so very proud to hold."" Jimmy Carter The 39th president more than once criticized Ronald Reagan, the man who defeated him in the 1980 presidential campaign, firmly defending his own record and offering relatively barbed comments about his successor. In September 1982, Carter responded to Reagan's earlier criticisms of the Democrat's legacy, accusing his rival of failing to ""accept his responsibilities as president,"" the New York Times reported: New York Times Former President Jimmy Carter, responding to criticism from President Reagan, said tonight that while his Administration made mistakes, ""we did not spend four years blaming our mistakes on our predecessors"" ... Mr. Carter accused Mr. Reagan of not accepting his responsibilities. The former President said that after his defeat in 1980, he resolved to pledge Mr. Reagan ""my help, my support when he was ready to accept the awesome responsibilities of the Presidency."" ""My offer still stands,"" Mr. Carter said at a Democratic National Committee fund-raising dinner. ""When he is ready to accept those responsibilities, I'll be there to help him."" At a press conference two months later, Carter continued that theme, saying Reagan's efforts to deflect criticism onto him were ""irresponsible and ill-advised"" and that his Republican successor had made ""radical"" and unwelcome changes to U.S. foreign policy, United Press International reported: reported Jimmy Carter criticized President Reagan for making 'radical' changes in U.S. foreign and domestic policy, and said Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin is responsible in part for failure of the Camp David accords. In a wide-ranging news conference, Carter also twitted Reagan for trying to lay the blame for the nation's problems on the previous administration. 'There is always the temptation for an incumbent politician to blame all his mistakes on his predecessor. Most are willing to withstand the temptation. Mr. Reagan, apparently, is not,' Carter said. 'The public sees through that and the results of the (midterm) election proves I'm right' ... Speaking typically with a soft voice but strong words, Carter said: ""Most of the quite radical departures in foreign, domestic and economic policy have not been good for the country. We have an unprecedented number of people unemployed; bankruptcies are the highest in years; farm income is at the lowest level ever; the deficits have never been so high, and so forth"" ... ""It's true President Reagan inherited some serious problems from my administration. I inherited some from President Ford. But to try to forego blame and say all these problems are my predecessor's fault is patently irresponsible and ill-advised,"" he said. Carter called Reagan's nuclear policies 'ill-advised.' Gerald Ford Just as Carter publicly took aim at the man who replaced him in the White House, he was also the subject of repeated and sometimes very strong criticism by Republican Gerald Ford, whom Carter had defeated in the 1976 election. In April 1977, less than three months after Carter succeeded him, Ford ridiculed the Democrat's economic policies in a widely-syndicated interview with the Washington Post: interview ""Mr. Carter's anti-inflation program came in like a lion,"" Ford said. ""It's going out like a mouse"" ... The former president, looking relaxed, voiced his criticism of Carter in a brief interview following a speech to a Republican group here [in Los Angeles, California.] Over the next three years, Ford also took aim at Carter's handling of negotiations over the Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty (SALT), his handling of the economic crisis, and in the summer of 1980 he launched a devastating attack on his successor's legacy at a Republican event in Indianapolis, as the Associated Press reported: negotiations crisis reported ""The Carter economic policies have been a catastrophe. They've been disasters. We handed them the economy on a silver platter,"" Ford said, arguing that the rate of inflation was less than 5 percent when he left office and that unemployment was going down. ""The president blew it."" Ford predicted that Carter will go into the November election with a national unemployment rate of 9 percent, double-digit inflation and double-digit interest rates. ""He'll be defending the worst economic policy of any president since the Depression of 1932. That's bad. And he's responsible."" Conclusion The examples highlighted above are far from exhaustive but serve to illustrate that Barack Obama's recent criticisms of President Donald Trump are far from unique or unprecedented and, especially when compared to the pronouncements of Gerald Ford, could even be argued to have been relatively tame. As such, the claim in the 2017 meme which re-emerged in November 2018, that Obama is ""the first ex-president to publicly speak against a successor"" is false. Wintour, Patrick.  ""Obama Criticises 'Strongman Politics' in Coded Attack on Trump."" 
  The Guardian.  17 July 2018. Reuters.  ""Bill Clinton Criticizes Bush on Iraq."" 
  19 July 2007. Stolberg, Sheryl Gay and Jeff Zeleny.  ""Clash Over Iraq Becomes Bitter Between Bush and Congress."" 
  The New York Times.  12 July 2007. Zizzo, David.  ""Bush Criticizes Clinton During Stop in City."" 
  The Daily Oklahoman.  5 November 1994. The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.  ""Bush Criticizes Clinton."" 
  5 November 1994. Associated Press.  ""Bush Criticizes Clinton, But Says Scandal Will Fade."" 
  The Atlanta Constitution   25 January 1999. Clymer, Adam.  ""Carter Says Reagan Has Failed to Accept His Responsibilities."" 
  The New York Times.  1 October 1982. Pippert, Wesley G.  ""Jimmy Carter Criticized President Reagan Wednesday for Making 'Radical'..."" 
  United Press International.  10 November 1982. Cannon, Lou.  ""Ford Criticizes Carter Economics."" 
  The Tampa Bay Times.  17 April 1977. Associated Press.  ""Ford Criticizes Carter's Policy."" 
  The [Uniontown] Evening Standard.  8 April 1977. Associated Press.  ""Ford Criticizes Carter's Economic Policies."" 
  The [Staunton] News Leader.  11 October 1979. Carrol, Jan.  ""Former President Ford Criticizes Carter for 'Flip-Flopping' Policies."" 
  The [Lousiville] Courier-Journal.  27 June 1980.",['income'],False,"In the lead-up to the 2018 U.S. midterm elections, an old meme re-emerged on social media which claimed that former president Barack Obama had displayed an unprecedented level of partisanship and opportunism in his criticisms of President Donald Trump, in that Obama was ""the first ex president to publicly speak against a successor""The meme was actually an edited form of an earlier version which first emerged on social media in 2017. The original included only the phrase ""First Ex President to Publicly Speak Against a Successor"":The 44th president offered what were widely perceived as thinly-veiled criticisms of President Donald Trump when he spoke in Johannesburg, South Africa, in July 2018, railing against what he called ""strongman politics,"" whereby ""those in power seek to undermine every institution or norm that gives democracy meaning."" He also criticized ""far-right parties"" with a platform of ""protectionism and closed borders"" as well as ""barely-hidden racial nationalism.""Obama had declined to openly attack Trump for the first 18 months of his presidency, following what, in his University of Illinois speech, he called the ""wise American tradition of ex-presidents gracefully exiting the political stage."" Obama said he had changed his mind because, in his view, the 2018 mid-term elections represented ""one of those pivotal moments when every one of us, as citizens of the United States, need to determine just who it is that we are, just what it is that we stand for.""In July 2007, the 42nd president took aim at the administration of his successor, George W. Bush, in its handling of the Iraq war, telling Good Morning America's Diane Sawyer ""There is no military victory here"" and criticizing Bush for attempting to filibuster Congressional efforts to bring about a withdrawal of troops:The Daily Oklahoman newspaper reported that Bush Sr. had offered a stinging counter-attack against Clinton during a visit to the state capital on 4 November 1994:During a Republican rally in Omaha, Nebraska, the same week, Bush attacked Clinton for having ""the nerve"" to blame the GOP for ""his own failures,"" the Pittsburgh Post-Gazettereported:In 1999, during the Monica Lewinsky scandal and Clinton's impeachment by the U.S. House of Representatives, Bush even appeared to accuse his successor of behaving in a way which demonstrated a lack of respect for the U.S. presidency, as the Associated Press reported:In September 1982, Carter responded to Reagan's earlier criticisms of the Democrat's legacy, accusing his rival of failing to ""accept his responsibilities as president,"" the New York Times reported:At a press conference two months later, Carter continued that theme, saying Reagan's efforts to deflect criticism onto him were ""irresponsible and ill-advised"" and that his Republican successor had made ""radical"" and unwelcome changes to U.S. foreign policy, United Press International reported:In April 1977, less than three months after Carter succeeded him, Ford ridiculed the Democrat's economic policies in a widely-syndicated interview with the Washington Post:Over the next three years, Ford also took aim at Carter's handling of negotiations over the Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty (SALT), his handling of the economic crisis, and in the summer of 1980 he launched a devastating attack on his successor's legacy at a Republican event in Indianapolis, as the Associated Press reported:"
"Under Republican Governor Chris Christie, tolls cost more. Train and bus rides cost more. College tuition goes up. But Christie protected a tax cut for millionaires.",[],"Few things anger New Jerseyans more than higher costs  and that just may be the point of a recentradio adcritical of Gov. Chris Christies time in office. One New Jersey, a Democratic grass-roots group, released the ad May 3. It uses the sound effects of a deck of cards being shuffled and cut to emphasize a theme that Christies gubernatorial tenure thus far has stacked the deck against taxpayers. Christie is up for re-election in November. His lone challenger is state Sen. Barbara Buono (D-Middlesex). The ad goes after Christie in a number of areas but were looking at issues that are near and dear to many New Jerseyans: toll costs, public transportation, education and the wealthy paying their fair share in taxes. Under Republican Governor Chris Christie, tolls cost more. Train and bus rides cost more. College tuition goes up. But Christie protected a tax cut for millionaires, a portion of the 60-second ad states. Most of the claims are accurate but some details are lacking. Lets start by reviewing toll hikes. One New Jersey is correct that tolls are higher under Christie, but doesnt mention that the state has hadtwomajor toll increases in recent years  the larger of which was courtesy of Democrat Jon Corzine, not Christie. In August 2011, Christie and New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo agreed to raise trans-Hudson tolls by $1.50 starting in September 2011, followed by additional hikes of 75 cents annually through 2015 to fund a $33 billion capital plan for the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. Those increases affected the Lincoln and Holland tunnels, the Outerbridge Crossing and the Goethals, Bayonne and George Washington bridges. The Corzine-approved hike that took effect Jan. 1, 2012 increased tolls 53 percent on the New Jersey Turnpike and 50 percent on the Garden State Parkway. Those hikes were the second part of a two-phase toll increase adopted by the Turnpike Authority in October 2008, when Corzine was governor. And costs also have increased for train and bus rides since Christie became governor in January 2010. Three months after Christie took office, NJ Transit approved its largest fare hike in history to help close a $300 million budget gap for the fiscal year beginning that July 1. The hikes, the first since 2007, amounted to 25 percent for train and some bus riders and 10 percent for local bus riders and light rail commuters. In February 2010 Christie called NJ Transit a political patronage pit that needed to cut costs and said fare hikes would be unavoidable since drivers of the states roads had just experienced another toll hike. Next, lets look at college tuition. Christie cut funding for county colleges by 10 percent in 2010, a year that also saw record enrollment increases at the states two-year schools. Tuition increased an average of 4.4 percent. Also, 24 of New Jerseys four-year colleges and universities raised tuition and fees in 2010 faster than the inflation rate, according to a Star-Ledger survey that year. Still, tuition generally increases annually at most schools. Finally, did Christie protect a tax cut for millionaires? Democrats approved a bill in May 2010 renewing a one-year tax rate increase of 10.75 percent for those with taxable income above $1 million. The rate had expired before Christie became governor. Christie, who campaigned that he wouldnt raise taxes, vetoed the surcharge -- protecting the rich, some claim -- and Democrats couldnt override it. Plain and simple, Christie picks and chooses when and how to use his power  and on whose behalf, One New Jersey spokesman Joshua Henne said in an e-mail. He used his power to roll back a tax hike on millionaires, but chose not to use his power to roll back toll, tuition and fare increases that disproportionately hurt New Jerseys middle-class and working families. Christie for Governor spokesman Kevin Roberts declined comment. Our ruling Part of an ad about Christie claims, Under Republican Governor Chris Christie, tolls cost more. Train and bus rides cost more. College tuition goes up. But Christie protected a tax cut for millionaires. The ad is correct that tolls, train and bus fares, and college tuition increased on Christies watch but disregards that some of those increases resulted because the governor slashed funding in an effort to close budget gaps. As for protecting a tax cut for millionaires, weve heard this one before and well point out again that Christie technically didnt cut the millionaires tax since it expired before he took office. Still, opinions vary wildly on that claim. We rate this portion of the ad Mostly True. To comment on this story, go toNJ.com.","['New Jersey', 'Education', 'Transportation', 'Taxes']",True,"Few things anger New Jerseyans more than higher costs  and that just may be the point of a recentradio adcritical of Gov. Chris Christies time in office.To comment on this story, go toNJ.com."
Did Biden promise to get rid of the 'stepped-up' basis for the capital gains tax?,"['For once, a viral Facebook post critical of a politician accurately articulated their past pronouncements. ']","In early 2021, readers asked Snopes to examine the accuracy of a widely shared social media post that purported to describe U.S. President Joe Biden's intention to eliminate a piece of tax law that allows taxpayers to benefit from selling a home inherited from their parents. The post, which was critical of Biden and the supposed plan, first emerged during the 2020 presidential election campaign but regained prominence after Biden was inaugurated in January 2021. It typically read as follows: ""Did you know Biden wants to get rid of something called 'stepped-up basis'? How does this affect you? When your parents pass and leave you the family house, normally you would inherit that property at its current value. If you were to sell that house, you would only pay taxes on the gain from its current value and what it sells for. If Biden does away with 'stepped-up basis,' you will inherit the property for what your parents paid for it. If you decide to sell, you will pay taxes on the difference between the original purchase price and what it sells for today. Here is what this looks like: 

Current Policy
Inherited House at Current Value - $200,000
Sells for $205,000
Taxable income = $5,000
Taxes Due - 20% of $5,000 = $1,000
Profit to you = $204,000

Biden Policy
Inherited House at Original Purchase Price - $40,000
Sells for $205,000
Taxable income = $165,000
Taxes Due - 20% of $165,000 = $33,000
Profit to you = $172,000

If your parents had sold this property prior to passing, they would have paid no taxes because it was their primary residence. So much for helping the middle class get ahead. My educated guess would be that at least 95% of Americans don’t even know Biden has proposed this. We are talking tens of thousands of additional tax dollars for the average person after inheritance! Wow, Google 'Biden stepped-up basis' and educate yourself because this is significant! Please share!

The viral post accurately stated that Biden proposed getting rid of the 'stepped-up' basis for capital gains tax and correctly explained the potential practical consequences for an individual taxpayer who inherits a home. In fact, the tax burden for wealthier individuals would be even greater than the post stated, because Biden has also proposed doubling the rate of long-term capital gains tax for those with income over $1 million. 

Here's how the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office describes the stepped-up basis for capital gains tax, which is the tax due on profits from the sale of an asset, such as shares or property: When people sell an asset for more than the price they paid for it, they realize a net capital gain. The net gain is typically calculated as the sale price minus the asset's adjusted basis—generally the original purchase price adjusted for improvements or depreciation. To calculate the gains on inherited assets, taxpayers generally use the asset's fair-market value at the time of the owner's death, often referred to as stepped-up basis, instead of the adjusted basis derived from the asset's value when the decedent initially acquired it. When the heir sells the asset, capital gains taxes are assessed only on the change in the asset's value relative to the stepped-up basis. As a result, any appreciation in value that occurred while the decedent owned the asset is not included in taxable income and therefore is not subject to the capital gains tax. 

In 2015, then-President Barack Obama also proposed eliminating the stepped-up basis. Here's his administration's explanation of how it works: Suppose an individual leaves stock worth $50 million to an heir, who immediately sells it. When purchased, the stock was worth $10 million, so the capital gain is $40 million. However, the heir's basis in the stock is stepped up to the $50 million gain when inherited, so no income tax is due on the sale, nor ever due on the $40 million of gain. Each year, hundreds of billions in capital gains avoid tax as a result of the stepped-up basis. 

During the 2020 presidential election, Biden and his campaign repeatedly expressed his intention to eliminate the stepped-up basis. As first highlighted by Politifact, the Biden campaign presented the proposal as a partial way to pay for its proposed student loan reforms. In October 2019, ABC News reported that the plan makes official several policies the former vice president often discusses on the trail about student debt. Biden's policy includes his plan for reducing student loan debt obligations for students who enter the public service sector, allowing $10,000 of undergraduate or graduate debt relief per year for up to five years of service. Biden would also double the maximum amount of Pell grants available to students, including Dreamers, and would allow students making less than $25,000 a year to defer payments on their federal loans without accruing interest. Any student making more than $25,000 would pay 5% of their discretionary income toward their loans rather than the current 10% owed. The plan would be funded through the elimination of the stepped-up basis loophole, a type of break on inheritance taxes, and capping itemized deductions for wealthy Americans at 28%, according to the campaign. 

In June 2020, according to CNBC, Biden told potential donors: ""I'm going to get rid of the bulk of Trump's $2 trillion tax cut, and a lot of you may not like that, but I'm going to close loopholes like capital gains and stepped-up basis."" On the Biden-Harris campaign's website, a Spanish-language document outlining the campaign's plans for education reforms stated (translated): ""The Biden plan for post-secondary education is a $750 billion investment over 10 years, aimed at developing a stronger and more inclusive middle class. It will be paid for by ensuring the super-rich pay their fair share. Specifically, this plan will be funded by eliminating the gap in our tax law known as the 'Stepped-up Basis Loophole' as well as reducing the itemized deductions that the richest Americans can make to 28%."" 

Elsewhere, the Biden campaign proposed not only eliminating the stepped-up basis but also doubling the tax rate for long-term capital gains—that is, profits from the sale of an asset owned for more than one year—for relatively wealthy taxpayers. Here's what the Biden-Harris campaign website stated, as part of the campaign's healthcare plan: ""As President, Biden will make healthcare a right by eliminating capital gains tax loopholes for the super wealthy. Today, the very wealthy pay a tax rate of just 20% on long-term capital gains... As President, Biden will roll back the Trump rate cut for the very wealthy and restore the 39.6% top rate he helped restore when he negotiated an end to the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy in 2012. Biden's capital gains reform will close the loopholes that allow the super wealthy to avoid taxes on capital gains altogether. Biden will ensure that those making over $1 million will pay the top rate on capital gains, doubling the capital gains tax rate on the super wealthy."" 

The Facebook post shared widely in late 2020 and early 2021 accurately described Biden's stated intention to eliminate the stepped-up basis for capital gains tax, a move that would indeed increase the tax burden on an individual who inherits a piece of property from their parents before selling it. The tax burden for wealthier taxpayers would be even greater than the Facebook post outlined, since Biden has also proposed increasing the rate of long-term capital gains tax for those with an income above $1 million. The Facebook post did not mention that Biden had stipulated he would use the money raised from eliminating the stepped-up basis to help pay for his healthcare and education plans. Snopes contacted the White House to ask whether the Biden administration still intended to push for the elimination of the stepped-up basis, but we did not receive a response in time for publication.",['profit'],True,"The post  which was critical of Biden and the supposed plan  first emerged during the 2020 presidential election campaign, but regained prominence after Biden was inaugurated in January 2021. It typically read as follows:Here's how the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office describes the stepped-up basis for capital gains tax, which is the tax due on profits from the sale of an asset, such as shares, a piece of property, and so on:In 2015, then-President Barack Obama also proposed eliminating the stepped-up basis. Here's his administration's explanation of how it works:During the 2020 presidential election, Biden and his campaign repeatedly expressed his intention to get rid of the stepped-up basis. As first highlighted by Politifact, the Biden campaign presented the proposal as a partial way to pay for its proposed student loan reforms. In October 2019, ABC News reported that:In June 2020, according to CNBC, Biden told would-be donors: ""Im going to get rid of the bulk of Trumps $2 trillion tax cut, and a lot of you may not like that but Im going to close loopholes like capital gains and stepped-up basis.On the Biden-Harris campaign's website, a Spanish-language document outlining the campaign's plans for education reforms stated (translated):Elsewhere, the Biden campaign proposed not only getting rid of the stepped-up basis, but also doubling the tax rate for long-term capital gains  that is, profits from the sale of an asset that you owned for more than one year  for relatively wealthy taxpayers. Here's what the Biden-Harris campaign website stated, as part of the campaign's healthcare plan:"
"Says Paul Ryan voted for two wars that were unpaid for, voted for the Bush tax cuts that were unpaid for, voted for the prescription drug bill that cost as much as my health care bill -- but wasn't paid for.",[],"In closed-doorremarks to campaignsupporterson April 14, 2011, President Barack Obama looked back in frustration at lengthy negotiations with Republicans over funding to keep the federal government operating.Obama opined, as aCBS News onlinestoryreported, that he expects Republicans to continue using the budget process to enact their political agenda under the guise of cutting spending.The president singled out U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., the House Budget Committee chairman who has authored a long-term deficit-reduction plan.When Paul Ryan says his priority is to make sure, you know, he's just being America's accountant, trying to be responsible ...This is the same guy who voted for two wars that were unpaid for, voted for the Bush tax cuts that were unpaid for, voted for the prescription drug bill that cost as much as my health care bill -- but wasn't paid for, Obama told his supporters. So it's not on the level.In making the remark, Obama pointed to several big-ticket items approved during the Bush administration while Ryan was in Congress -- ones he says have helped drive the nations record deficits.Given the prominence of the protagonists and the timeliness of the comments, we decided to take a look at Obamas critique of Ryan.With the words, Obama is offering an opinion about how Ryan has framed his budget-cutting efforts. We cant fact-check the presidents opinion about Ryans message. But we can focus on the factual assertions, and try to put them into some context.We started with the White House, which declined to comment, saying the presidents remarks spoke for themselves.Lets look at the votes.There is no dispute Ryan voted forAfghanistanandIraqwarfunding; for themajor taxcutsenacted under President George W. Bush in 2001 and2003(andextended in 2010); and for the new Medicare prescription drug benefitcreated in 2003.All were big-ticket items.But Obama goes a step further to assert that all were unpaid for. Thats Washington parlance for bills not offset by corresponding spending cuts or tax increases elsewhere in the federal budget.Budget experts we consulted and the historical record confirm there were no direct offsets built into those bills.Obamas claim on the prescription drug bill was slightly different -- that it wasnt paid for and cost as much as my health care bill.Lets break this into two parts.Obama appears to refer to the gross outlays needed for the two landmark bills.For the Medicare prescription drug bill, passed in 2003 and effective in 2006, we found a range of cost estimates for 10 years: $395 billion to $720 billion. Theofficial Congressional Budget Officeestimatewas the low end.That was at the time. Now, government estimates show the original cost projections were too high, perhaps by as much as 40 percent, said Jon Gabel, senior fellow in health care research at the National Opinion Research Center.Obamas health reform bill -- thePatient Protection and Affordable Care Act-- was pricier, with estimates in the$800 billion to $1.4 trillion range. Ryan and Republicans opposed the bill.But the two measures were passed seven years apart, so inflation may be a factor.Paul Van de Water, a former Congressional Budget Office official who is now a senior fellow with the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, did an inflation-adjusted comparison and found the Medicare bill is probably two-thirds or three-quarters the cost of the Obama health care measure.That is, Obamas health care bill is still hundreds of millions of dollars more costly than the Medicare drug bill.So the president was off in equating the gross cost of the bills.On the offset question, the Medicare prescription drug bill, however, indisputably added to the federal deficit. It was not offset by new revenue or other spending cuts.In contrast, theofficial governmentestimateof the 2010 health care laws impact said it would actually reduce the deficit, in part because of the new taxes it enacts to help offset the cost of expanding health coverage.The source for that is the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.TheCBOs estimate is hardly undisputed-- Ryan, other Republican leaders and various budget analysts haveargued that the CBOs report was skewed by questionableassumptionsgiven to it by the Obama administration. They contend the law would actually add to the deficit.Nevertheless, we -- and Congress -- have used CBO estimates as the gold standard on such matters. So Obama has a pretty firm leg to stand on in saying his health bill was paid for while the Medicare bill was not.That covers the details behind the presidents remarks. In this case, its important to put them into their proper context. We consulted several experts and sought Ryans take.Ryan was asked in arecentinterviewabout Obamas citing the Medicare drug program, the two wars and the Bush tax cuts as major drivers of the deficit.He disagreed: We still had these enormous, building, unfunded liabilities, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security -- I mean, the big drivers of our debt.His office sent us a defense of his votes on war funding, quotinghis budget plan: Like all categories of government spending, defense spending should be executed with greater efficiency and accountability. But responsible budgeting must never lose sight of the fact that the first responsibility of the federal government is to provide for the defense of the nation.On the Bush tax cuts, Ryan aides said the congressman believes that we have deficits because Washington spends too much, not because Americans are taxed too little. He says the tax cuts helped fuel economic growth and bring in more tax revenue.Indeed, in December, Obama himself backeda compromise with Republicans, including Ryan,that extended the Bush tax cuts.Bottom line: Ryan has voted for massive new spending and so has the president, said Tad DeHaven, a budget analyst at the libertarian Cato Institute.Iraq war costs have topped $1 trillion, said Scott Lilly, former staff director for the House Appropriations Committee and now a research fellow at the left-leaning Center for American Progress. Neither Bushs war effort in Afghanistan nor Obamas escalation there has been paid for, both analysts noted.In April, bothObamaandRyanunveiled long-term deficit reduction plans in the neighborhood of $4 trillion over a decade or more.So where does this leave us?The president cherry-picked a handful of votes in an effort to show that Ryan is not pristine on the subject of the deficit.Obama got it right on Ryans support for the big-ticket bills, including war funding, Medicare prescription drugs and the Bush tax cuts. He was also on target in saying that none was offset or paid for by spending cuts or tax increases. Thats the main part of his claim.He was off the mark in asserting that one of the bills -- Medicare prescription drugs -- was as costly as his 2010 health care reform bill.That puts him at Mostly True.","['Afghanistan', 'Deficit', 'Federal Budget', 'Health Care', 'Iraq', 'Taxes', 'Wisconsin']",True,"In closed-doorremarks to campaignsupporterson April 14, 2011, President Barack Obama looked back in frustration at lengthy negotiations with Republicans over funding to keep the federal government operating.Obama opined, as aCBS News onlinestoryreported, that he expects Republicans to continue using the budget process to enact their political agenda under the guise of cutting spending.The president singled out U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., the House Budget Committee chairman who has authored a long-term deficit-reduction plan.When Paul Ryan says his priority is to make sure, you know, he's just being America's accountant, trying to be responsible ...This is the same guy who voted for two wars that were unpaid for, voted for the Bush tax cuts that were unpaid for, voted for the prescription drug bill that cost as much as my health care bill -- but wasn't paid for, Obama told his supporters. So it's not on the level.In making the remark, Obama pointed to several big-ticket items approved during the Bush administration while Ryan was in Congress -- ones he says have helped drive the nations record deficits.Given the prominence of the protagonists and the timeliness of the comments, we decided to take a look at Obamas critique of Ryan.With the words, Obama is offering an opinion about how Ryan has framed his budget-cutting efforts. We cant fact-check the presidents opinion about Ryans message. But we can focus on the factual assertions, and try to put them into some context.We started with the White House, which declined to comment, saying the presidents remarks spoke for themselves.Lets look at the votes.There is no dispute Ryan voted forAfghanistanandIraqwarfunding; for themajor taxcutsenacted under President George W. Bush in 2001 and2003(andextended in 2010); and for the new Medicare prescription drug benefitcreated in 2003.All were big-ticket items.But Obama goes a step further to assert that all were unpaid for. Thats Washington parlance for bills not offset by corresponding spending cuts or tax increases elsewhere in the federal budget.Budget experts we consulted and the historical record confirm there were no direct offsets built into those bills.Obamas claim on the prescription drug bill was slightly different -- that it wasnt paid for and cost as much as my health care bill.Lets break this into two parts.Obama appears to refer to the gross outlays needed for the two landmark bills.For the Medicare prescription drug bill, passed in 2003 and effective in 2006, we found a range of cost estimates for 10 years: $395 billion to $720 billion. Theofficial Congressional Budget Officeestimatewas the low end.That was at the time. Now, government estimates show the original cost projections were too high, perhaps by as much as 40 percent, said Jon Gabel, senior fellow in health care research at the National Opinion Research Center.Obamas health reform bill -- thePatient Protection and Affordable Care Act-- was pricier, with estimates in the$800 billion to $1.4 trillion range.  Ryan and Republicans opposed the bill.But the two measures were passed seven years apart, so inflation may be a factor.Paul Van de Water, a former Congressional Budget Office official who is now a senior fellow with the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, did an inflation-adjusted comparison and found the Medicare bill is probably two-thirds or three-quarters the cost of the Obama health care measure.That is, Obamas health care bill is still hundreds of millions of dollars more costly than the Medicare drug bill.So the president was off in equating the gross cost of the bills.On the offset question, the Medicare prescription drug bill, however, indisputably added to the federal deficit. It was not offset by new revenue or other spending cuts.In contrast, theofficial governmentestimateof the 2010 health care laws impact said it would actually reduce the deficit, in part because of the new taxes it enacts to help offset the cost of expanding health coverage.The source for that is the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.TheCBOs estimate is hardly undisputed-- Ryan, other Republican leaders and various budget analysts haveargued that the CBOs report was skewed by questionableassumptionsgiven to it by the Obama administration. They contend the law would actually add to the deficit.Nevertheless, we -- and Congress -- have used CBO estimates as the gold standard on such matters. So Obama has a pretty firm leg to stand on in saying his health bill was paid for while the Medicare bill was not.That covers the details behind the presidents remarks. In this case, its important to put them into their proper context. We consulted several experts and sought Ryans take.Ryan was asked in arecentinterviewabout Obamas citing the Medicare drug program, the two wars and the Bush tax cuts as major drivers of the deficit.He disagreed: We still had these enormous, building, unfunded liabilities, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security -- I mean, the big drivers of our debt.His office sent us a defense of his votes on war funding, quotinghis budget plan: Like all categories of government spending, defense spending should be executed with greater efficiency and accountability. But responsible budgeting must never lose sight of the fact that the first responsibility of the federal government is to provide for the defense of the nation.On the Bush tax cuts, Ryan aides said the congressman believes that we have deficits because Washington spends too much, not because Americans are taxed too little. He says the tax cuts helped fuel economic growth and bring in more tax revenue.Indeed, in December, Obama himself backeda compromise with Republicans, including Ryan,that extended the Bush tax cuts.Bottom line: Ryan has voted for massive new spending and so has the president, said Tad DeHaven, a budget analyst at the libertarian Cato Institute.Iraq war costs have topped $1 trillion, said Scott Lilly, former staff director for the House Appropriations Committee and now a research fellow at the left-leaning Center for American Progress. Neither Bushs war effort in Afghanistan nor Obamas escalation there has been paid for, both analysts noted.In April, bothObamaandRyanunveiled long-term deficit reduction plans in the neighborhood of $4 trillion over a decade or more.So where does this leave us?The president cherry-picked a handful of votes in an effort to show that Ryan is not pristine on the subject of the deficit.Obama got it right on Ryans support for the big-ticket bills, including war funding, Medicare prescription drugs and the Bush tax cuts. He was also on target in saying that none was offset or paid for by spending cuts or tax increases. Thats the main part of his claim.He was off the mark in asserting that one of the bills -- Medicare prescription drugs -- was as costly as his 2010 health care reform bill.That puts him at Mostly True."
The Dead Cat in the Package,['Thief makes off with a package containing a dead cat.'],"A package containing a dead cat is stolen by a thief who thinks she's making off with something of value. Two elderly women went shopping. As they came out of the mall, they spotted a dead cat in the parking lot. Being cat lovers, they couldn't bear the thought of leaving the poor dead kitty there. They decided to take it home and give it a decent burial. They went back into the store and got some Dillard's shopping bags. They wrapped the dead kitty in one sack and then put it in another Dillard's sack, hoping to contain the odor. It was lunchtime, so their next stop was a local restaurant. As it was a warm day, they were reluctant to leave the dead kitty closed up in the car. So, they placed the Dillard's sack beside the car and went in to eat. As it happened, their car was visible through the window where they were sitting in the restaurant. They watched a lady walk by their car, stop, go back, pick up their Dillard's sack, and walk into the restaurant. This lady was then seated next to our two elderly cat lovers. The lady ordered her lunch, and curiosity getting the better of her, she opened the Dillard's sack. She peeked inside, screamed, and in trying to get out of her chair, fell and hit her head. An ambulance was called to take the poor woman away. As they were taking her away, one of our elderly cat lovers placed the Dillard's sack on the gurney, saying, ""I think this belongs to her..."" Recent versions of this story often place it at the West Edmonton Mall in Canada or the Mall of America in the United States. In those incarnations, the action supposedly takes place in the parking lot, where a Good Samaritan places the deceased beastie in a shopping bag, then retreats to her own car to watch so she'll be on hand to give an explanation when the cat's owner returns. Another woman comes along, filches the bag, and gets it back to her own car, where she opens it and is seen fainting dead away once she catches sight of her ill-gotten gains. In some tellings, an ambulance is called, and the still-unconscious woman is placed on a stretcher with what the emergency workers believe to be the poor dear's bag thoughtfully placed on her chest. Now I'm going to ruin your day by telling you it never happened. Not only that, dead-cats-in-package stories are as old as the hills; one even turned up in a 1904 New York Times article. Another standard version has an old woman taking her dear, departed Fluffy across town on a bus so she can bury her in a lovely park. Either thieves brazenly steal her package, or her parcel somehow gets innocently switched with someone else's, and she arrives at her destination not with Fluffy but instead with a nice ham all wrapped up. It's told both ways. In a closely related version, the woman takes the subway with her soon-to-be-buried cat, but this time the beastie is in a suitcase. While the woman is struggling up the steep stairs, a nice young boy offers to carry the suitcase up for her. She gratefully hands over the bag, and he hurries off with dead Fluffy. In this version, you're left to imagine the lad's reaction when he pries it open. The following tale of one man's efforts to track down this story comes from David Jacobson's 1948 book, The Affairs of Dame Rumor: Through the association of ideas, a given concept turns into a dramatic event, such as the perennial wonder of the Dead-Cat-Come-to-Justice. A New York City newspaperman once decided to track down this tale. He had first heard it from a friend. Claiming to believe the story himself, the friend told the newspaperman about a woman who had placed her pet cat in a veterinary hospital where it later died. As she wished to give the animal a decent burial, the woman called for her pet's remains, and neatly wrapped in a box, she received the dead cat. Along the way home, the woman stopped to do some shopping at Stern's department store on 42nd Street. While selecting her purchases, the woman placed the box on a nearby counter. But suddenly she looked around for it, and the box was gone. Stern's detectives began searching the store for the packaged body of the cat. Within a short time, they found it. The opened box, the deceased animal leering out of it, was on the floor of a telephone booth. Alongside lay the body of a woman, immediately identified as a well-known shoplifter who had been under the scrutiny of this and other stores for several months. The shoplifter had apparently taken her loot to the telephone booth, opened it, caught a glimpse of the dead cat, and dropped to the floor dead of a heart attack resulting from fright. His friend, the newspaperman learned, got the rumor about this macabre justice from two actors who lived in the neighboring apartment. The two knew the full truth of the story, according to the friend. Yet, interviewing the actors, the journalist found they had received the tale from a Christian Science practitioner, a man whose word they did not doubt as he had told them the rumor as gospel. The Christian Science practitioner willingly repeated this gospel before the newspaperman, adding that he had heard it from a woman. She was the friend of the dead cat's owner. She would give him the names of all the people involved. And, to be sure, this woman was full of the dead-cat wonder, according to the journalist. Not that she actually knew the name of the animal's owner. But she had heard the rumor from her son-in-law, who knew all about it. ""He turned out to know everything about it,"" the newspaperman reported. ""He had heard the story firsthand from a passenger on a commuter train whose aunt knew the lady who owned the dead cat."" Still curious about the rumor, the newspaperman went to Stern's department store. There, a somewhat firm, if not angered, chief detective swiftly assured him that nothing of the sort had happened. Neither had the local police station any record of either a dead shoplifter or a dead cat having been reported. While the newspaperman was playing ring-around-a-rosy with the Dead-Cat-Come-to-Justice rumor, it was having a gay time of its own. It was flying from table to table, from office to office on its cross-country journey. Readjusted to fit the local situation in Chicago, the rumor was an eye-opener months later when it became current talk. In California, the following year, people gasped in amazement as they heard about the fate of the shoplifter in the local department store. And at least one national magazine published the rumor as one of its truth-is-stranger-than-fiction features for the edification of the wonder-lovers among its loyal subscribers.",['returns'],True,"  Brunvand, Jan Harold.  The Choking Doberman.  New York: W. W. Norton, 1984.  ISBN 0-393-30321-7  (pp. 216-219).  Brunvand, Jan Harold.  The Mexican Pet.  New York: W. W. Norton, 1986.   ISBN 0-393-30542-2   (pp. 31-34).  Brunvand, Jan Harold.  Too Good To Be .  New York: W. W. Norton, 1999.   ISBN 0-393-04734-2  (pp. 63-65, 74-76).  Brunvand, Jan Harold.  The Vanishing Hitchhiker.  New York: W. W. Norton, 1981.  ISBN 0-393-95169-3  (pp. 103-112).   de Vos, Gail.  Tales, Rumors and Gossip.  Englewood: Libraries Unlimited, 1996.  ISBN 1-56308-190-3  (pp. 158, 164-169).  Dorson, Richard.  American Folklore.  Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1959  (pp. 253-254).   Jacobson, David J.  The Affairs of Dame Rumor.   New York: Rinehart & Company, 1948  (pp. 44-46).   Scott, Bill.  Pelicans & Chihuahuas and Other Urban Legends.  St. Lucia, Queensland: Univ. of Queensland, 1996.  ISBN 0-7022-2774-9  (p. 64).  Smith, Paul.  The Book of Nastier Legends.  London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1986.  ISBN 0-7102-0573-2  (p. 88).     Holt, David and Bill Mooney.  Spiders in the Hairdo.  Little Rock: August House, 1999.  ISBN 0-87483-525-9  (pp. 92-93).  Schwartz, Alvin.  More Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark.  New York: HarperCollins, 1984.  ISBN 0-397-32081-7  (pp. 52-53).    The Big Book of Urban Legends.  New York: Paradox Press, 1994.  ISBN 1-56389-165-4  (pp. 42-43)."
Did a Billboard in Missouri Show President Trump Alongside a Gospel Quote?,['Some Christians expressed concern that a billboard near St. Louis seemingly equated the 45th president with Jesus Christ himself.'],"In the final days before the November 2018 elections, social media users in Missouri began posting descriptions and photographs of a billboard that appeared to show President Donald Trump's face, accompanied by an excerpt from a well-known Bible verse and a reworking of his 2016 presidential campaign slogan, ""Make America Great Again."" From a friend -- a billboard spotted outside of St. Louis. I don't like using the word ""heresy,"" but I think I'll make an exception in this case. The images prompted expressions of concern from some Christians that the billboard was associating or likening President Trump to Jesus Christ himself, the ""Word made flesh"" referenced in the Gospel quotation. In its proper context, Chapter 1, Verse 14 of the Gospel of John reads: ""He came unto his own, and his own received him not. But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth. John bare witness of him, and cried, saying, This was he of whom I spake, He that cometh after me is preferred before me: for he was before me. And of his fulness have all we received, and grace for grace. For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ."" The billboard is real, and the photographs of it shared on social media in early November are authentic. The existence of the billboard was verified by St. Louis television station KMOV, which published its own photograph of it, describing the location as being ""on Interstate 170 near St. Charles Rock Road,"" which is around 15 miles northwest of downtown St. Louis, Missouri. This corroborates the description in Martha Baker's 3 November Facebook post, which stated that the billboard was located ""on I-170 (the Innerbelt in St. Louis) between the Rock Road and Page Blvd."" Three days before Baker's post, another social media user posted their description of the billboard, expressing their dismay at what they called its ""idolatry"": ""This is not a drill. In #STL I just saw a billboard with Trump on it that says, 'The word made flesh.' And 'Make the gospel great again.' I cannot begin to express how livid I am at this level of idolatry."" The billboard is undoubtedly real, though it is not yet clear who paid for it and when it was erected. A spokesperson for DDI Media, the St. Louis company that owns the billboard itself, told us they could not share such information. On 5 November, a Facebook page called ""Make the Gospel Great Again"" (which is no longer available on the social networking website) claimed responsibility for the billboard: ""We met as a team last night to discuss how much hatred we've received for our efforts to encourage fellow believers in holding fast to the faith. We prayed that the Facebook page would be a community for fellow Christians to be encouraged at what God is doing in the world and to find out how they could, like our president, be a part of being God's presence in making America great. But the hateful comments and mean-spiritedness from liberals and atheists drowned out the voices of Christians in this country. These reflect the level of unfair, deranged media attacks on the President in general and his supporters. Our billboard IS NOT equating Jesus with President Donald Trump. Salvation comes only from a personal relationship with Jesus Christ, not any man. But God does send his messengers to us, and just as King David liberated the faithful in his day, President Trump is doing this today through his protection of the unborn, defense of our land against foreign invaders, and standing up for Israel."" The page described its mission statement as follows: ""We believe God has given American Christians His earthly messenger - Donald J. Trump. We follow his words in faith each day!"" As far back as 10 October, ""Make the Gospel Great Again"" posted an image that was almost identical to that ultimately displayed on the St. Louis billboard, and its profile photograph was the same logo that appeared on the billboard (a crucifix with an American flag). We sent a list of questions to an email address associated with the ""Make the Gospel Great Again"" Facebook page in order to clarify who was behind it and verify whether there was a link between it and the St. Louis billboard, but we did not receive any response. Zotos, Alexis. ""'Make the Gospel Great Again': Large Billboard of Trump Has St. Louis Co. Residents Talking."" KMOV. 5 November 2018. Updated [7 November 2018]: Added information about the Facebook page ""Make the Gospel Great Again.""",['share'],True,"From a friend -- a billboard spotted outside of St Louis. I don't like using the word ""heresy,"" but I think I'll make an exception in this case. pic.twitter.com/FqaPnBXGHT Diana Butler Bass (@dianabutlerbass) November 4, 2018The images prompted expressions of concern by some Christians that the billboard was associating or likening President Trump to Jesus Christ himself, the ""Word made flesh"" referenced in the Gospel quotation. In its proper context, Chapter 1, Verse 14 of the Gospel of John reads:The billboard is real, and the photographs of it shared on social media in early November are authentic. The existence of the billboard was verified by St. Louis television station KMOV, which published their own photograph of it, describing the location as being ""on Interstate 170 near St. Charles Rock Road,"" which is around 15 miles north-west of downtown St. Louis, Missouri:""Make the Gospel Great Again"": Large billboard of Trump has St. Louis Co. residents talking https://t.co/l0EDbpWhU2 #KMOV pic.twitter.com/FLIuXd47C9 KMOV (@KMOV) November 5, 2018This is not a drill. In #STL I just saw a billboard with Trump on it that says, The word made flesh. And Make the gospel great again. I cannot begin to express how livid I am at this level of idolatry. Rev. Momma (@TheRevMomma) October 31, 2018On 5 November, a Facebook page called ""Make the Gospel Great Again"" (which is no longer available on the social networking web site) claimed responsibility for the billboard: The page described its mission statement as follows: ""We believe God has given American Christians His earthly messenger - Donald J Trump. We follow his words in faith each day!""As far back as 10 October, ""Make the Gospel Great Again"" posted an image which was almost identical to that ultimately displayed on the St. Louis billboard, and its profile photograph was the same logo which appeared on the billboard (a crucifix with an American flag):"
Did Astronaut Chris Hadfield Test the Effects of Marijuana in Space?,['A photograph shows astronaut Chris Hadfield holding what looks like a bag of marijuana aboard the International Space Station.'],"An image purportedly showing NASA astronaut Chris Hadfield holding a bag of marijuana aboard the International Space Station (ISS) was posted by the ""Pictures in History"" Facebook page in November 2018, along with a caption stating that the astronaut was testing the effects of the drug in space: Facebook   Although followers might expect to see genuine historical images being posted by a social media page named ""Pictures in History,"" that account frequently shares manipulated or miscaptioned images. In this case, an image of Hadfield holding a bag of Easter Eggs was doctored in order to make it appear as if the astronaut were showing off a pouch of marijuana frequently shares manipulated miscaptioned The genuine image was originally posted to Hadfield's Twitter account on Easter in 2013: posted   Not only is the image of Chris Hadfield holding a bag of marijuana fake, but it's unlikely that any similar (but genuine) photographs of astronauts with drug paraphernalia exist, as NASA has been a drug-free workplace since at least the mid-1980s.  drug-free workplace Astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson has also warned against drug use aboard the International Space Station, arguing that it could be deadly for astronauts to get stoned in space: warned ""The problem is, in space now, many things will kill you. So, if you do anything to alter your understanding of what is reality, that's not in the interest of your health. If you want to get high in space, lock yourself in your cabin, and don't come out. 'Cause you could break stuff inadvertently."" Koren, Marina.  ""Reefer Madness at NASA.""
  The Atlantic.  21 November 2018.  Specktor, Brandon.  ""Neil deGrasse Tyson Reminds Us Why Smoking Weed in Space Is a Bad Idea.""
  Live Science.  17 September 2018. ",['interest'],False,"An image purportedly showing NASA astronaut Chris Hadfield holding a bag of marijuana aboard the International Space Station (ISS) was posted by the ""Pictures in History"" Facebook page in November 2018, along with a caption stating that the astronaut was testing the effects of the drug in space:Although followers might expect to see genuine historical images being posted by a social media page named ""Pictures in History,"" that account frequently shares manipulated or miscaptioned images. In this case, an image of Hadfield holding a bag of Easter Eggs was doctored in order to make it appear as if the astronaut were showing off a pouch of marijuanaThe genuine image was originally posted to Hadfield's Twitter account on Easter in 2013:Not only is the image of Chris Hadfield holding a bag of marijuana fake, but it's unlikely that any similar (but genuine) photographs of astronauts with drug paraphernalia exist, as NASA has been a drug-free workplace since at least the mid-1980s. Astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson has also warned against drug use aboard the International Space Station, arguing that it could be deadly for astronauts to get stoned in space:"
"Is Columbia University Planning Graduation Ceremonies Based on Race, Background?",['It is common for higher education institutions to organize various events in celebration of the annual milestone.'],"On March 16, 2021, Fox published an article with the headline, ""Columbia University hosting 6 separate graduation ceremonies based on income level, race, ethnicities."" The link garnered heavy reaction online, notably among high-profile conservative commentators who framed the alleged events by the New York City university as unnecessarily separatist.  an article unnecessarily separatist.   The viral claim was a misleading depiction of the facts, absent of context explaining why and under what circumstances the university hosted what it dubbed ""multicultural graduation ceremonies"" annually. In reality, it is common for higher education institutions to organize various graduation ceremonies. In the case of Columbia University, students could attend multiple institution-sponsored commencement celebrations on a voluntary basis. Those facts discredited social media posts that advertised the multicultural events as examples of the university forcing students to celebrate graduation only with peers who identify or look like them. As of this writing, schools within Columbia University were also planning commencement ceremonies for spring 2021 that did not promise to explicitly honor, nor highlight the significance of, graduating seniors who are not white, affluent, or Hispanic. (Here's the page to find information on those events.) Also, the institution was preparing for a university-wide commencement ceremony on April 30. Here's the page university-wide commencement With that said, the Fox article failed to state of the goal of the multicultural ceremonies: to provide students of historically-disenfranchised communities spaces to honor their academic successes with their background and identity front of mind, according to the events' registration page (a portion of which is displayed below). registration page ""Complementing our school and University-wide ceremonies, these events provide a more intimate setting for students and guests to gather, incorporate meaningful cultural traditions and celebrate the specific contributions and achievements of their communities,"" the registration page read. In other words, it was true that, as of this writing, graduating seniors of any undergraduate school at Columbia University could voluntarily attend ceremonies between April 25 and April 30 based on whether they identify as Native, Asian, Black, Latino or Latina, low income, or a member of the LGBTQ community, or whether they are the first generation in their family to achieve the academic milestone. The events would take place virtually due to the COVID-19 pandemic. COVID-19 pandemic See the below-displayed screenshot from Columbia University's website for evidence of the 2021 events.   The scheduled events, coordinated by Columbia University's Intercultural Resource Center (IRC), were not the first of their kind. According to photographic evidence on the center's Facebook page, it hosted the multicultural graduation ceremonies every year since the social media account's creation in 2012. Facebook page Snopes reached out to university leaders for their response to the Fox News story and subsequent criticism of the multicultural graduation ceremonies. A Columbia University spokesperson emailed us the following statement: Columbia marks graduation every spring with a university-wide Commencement ceremony. [...] The smaller celebratory events held for particular groups are in addition to, not instead of, the main Commencement and Class Day graduation ceremonies. In most instances, these smaller, multicultural gatherings evolved from ceremonies originally created by alumni and students. The gatherings are voluntary, open to every student who wants to participate, and have become a highly anticipated and meaningful part of the Columbia graduation experience. Class Day In sum, while it was true graduating seniors at Columbia University could attend 2021 commencement ceremonies based on race, ethnicity, gender or sexual identity, or socioeconomic status, it was false to frame those events as unprecedented efforts to ""bring back segregation"" or eliminate diversity at graduation ceremonies. For those reasons, we rate this claim a ""Mixture"" of true and misleading information.",['income'],NEI,"On March 16, 2021, Fox published an article with the headline, ""Columbia University hosting 6 separate graduation ceremonies based on income level, race, ethnicities."" The link garnered heavy reaction online, notably among high-profile conservative commentators who framed the alleged events by the New York City university as unnecessarily separatist. As of this writing, schools within Columbia University were also planning commencement ceremonies for spring 2021 that did not promise to explicitly honor, nor highlight the significance of, graduating seniors who are not white, affluent, or Hispanic. (Here's the page to find information on those events.) Also, the institution was preparing for a university-wide commencement ceremony on April 30.With that said, the Fox article failed to state of the goal of the multicultural ceremonies: to provide students of historically-disenfranchised communities spaces to honor their academic successes with their background and identity front of mind, according to the events' registration page (a portion of which is displayed below).In other words, it was true that, as of this writing, graduating seniors of any undergraduate school at Columbia University could voluntarily attend ceremonies between April 25 and April 30 based on whether they identify as Native, Asian, Black, Latino or Latina, low income, or a member of the LGBTQ community, or whether they are the first generation in their family to achieve the academic milestone. The events would take place virtually due to the COVID-19 pandemic.The scheduled events, coordinated by Columbia University's Intercultural Resource Center (IRC), were not the first of their kind. According to photographic evidence on the center's Facebook page, it hosted the multicultural graduation ceremonies every year since the social media account's creation in 2012.Columbia marks graduation every spring with a university-wide Commencement ceremony. [...] The smaller celebratory events held for particular groups are in addition to, not instead of, the main Commencement and Class Day graduation ceremonies. In most instances, these smaller, multicultural gatherings evolved from ceremonies originally created by alumni and students. The gatherings are voluntary, open to every student who wants to participate, and have become a highly anticipated and meaningful part of the Columbia graduation experience."
Spokeo,['Personal information is viewable through the Spokeo aggregator site?'],"Claim:  Your personal information may be viewable through the Spokeo web site. Example:  [Collected via e-mail, March 2010] This is so scary to me.  My address along with a picture of my home is showing on this site.. GO to this website:  https://www.spokeo.com/ and type in your name. If you find ANYTHING with your info on it, go to ""Privacy"" at the bottom of the page and follow the instructions to remove your information. Some of the information they have listed may not be correct, but if your address, phone number and a picture of your home comes up, that's cause for concern!  Holy Cow Family and Friends! I just received a link for a crazy website. A friend emailed it to me saying that the website has all the personal info on her family and that maybe I should check it out to make sure I am not on the site. Well, I checked it out and although it didn't show mine, it listed many names addresses, birthdays, even showing a picture of the houses my friends lived in. It also mentions if you were married, with kids and much more. Then they have a service were people can sign up and pay 3.00 and have access to even more of my info like credit score, income, etc. I have typed in several other of my family members names and ALL were in the database. Who wants all this personal info out there on the web??????? you can scroll down to the bottom and find the privacy link and remove yourself from the website! good luck! and pass this email along to help your family and friends will possible identity theft. here is the website..... www.spokeo.com   Origins:  Spokeo is one of many sites now operating on the Internet that aggregate and display personal information collected from a variety of public sources (such as social networking accounts, blog posts, phone book listings, customer-submitted reviews, real estate listings, etc., as well as from the databases of other information aggregators) and sell detailed reports on individuals to anyone who pays for them.  Spokeo advertises itself as a ""search engine specialized in organizing people-related information"": advertises Spokeo is a search engine specialized in organizing people-related information from phone books, social networks, marketing lists, business sites, and other public sources. Most of this data is publicly available on the Web.  For example, you can find peoples name, phone, and address on Whitepages.com, and you can get home values from Zillow.com.  That said, only Spokeo's algorithm can piece together the scattered data into coherent people profiles, giving you the most comprehensive intelligence about anyone you want to find. Spokeo displays listings that sometimes contain more personal information than many people are comfortable having made publicly accessible through a single, easy-to-use search site, and in March 2010 warning messages alerting recipients that their personal information was viewable through Spokeo began circulating, just as warnings about a similar (pay-for-use) site, ZabaSearch, had been circulated several years earlier.   ZabaSearch Our advice here is similar to what we wrote in response to concerns about ZabaSearch several years ago:  Spokeo does have a privacy policy that allows you to request that Spokeo remove your listing from public searches, but it's important to understand that even if you block your Spokeo listing, your personal information will still be available through the underlying sources used by Spokeo.  Those third-party records will still exist and will still be publicly accessible, so the same information provided by Spokeo will still be available to others, either working on their own or using information aggregators similar to Spokeo: privacy You can remove your Spokeo listing from public searches for free. Please note that removing your Spokeo listing from public searches does not remove your information from the third-party data sources. Your information will still be shown on other people search sites, and you will need to contact those third-party sites one-by-one, In short, removing your personal information from display by Internet aggregators isn't a one-time deal, but rather more like a never-ending game of Whack-a-Mole: You might swat down an aggregator site or two, but more of them will inevitably pop up.  Last updated:  12 January 2011     Smith, Alicia.  ""Search Site Raises Privacy Concerns.""   WXYZ-TV [Detroit].  8 April 2010.",['income'],True,"Origins:  Spokeo is one of many sites now operating on the Internet that aggregate and display personal information collected from a variety of public sources (such as social networking accounts, blog posts, phone book listings, customer-submitted reviews, real estate listings, etc., as well as from the databases of other information aggregators) and sell detailed reports on individuals to anyone who pays for them.  Spokeo advertises itself as a ""search engine specialized in organizing people-related information"":Spokeo displays listings that sometimes contain more personal information than many people are comfortable having made publicly accessible through a single, easy-to-use search site, and in March 2010 warning messages alerting recipients that their personal information was viewable through Spokeo began circulating, just as warnings about a similar (pay-for-use) site, ZabaSearch, had been circulated several years earlier.  Our advice here is similar to what we wrote in response to concerns about ZabaSearch several years ago:  Spokeo does have a privacy policy that allows you to request that Spokeo remove your listing from public searches, but it's important to understand that even if you block your Spokeo listing, your personal information will still be available through the underlying sources used by Spokeo.  Those third-party records will still exist and will still be publicly accessible, so the same information provided by Spokeo will still be available to others, either working on their own or using information aggregators similar to Spokeo:"
"""Contrary to rumors, Walmart is not providing a complimentary $50 'Anniversary' voucher on Facebook.""","['Yet another ""free coupon"" scam attempted to lure social media users with bogus promises.']","In March 2020, Facebook posts offering free coupons supposedly worth $50 in merchandise from Walmart began circulating with the claim that the company was celebrating its anniversary:  Users who clicked on the offer were taken to an external website where they were instructed to answer survey questions in order to receive their coupon:  After completing the questionnaire, however, users are then required to click a button to share the ""offer"" with all their Facebook friends before they can retrieve their coupon. Those who comply by spamming their friends are then allowed to click a ""Receive the Coupon"" button. However, there is no actual coupon to receive. Like innumerable other ""free merchandise"" offers on Facebook (including previous examples targeting Walmart customers), this one is a scam. We've had many occasions to alert readers to this kind of fraud: other free merchandise offers targeting These types of viral coupon scams often involve websites and social media pages set up to mimic those of legitimate companies. Users who respond to those fake offers are required to share a website link or social media post in order to spread the scam more widely and lure in additional victims. Then those users are presented with a survey that extracts personal information such as email addresses, telephone numbers, dates of birth, and even sometimes credit card numbers. Finally, those who want to claim their free gift cards or coupons eventually learn they must first sign up to purchase a number of costly goods, services, or subscriptions. The Better Business Bureau offers consumers several general tips to avoid getting scammed: offers consumers Better Business Bureau.  Scam Alert: Giveaway Scam Poses as Facebook.
  14 April 2017.",['credit'],False,"After completing the questionnaire, however, users are then required to click a button to share the ""offer"" with all their Facebook friends before they can retrieve their coupon. Those who comply by spamming their friends are then allowed to click a ""Receive the Coupon"" button. However, there is no actual coupon to receive. Like innumerable other ""free merchandise"" offers on Facebook (including previous examples targeting Walmart customers), this one is a scam. We've had many occasions to alert readers to this kind of fraud:The Better Business Bureau offers consumers several general tips to avoid getting scammed:"
Did Stalin Say 'America Is Like a Healthy Body with Threefold Resistance'?,"['Despite how frequently these words are shared in his name, there appears to be no record of Josef Stalin writing or uttering them.']","One of the forms of political expression that frequently arrives in our inbox for verification is the ""evil plan"" warning, items which present the notion that some malevolent entity (ranging from Communists to Satan himself) not only expressed an intent to destroy our society from within, but outlined a specific plan for doing so. A quote attributed to Soviet dictator Josef Stalin that a reader emailed us in November 2011 exemplifies the genre: Soviet dictator Josef Stalin ""America is like a healthy body and its resistance is threefold: its patriotism, its morality, and its spiritual life. If we can undermine these three areas, America will collapse from within.""   The specifics of these plans (no matter how long ago they may supposedly have been formulated) generally relate to current events, and the political purpose of circulating them is to make readers aware that trends which threaten the health of our society are currently in place (i.e., ""This is EXACTLY what is happening now!""), and to warn them that we must be vigilant about holding our course and stopping or reversing the encroachment of these socially unhealthful trends. This form has been expressed in such widely circulated items as Paul Harvey's ""If I Were the Devil"" essay, an (apocryphal) quotation by Karl Marx about the perils of consumer debt, and an (also apocryphal) warning from Abraham Lincoln about the accumulation of vast wealth in the hands of a few. If I Were the Devil Karl Marx Abraham Lincoln The putative quotation from Stalin referenced above is another item of this genre, one which presents the concept that Communist enemies of the U.S. viewed patriotism, morality, and spirituality as America's greatest assets and cannily plotted that the U.S. could be made to collapse from within if these values were sufficiently undermined (and which, of course, serves as an admonition to American readers to be attentive in maintaining these values). Whatever level of truth one might find in this sentiment, however, it's highly unlikely that Stalin ever spoke these words. Proving a negative is often an uncertain proposition, but our reasons for believing this quotation to be of dubious origin are: Josef Stalin Internet Archive Stalin documents letter Cummings, Jeanne.  ""Gingrich Out to Save America.""The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. 16 January 1994 (p. G1). ""Readers Respond to 'The Day After'.""Lawrence Journal-World. 23 November 1983 (p. 9). Stalin Internet Archive. https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/subject/index.htm. Accessed 15 Sept. 2022. Stalin, Joseph, 1879-1953 | The Online Books Page. https://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/webbin/book/lookupname?key=Stalin%2c%20Joseph%2c%201879-1953. Accessed 15 Sept. 2022. Updated [Sept.15, 2022]: Sources and links refreshed.",['asset'],False,"A quote attributed to Soviet dictator Josef Stalin that a reader emailed us in November 2011 exemplifies the genre:The specifics of these plans (no matter how long ago they may supposedly have been formulated) generally relate to current events, and the political purpose of circulating them is to make readers aware that trends which threaten the health of our society are currently in place (i.e., ""This is EXACTLY what is happening now!""), and to warn them that we must be vigilant about holding our course and stopping or reversing the encroachment of these socially unhealthful trends. This form has been expressed in such widely circulated items as Paul Harvey's ""If I Were the Devil"" essay, an (apocryphal) quotation by Karl Marx about the perils of consumer debt, and an (also apocryphal) warning from Abraham Lincoln about the accumulation of vast wealth in the hands of a few."
Notable concepts worth discarding.,[''],"FACT CHECK: Was Nick Hanauer's 2012 TED Talk about income inequality banned because it was ""too politically controversial"" to release? Claim: A 2012 TED Talk video featuring wealthy entrepreneur Nick Hanauer speaking on the subject of income inequality was banned because it was deemed ""too politically controversial."" Example: [Collected via e-mail, July 2015] There are several articles that claim ""TED Banned This Billionaire For Exposing Capitalism's Biggest Lie"" or similar wording. This refers to the speech of Nick Hanauer, a Seattle venture capitalist. The sensational language of this claim makes me suspicious, as does the unlikelihood of the assertion. Is it true? What is the source of the rumor? Origins: On 1 March 2012, Seattle-based venture capitalist and entrepreneur Nick Hanauer participated in the global conference series of ""TED Talks."" The video of his six-minute talk, widely circulated since its release, captured him addressing a range of issues pertaining to income inequality and capitalism from the perspective of a very wealthy individual. Not long after Hanauer's March 2012 talk was filmed, rumors began circulating that TED had deliberately suppressed the clip due to its potentially offensive nature (to rich people). On 16 May 2012, National Journal published an article contending that TED's organizers had quashed the groundbreaking talk because its content was simply too controversial to release, an odd assertion considering the 2011 emergence of a well-known protest movement known as Occupy Wall Street. TED organizers invited multimillionaire Seattle venture capitalist Nick Hanauer, the first non-family investor in Amazon.com, to give a speech on March 1 at their TED University conference. Inequality was the topic, specifically Hanauer's contention that the middle class, and not wealthy innovators like himself, are America's true ""job creators."" ""We've had it backward for the last 30 years,"" he said. ""Rich businesspeople like me don't create jobs. Rather, they are a consequence of an ecosystemic feedback loop animated by middle-class consumers, and when they thrive, businesses grow and hire, and owners profit. That's why taxing the rich to pay for investments that benefit all is a great deal for both the middle class and the rich."" You can't find that speech online. TED officials initially told Hanauer they were eager to distribute it. ""I want to put this talk out into the world!"" one of them wrote to him in an e-mail in late April. But early this month, they changed course, telling Hanauer that his remarks were too ""political"" and too controversial for posting. In the years since 2012, Hanauer's TED clip has paradoxically been viewed millions of times while remaining the focus of articles describing it as ""banned,"" ""too controversial,"" or the speech TED ""doesn't want you to see."" While it's difficult to determine the accuracy of statements about its online availability in March 2012, the clip clearly became widely available and was frequently viewed on sharing sites such as YouTube shortly thereafter, and it has remained popular ever since. But in 2015, many social media users continued to assert Hanauer's talk was banned: Banned TED Talk: Nick Hanauer Rich People Don't Create Jobs (VIDEO) #news https://t.co/wmlAmaIZ48 #news https://t.co/wmlAmaIZ48 Hannah Kennison (@HannahKennison1) July 6, 2015 July 6, 2015 Nick Hanauer on His Banned TED Talk & Why the Middle Class are the Job Creators https://t.co/KKQOqIK5PQ https://t.co/KKQOqIK5PQ Jonathan Goodman (@GoodmanJonathan) July 20, 2015 July 20, 2015 if you are interested in #economics, then it is worth listening Banned TED Talk: Nick Hanauer 'Rich people don't... https://t.co/00E6rlPF1g #economics https://t.co/00E6rlPF1g Mudassar Bashir (@mb62020) June 15, 2015 June 15, 2015 Nick Hanauer too politically controversial: rich people don't create jobs, consumers do - via Reese Jones https://t.co/9xzs0vn1kz https://t.co/9xzs0vn1kz VritTV (@Verite_TV) June 11, 2015 June 11, 2015 In late May 2012, a contributor to TED's forums specifically asked why Hanauer's talk had been ""banned,"" prompting a lengthy discussion during which individuals affiliated with TED linked to a statement issued by TED curator Chris Anderson explaining why Hanauer's talk had not been promoted. The service by which Anderson published the explanation (Posterous) shuttered in April 2013, taking Anderson's remarks with it. However, a cached version revealed the date (17 May 2012), title (""TED and inequality: The real story""), and content of Anderson's rebuttal. Anderson opened by stating that ""TED was subject to a story so misleading it would be funny... except it successfully launched an aggressive online campaign against us."" He described an ensuing ""firestorm of outrage"" on sites including Reddit and Huffington Post, wherein TED was ""accused of being cowards ... in the pay of our corporate partners ... [and] the despicable puppets of the Republican party."" Anderson's account of the decision not to release Hanauer's talk differed dramatically from the circulating rumors: Here's what actually happened. At TED this year, an attendee pitched a 3-minute audience talk on inequality. The talk tapped into a really important and timely issue. But it framed the issue in a way that was explicitly partisan. (The talk explicitly attacked what he called an article of faith for Republicans. He criticized Democrats too, but only for not also attacking this idea more often.) And it included a number of arguments that were unconvincing, even to those of us who supported his overall stance, such as the apparent ruling out of entrepreneurial initiative as a root cause of job creation. The audience at TED who heard it live (and who are often accused of being overly enthusiastic about left-leaning ideas) gave it, on average, mediocre ratings—some enthusiastic, others critical. At TED, we post one talk a day on our home page. We're drawing from a pool of 250+ that we record at our own conferences each year and up to 10,000 recorded at the various TEDx events around the world, not to mention our other conference partners. Our policy is to post only talks that are truly special. And we try to steer clear of talks that are bound to descend into the same dismal partisan head-butting people can find every day elsewhere in the media. We discussed internally and ultimately told the speaker we did not plan to post. He did not react well. He had hired a PR firm to promote the talk to MoveOn and others, and the PR firm warned us that unless we posted, he would go to the press and accuse us of censoring him. We again declined, and this time I wrote to him and tried gently to explain in detail why I thought his talk was flawed. So he forwarded portions of the private emails to a reporter, and the National Journal duly bit on the story. And it was picked up by various other outlets. As Anderson noted, income inequality was the subject of at least one TED Talk video in 2011. Much of the rumor regarding Nick Hanauer's purportedly banned TED Talk segment hinged upon the differing assertions made by TED and Nick Hanauer at the time of the controversy in 2012. However, Anderson's claims (that TED curators are tasked with promoting only the most impactful clips) weren't implausible or suggestive of a cover-up. It would be difficult to determine whether Hanauer or anyone working on his behalf threatened a public relations offensive, but TED maintained that quality and not content was behind the decision not to feature the video (which clearly was not ""banned"" from public view but was simply not promoted by TED). Since the time of the initial debate over whether or why the TED talk was ""banned,"" the clip has been distributed both by TED and other outlets and widely viewed by a large online audience. In August 2014, Hanauer returned for a TED Talk titled ""Beware, fellow plutocrats, the pitchforks are coming."" While it's true that TED opted not to promote Hanauer's initial appearance (during which he discussed income inequality), his segment was not banned, and the organization cited his lack of substantive content alongside his primary reliance on partisan ideas as the reason it was not curated alongside other featured TED Talks. At no point during the immediate controversy did TED appear to deny the existence of the video, remove it from the Internet, interfere with its distribution, or otherwise thwart the ideas advocated by Hanauer from spreading. The group simply chose initially not to promote the clip (as they do for a large number of TED Talks) in favor of other content selected by their curators. Last updated: 27 July 2015 Originally published: 27 July 2015",['profit'],True,"Not long after Hanauer's March 2012 talk was filmed, rumors began circulating claiming that TED had deliberately suppressed the clip due to its potentially offensive (to rich people) nature. On 16 May 2012, National Journal published an article contending that TED's organizers had quashed the groundbreaking talk because its content was simply too controversial to release, an odd assertion considering the 2011 emergence of a well-known (and widely reported upon) protest movement known as Occupy Wall Street):Banned TED Talk: Nick Hanauer  Rich People Dont Create Jobs (VIDEO) #news https://t.co/wmlAmaIZ48 Hannah Kennison (@HannahKennison1) July 6, 2015Nick Hanauer on His Banned TED Talk & Why the Middle Class are the Job Creators https://t.co/KKQOqIK5PQ Jonathan Goodman (@GoodmanJonathan) July 20, 2015if you are interested in #economics, then it is worth listeningBanned TED Talk: Nick Hanauer 'Rich people don't... https://t.co/00E6rlPF1g Mudassar Bashir (@mb62020) June 15, 2015Nick Hanauer too politically controversial: rich people dont create jobs, consumers do - via Reese Jones https://t.co/9xzs0vn1kz VritTV (@Verite_TV) June 11, 2015In late May 2012 a contributor to TED's forums specifically asked why Hanauer's talk had been ""banned,"" prompting a lengthy discussion during the course of which individuals affiliated with TED linked to a statement issued by TED curator Chris Anderson on why Hanauer's talk had not been promoted.     The service by which Anderson published the explanation (Posterous) shuttered in April 2013, taking Anderson's remarks with it. However, a cached version revealed the date (17 May 2012), title (""TED and inequality: The real story""), and content of Anderson's rebuttal.As Anderson noted, income inequality was the subject of at least one [uncensored] TED Talk video in 2011.Since the time of the initial debate over whether or why the TED talk was ""banned,"" the clip has been distributed both by TED and other outlets and widely viewed by a large online audience. In August 2014, Hanauer returned for a TED Talk titled ""Beware, fellow plutocrats, the pitchforks are coming."""
"Says at the state level we're spending more on tax expenditures than we are on public safety, health care and education combined.",[],"Jefferson Smith has his sights set on the Portland mayor's office, but state issues seem to arise in his campaign. It's little wonder, given that he has represented Portland in the Oregon House since 2009. One fact he has taken to repeating—first during a candidates' forum hosted by Family Forward Oregon and Mother PAC, and later during a Rotary Club meeting—is that at the state level, we're spending more on tax expenditures than we are on public safety, health care, and education combined. Tax expenditures is government-speak for what most of us call tax breaks. ""I think we should think about money beyond tax breaks,"" he said just before making his claim. ""That is a handy tool. But it is a tool we've been using for years and years and years."" Sure, tax breaks come in many different shapes and sizes—seniors can deduct medical expenses, and businesses can receive breaks for green building improvements—but could they really outweigh the amount the state spends on some of its core programs? We began to investigate. Smith's campaign wasn't very helpful—staffers had no source for his claim, and his spokeswoman, Stacey Dycus, told us the idea was a random remark he made while explaining something. We were on our own. Thankfully, we know our way around the state budget. Our first stop was the state's 2011-2013 tax expenditure report. The report clearly lays out the amount of tax expenditures—or breaks—for the current biennium. All told, the state gives about $12 billion in income tax breaks, $19 billion in property tax breaks, and just over $100 million in others, for a grand total of $31.3 billion in forgone revenues. Getting those figures was the easy part—the hard part was figuring out what to compare them to. The state's budget can be divided and analyzed in dozens of ways. Generally, though, we talk about the state's general fund and lottery budget—this budget deals with the money that the state has the most discretionary power over—and the total funds budget, which includes cash we receive from the federal government for programs like Medicare and Medicaid, as well as food assistance programs. Let's start with the all-funds budget. The current budget accounts for nearly $59 billion in total spending—this is without the tax breaks. Of that, $13.5 billion goes to education, and $3.6 billion goes to public safety. The health care figure is a little harder to determine. The best estimate we could find is the total funds budget for the Oregon Health Authority—the executive bureaucracy that handles the majority of the state's health care work. That budget is just over $12 billion. If you add those three budget areas, you get $29.1 billion, about $2.2 billion short of the tax breaks the state provides. By this measurement, Smith is correct. Now, another way to approach this would be to look at the general and lottery funds budget. This method might be somewhat fairer, given that so much of the total funds budget is made up of federal dollars. All told, the current general and lottery funds budget includes about $11.7 billion for health care, education, and public safety. Obviously, that's quite a bit less than the $31.3 billion in state tax breaks. The problem here is that you can't directly compare those two figures. We mentioned earlier that there's a report that clearly lays out the various tax giveaways, but it doesn't explain exactly how that money would be rerouted if it were being collected by the state. For instance, $19 billion of those giveaways are for property taxes. Most of that money would go to municipalities if it were collected—not the state. There is an argument to be made that about 40 percent of the property tax revenue would go to local schools—relieving a burden on the state and freeing up cash, but that's all indirect. That said, about $12 billion of those giveaways—the portion that comes from income taxes—would end up in the state's general fund budget. Again, that's slightly more than the $11.7 billion the state allocates to those three program areas. We wanted to add a little context to all of this because tax policy is never so simple, so we made calls to individuals in the state's legislative fiscal and revenue offices and to the state's chief economist. Paul Warner from the revenue office explained it most clearly. ""Smith is technically correct,"" he said, ""that there's about $31 billion in lost revenue."" But he cautioned that there would be many steps to try to collect those dollars. The revenue document itself addresses this as well. It notes that the dollar impact listed for tax breaks is not the amount of revenue you could gain if you wanted to repeal all of them. It gets very technical and somewhat tedious here, so we'll give you just one example: Federal land, which Oregon has a lot of, is exempt from property taxes. And, Warner notes, there's federal law that prohibits us from taxing federal land. Certainly, some of these tax breaks are up for grabs if the Legislature decided to mine a few of them for increased revenues. On the books are laws for home mortgage deductions, along with tax cuts for green energy and property tax exemptions for private aircraft. Smith knows that. Last year, he pushed for a package of bills that would have reduced some of these credits, including one that would put a sunset date on all income tax credits, subtractions, and exemptions. Indeed, the Legislature has since instituted a six-year cycle in which all credits will be reviewed before being renewed. That's a little beyond the point, though. As for our ruling, Smith's claim is accurate. The state does spend more on tax breaks than it does on public safety, health care, and education. This holds true whether you look at the larger all-funds budget or the smaller general and lottery funds budget. However, there is some important context here, including the fact that many of those tax breaks are off-limits to state lawmakers. We rate this claim Mostly True—accurate but requiring some clarification.","['Oregon', 'Education', 'Health Care', 'Public Safety', 'State Budget', 'Taxes']",True,Return to OregonLive to comment on this ruling.
The largest U.S. companies would owe $620 billion in U.S. taxes on the cash they store in tax havens.,[],"Getting companies to pay more in taxes is one of the pillars of Bernie Sanders plans for America. The extra revenue plays a key role in everything from universal health care, to tuition-free college, to rebuilding the nations aging water mains, bridges and highways. How much does he think is there? The largest U.S. companies would owe $620 billion in U.S. taxes on the cash they store in tax havens, SanderstweetedApril 6, 2016. Thats a fair chunk of change, and we thought wed see if it held up. By the way, theres no single definition of a tax haven. The term covers both profits from overseas subsidiaries and the use of offshore accounts in places like Bermuda. The common thread is money is booked in places with lower taxes than the United States. The Sanders campaign directed us to ajoint studyfrom Citizens for Tax Justice and US PIRG, both left-leaning organizations. Their analysis began with the more than $2.1 trillion that Fortune 500 companies are holding in accumulated profits offshore for tax purposes. When the foreign subsidiary of a U.S. multinational turns a profit, the money is taxed at the rate where the subsidiary is based. Uncle Sam doesnt get a penny until the multinational brings the money home. That gets a little confusing because the money might actually be in the United States, but it isnt on the books of the U.S. parent. In any event, for tax purposes, most of those funds are not formally repatriated or brought back to the United States. The logic is simple: Why pay a higher rate in the United States, formally as high as 35 percent, when you might be paying a fifth that much in a foreign country, such as Ireland? The Citizens for Tax Justice/US PIRG analysts looked atthe 57 corporations that actually told regulators how big their tax bill would be if they brought the money home. These 57 companies would owe $184.4 billion in additional federal taxes, the report said. The analysts made some assumptions and applied the results to the companies that didnt release this information. The total for all Fortune 500 companies combined? They would collectively owe $620 billion in additional federal taxes. We asked independent tax scholars what they thought of that estimate. Some of them said it was in the ballpark. Richard Harvey, a former partner at the accounting firm Pricewaterhouse Coopers and now at Villanova School of Law, said Sanders might actually be underestimating. Harvey pointed to the foreign earnings that multinationals report as indefinitely reinvested. Officially, thetotal is about $2.3 trillion. But Harvey thinks that overlooks a lot of cash. The total unrepatriated foreign earnings would be even higher because companies like Apple and Pfizer do not label all undistributed foreign earnings as indefinitely reinvested,  Harvey said. If one assumes that U.S. multinational corporations have approximately $2.5 trillion to $3 trillion of unrepatriated foreign earnings, and the average tax rate on most undistributed foreign earnings is less than 10 percent (in many cases close to 0 percent), then a $620 billion estimate is very reasonable, and may be low. Edward Kleinbard, professor of law at the University of Southern California and a former chief of staff at the U.S. Congress' Joint Committee on Taxation, took a different approach, and reached approximately the same conclusion. Kleinbard took theJoint Committee on Taxationsestimate of how much revenue would come from a one-time 14 percent tax on those foreign earnings kept overseas. This is in fact what President Barack Obama has proposed in his latest budget. The net haul from that would be about $195 billion. Using that figure, Kleinbard estimated how much would come in if the rate were 35 percent, rather than 14 percent. You get to $488 billion, he said. Thats not perfect, because of how foreign tax credits (offsets to U.S. taxes) would have to be handled, but its the right ballpark. Thats less than the $620 billion Sanders cited, but as Kleinbard put it, it's a honkin' big number. The banking giantCredit Suisseestimated the total new revenues at $533 billion. Edmund Outslay, professor of taxation at Michigan State University, thinks Sanders overshot the mark. Outslay told PolitiFact that he questions a key assumption in the study behind Sanders number. The study estimates an average tax rate of 6 percent that all Fortune 500 companies are paying overseas today. Because any foreign tax bill is deducted from what a firm owes Washington, the lower the foreign tax rate, the higher the potential revenues for the United States. Outslay thinks 6 percent is unrealistic. Some studies I have seen estimate a foreign tax rate of about 16.5 percent, Outslay said. If this number is more accurate, the total tax to be gained (would be) $550 billion. At 25 percent, the net U.S. tax would only be $320 billion. Outslay himself leans more toward a $300 billion figure. In addition to thinking multinationals are paying a higher rate overseas, he also said in most cases, the foreign earnings are actually invested in bricks and mortar. Those dollars are not cash in the way Sanders talked about this. How the IRS would treat that money is unclear. All this leaves us with a range of estimates of the potential tax revenues, ranging from about $300 billion (Outslay), to $490 billion (Kleinbard), to $550 billion (Credit Suisse), to over $620 billion (Harvey). Our ruling Sanders said that if American multinational corporations had to pay taxes on the profits they made overseas, they would owe $620 billion. This is at the high end of the estimates we collected. Sanders also described the overseas holdings as cash. According to one expert we reached, a lot of that money might be invested in factories and other hard infrastructure and might not be available for tax collections. Still, the mid-range estimate from credible sources is in the $500 billion to $550 billion range. All the numbers cited were relatively high. We rate Sanders estimate Mostly True.","['National', 'Corporations', 'Taxes']",True,"The largest U.S. companies would owe $620 billion in U.S. taxes on the cash they store in tax havens, SanderstweetedApril 6, 2016.The Sanders campaign directed us to ajoint studyfrom Citizens for Tax Justice and US PIRG, both left-leaning organizations. Their analysis began with the more than $2.1 trillion that Fortune 500 companies are holding in accumulated profits offshore for tax purposes.Richard Harvey, a former partner at the accounting firm Pricewaterhouse Coopers and now at Villanova School of Law, said Sanders might actually be underestimating. Harvey pointed to the foreign earnings that multinationals report as indefinitely reinvested. Officially, thetotal is about $2.3 trillion. But Harvey thinks that overlooks a lot of cash.Kleinbard took theJoint Committee on Taxationsestimate of how much revenue would come from a one-time 14 percent tax on those foreign earnings kept overseas. This is in fact what President Barack Obama has proposed in his latest budget. The net haul from that would be about $195 billion.The banking giantCredit Suisseestimated the total new revenues at $533 billion."
Leaked E-mails Show John Podesta Discussed Alien Technology with Former NASA Astronaut,"[""A retired astronaut with some eccentric views did attempt to set up a meeting with Hillary Clinton's campaign chairman, but that's about as far as it got.""]","On October 9th, 2016, WikiLeaks disclosed thousands of e-mails from the personal account of Hillary Clinton campaign director John Podesta, also a former counselor to President Barack Obama. Among those files were two e-mails signed by former NASA astronaut Edgar D. Mitchell from the e-mail address terribillionairs@aol.com. The first message, dated 18 January 2015, read: message Subject: email for John Podesta (c/o Eryn) from Edgar Mitchel re meeting ASAP Dear John, As 2015 unfolds, I understand you are leaving the Administration in February. It is urgent that we agree on a date and time to meet to discuss Disclosure and Zero Point Energy, at your earliest available after your departure. My Catholic colleague Terri Mansfield will be there too, to bring us up to date on the Vaticans awareness of ETI [extraterrestrial intelligence]. Another colleague is working on a new Space Treaty, citing involvement with Russia and China. However with Russias extreme interference in Ukraine, I believe we must pursue another route for peace in space and ZPE on Earth. I met with President Obamas Honolulu childhood friend, US Ambassador Pamela Hamamoto on July 4 at the US Mission in Geneva, when I was able to tell her briefly about zero point energy. I believe we can enlist her as a confidante and resource in our presentation for President Obama. I appreciate Eryns assistance in working with Terri to set up our meeting.  Best regards,Edgar D. Mitchell, ScDChief Science Officer & Founder, QuantrekApollo 14 astronaut6th man to walk on the Moon The second message, dated 18 August 2015, included a brief introduction and a series of links to articles that primarily discussed the militarization of space. It bore the same signature as the first e-mail: message Subject: email for John Podesta c/o Eryn re Space Treaty (attached) Dear John,  Because the War in Space race is heating up, I felt you should be aware of several factors as you and I schedule our Skype talk. Remember, our nonviolent ETI from the contiguous universe are helping us bring zero point energy to Earth. They will not tolerate any forms of military violence on Earth or in space. The following information in italics was shared with me by my colleague Carol Rosin, who worked closely for several years with Wernher von Braun before his death. Carol and I have worked on the Treaty on the Prevention of the Placement of Weapons in Outer Space, attached for your convenience. Best regards,Edgar Edgar D. Mitchell, ScDChief Science Officer & Founder, QuantrekApollo 14 astronaut6th man to walk on the Moon Before diving into the content of these two e-mails, we should identify the players involved. Dr. Edgar Mitchell (who passed away in 2016) was a NASA astronaut who traveled to (and walked on) the moon as part of the Apollo 14 mission in 1971. A Presidential Medal of Freedom recipient, he once completed a record-breaking nine-hour, 24-minute EVA on the surface of the moon. In addition to his distinguished scientific career with NASA, he was a strong believer in metaphysical phenomena. He claimed, for example, that a Toronto-based healer named Adam Dreamhealer had cured him of kidney cancer remotely while the two men were separated by thousands of miles. He also was a strong believer in the existence of intelligent extraterrestrial life and claimed Earth had frequently been visited by aliens. Among the many times he made these assertions was in a 2009 interview with the Guardian: recipient record-breaking Adam Dreamhealer interview ""We are being visited,"" [Mitchell] said. ""It is now time to put away this embargo of truth about the alien presence. I call upon our government to open up ... and become a part of this planetary community that is now trying to take our proper role as a spacefaring civilisation."" Though Mitchell signed the messages, the e-mail address from which they originated belonged to Terri Mansfield (Mitchells Catholic colleague), who runs a nonprofit that focuses on metaphysical concepts including consciousness, god, extraterrestrial intelligence, and the development of technology that could harness zero point energy (a pseudoscientific concept discussed below). belonged nonprofit Carol Rosin, whom Mitchell mentions as having helped to collect the links listed in the second e-mail, states on her web site that she is the founder of the Institute for Security and Cooperation in Outer Space. On the same site, she describes her role as advis[ing] decision makers and others about applications of technology and information services for human needs, environment, new energy, and peace and security, health and prosperity for all on earth and in space. web site Mansfield and Rosin's connection to Mitchell does not necessarily imply influence or authorship of these emails, as the content is consistent with causes he championed. In fact, Rebecca Hardcastle Wright, a former employee of Mitchell's, wrote a post attesting to their authenticity, confirming that a Skype meeting with Podesta had been requested by Mitchell but never ended up taking place. former employee post  As far as the content of the e-mails, there are two (very) loosely connected threads at play. The more straightforward thread (and what ultimately seems to be the primary premise for a Skype meeting, based on the subject lines) is the discussion of adding the United States as a signatory to an amended version of the Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, an international agreement dating back to the 1960s that prevents governments, essentially, from putting nukes or weapons of mass destruction in orbit or from putting military bases on the moon or on other objects in space. agreement Mitchell and Rosin were arguing for the United States to sign onto an even more restrictive treaty originally proposed  by China and Russia in 2008, which would ban weapons in space outright. The list of links provided by Rosin (primarily news articles and blog posts) all related to international space collaboration and various warnings about countries currently involved in, or planning to be involved in, putting weapons in space. treaty Its the material in the first e-mail that is a bit more convoluted. That missive opens with an urgent request to discuss zero point energy and disclosure. Disclosure refers to the release of any and all information the U.S. government might have on UFOs. This is, in fact, a topic for which John Podesta openly advocated well before any WikiLeaks referenced the subject, as the Washington Post reported in April of 2016: reported ""In 2002,"" [Leslie] Kean and co-author [of UFOs: Generals, Pilots and Government Officials Go on the Record] Ralph Blumenthal wrote, ""Podesta began publicly supporting what became a landmark Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit filed by the Coalition for Freedom of Information, an independent advocacy group. NASA had been stonewalling and refusing to release its records concerning a significant 1965 UFO incident in Kecksburg, PA."" Documents were released, but they ""did not include one iota of information relating to the Kecksburg case, despite an earnest and thorough effort by NASA staff."" It's apparently those documents to which Podesta was referring when, after a brief stint working in the Obama White House, he tweeted that failing to secure the release of UFO files was his ""biggest failure of 2014."" Zero point energy is a concept in quantum physics that refers to the amount of energy a given quantum system has at its lowest quantum state or ground state. The fact that systems at this zero point actually still possess some energy has lead to myriad science fiction or pseudoscientific claims of being able to tap into that energy to achieve things currently known to be physically impossible. concept Mitchell ran a company, listed in his email signature, called Quantrek, which sought, among other things, to harness this zero point energy, according to Terri Mansfield (the woman from whom the e-mails to Podesta originated): [Mitchell] and his science team researched the application of the quantum hologram as well as zero point energy, the most powerful, cleanest, cheapest, safest, most ubiquitous form of energy for the planet. ZPE will power cars, trains, planes, sea-going vessels, space ships, as well as our homes and buildings. The connection between the zero point energy topic and the space treaty, while not completely articulated in the e-mails, appears to be based on Mansfields (and presumably Mitchells) belief that as a species humans need to show our obedience to God and embrace extraterrestrial beings by abandoning free will and embracing peace, at which point the aliens will allow us to understand and implement zero point energy. Mansfield explains that connection on her web site: connection The ETI (Extraterrestrial Intelligence) with whom Suzanne and Terri work are peaceful, nonviolent and obedient to God. They are NOT from our universe but from a CONTIGUOUS universe. They are the highest form of intelligence working directly with God. Their purpose is to assist us humans who are eager to bring powerful, safe, clean, cheap, sustainable, ubiquitous, infinite ZERO POINT ENERGY application as THE energy source to our viable Earth. This ZPE energy is centered on the Tau neutrino. When ETI want to make themselves known, they do so with specific colors, sound, touch, scent, taste and manipulation of matter. Examples abound. They frequently turn on lights in our homes when they want our attention. ETI want only what is best for humanity to evolve spiritually, demand obedience given by free will choice, respond with compassion and / or justice, when required. The implication appears to be that extraterrestrials are willing to help us with our zero point energy problems so long as we can demonstrate our peaceful nature. This is presumably what Mitchell is referring to in the second e-mail when he wrote: Remember, our nonviolent ETI from the contiguous universe are helping us bring zero point energy to Earth. They will not tolerate any forms of military violence on Earth or in space. Though we cannot say for certain, it appears likely that the reference to God and the Vatican stems from Mansfield's belief system revolving around obedience to God and her Catholicism. Ultimately, though, what has emerged from these messages is a picture of a decorated astronaut with a history of eccentric views attempting, unsuccessfully, to set up a meeting with a high ranking and potentially sympathetic government official with either the help of (or influence from) both a metaphysicist and an advocate for a demilitarized space. In Mitchells and Mansfield's view, there is a straight line connection between signing a stronger space treaty and receiving information from aliens about how to create a form of energy that will save our civilization. What does not emerge, however, is any evidence supporting the quasi-scientific claims made by Mitchell or Mansfield, or that the United States Government is privy to any information regarding those claims.",['lien'],NEI,"The first message, dated 18 January 2015, read:The second message, dated 18 August 2015, included a brief introduction and a series of links to articles that primarily discussed the militarization of space. It bore the same signature as the first e-mail:Dr. Edgar Mitchell (who passed away in 2016) was a NASA astronaut who traveled to (and walked on) the moon as part of the Apollo 14 mission in 1971. A Presidential Medal of Freedom recipient, he once completed a record-breaking nine-hour, 24-minute EVA on the surface of the moon. In addition to his distinguished scientific career with NASA, he was a strong believer in metaphysical phenomena. He claimed, for example, that a Toronto-based healer named Adam Dreamhealer had cured him of kidney cancer remotely while the two men were separated by thousands of miles. He also was a strong believer in the existence of intelligent extraterrestrial life and claimed Earth had frequently been visited by aliens. Among the many times he made these assertions was in a 2009 interview with the Guardian:Though Mitchell signed the messages, the e-mail address from which they originated belonged to Terri Mansfield (Mitchells Catholic colleague), who runs a nonprofit that focuses on metaphysical concepts including consciousness, god, extraterrestrial intelligence, and the development of technology that could harness zero point energy (a pseudoscientific concept discussed below).Carol Rosin, whom Mitchell mentions as having helped to collect the links listed in the second e-mail, states on her web site that she is the founder of the Institute for Security and Cooperation in Outer Space. On the same site, she describes her role as advis[ing] decision makers and others about applications of technology and information services for human needs, environment, new energy, and peace and security, health and prosperity for all on earth and in space.Mansfield and Rosin's connection to Mitchell does not necessarily imply influence or authorship of these emails, as the content is consistent with causes he championed. In fact, Rebecca Hardcastle Wright, a former employee of Mitchell's, wrote a post attesting to their authenticity, confirming that a Skype meeting with Podesta had been requested by Mitchell but never ended up taking place.As far as the content of the e-mails, there are two (very) loosely connected threads at play. The more straightforward thread (and what ultimately seems to be the primary premise for a Skype meeting, based on the subject lines) is the discussion of adding the United States as a signatory to an amended version of the Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, an international agreement dating back to the 1960s that prevents governments, essentially, from putting nukes or weapons of mass destruction in orbit or from putting military bases on the moon or on other objects in space.Mitchell and Rosin were arguing for the United States to sign onto an even more restrictive treaty originally proposed  by China and Russia in 2008, which would ban weapons in space outright. The list of links provided by Rosin (primarily news articles and blog posts) all related to international space collaboration and various warnings about countries currently involved in, or planning to be involved in, putting weapons in space.Its the material in the first e-mail that is a bit more convoluted. That missive opens with an urgent request to discuss zero point energy and disclosure. Disclosure refers to the release of any and all information the U.S. government might have on UFOs. This is, in fact, a topic for which John Podesta openly advocated well before any WikiLeaks referenced the subject, as the Washington Post reported in April of 2016:Zero point energy is a concept in quantum physics that refers to the amount of energy a given quantum system has at its lowest quantum state or ground state. The fact that systems at this zero point actually still possess some energy has lead to myriad science fiction or pseudoscientific claims of being able to tap into that energy to achieve things currently known to be physically impossible.The connection between the zero point energy topic and the space treaty, while not completely articulated in the e-mails, appears to be based on Mansfields (and presumably Mitchells) belief that as a species humans need to show our obedience to God and embrace extraterrestrial beings by abandoning free will and embracing peace, at which point the aliens will allow us to understand and implement zero point energy. Mansfield explains that connection on her web site:"
Have 3D-printed rhinoceros horns been created as a solution to combat poaching?,"[""Several biotechnology firms have developed undetectably fake rhino horns as an anti-poaching measure, but wildlife experts aren't thrilled about the innovation.""]","On 9 July 2016, the Facebook page ""The Medical Facts"" published the image and explanation shown below, reporting the development of synthetic rhino horn as an anti-poaching measure: image A biotech startup has managed to 3-D print fake rhino horns that carry the same genetic fingerprint as the actual horn. The company plans to flood Chinese [the] Chinese rhino horn market at one-eighth of the price of the original, undercutting the price poachers can get and forcing them out eventually.  The International Rhino Foundation (IRF) and Save the Rhino International (SRI) issued a joint statement after ""monitoring the progress of four US-based companies that have announced their intentions  with varying degrees of success  to produce synthetic or bio-fabricated rhino horn, and occasionally also other products including e.g. elephant ivory, lion bones or pangolin scales."" In that statement, both groups expressed their opposition to the introduction of fake rhino horn to international markets: statement We are opposed to the development, marketing and sale of synthetic rhino horn [because]: o Selling synthetic horn does not reduce the demand for rhino horn or dispel the myths around rhino horn and could indeed lead to more poaching because it increases demand for the real thing o More than 90% of rhino horns in circulation are fake (mostly carved from buffalo horn or wood), but poaching rates continue to rise annually. o Synthetic horn could give credence to the notion that rhino horn has medicinal value, which is not supported by science. o Users buy from trusted sources and value the real thing. o The availability of legal synthetic horn could normalise or remove the stigma from buying illegal real horn. o It will take time to develop synthetic horn and meanwhile the poaching crisis continues. o How can consumers and law enforcement officials distinguish between legal synthetic horn that looks real, and illegal real horn? o Companies benefitting from making synthetic horn have shown very little commitment to use their profits to help the core problem of rhino poaching; besides which, those profits would meet only a tiny fraction of the total rhino protection costs that would remain to be met as long as demand reduction campaigns falter, as they would with the marketing of synthetic horn. o Finally, the manufacture / marketing / sale of synthetic horn diverts funds and attention from the real problem: unsustainable levels of rhino poaching. A December 2015 National Geographicarticle covered the efforts of one such biotechnology outfit producing synthetic rhino horn (Pembroke) and outlined some conservationist concerns about the unintended consequences of such a venture: article I frankly dont see that its any better, to be honest, says Susie Watts, a consultant for WildAid and co-chair of the Species Survival Network Rhino Working Group, referring to Pembients move to put faux powder on the back burner. While shes aware that people buy rhino horn jewelry, Watts has never heard of rhino horn cell phone cases and chopsticks. But opposition to Pembients synthetic horn plans extends beyond the possible new market it could create. Theres very little, if any, relief on wild populations when we see commercial farming develop or commercial trade of a protected species, says Douglas Hendrie, manager of the wildlife crime and investigations unit for conservation group Education for Nature - Vietnam. The wild trade continues right alongside. Patrick Bergin, CEO of the African Wildlife Foundation, also believes that inserting fake horn into the market could counteract efforts to educate people about why they shouldnt buy wild horn, a strategy most activists push as the best way to reduce demand. If you start to nuance that message with some rhino horn is good, some of it is bad, some of it is legal, some of it is illegal, he says, you lose people and lose the clarity of the message. Theres also concern that fake horn could increase the workload for law enforcement in countries already struggling to contain the illicit trade. According to Hendrie, Vietnam doesnt have the enforcement capacity to regulate the black market along with the legal one. A February 2016 followup article presented a five-point set of objections to the introduction of genetic copies of rhino horn to the market, filed with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service by the Center for Biological Diversity: presented Additionally, U.S Fish & Wildlife Service Law Enforcement Deputy Chief Ed Grace commented: Experience demonstrates that efforts to 'flood the market' with products produced from protected wildlifeeither by producing synthetic alternatives or raising animals in captivity for harvestoften fail to achieve their stated goal. Such efforts often create more demand from consumers, even as products from wild animals and plants continue to command a premium over synthetic or farmed alternatives... We also have significant concerns about injecting products into the market that would make it harder for law enforcement to detect poached and trafficked wildlife products, or allow criminals to disguise the source of illegal products by commingling them with these alternatives. In short, it's true that at least four biotechnology firms have engaged in some form of development of synthetic material genetically identical to rhino horn. Although progress in that area was initially hailed as a potential anti-poaching measure, conservation groups and wildlife officials have since expressed strong skepticism that the overall effects on the rhinoceros population of selling such material wouldn't be deleterious.  Members of both groups have espoused positions opposing the introduction of fake rhino horn to any market, citing anticipated demand uptick and burdens on already taxed enforcement agencies. Actman, Jani.  ""Can Fake Rhino Horn Stop the Poaching of an Endangered Species?""
  National Geographic.  2 December 2015. Neme, Laurel.  ""Petition Seeks Ban on Trade in Fake Rhino Horn.""
  National Geographic.  10 February 2016. Save the Rhino International.  ""Joint Statement by the International Rhino Foundation and Save the Rhino International.""
  July 2015.",['funds'],NEI,"On 9 July 2016, the Facebook page ""The Medical Facts"" published the image and explanation shown below, reporting the development of synthetic rhino horn as an anti-poaching measure:The International Rhino Foundation (IRF) and Save the Rhino International (SRI) issued a joint statement after ""monitoring the progress of four US-based companies that have announced their intentions  with varying degrees of success  to produce synthetic or bio-fabricated rhino horn, and occasionally also other products including e.g. elephant ivory, lion bones or pangolin scales."" In that statement, both groups expressed their opposition to the introduction of fake rhino horn to international markets:A December 2015 National Geographicarticle covered the efforts of one such biotechnology outfit producing synthetic rhino horn (Pembroke) and outlined some conservationist concerns about the unintended consequences of such a venture:A February 2016 followup article presented a five-point set of objections to the introduction of genetic copies of rhino horn to the market, filed with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service by the Center for Biological Diversity:"
Was there a contribution made by Home Depot to Herschel Walker's campaign?,"[""The truth of the matter regarding Home Depot and Walker, a Georgia Republican candidate for U.S. Senate, wasn't as simple as it was presented by some news articles.""]","On Oct. 7, 2022, a Twitter user named Nathalie Jacoby tweeted, ""Will you join me in boycotting Home Depot for donating $1.75 MILLION to Herschel Walkers campaign?"" Walker is a Republican U.S. Senate candidate for the state of Georgia. The tweet led several of our readers to email us about the matter. tweeted  In the 2022 U.S. election, Walker was challenging U.S. Sen. Raphael Warnock, a Democrat. Should Walker win the seat, it would potentially give Republicans a coveted Senate majority. The race brought with it a lot of rumors and news stories. One of the biggest rumors appeared to be about Walker purportedly encouraging a woman to have two abortions. However, for this fact check, we will only be looking into the claim about Home Depot. Walker encouraging a woman to have two abortions Home Depot responded to Jacoby's tweet by saying that the contribution in question came from the company's co-founder Bernie Marcus. responded  We also reached out to the company to inquire about the matter. By email, a company spokesperson told us the following: ""Thanks for reaching out. This isnt true. Home Depots PAC hasnt donated to Walkers or Warnocks campaigns. Our co-founder Bernie Marcus left Home Depot more than 20 years ago, and his views do not represent the company."" It's true that Marcus retired from the company in 2002. However, despite what some readers may have read in other articles that appeared at the top of Google search results, that wasn't the full story. retired On the morning of Oct. 10, Judd Legum of the Popular Information blog reported that Home Depot PAC, a political action committee associated with the company, had donated funds to a Republican organization that funded ad spending for Walker's campaign. reported associated funded ad spending After reviewing Legum's reporting, we located expenditure records for Home Depot PAC that had been published on OpenSecrets.org. The website calls itself ""the nation's premier research and government transparency group tracking money in politics and its effect on elections and policy."" published The information on Open Secrets indicated the following: While there is no record of Home Depot directly donating to Walker's efforts to win the Senate seat, Home Depot PAC did provide funds to the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC). According to reporting from Politico that was published on Oct. 4, the NRSC was ""splitting a new $8.5 million ad buy with the Walker campaign."" National Republican Senatorial Committee reporting We contacted Legum by Twitter DM, who told us that the Federal Election Commission website, FEC.gov, also showed four key records related to Home Depot and NRSC. These records indicated that Home Depot PAC, shown on the website as The Home Depot Inc. Political Action Committee, had donated a combined $90,000 to the NRSC in late 2021 and early 2022. four key records  Other large expenditures made by the Home Depot PAC in 2021 and 2022 also went to organizations that were associated with the Republican Party, according to the FEC website. Examples included $45,000 to the California Republican Party and $25,000 to the Georgians First Leadership Committee. Other large expenditures At the same time, Home Depot PAC also gave money in 2021 and 2022 to organizations that appeared to be led by Democrats. Examples included $60,000 to the California Legislative Black Caucus Policy Institute, $50,000 to the Los Angeles Delegation Foundation, $30,000 to the Women in Power PAC, and $25,000 to the Asian Pacific Islander Leadership PAC. Home Depot Note: Jacoby, the Twitter user, also previously tweeted in support of boycotting CNN, Chick-fil-A, Kanye West, and Hobby Lobby and MyPillow. CNN Chick-fil-A Kanye West Hobby Lobby and MyPillow Allison, Natalie, and Marianne Levine. Republicans Rally around Walkers Imperiled Candidacy. POLITICO, 4 Oct. 2022, https://www.politico.com/. Federal Election Commission. https://www.fec.gov/. Grace Meng Elected as New Chair of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus Leadership PAC. Capacleadership.Org, 13 Apr. 2016, https://www.capacleadership.org/. Home Depot. Twitter, https://twitter.com/homedepot/. Jacoby, Nathalie. Twitter, https://twitter.com/nathaliejacoby1/. Kamisar, Ben. Big Georgia Senate Ad Spending Shift Highlights a Novel Strategy. NBC News, 23 Sept. 2022, https://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/meetthepressblog/big-georgia-senate-ad-spending-shift-highlights-novel-strategy-rcna49125. Kempner, Matt. Home Depot Founders Reunite: $40M for Vets, 1st Responders Health. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, 16 Feb. 2021. AJC.com, https://www.ajc.com/ajcjobs/home-depot-founders-reunite-40m-for-vets-1st-responders-health/WRWBASV6GREQTKUU56LWLXGGY4/. Koseff, Alexei. Women Target Seats Held by California Lawmakers Accused of Sexual Harassment. The Sacramento Bee, 15 Feb. 2018, https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article200150799.html. Legum, Judd. Who Is Really Financing Herschel Walkers Campaign? Popular Information, 10 Oct. 2022, https://popular.info/p/who-is-really-financing-herschel. Members. CLBCPI Foundation, https://cablackcaucus.org/members/. National Republican Senatorial Committee. https://www.nrsc.org/. NBCSL | California Legislative Black Caucus Elects New Leadership. 25 Aug. 2022, https://nbcsl.org/media-center/news/item/2376-california-legislative-black-caucus-elects-new-leadership.html. OpenSecrets. https://www.opensecrets.org/. Report: Walker Encouraged Woman to Have Second Abortion. The Associated Press, 8 Oct. 2022, https://apnews.com/article/2022-midterm-elections-herschel-walker-congress-government-and-politics-9d7d9c68a802169994b9db719d8256c0. Rosenhall, Laurel. The New Thing for California Politicians? Sweet Charity. CalMatters, 18 Feb. 2020, https://calmatters.org/projects/california-lawmaker-nonprofits-politics-charity-campaign-finance-foundation-dark-money/. Scribner, Herb. Home Depot Denies Donating over $1 Million to Herschel Walkers Campaign. Axios, 8 Oct. 2022, https://www.axios.com/2022/10/08/home-depot-herschel-walker-georgia-donation. Werschkul, Ben. Home Depot Now the Biggest Corporate Donor to 2020 Election Objectors, Analysis Finds. Yahoo Finance, 25 Mar. 2022, https://finance.yahoo.com/news/home-depot-biggest-corporate-contributor-to-2020-election-objectors-analysis-finds-185705617.html. After this story was published, on Oct. 10, we added an email statement sent to us by Home Depot.",['finance'],NEI,"On Oct. 7, 2022, a Twitter user named Nathalie Jacoby tweeted, ""Will you join me in boycotting Home Depot for donating $1.75 MILLION to Herschel Walkers campaign?"" Walker is a Republican U.S. Senate candidate for the state of Georgia. The tweet led several of our readers to email us about the matter.In the 2022 U.S. election, Walker was challenging U.S. Sen. Raphael Warnock, a Democrat. Should Walker win the seat, it would potentially give Republicans a coveted Senate majority. The race brought with it a lot of rumors and news stories. One of the biggest rumors appeared to be about Walker purportedly encouraging a woman to have two abortions. However, for this fact check, we will only be looking into the claim about Home Depot.Home Depot responded to Jacoby's tweet by saying that the contribution in question came from the company's co-founder Bernie Marcus.It's true that Marcus retired from the company in 2002. However, despite what some readers may have read in other articles that appeared at the top of Google search results, that wasn't the full story.On the morning of Oct. 10, Judd Legum of the Popular Information blog reported that Home Depot PAC, a political action committee associated with the company, had donated funds to a Republican organization that funded ad spending for Walker's campaign.After reviewing Legum's reporting, we located expenditure records for Home Depot PAC that had been published on OpenSecrets.org. The website calls itself ""the nation's premier research and government transparency group tracking money in politics and its effect on elections and policy.""The information on Open Secrets indicated the following: While there is no record of Home Depot directly donating to Walker's efforts to win the Senate seat, Home Depot PAC did provide funds to the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC). According to reporting from Politico that was published on Oct. 4, the NRSC was ""splitting a new $8.5 million ad buy with the Walker campaign.""We contacted Legum by Twitter DM, who told us that the Federal Election Commission website, FEC.gov, also showed four key records related to Home Depot and NRSC. These records indicated that Home Depot PAC, shown on the website as The Home Depot Inc. Political Action Committee, had donated a combined $90,000 to the NRSC in late 2021 and early 2022.Other large expenditures made by the Home Depot PAC in 2021 and 2022 also went to organizations that were associated with the Republican Party, according to the FEC website. Examples included $45,000 to the California Republican Party and $25,000 to the Georgians First Leadership Committee.At the same time, Home Depot PAC also gave money in 2021 and 2022 to organizations that appeared to be led by Democrats. Examples included $60,000 to the California Legislative Black Caucus Policy Institute, $50,000 to the Los Angeles Delegation Foundation, $30,000 to the Women in Power PAC, and $25,000 to the Asian Pacific Islander Leadership PAC.Note: Jacoby, the Twitter user, also previously tweeted in support of boycotting CNN, Chick-fil-A, Kanye West, and Hobby Lobby and MyPillow."
Air Force Academy Commencement 2013,['Account describes the 2013 Air Force Academy commencement ceremonies?'],"Good friends of ours from Elizabethtown, KY, just returned home from a visit to the Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs, where they attended the commencement exercises for the graduating class of 2013. In fact, John's grandson was one of the graduates, and John, being a retired US Army officer, was able to swear in his grandson as a brand new US Air Force 2Lt. What an honor that must have been for John and his family! However, that's not the real story, nor is it the historic significance of the 2013 commencement celebration. You see, 2013 marked the first Air Force graduation on record that occurred under a sequester created by a nonfunctioning Congress and an unyielding Obama Administration. Due to operating under this sequester, the ceremonies proceeded as follows: President Obama regretfully declined the kind invitation of the Commandant of the Air Force Academy to speak to the graduates and their families on the occasion of their graduation, stating he was committed to addressing the graduates at West Point. Instead, it was established that Vice President Biden was available and would come to Colorado Springs. As for the request for a flyover by the US Air Force Thunderbirds, that was declined again due to the sequester. After consulting with his chain of command, the Commandant of the Air Force Academy notified the White House that, due to the sequester canceling the traditional flyover of the Thunderbirds, he was confident that the nation didn't need the added expense of over $1 million to fly Air Force 2, of any configuration or model, along with the additional costs of the Secret Service and their entourage required when the Vice President traveled. Thus, the initial request for a speaker from the White House for the commencement was canceled. The commencement went off as planned without representation from the Obama Administration. The featured speaker was the Secretary of the Air Force, who is a decorated Vietnam veteran. The Secretary flew back and forth from Andrews AFB to Peterson AFB in Colorado Springs on a routine training flight conducted by the Air Force, thus costing the American taxpayers nothing. John tells me that there were nearly as many Air Force General Officers in attendance as there were family members. He estimates there were a dozen or more 4-Star Generals, three or four times as many 3-Star and 2-Star Generals, and an untold number of 1-Star Generals, along with countless Colonels and below. Most of these officers were alumni of the Air Force Academy and wanted nothing less than to present a perfect program for the graduating class. Since Congress and the Obama Administration could not see fit to allow a flyover by the Thunderbirds, a number of senior generals took matters into their own hands. So, when the speeches concluded, the hats were thrown into the air, and all the family hugs were exchanged, it became time for the flyover. A roar of engines was detected from the west of the airstrip and parade grounds, and everyone was treated to a flyover by the Commemorative Air Force. Looking up, we saw vintage aircraft including B-17s, B-24s, B-25s, P-38s, P-51s, and others, all flown by our heroes from prior conflicts who still see fit to stay active for services such as this. It was a wonderful experience for all who were there. I am sure you will join me in offering a salute to these serving officers who chose not to rob the 2013 graduating class of their day of celebration, to our heroes who flew the planes for this worthy occasion, and to the many private donors who contributed and covered the expenses involved in bringing these aircraft to Colorado Springs from various locations across the country. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE SALUTE YOU!!!",['budget'],False,"Origins:  The U.S. Air Force Academy's (USAFA) graduation ceremony is typically marked by a flyover performed by the Air Force Thunderbirds aerial demonstration team, but in 2013 sequestration cuts ruled that out, resulting in the class of 2013's being the first group of graduates in modern memory to go without the traditional flyover.  Aside from that fact, however, virtually everything else in the account of those ceremonies reproduced above is inaccurate: Because of sequestration and the attendant lack of funding, the USAF Thunderbirds have had to cancel all the events on their show schedule since 1 April 2013.  The Thunderbirds did not ""decline"" to perform a fly-by at the 2013 USAFA graduation, nor were they prevented from doing because the Obama administration supposedly refused to ""allow"" it  the Thunderbirds currently aren't able to appear anywhere due to unresolved budget issues between the administration and Congress. ""Senior generals"" did not ""take matters into their own hands"" to come up with a substitute for the usual Thunderbirds flyover. USAFA graduates and other flying groups took it upon themselves to contact the USAFA and offer their services to fill the void in honoring the 2013 graduating class, and their efforts were coordinated by the 306th Flying Training Group and USAFA Plans and Programs.  The flyover staged at the ceremonies included not just airplanes provided by the Commemorative Air Force (formerly known as the Confederate Air Force), but also by the Texas Flying Legends Museum and the National Museum Of WWII Aviation. The Texas Flying Legends Museum estimated that they expended about $100,000 in private and corporate donations to bring aircraft to Colorado Springs for the flyover."
Can this video depict refugees stealing from a coffee shop in Spain?,['A video purportedly showing refugees looting a caf in Spain actually captures an incident from 2015 involving students at a university in South Africa.'],"Another video seemingly intended to malign refugees began to spread online in August 2018. This video purportedly showed a group of dark-skinned individuals smashing glass cases and stealing food from a small café. The video was captioned ""Refugees Welcome to Spain,"" an apparent nod to the ""Refugees Welcome"" sign that had been hung on Madrid City Hall a few years prior. However, this video does not feature refugees, was not recorded in Spain, and does not depict a recent incident. The footage was actually taken in a cafeteria at Tshwane University of Technology in Pretoria, South Africa, in November 2015. At that time, students at several South African universities were engaged in protests against fee hikes and inadequate funding. The South African Independent Online (IOL) news outlet reported that 16 protesting students at two Tshwane University of Technology (TUT) campuses were arrested for the incident depicted in this video and were released the following day. The Gencor Hall, the main exam center at the South campus, along with the information center and two security vehicles, were torched. The protests took an ugly turn when students vandalized a cafeteria at the South campus. That same day, police arrested 16 students in connection with the violence but released them a day later. South African History Online provided context for the student protest: student protests at public universities and colleges over financial exclusions speak directly to the issue of inadequate governmental and other funding for education in South Africa. An estimated R900 million per annum for student funding is needed for TUT to function as an institution that still serves qualifying students requiring financial aid. NSFAS, a loan and bursary scheme the government introduced in 1999 to provide financially disadvantaged matrics access to university education, offers only a portion of this amount to students who need financial aid at TUT. For example, in 2014, the state scheme funded half of the university students who qualified for its loans and bursaries at TUT. Despite obtaining an additional allocation of R1 billion for that year, NSFAS was still unable to fund an estimated 10,000 students across TUT's campuses who needed and qualified for financial aid in 2014, of which R270 million was allocated for TUT. In 2015, the situation worsened as the NSFAS allocation excluded that portion. The 2015 SRC estimated that over 20,000 returning students across the university's six campus regions were excluded that year. Many of these students had been funded by NSFAS in 2014 but were left out in 2015 and were not allowed to register without an upfront payment; they were also barred from receiving their results without settling their debt. Students at institutions including the Vaal University of Technology, the University of Johannesburg, the University of Venda, and Walter Sisulu University faced similar issues around the same time. Academic activities at the university were suspended for the remainder of the school year after the protests turned violent in November 2015. YouTuber Arphalia Meyer contemporaneously posted a series of videos of the protesters looting the campus, with the video that formed the basis of the later viral ""Refugees Welcome to Spain"" clip being uploaded on 23 November 2015. That original video was accompanied by the caption ""Security cam footage of the mob looting Kantina, the tuck shop on campus at TUT PTA. It's clear enough that this was premeditated and they are no strangers to it."" This footage was taken at a university in South Africa and shows a group of students vandalizing a cafeteria amidst protests in 2015 against inadequate school funding. It has nothing to do with Spain or refugees, and it was nearly three years old when it was re-captioned and circulated online. South African History Online. ""Student Protests at Tshwane University of Technology -- Timeline."" Retrieved 16 August 2018. El Pais. ""'Refugees Welcome,' Reads Sign on Madrid City Hall."" 8 September 2015. Makhetha, Tankiso. ""Two TUT Campuses Shut Down."" IOL. 24 November 2015.",['debt'],False,"Another video seemingly offered to malign refugees started to spread online in August 2018, in this case one purportedly showing a group of dark-skinned people smashing glass cases and stealing foodstuffs froma small caf. The video bore the caption ""Refugees Welcome to Spain,"" an apparent nod to the ""Refugees Welcome"" sign that was hung on Madrid City Hall a few years prior:The South African Independent Online (IOL) news outlet reported that 16 protesting students at two Tshwane University of Technology (TUT) campuses were arrested for the incident depicted in this video and were released the following day:South African History Online provided the context behind that student protest:Academic activities at the university were suspended for the remainder of the school year after the protests turned violent in November 2015. YouTuber Arphalia Meyer contemporaneously posted a series of videos of the protesters looting the campus, with the video that formed the basis of the later viral ""Refugees Welcome to Spain"" clip being put online on 23 November 2015.  That original video was accompanied by the caption ""Security cam footage of the mob looting Kantina, the tuck shop on campus at TUT PTA. It's clear enough that this was premeditated and they are no strangers to it"":"
Were  getting into the pool of the 100 million people that are not working. That pool is now coming back.,[],"President Donald Trump took a victory lap on the job market during one of his periodic Cabinet meetings. ""Unemployment is at a 17-year low,"" he said on Dec. 6, 2017. ""Very shortly it's going to be at a 19-year low. We think the numbers are going to continue to go down. And we're also getting into the pool of the 100 million people that are not working. That pool is now coming back. As you know, that's not considered in the low employment numbers, which means we have a lot of people that want to get to work, and that will be working."" The unemployment rate is indeed at its lowest point since December 2000. But we were curious about Trump's other assertion—that would-be workers from a pool of 100 million are coming back into the workforce. First off, Trump is in the ballpark when he says that there are 100 million people not working. There are currently 95.4 million people above the age of 16 who are out of the labor force—meaning neither working nor actively looking for work—and another 6.5 million people who are unemployed. If you look at the raw number of Americans who are not in the labor force—people who are not working or looking actively for work—that figure has risen by 1.02 million since January 2017, an increase of about 1 percent. Meanwhile, the labor force participation rate—or the percentage of people age 16 and up who are either working or actively looking for work—has been bouncing around in a narrow band since Trump took office—between 62.7 percent and 63.1 percent—with no clear trend. While neither of these measures supports Trump's assertion, each presents an imperfect view of the labor pool by including everyone 16 and up. Those totals are shaped by demographic changes. Demographic trends, such as the aging of the baby boomer cohort, have been the primary drivers for the decline in labor force participation, said Chris Lafakis, a director at Moody's Analytics. ""We simply have more retirees now because our population is older."" If you drill down using statistics that are more targeted to working-age Americans, Trump's assertion looks more credible. Consider the employment-to-population ratio for Americans age 25 to 54. During Obama's last 12 months, this measurement rose by half a percentage point. (Rising, for this statistic, is good—it means a larger percentage of Americans are employed.) But in the first 10 months of Trump's tenure, the statistic rose by six-tenths of a percentage point. That's not a radical improvement, but it's better than his predecessor managed in his final year. If you look at the raw numbers, the number of non-workers in the 25 to 54 age range has declined by about 691,000 since January 2017. Another statistic also puts the improvement in 2017 in a favorable light. That would be the unemployment rate known as U-6. This statistic uses a more generous definition of unemployment than the most commonly used measure. The U-6 rate includes not just workers who are officially unemployed but also those who are employed part-time when they would prefer a full-time job, and those who want to work but who haven't looked for work in the preceding four weeks. In Obama's final year, this measure dropped by half a percentage point. (A drop is a good sign.) But under Trump, it has dropped by 1.5 percentage points—three times faster in a shorter period of time. This statistic is an important one for judging Trump's assertion because the people who would be driving the declines would specifically be those who find jobs after being unemployed by conventional definitions, plus those who had been forced to work only part-time and those who had not looked for work for several months. President Trump is correct that the pool of non-workers continues to shrink, said Brookings Institution economist Gary Burtless, though he added that it has done so fairly steadily since the last quarter of 2011. Jed Kolko, the chief economist for the job site Indeed.com, puts significant stock in the two statistics that support Trump's statement. ""Our view is that the labor market is entering 2018 with strength and momentum, with some room to grow,"" Kolko said. Finally, it's worth noting that no president can take full credit for the economy's achievements (or take full fault for its shortcomings). Many other factors, including the health of the rest of the world economy and changes in demographics and technology, play a role as well. Our ruling: Trump said that we're getting into the pool of the 100 million people that are not working. The statistics that shine the most direct light on working-age Americans support Trump's point. Both the working-age employment-to-population ratio and the U-6 expanded unemployment rate have improved on Trump's watch. It's worth noting that they also improved during Obama's final year, so Trump was fortunate to take office at a time when the economy was already going in the right direction. But the scale of the increase has been bigger under Trump. We rate this statement Mostly True.","['National', 'Economy', 'Jobs']",True,"Unemployment is at a 17-year low,he saidon Dec. 6, 2017. Very shortly it's going to be at a 19-year low. We think the numbers are going to continue to go down. And we're also getting into the pool of the 100 million people that are not working. That pool is now coming back. As you know, that's not considered in the low employment numbers, which means we have a lot of people that want to get to work, and that will be working."
"No, McDonald's Isn't Charging a 'Caucasian' Service Fee",['A faked image mocked up to look like a message from the restaurant chain circulated online.'],"Curious about how Snopes' writers verify information and craft their stories for public consumption? We've collected some posts that help explain our process. Happy reading, and let us know what else you might be interested in learning. In January 2022, an image circulated online, allegedly alerting Caucasian customers of the fast food chain McDonald's that they would be required to pay an additional fee: ""As an insurance measure, due in part to the recent coup attempt of the Capital (sic) earlier this year, all Caucasian customers are required to pay an additional fee of $1.50 per transaction."" McDonald's has no such policy, but the image appears to be a variation of a similar internet post. In 2012, a comparable image with similar wording circulated online, claiming that McDonald's was instituting an additional $1.50 fee on Black customers. Mikkelson, David. ""FACT CHECK: Did a McDonald's Impose a Surcharge on African-American Customers to Cover Robbery Insurance?"" Snopes, 24 Jan. 2012, https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/self-insured/.",['insurance'],False,"Curious about how Snopes' writers verify information and craft their stories for public consumption? We've collected some posts that help explain how we do what we do. Happy reading and let us know what else you might be interested in knowing.In 2012, a similar image with similar wording circulated online claiming that McDonald's was instituting an additional $1.50 fee on Black customers."
Did Bill Belichick Shake His Head at Mac Jones' Overthrow?,"[""It's quite imaginative to believe that Belichick and a number of other NFL coaches and general managers would show disappointment at a single throw.""]","In late March 2021, a video was shared that showed Bill Belichick shaking his head moments after NFL prospect Mac Jones overthrew a football. The New England Patriots coach was present to attend the University of Alabama football team's pro day. In the video, he was standing next to San Francisco 49ers head coach Kyle Shanahan. The video appeared in articles that were shown to Google Discover users. For example, one story stated, ""Bill Belichick isn't impressed with Mac Jones' throw at Alabama pro day."" Another read, ""Cameras catch Bill Belichick's reaction to Mac Jones' overthrow at Alabama Pro Day."" Several articles seemed to suggest they could read minds. We found no indication that Belichick was shaking his head or showing disapproval at a single overthrow by Jones. In the video, it appeared that Shanahan and Belichick were having a conversation. The likely explanation for Belichick's head shake was that he was reacting to something Shanahan said. Four NFL coaches were present to watch Jones and other Alabama football prospects: Sean Payton of the New Orleans Saints, Matt Nagy of the Chicago Bears, Shanahan, and Belichick. The Associated Press also reported that Belichick was among a group of five general managers in attendance. In January 2021, Jones led the Alabama football team to the College Football Playoff national championship. He was also a Heisman Trophy finalist, placing third in the vote count. The team's head coach is Nick Saban. The same Twitter account that hosted the video of Belichick shaking his head also tweeted another video showing Jones throwing a deep ball with precision. ESPN also shared additional videos of the Alabama pro day that showcased Jones executing a number of solid plays. The Associated Press published a brief comment from Jones, who appeared to feel confident in his performance in front of Belichick and the other NFL coaches and general managers. ""At Alabama, they told me to sit in the pocket and rip it, so that's what I did,"" Jones said. ""That's what you're supposed to do when you're at Alabama. But when the NFL comes, I'll do whatever they tell me to do. I showed today that I can do everything that they want me to do."" Without further evidence that Belichick was showing disapproval at a single throw by a Heisman Trophy finalist who led his team to a national title, we have rated this claim as ""Unproven.""",['share'],NEI,"In late March 2021, a video was shared that showed Bill Belichick shaking his head moments after NFL prospect Mac Jones overthrew a football. The New England Patriots coach was on hand to attend the University of Alabama football team's pro days. In the video, he was standing next to San Francisco 49ers head coach Kyle Shanahan: Several articles appeared to perhaps read minds.Four NFL coaches were on hand to watch Jones and other Alabama football prospects. Sean Payton of the New Orleans Saints, Matt Nagy of the Chicago Bears, Shanahan, and Belichick were all in attendance. The Associated Press also reported that Belichick was among a group of five general managers on hand.In January 2021, Jones led the Alabama football team to the College Football Playoff national championship. He was also a Heisman Trophy finalist, placing third in the vote count. The team's head coach is Nick Saban.The same Twitter account that hosted the video of Belichick shaking his head also tweeted this video. It showed Jones throwing a deep ball with precision:ESPN also shared more videos of the Alabama pro days that showed Jones executing a number of solid plays.The Associated Press published a brief comment from Jones. He appeared to feel confident in his showing in front of Belichick and the other NFL coaches and general managers:Without further evidence that Belichick was showing disapproval at a single throw of the football by a Heisman Trophy finalist who led his team to a national title, we have rated this claim as ""Unproven."""
"Tim Kaine, as governor, proposed tax increases on people earning as little as $17,000.",[],"Republican Senate candidate George Allen recently accused Democratic opponent Tim Kaine of being a tax hiker, even for people of modest means. During a July 21 debate in Hot Springs, Allen criticized Kaine for proposing tax increases that would affect individuals earning as little as $17,000 a year. We checked to see if Kaine, who served as governor from 2006 to 2010, indeed attempted to raise taxes on people at that income level. The Allen campaign, in a website post, supported Allen's statement by citing news articles about a proposal Kaine unveiled in December 2009 as part of his farewell biennial budget proposal for 2010-2012. Kaine called for adding a 1 percent income tax surcharge and allocating all proceeds to localities in exchange for them eliminating the car tax they impose on personal vehicles. Legislators in 1998 adopted a five-year plan to phase out the personal property tax on most cars and reimburse localities for their lost revenues. However, the program was more expensive than anticipated, and legislators eventually capped the state reimbursement at $950 million a year. The remaining share is paid by vehicle owners. Ending the car tax would mean the state would not have to provide the annual $950 million payment to localities, Kaine said in a speech to the General Assembly's money committees. Kaine wanted to use the savings to help balance the state's recession-wracked budget. News articles from the time indicated that Kaine's policy would raise the maximum state income tax rate from 5.75 percent to 6.75 percent. That maximum rate applies to all taxable income above $17,000 after deductions and exemptions are taken into account. The state charges gradually higher income tax rates up to that level. Virginia imposes a 2 percent levy on the first $3,000 of taxable income, 3 percent on the next $2,000, 5 percent on the next $12,000, and then 5.75 percent on all taxable income above $17,000. The bill advancing Kaine's proposal did not specify that the added tax would only be levied on taxable income of $17,000 or more. The added 1 percent surtax would have applied to all income levels, according to Joel Davison, a spokesman for the Virginia Department of Finance. Virginia does not require individuals with a state adjusted income below $11,950 and married couples with a state adjusted income below $23,900 to pay state income taxes, so they would not have been affected by the tax increase. Kaine's proposal was ultimately rejected by the General Assembly. It should be noted that some individuals earning $17,000 would have benefited from Kaine's plan if their savings from the elimination of the car tax exceeded their increased income tax. There are no estimates of the number of Virginians who would have fallen into this category, but we suspect it would be a small group. Here’s why: For starters, we can eliminate those who did not own cars. Now, let’s consider those who did own vehicles. A single filer with no children earning $17,000 would have a taxable income of $13,070 after taking the standard deduction and exemption. A 1 percent income tax increase for that person would amount to almost $131 a year. The car levy paid by that person would depend on where he or she lived, as each locality sets its own tax rate based on the assessed value of the vehicle. In Richmond, a person would not pay a $131 levy unless they had a car worth about $9,000. In rural Henry County, a vehicle would have to be valued at about $17,500 to incur a $131 tax. Our ruling: Allen stated that Kaine proposed a tax increase that would have affected people earning as little as $17,000 a year. Not everyone at that level would have paid more under Kaine's plan, but it is a safe bet that a large number of them would have seen their overall tax bill rise. We rate Allen's statement True.","['State Budget', 'Taxes', 'Virginia']",True,"Republican Senate candidate George Allen recently accused Democratic opponent Tim Kaine of being a tax hiker, even on people of modest means.During a July 21 debate in Hot Springs, Allen criticized Kaine for actually proposing tax increases that would be hitting people earning as little as $17,000 a year.We checked to see if Kaine, who was governor from 2006 to 2010, really did try to raise taxes on people at that income level.The Allen campaign, in awebsite post, backed Allens statement by citing news articles about a proposal Kaine unveiled in December 2009 as part of his farewell biennial budget proposal for 2010-2012. Kaine called for adding a 1 percent income tax surcharge and giving all proceeds to localities in return for them scrapping the car tax they levy on personal vehicles.Legislators in 1998 adopted a five-year plan to phase out the personal property tax on most cars and reimburse localities for their lost revenues. But the program was more expensive than anticipated and legislators eventually capped the state reimbursement at $950 million a year. The remaining share is paid by vehicle owners.Ending the car tax would mean the state wouldnt have to provide the annual $950 million payment to localities, Kaine said in aspeechto the General Assemblys money committees. Kaine wanted to use the savings to help balance the states recession-wracked budget.News articles from the time said Kaines policy would raise the maximum state income tax rate from 5.75 percent to 6.75 percent. That maximum rate applies to all taxable income above $17,000 after deductions and exemptions are taken into account.The state charges gradually higher income tax rates up to that level. Virginia puts a 2 percent levy on the first $3,000 of taxable income, 3 percent of the next $2,000, 5 percent on the next $12,000 and then 5.75 percent on all taxable income above $17,000.Thebilladvancing Kaines proposal did not say the added tax would only be levied on taxable income of $17,000 or more. The added 1 percent surtax would have pertained to all income levels, according to Joel Davison, a spokesman for the Virginia Department of Finance.Virginia does not require individuals with a state adjusted income below $11,950 and married couples with a state adjusted income below $23,900 to pay state income taxes. So they wouldnt have been affected by the tax increase.Kaines proposal was killed by the General Assembly.It should be noted that some people earning $17,000 would have benefitted from Kaines plan if their savings from the elimination of the car tax outstripped their increased income tax. There are no estimates of the number of Virginians who would fallen into this category, but we suspect it would be a small group. Heres why:For starters, we can eliminate those who didnt own cars.Now, lets consider those who did own vehicles. A single filer with no children earning $17,000 would have a taxable income of $13,070 after taking the standard deduction and exemption. A 1 percent income tax increase for that person would come to almost $131 a year.The car levy paid by that person would depend on where he or she lived because each locality sets it own tax rate based on the assessed value of the vehicle. In Richmond, a person wouldnt pay a $131 levy unless they had a car worth about $9,000. In rural Henry County, a vehicle would have to be valued at about $17,500 to merit a $131 tax.Our rulingAllen said that Kaine proposed a tax increase that would have affected people earning as little as $17,000 a year. Not everyone at that level would have paid more under Kaines plan, but its a safe bet that large number of them would have seen their overall tax bill rise.We rate Allens statement True."
"When the price for oil goes up on the markets, it goesright up, but it never goes down.",[],"What goes up must come down, the old saying goes. But, according to Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., thats not the case for oil prices. As part of a round of appearances to tout a new Democratic economic-policy agenda, Schumertook a momenton ABCsThis Weekto promote his partys plan to curb mergers that arent in the interest of consumers. We're going to change the way companies can merge,Schumer said. We have these huge companies buying up other big companies. It hurts workers and it hurts prices. The old Adam Smith idea of competition, it's gone. So people hate it when their cable bills go up, their airline fees. They know that gas prices are sticky. You know  when the price for oil goes up on the markets, it goes right up, but it never goes down. However, this broad statement clashes with the long-term data for gasoline and crude oil prices. There are long stretches over the past four decades wheninflation-adjusted gasoline priceshave gone down. Heres a chart from the Energy Information Administration, a federal office that tracks energy statistics. And heres theinflation-adjusted data for imported crude oil. The pattern is similar. Clearly, gasoline and crude oil prices arent simply on an eternal escalator to infinity, as one might think hearing Schumer. So whats going on? When we checked with Schumers office, they said he was referring to the rise like a rocket, fall like a feather theory of gas prices. Under this theory, gasoline prices tend to go up quickly if theres a market shock, then fall more slowly after supply and demand resolve themselves. Schumer sees that pattern as one example of how big companies can sometimes have too much power to control prices, regardless of market forces. But when we ran Schumers statement by Severin Borenstein, a University of California-Berkeley economist who wrote a seminalpaperon the rocket-feather theory in 1997, he said the senators formulation is off-base. He said that while it is true that retail gasoline prices decline more slowly than they rise, the time frame for these changes is fairly short -- two weeks to go up, and six weeks or more to go down. Schumers statement suggests an iron rule, not a pattern for short-term changes following a market shock. You don't have to be an economist or analyst of oil markets to know that the statement isn't correct, Borenstein told PolitiFact. Obviously, gasoline prices do go down when oil prices decline. The change in gasoline prices since the 2014 collapse in oil prices made that very clear. Meanwhile, Denton Cinquegrana, chief oil analyst at the Oil Price Information Service, a private firm, said that Schumers targets -- monopoly-minded companies -- arent necessarily to blame. He pointed to a study of 420 gas stations in San Diego in 2000 and 2001 that looked at the psychology and behavior of consumers. If a consumer sees a relatively low price, the study found, they wont bother searching aggressively for a price thats lower still, even though such bargains may exist around the corner. When such behavior is multiplied across many drivers, gas stations feel less pressure to reduce prices further than they already have, slowing the fall of gas prices. And economist Philip K. Verleger, who runs the firm PKVerleger LLC, said Schumer may also have an outdated view of how the oil markets work. Theres a more competitive market today -- the futures market runs everything now, he said. The futures can predict your local gas prices, and the response is more symmetric (before and after a market shock) than it was. Schumer said, When the price for oil goes up on the markets, it goes right up, but it never goes down. This comment takes a well-known phenomenon and exaggerates it beyond recognition. While experts agree that prices tend to go up quickly after a market shock but usually come down more slowly once the shock is resolved, this phenomenon only occurs on a short-term basis -- a couple of weeks in most cases. Long-term data show long stretches since the mid 1970s when the inflation-adjusted price of gasoline and crude oil have fallen. We rate the statement False.","['National', 'Economy', 'Energy']",False,"As part of a round of appearances to tout a new Democratic economic-policy agenda, Schumertook a momenton ABCsThis Weekto promote his partys plan to curb mergers that arent in the interest of consumers.We're going to change the way companies can merge,Schumer said. We have these huge companies buying up other big companies. It hurts workers and it hurts prices. The old Adam Smith idea of competition, it's gone. So people hate it when their cable bills go up, their airline fees. They know that gas prices are sticky. You know  when the price for oil goes up on the markets, it goes right up, but it never goes down.There are long stretches over the past four decades wheninflation-adjusted gasoline priceshave gone down. Heres a chart from the Energy Information Administration, a federal office that tracks energy statistics.And heres theinflation-adjusted data for imported crude oil. The pattern is similar.But when we ran Schumers statement by Severin Borenstein, a University of California-Berkeley economist who wrote a seminalpaperon the rocket-feather theory in 1997, he said the senators formulation is off-base."
Red Lobster Closing?,['Is the Red Lobster chain about to close its doors and go out of business for good?'],"Claim: The Red Lobster chain is about to close its doors and go out of business for good. Example: [Collected via Facebook, December 2013] Is Red Lobster closing? Origins: Red Lobster is the ubiquitous casual dining restaurant chain operated by Darden Restaurants of Orlando, Florida, which boasts over seven hundred outlets worldwide, including operations in Canada, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, and Japan, in addition to the United States. In September 2013, the Darden Restaurants corporation (which also owns the Olive Garden, LongHorn Steakhouse, Bahama Breeze, Capital Grille, and Seasons 52 restaurant chains) reported disappointing financial results, including a 37.6% decrease in earnings per share and a $41 million drop in net earnings. A significant portion of those disappointing financial results was attributed to the poor performance of the Red Lobster chain, which saw a 5.2% decline in sales compared to the same quarter of the previous year and a 3.8% decline in same-restaurant traffic. These results prompted Darden, under pressure from investors, to announce in mid-December 2013 that they planned to separate themselves from the Red Lobster chain by selling it or spinning it off as a separate company. Under pressure from an activist hedge fund, Darden announced that it would dispose of the chain that gave it life, Red Lobster, as one of several steps meant to bolster its stock price. The company plans to shed Red Lobster through a tax-free spinoff to shareholders but would be interested in a sale if it could raise more money. Darden's plan follows months of questions and pressure from investors and analysts regarding how it intended to attract consumers back after the recession. Darden is one of the biggest companies in the casual dining industry, with a market value of $6.7 billion, but its core chains have experienced stagnant growth. Although Red Lobster served as the foundation for the Darden empire, it has become less important to the company over time. Members of the management team indicated that they expected same-restaurant sales for the chain to fall by 4 to 5 percent this year. Separating the low-growth brand would allow its new management team to focus on running the company for its significant cash flows while enabling the rest of the company to concentrate on the needs of its other brands, including different marketing and pricing strategies. This announcement about Red Lobster's future was interpreted by some casual news consumers as an indication that the Red Lobster chain would imminently go out of business, but a Darden spokesman quickly moved to quell such rumors. The Red Lobster restaurant chain dismissed reports that it would be closing its doors. Rich Jeffers, a spokesman for Darden Restaurants Inc., which owns the chain, stated that the rumor may have originated after the website LA Weekly published a story suggesting that the company faced an ""uncertain future."" A torrent of tweets and other online media followed with reports that the chain was closing. ""We are not closing any restaurants,"" Jeffers said. The confusion may also be linked to Darden's announcement that it plans to sell or spin off the Red Lobster chain into a separate company. Several months later, in May 2014, Darden Restaurants announced that they had agreed to sell the Red Lobster chain to Golden Gate Capital for $2.1 billion. Darden Restaurants announced that private equity firm Golden Gate Capital had agreed to buy the seafood chain Red Lobster for $2.1 billion in cash. In December 2013, the restaurant group revealed plans to release its oldest but worst-performing segment into the wild. The initial plan was to create two independent companies, but after considering a number of structures—ranging from selling to a strategic partner to relinquishing the real estate assets while retaining the brand—Darden concluded that the Golden Gate deal would create the most value, as stated by the company. Nonetheless, as The Motley Fool warned back in December 2013, Darden's shedding of Red Lobster could still possibly signal a death knell for the chain. The Motley Fool noted that it's not so much that Red Lobster is a damaged brand, but rather that its results reflect trends seen across the casual dining sector. Releasing it back into the wild on its own may only lead to the restaurant chain's failure. It's clear that Red Lobster can't compete on its own yet, and until it can find a way to attract diners back to the restaurant, it would be unwise to cast it off. It's possible that economic circumstances may lead to the closure of some Red Lobster outlets in the coming years or even the eventual demise of the chain itself. However, those possibilities are currently only speculative and uncertain; there's no definitive reason to expect that the entire chain will be closing its doors anytime soon. Last updated: 16 May 2014 Kim, Susanna. ""Red Lobster Says It's Not Closing Its 705 Restaurants."" ABC News. 27 December 2013. McGrath, Maggie. ""Red Lobster and Olive Garden Drag Darden Lower."" Forbes. 20 September 2013. Sharf, Samantha. ""Red Lobster Caught by Golden Gate Capital for $2.1 Billion."" Forbes. 16 May 2014.",['asset'],NEI,"Nonetheless, as The Motley Fool warned back in December 2013, Darden's shedding of Red Lobster could still possibly sound a death knell for the chain:"
Says Scott Walker is proposing to add 485 employees in the category of supervisor and management to his Department of Administration.,[],"Wisconsin DemocratKathleen Vinehout, who is considering a run for governor in 2018, is sounding alarm bells about the state budget proposed by Republican Gov.Scott Walker-- who appears to be preparing to runfor a third term. In a Feb. 20, 2017interview, the state senator from Alma was asked by Wisconsin Public Radio talk show host Joy Cardin abouta columnshe had written about Walkers 2017-19 spending plan, which was released a couple of weeks earlier. The column highlighted what Vinehout -- who ran unsuccessfully for the Democratic nomination to run against Walker in the 2012 gubernatorial recall election -- described as little known details about the budget. Cardin wanted to know why there would be a large increase in the number of people working for the Department of Administration. Thats a department, whose secretary is appointed by Walker, that works closely with the governors office. Vinehout replied by saying 485 positions would be added to the department in the category of supervisor and management, although in many cases, they would be people transferred from other departments. It really kind of takes the whole heart of state government -- especially as money flows in and out of agencies, and puts it into the Department of Administration, she added. Leaving aside Vinehouts view of the impact of the move, lets check whether Walker is proposing to add 485 positions in the category of supervisor and management to his Department of Administration. The numbers The major functions of theDepartment of Administrationinclude helping the governor develop and implement the state budget and supporting other state agencies with centralized purchasing and financial management.The department alsocoordinates telecommunications, energy, and land use planning and community development, and it regulates racing, charitable gaming and Indian gaming. Walkers budget, which must be approved by the Legislature, would increase the departments positions in both years of the budget. The new total for the department would be 1,149 positions -- an increase of 485. And those positions are listed under the heading of supervision and management. But Bob Lang, director of the nonpartisan state Legislative Fiscal Bureau, gave us some context about the 485: The majority of positions are held by existing employees who work for other agencies; these are not new state government positions. The majority would continue to physically work in those agencies, such as the Department of Natural Resources, but would become employees of the Department of Administration. Despite the designation in the budget document as supervision and management, the vast majority would not be supervisors or managers -- rather they are involved in the supervision and management of human resource activities such as employee recruitment and assistance, training, and payroll and benefits. Walker saysthe primary aim is to assign various administrative functions to a single entity, allowing individual agencies to focus on their core business missions and avoid redundant efforts on services that can be offered most effectively from a central entity. But its also true that if the Legislature goes along with Walkers plan, those employees would be more directly under his control. Our rating In sounding alarms about Walkers budget, Vinehout says the governor is proposing to add 485 positions in the category of supervisor and management to his Department of Administration. Vinehout is correct on the number and, technically, they are in the category of supervisor and management. But while they are involved in the supervision and management of human resource activities, the vast majority are not actually in supervisory or management positions. For a statement that is accurate but needs clarification, our rating is Mostly True.","['Labor', 'State Budget', 'Wisconsin']",True,"Wisconsin DemocratKathleen Vinehout, who is considering a run for governor in 2018, is sounding alarm bells about the state budget proposed by Republican Gov.Scott Walker-- who appears to be preparing to runfor a third term.In a Feb. 20, 2017interview, the state senator from Alma was asked by Wisconsin Public Radio talk show host Joy Cardin abouta columnshe had written about Walkers 2017-19 spending plan, which was released a couple of weeks earlier.The major functions of theDepartment of Administrationinclude helping the governor develop and implement the state budget and supporting other state agencies with centralized purchasing and financial management.The department alsocoordinates telecommunications, energy, and land use planning and community development, and it regulates racing, charitable gaming and Indian gaming.Walkers budget, which must be approved by the Legislature, would increase the departments positions in both years of the budget. The new total for the department would be 1,149 positions -- an increase of 485. And those positions are listed under the heading of supervision and management.Walker saysthe primary aim is to assign various administrative functions to a single entity, allowing individual agencies to focus on their core business missions and avoid redundant efforts on services that can be offered most effectively from a central entity."
Why Are Coins Left on Gravestones in Cemeteries?,['Modern tradition holds that leaving coins on military graves denotes visits from living soldiers.'],"Humans have been leaving mementos on and within the final resting places of loved ones almost from the beginning of the species. Excavations of even the earliest graves uncover goods meant to serve the deceased in the next world, such as pottery, weapons, and beads. But what about coins being left on graves? The earliest known coins date to the late seventh century B.C., and as societies began embracing such monetary systems, the practice leaving of coins in the graves of citizens began as yet another way of equipping the dear departed for the afterlife. earliest Mythologies within certain cultures added specific purpose for coins being left with the dead. In Greek mythology, Charon, the ferryman of Hades, required payment for his services. A coin was therefore placed in the mouth of the dear departed to ensure he would ferry the deceased across the rivers Styx and Acheron and into the world of the dead rather than leave him to wander the shore for a hundred years. In England and the U.S., pennies were routinely placed on the closed eyes of the dead, yet the purpose for that practice was not clear  some say it was to keep the eyes of the corpse from flying open (even though the eyes, once shut by the person laying out the body, do not reopen). In these more recent days, coins and other small items are sometimes discovered on grave markers, be they plaques resting atop the sod or tombstones erected at the head of the burial plot. These small tokens are left by visitors for no greater purpose than to indicate that someone has visited that particular grave. It has long been a tradition among Jews, for example, to leave a small stone or pebble atop a headstone just to show that someone who cared had stopped by. Coins (especially pennies) are favored by others who wish to demonstrate that the deceased has not been forgotten and that instead his loved ones still visit him. Sometimes these small remembrances convey meaning specific to the person buried in that plot. For more than twenty years, every month someone has been leaving one Campbell's tomato soup can and a pocketful of change on the plain black granite tombstone that marks the grave of Andy Warhol. The soup can is easy to explain, given Warhol's iconic use of that commodity in his art, but the handful of change remains a bit of a mystery. In similar vein, visitors often leave pebbles, coins and maple leaf pins at the grave of Canadian Prime Minister Lester B. Pearson, the man who replaced Canada's Red Ensign with the Maple Leaf flag. soup can Regarding the 'tradition' of soldiers leaving on the headstones of fallen comrades varying denominations of coins to denote their relationship with the deceased, the earliest reference to this practice we've found so far dates only to June 2009, when it appeared as a web site post. A version now commonly circulated in e-mail appears to have been drawn from it, albeit some changes have slipped in, such as ""A buddy who served in the same outfit, or was with the deceased when he died, might leave a quarter"" becoming ""By leaving a quarter at the grave, you are telling the family that you were with the soldier when he was killed"": COINS LEFT ON TOMBSTONES While visiting some cemeteries you may notice that headstones marking certain graves have coins on them, left by previous visitors to the grave. These coins have distinct meanings when left on the headstones of those who gave their life while serving in America's military, and these meanings vary depending on the denomination of coin. A coin left on a headstone or at the grave site is meant as a message to the deceased soldier's family that someone else has visited the grave to pay respect. Leaving a penny at the grave means simply that you visited. A nickel indicates that you and the deceased trained at boot camp together, while a dime means you served with him in some capacity. By leaving a quarter at the grave, you are telling the family that you were with the soldier when he was killed. According to tradition, the money left at graves in national cemeteries and state veterans cemeteries is eventually collected, and the funds are put toward maintaining the cemetery or paying burial costs for indigent veterans. In the US, this practice became common during the Vietnam war, due to the political divide in the country over the war; leaving a coin was seen as a more practical way to communicate that you had visited the grave than contacting the soldier's family, which could devolve into an uncomfortable argument over politics relating to the war. Some Vietnam veterans would leave coins as a ""down payment"" to buy their fallen comrades a beer or play a hand of cards when they would finally be reunited. The tradition of leaving coins on the headstones of military men and women can be traced to as far back as the Roman Empire. [Collected via Facebook, October 2015] While ""Cleaning of the Stones"" at the National Cemetery in Holly. I noticed a quarter placed on one of the stones. Later I also noticed a nickel placed on another stone. I was so touched with this that I took pictures.I googled about the coins, and found this out. I am very proud to share this. A coin left on a headstone lets the deceased soldiers family know that somebody stopped by to pay their respect. Leaving a penny means you visited. A nickel means that you and the deceased soldier trained at boot camp together. If you served with the soldier, you leave a dime. A quarter is very significant because it means that you were there when that soldier died.  Despite the claim of this tradition dating back to the days of the Roman Empire, there's no reason to suppose that it does. A coin might be placed in the mouth of a fallen Roman soldier (to get him across the River Styx), but the deceased's comrades would more likely have been expending any further coinage on a funeral banquet in his honor rather than interring it with his remains. Given the lack of documentation attesting to the origins and consistency of this 'tradition,' it is perhaps best regarded not as an actual common practice but instead as someone's idealized legend of what should be. Roman Empire Yet military folk do sometimes leave very special remembrances at the graves of deceased servicemen: challenge coins. These tokens identify their bearers as members of particular units and are prized and cherished by those to whom they have been given; thus any challenge coins found at gravesites were almost certainly left there by comrades-in-arms of the deceased. challenge coins It needs be mentioned that not only coins, medallions, and stones have been found on military headstones. In July 2013, a wife of a deceased serviceman discovered another woman's name on her husband's marker in place of her own. Edna Fielden, widow of Air Force Master Sergeant Billy Fielden (buried at Fort Logan Cemetery in Denver 25 years earlier) was shocked to discover the headstone bore the inscription ""Dolores"" over the legend ""His Wife"" when she brought her grandchildren to visit the grave. Update: In early 2021, coins on graves was the subject of a number of online advertisements. One of the ads read: ""[Pics] Here's Why You Should Never, Ever Touch Coins Left On A Gravestone."" Another claimed: ""[Pics] If You See Coins Placed On A Gravestone, Here's What It Means."" Both ads led to lengthy slideshow articles. Buchan, Rebecca.  ""Toy Cars and Coins Taken from Toddler's Graveside.""
  Aberdeen Press and Journal.  6 October 2011  (p. 3). Caswell, Emily.  ""Ask Us: Pennies on Gravestones Reflect Greek Mythology.""
  The [Manchester] Union Leader.  13 July 2011  (p. D36). Hamill, Sean.  ""An Homage in Coins and Soup Cans.""
  The International Herald Tribune.  27 February 2007  (p. 9). Hogan, Jim.  ""Tokens of Remembrance.""
  Los Angeles Times.  27 May 2013  (p. A15). Lang, Sarah.  ""Coins Gone from Strong's Grave.""
  The Lebanon Reporter [Indiana].  11 May 2011. McArthur, Douglas.  ""A Historical Stroll Through Canada's Prime Ministerial Grave Sites.""
  The Globe and Mail.  7 October 2000  (p. T4). NBC News.  ""Military Widow Finds Another Woman's Name Engraved on Her Husband's Tombstone.""
  18 June 2013. San Jose Mercury News.  ""Fans Still Pay Tribute to Allison.""
  The Globe and Mail.  14 July 1994  (p. F2).",['funds'],True,"The earliest known coins date to the late seventh century B.C., and as societies began embracing such monetary systems, the practice leaving of coins in the graves of citizens began as yet another way of equipping the dear departed for the afterlife.Sometimes these small remembrances convey meaning specific to the person buried in that plot. For more than twenty years, every month someone has been leaving one Campbell's tomato soup can and a pocketful of change on the plain black granite tombstone that marks the grave of Andy Warhol. The soup can is easy to explain, given Warhol's iconic use of that commodity in his art, but the handful of change remains a bit of a mystery. In similar vein, visitors often leave pebbles, coins and maple leaf pins at the grave of Canadian Prime Minister Lester B. Pearson, the man who replaced Canada's Red Ensign with the Maple Leaf flag.Despite the claim of this tradition dating back to the days of the Roman Empire, there's no reason to suppose that it does. A coin might be placed in the mouth of a fallen Roman soldier (to get him across the River Styx), but the deceased's comrades would more likely have been expending any further coinage on a funeral banquet in his honor rather than interring it with his remains. Given the lack of documentation attesting to the origins and consistency of this 'tradition,' it is perhaps best regarded not as an actual common practice but instead as someone's idealized legend of what should be.Yet military folk do sometimes leave very special remembrances at the graves of deceased servicemen: challenge coins. These tokens identify their bearers as members of particular units and are prized and cherished by those to whom they have been given; thus any challenge coins found at gravesites were almost certainly left there by comrades-in-arms of the deceased."
Did Biden promise to abolish the 'stepped-up' basis for capital gains tax?,"['For once, a viral Facebook post critical of a politician accurately articulated their past pronouncements. ']","In early 2021, readers asked Snopes to examine the accuracy of a widely shared social media post that purported to describe U.S. President Joe Biden's intention to eliminate a piece of tax law that allows taxpayers to benefit from selling a home inherited from their parents. The post, which was critical of Biden and the supposed plan, first emerged during the 2020 presidential election campaign but regained prominence after Biden was inaugurated in January 2021. It typically read as follows: ""Did you know Biden wants to get rid of something called 'stepped-up basis'? How does this affect you? When your parents pass and leave you the family house, normally you would inherit that property at its current value. If you were to sell that house, you would only pay taxes on the gain from its current value and what it sells for. If Biden does away with 'stepped-up basis,' you will inherit the property for what your parents paid for it. If you decide to sell, you will pay taxes on the difference between the original purchase price and what it sells for today. Here is what this looks like: 

Current Policy
Inherited House at Current Value - $200,000
Sells for $205,000
Taxable income = $5,000
Taxes Due - 20% of $5,000 = $1,000
Profit to you = $204,000

Biden Policy
Inherited House at Original Purchase Price - $40,000
Sells for $205,000
Taxable income = $165,000
Taxes Due - 20% of $165,000 = $33,000
Profit to you = $172,000

If your parents had sold this property prior to passing, they would have paid no taxes because it was their primary residence. So much for helping the middle class get ahead. My educated guess would be that at least 95% of Americans don’t even know Biden has proposed this. We are talking tens of thousands of additional tax dollars for the average person after inheritance! Wow, Google 'Biden stepped-up basis' and educate yourself because this is significant! Please share! 

The viral post accurately stated that Biden proposed eliminating the 'stepped-up' basis for capital gains tax and correctly explained the potential practical consequences for an individual taxpayer who inherits a home. In fact, the tax burden for wealthier individuals would be even greater than the post indicated, as Biden has also proposed doubling the rate of long-term capital gains tax for those with income over $1 million. 

Here's how the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office describes the stepped-up basis for capital gains tax, which is the tax due on profits from the sale of an asset, such as shares or property: When people sell an asset for more than the price they paid for it, they realize a net capital gain. The net gain is typically calculated as the sale price minus the asset's adjusted basis—generally the original purchase price adjusted for improvements or depreciation. To calculate the gains on inherited assets, taxpayers generally use the asset's fair-market value at the time of the owner's death, often referred to as stepped-up basis, instead of the adjusted basis derived from the asset's value when the decedent initially acquired it. When the heir sells the asset, capital gains taxes are assessed only on the change in the asset's value relative to the stepped-up basis. As a result, any appreciation in value that occurred while the decedent owned the asset is not included in taxable income and therefore is not subject to capital gains tax. 

In 2015, then-President Barack Obama also proposed eliminating the stepped-up basis. Here's his administration's explanation of how it works: Suppose an individual leaves stock worth $50 million to an heir, who immediately sells it. When purchased, the stock was worth $10 million, so the capital gain is $40 million. However, the heir's basis in the stock is stepped up to the $50 million gain when inherited, so no income tax is due on the sale, nor ever due on the $40 million of gain. Each year, hundreds of billions in capital gains avoid tax as a result of the stepped-up basis. 

During the 2020 presidential election, Biden and his campaign repeatedly expressed their intention to eliminate the stepped-up basis. As first highlighted by Politifact, the Biden campaign presented the proposal as a partial way to pay for its proposed student loan reforms. In October 2019, ABC News reported that the plan makes official several policies the former vice president often discusses on the trail about student debt. Biden's policy includes his plan for reducing student loan debt obligations for students who enter the public service sector, allowing $10,000 of undergraduate or graduate debt relief per year for up to five years of service. Biden would also double the maximum amount of Pell grants available to students, including Dreamers, and would allow students making less than $25,000 a year to defer payments on their federal loans without accruing interest. Any student making more than $25,000 would pay 5% of their discretionary income toward their loans rather than the current 10% owed. The plan would be funded through the elimination of the stepped-up basis loophole, a type of break on inheritance taxes, and capping itemized deductions for wealthy Americans at 28%, according to the campaign. 

In June 2020, according to CNBC, Biden told potential donors: ""I'm going to get rid of the bulk of Trump's $2 trillion tax cut, and a lot of you may not like that, but I'm going to close loopholes like capital gains and stepped-up basis."" On the Biden-Harris campaign's website, a Spanish-language document outlining the campaign's plans for education reforms stated (translated): ""The Biden plan for post-secondary education is a $750 billion investment over 10 years, aimed at developing a stronger and more inclusive middle class. It will be paid for by ensuring the super-rich pay their fair share. Specifically, this plan will be funded by eliminating the gap in our tax law known as the 'Stepped-up Basis Loophole' as well as reducing the itemized deductions that the richest Americans can make to 28%."" 

Elsewhere, the Biden campaign proposed not only eliminating the stepped-up basis but also doubling the tax rate for long-term capital gains—that is, profits from the sale of an asset owned for more than one year—for relatively wealthy taxpayers. Here's what the Biden-Harris campaign website stated, as part of the campaign's healthcare plan: ""As President, Biden will make healthcare a right by eliminating capital gains tax loopholes for the super wealthy. Today, the very wealthy pay a tax rate of just 20% on long-term capital gains... As President, Biden will roll back the Trump rate cut for the very wealthy and restore the 39.6% top rate he helped restore when he negotiated an end to the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy in 2012. Biden's capital gains reform will close the loopholes that allow the super wealthy to avoid taxes on capital gains altogether. Biden will ensure that those making over $1 million will pay the top rate on capital gains, doubling the capital gains tax rate on the super wealthy."" 

The Facebook post shared widely in late 2020 and early 2021 accurately described Biden's stated intention to eliminate the stepped-up basis for capital gains tax, a move that would indeed increase the tax burden on an individual who inherits a piece of property from their parents before selling it. The tax burden for wealthier taxpayers would be even greater than the Facebook post outlined, since Biden has also proposed increasing the rate of long-term capital gains tax for those with an income above $1 million. The Facebook post did not mention that Biden had stipulated he would use the money raised from eliminating the stepped-up basis to help pay for his healthcare and education plans. Snopes contacted the White House to ask whether the Biden administration still intended to push for the elimination of the stepped-up basis, but we did not receive a response in time for publication.",['loan'],True,"The post  which was critical of Biden and the supposed plan  first emerged during the 2020 presidential election campaign, but regained prominence after Biden was inaugurated in January 2021. It typically read as follows:Here's how the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office describes the stepped-up basis for capital gains tax, which is the tax due on profits from the sale of an asset, such as shares, a piece of property, and so on:In 2015, then-President Barack Obama also proposed eliminating the stepped-up basis. Here's his administration's explanation of how it works:During the 2020 presidential election, Biden and his campaign repeatedly expressed his intention to get rid of the stepped-up basis. As first highlighted by Politifact, the Biden campaign presented the proposal as a partial way to pay for its proposed student loan reforms. In October 2019, ABC News reported that:In June 2020, according to CNBC, Biden told would-be donors: ""Im going to get rid of the bulk of Trumps $2 trillion tax cut, and a lot of you may not like that but Im going to close loopholes like capital gains and stepped-up basis.On the Biden-Harris campaign's website, a Spanish-language document outlining the campaign's plans for education reforms stated (translated):Elsewhere, the Biden campaign proposed not only getting rid of the stepped-up basis, but also doubling the tax rate for long-term capital gains  that is, profits from the sale of an asset that you owned for more than one year  for relatively wealthy taxpayers. Here's what the Biden-Harris campaign website stated, as part of the campaign's healthcare plan:"
Are Pins Placed in the Collars of Chinese Officers to Correct Posture?,"[""It's definitely difficult to slouch when a needle is poking you in the neck. ""]","On Aug. 26, 2019, the Twitter account Discover and Know (@myth_vs_facts) posted a photograph that supposedly showed ""how Chinese soldiers keep their posture"" by placing a pin or needle in their uniform collars with the point facing toward the neck skin. This is a genuine photograph. It was taken in Beijing in February 2012 and shows a Chinese paramilitary policeman preparing for the National People's Congress. The picture is available via Getty Images with the following caption: A pin, used for training purposes, is placed on the collar of a Chinese paramilitary policeman undergoing a drill to prepare for the upcoming National People's Congress (NPC) in Beijing on February 28, 2012. China's parliament, the National People's Congress, is set to open its annual session on March 5. CHINA OUT AFP PHOTO (Photo credit should read STR/AFP/Getty Images). While this is a genuine photograph of a pin being used to correct posture, this is not a training method that all soldiers have to endure. A 2009 article from The New York Times indicated that this is a corrective measure for soldiers whose postures aren't up to standards: The New York Times The Olympics that dazzled spectators last year showed China's knack for meticulous preparation. Participants in the Thursday parade have engaged in similarly intense drills for months, according to reports in the Chinese news media. Soldiers have practiced endless hours to hold their rifles at precisely the same level. Photos show their instructors holding threads as rifle guides or sticking needles in soldiers' shirt collars, pointed at their necks, to correct poor posture. They have trained to stand motionless for a solid hour, to refrain from swaying during the second hour, and not to collapse after three hours, reported Xinhua, the state-run news agency. We found one other photograph from Getty Images showing a Chinese officer with a pin being placed in his collar in an attempt to correct posture. The following picture is available with the caption: ""An officer sticks a needle in the collar of a paramilitary policeman to correct his posture during a training session in Hefei, Anhui province, September 13, 2009. VCP (Photo by Jie Zhao/Corbis via Getty Images)."" LaFraniere, Sharon. ""No Detail Is Overlooked as China Prepares to Celebrate."" The New York Times. 28 September 2009.",['credit'],True,"This is how Chinese soldiers keep their posture. pic.twitter.com/WU8Y9DDLf5 Discover and Know (@myth_vs_facts) August 26, 2019While this is a genuine photograph of a pin being used to correct posture, this is not a training method that all soldiers have to endure. A 2009 article from The New York Times indicated that this is a corrective measure for soldiers whose postures aren't up to standards (emphasis ours):We found one other photograph from Getty Images showing a Chinese officer with a pin being placed in his collar in an attempt to correct posture. The following picture is available with the caption: ""An officer sticks a needle in the collar of a paramilitary policeman to correct his posture during a training session in Hefei, Anhui province September 13, 2009.VCP (Photo by Jie Zhao/Corbis via Getty Images)."""
"If youre a low-wage worker and youre single and dont have children, were literally taxing you into poverty.","['The federal Bureau of Labor Statistics says there are about 1.1 million workers with wages at or below the federal minimum wage, making up 1.5 percent of all hourly paid workers., Moore, in her statement, did not define the terms she was using, but experts we talked to were able to create plausible scenarios and found that -- in at least limited scenarios -- she is on target']","After months and months of the ongoing debate over the various plans and proposals being considered in Washington D.C., its rare to see a new argument emerge. But in an Oct. 30, 2021 appearance on MSNBC, U.S. Rep. Gwen Moore, D-Milwaukee, offered this case for supporting President Joe Bidens Build Back Better plan. The framework is much more than a social safety net program, Moore said onVelshi, an MSNBC programhosted by author and finance correspondent Ali Velshi. I think these programs contribute as much to our growing economy as anything. What good is growth if were taxing our workers into poverty? Moore went on to say: If youre a low-wage worker and youre single and dont have children, were literally taxing you into poverty. Is Moore right? When asked to provide backup for the statement, Moores office directed PolitiFact Wisconsin to a July 2020 report from the liberalCenter on Budget and Policy Priorities. Thereport focused on a provision in the planthat would temporarily extend the Earned Income Tax Credit to about 17 million low-wage workers. The report said, in part: The federal tax code currently taxes about 5.8 million low-wage workers aged 19-65 into or deeper into poverty, because the payroll and (in some cases) federal income taxes they pay exceed any EITC they receive. Thats generally on point, but does not cover the single and no children aspect of Moores claim. So, we reached out to other experts on the topic. Lets start with the terms involved and some basic data. The Bureau of Labor Statistics, part of the U.S. Department of Labor, does not use the phrase low-wage worker. However, the agency does publish an annual report and data on workers with hourly earnings at or below theprevailing Federal minimum wage. According to the February 2021BLS Report: In 2020, 73.3 million workers age 16 and older were paid on an hourly basis, or about 55.5 percent of all workers. About 1.1 million of those, or 1.5 percent, were paid at or below the federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour. Whats more, according to the report, among workers paid an hourly wage, those who were single were more likely than married workers to earn the federal minimum wage or less. And about 60 percent of those in the hourly-wage category worked in the hospitality industry, meaning bars, restaurants and food services. Low wages are common in these fields, in part because workers typically supplement their pay with tips. When asked about Moores claim,Christopher Wimer, senior research scientist at Columbia Universitys Center on Poverty & Social Policy, told us he would need more precise definitions for low-wage, worker and even single without children. Since Moores statement did not address those details, Wimer, who conducts research on the measurement of poverty and disadvantage as well as historical trends in poverty, constructed his own measurement. He chose 2017 to 2019, because 2020 was an unusual year with COVID-19 job losses, stimulus payments and more. He defined low-wage as being in the bottom quartile -- that is the bottom 25% -- of annual income from wage and salary income (among those with at least some wage and salary income, so a worker). Then he selected adults who lived with no other family members (including any children, so single with no children). The bottomline: For those folks, their poverty rates are indeed higher after you use after-tax income. That is, about 49 percent fall under the poverty rate after taxes, but if you take out federal, state and payroll taxes, the figure would be more like 41 percent. Elaine Maag, a principal research associate in the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center at the Urban Institute, said Moore's comment is not only plausible, but in limited contexts -- true. Maag pointed out that in 2020, the official poverty threshold for a single person under age 65 with no children in the home was $13,465. (For a married couple younger than 65 with no children, the threshold was $17,331.) If I select a household with income just above that threshold, you can see that after tax, their income will be below $13,465, Maag said. Moore said If youre a low-wage worker and youre single and dont have children, were literally taxing you into poverty. Moore, in her statement, did not define the terms she was using, but experts we talked to were able to create plausible scenarios and found that -- in at least limited scenarios -- she is on target. For a statement that is accurate but needs clarification or additional information, our rating is Mostly True.","['Economy', 'Poverty', 'Workers', 'Taxes', 'Wisconsin']",True,"The framework is much more than a social safety net program, Moore said onVelshi, an MSNBC programhosted by author and finance correspondent Ali Velshi. I think these programs contribute as much to our growing economy as anything. What good is growth if were taxing our workers into poverty?When asked to provide backup for the statement, Moores office directed PolitiFact Wisconsin to a July 2020 report from the liberalCenter on Budget and Policy Priorities.Thereport focused on a provision in the planthat would temporarily extend the Earned Income Tax Credit to about 17 million low-wage workers. The report said, in part:The Bureau of Labor Statistics, part of the U.S. Department of Labor, does not use the phrase low-wage worker. However, the agency does publish an annual report and data on workers with hourly earnings at or below theprevailing Federal minimum wage.According to the February 2021BLS Report:When asked about Moores claim,Christopher Wimer, senior research scientist at Columbia Universitys Center on Poverty & Social Policy, told us he would need more precise definitions for low-wage, worker and even single without children.Elaine Maag, a principal research associate in the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center at the Urban Institute, said Moore's comment is not only plausible, but in limited contexts -- true."
Did Donald Trump 'Save' the NYC Vets Day Parade in 1995?,"['Trump reportedly donated $200,000 and helped raise another $500,000 for the ""Nation\'s Parade.""']","A story from 1995 resurfaced around Veterans Day 2019, reporting that then-private citizen and real estate mogul Donald Trump had ""saved"" the Veterans Day parade that year in New York City when organizers ran out of money. On Nov. 6, 2019, for example, the Daily Caller News Foundation website published a story bearing the headline, ""The 1995 NYC Veterans Day Parade Had $1.21 In The Bank. Then Donald Trump Stepped In."" A meme circulating on Facebook similarly described Trump's intervention:This claim apparently originated with Trump himself, or at least it was touted on his campaign website in the lead-up to the 2016 presidential election. The website at the time stated: headline  campaign website Mr. Trump has long been a devoted supporter of veteran causes. In 1995, the fiftieth anniversary of World War II, only 100 spectators watched New York Citys Veteran Day Parade. It was an insult to all veterans. Approached by Mayor Rudy Giuliani and the chief of New York Citys FBI office, Mr. Trump agreed to lead as Grand Marshall a second parade later that year. Mr. Trump made a $1 million matching donation to finance the Nations Day Parade. On Saturday, November 11th, over 1.4 million watched as Mr. Trump marched down Fifth Avenue with more than 25,000 veterans, some dressed in their vintage uniforms. A month later, Mr. Trump was honored in the Pentagon during a lunch with the Secretary of Defense and the entire Joint Chiefs of Staff. First off, Trump's website contained some confusing pieces of misinformation: The Veterans Day parade in New York City went by the name the ""Nation's Parade."" The poorly attended parade ""with only 100 spectators"" occurred in 1994, not 1995 (The New York Times reported police did not give a crowd estimate). Only one Veteran's Day parade took place in the city in 1995  the Nation's Parade on Nov. 11. That event was slated by the U.S. Defense Department as representing ""the official close of the 50th anniversary of World War II."" reported We contacted the United War Veterans of New York (UWNY), which organized the Nation's Parade in 1995, to ask about claims that Trump's intervention saved the event from cancellation, and we were referred by spokesman Pat Smith to a Nov. 10, 1995, New York Times article about the event. Smith told us that Trump did make a financial contribution toward the parade, but also said UWNY is a small, volunteer-staffed group that doesn't keep records that could answer questions in detail about an event that occurred more than two decades ago. article  The 1995 Times article reported that Trump did make a financial contribution, but that he tried to make it in exchange for being named the parade's grand marshal even though he is not a veteran. The Times reported Trump gave $200,000, not $1 million: By mid-August, organizers had a bank account of exactly $1.21. A request to airlines to donate blankets for aging veterans was turned down because logos might not be visible on television. Then Donald Trump, a nonveteran, agreed to throw in $200,000 as well as raise money from his friends, in exchange for being named grand marshal. Since then, money has come in, though not enough to meet the original budget, which was reduced from $2.9 million to $2.4 million. Fireworks were just one of many cuts. In May 2016, CNN spoke to Vincent McGowan, the president emeritus of UWNY who organized the parade in 1995. McGowan said that Trump's contribution was ""somewhere between $325,000 and $375,000,"" but McGowan also said Trump's donation did save the event. McGowan also said Trump was never the grand marshal because that honor was only given to military veterans. CNN In a follow-up story, the Times in 1995 reported that organizers had agreed to make Trump the parade's grand marshal, a move that had angered some veterans, while others expressed appreciation for his ""crucial"" financial assistance: reported Also in the reviewing stand was the developer Donald Trump, who provided the only note of controversy in an otherwise positive day. Many veterans were angry that organizers had agreed to name Mr. Trump, who is not a veteran, as grand marshal in exchange for his contribution of $200,000 and help in raising additional funds. Another story, dated Nov. 11, 1995, from the news service UPI, reported that Trump contributed $200,000 and raised another $300,000 for the parade, which was viewed by parade Director Tom Fox as having been key: UPI Police estimated 500,000 people attended the largest military parade ever held in New York. Organizers, who placed the turnout at closer to a million, said the parade would not have been a success if it hadn't been for real estate developer Donald Trump, who contributed $200,000 and raised another $300,000. ""Donald Trump saved the parade,"" said parade director Tom Fox, himself a Vietnam veteran. ""We had asked for donations from 200 corporations, and none of them came through,"" he said. ""This donation is the single most important thing I've ever done,"" said a beaming Trump. ""This is more important than all of my buildings and my casinos. This is my way of saying thank you to all the men and women in the armed services who have made it possible for me to become a success. Without them freedom and liberty would be gone."" In sum, we are rating this claim ""True"" because two individuals involved with the planning of the 1995 parade stated on two separate occasions that Trump's efforts and donation did indeed enable the event to take place. Still unclear are the origins of other sources of funding. Martin, Douglas.""Veterans Day Parade Tries for a Comeback.""
The New York Times.10 November 1995. Fitzpatrick, David and Curt Devine.""Trump Will Give $1 Million to Marine Charity, but There Are Other Discrepancies.""
CNN.25 May 2016. McFadden, Robert D. ""On Parade To the Beat of History.""
The New York Times.12 November 1995. UPI.""More Than 500,000 Watch Nation's Parade.""
11 November 1995.",['budget'],True,"On Nov. 6, 2019, for example, the Daily Caller News Foundation website published a story bearing the headline, ""The 1995 NYC Veterans Day Parade Had $1.21 In The Bank. Then Donald Trump Stepped In."" A meme circulating on Facebook similarly described Trump's intervention:This claim apparently originated with Trump himself, or at least it was touted on his campaign website in the lead-up to the 2016 presidential election. The website at the time stated:First off, Trump's website contained some confusing pieces of misinformation: The Veterans Day parade in New York City went by the name the ""Nation's Parade."" The poorly attended parade ""with only 100 spectators"" occurred in 1994, not 1995 (The New York Times reported police did not give a crowd estimate). Only one Veteran's Day parade took place in the city in 1995  the Nation's Parade on Nov. 11. That event was slated by the U.S. Defense Department as representing ""the official close of the 50th anniversary of World War II.""We contacted the United War Veterans of New York (UWNY), which organized the Nation's Parade in 1995, to ask about claims that Trump's intervention saved the event from cancellation, and we were referred by spokesman Pat Smith to a Nov. 10, 1995, New York Times article about the event. Smith told us that Trump did make a financial contribution toward the parade, but also said UWNY is a small, volunteer-staffed group that doesn't keep records that could answer questions in detail about an event that occurred more than two decades ago.In May 2016, CNN spoke to Vincent McGowan, the president emeritus of UWNY who organized the parade in 1995. McGowan said that Trump's contribution was ""somewhere between $325,000 and $375,000,"" but McGowan also said Trump's donation did save the event. McGowan also said Trump was never the grand marshal because that honor was only given to military veterans.In a follow-up story, the Times in 1995 reported that organizers had agreed to make Trump the parade's grand marshal, a move that had angered some veterans, while others expressed appreciation for his ""crucial"" financial assistance:Another story, dated Nov. 11, 1995, from the news service UPI, reported that Trump contributed $200,000 and raised another $300,000 for the parade, which was viewed by parade Director Tom Fox as having been key:"
An image of empty grocery store shelves shows the effect of President Joe Biden's Build Back Better plan.,"['Conservative commentator Kimberly Klacik posted a photograph of empty shelves at a grocery store, with a hashtag suggesting they were due to President Joe Bidens economic policies., The photograph was from a U.K. store in March 2020, during the earliest weeks of the pandemic.', 'Klacik deleted the posts.']","UPDATE, Oct. 14, 3:30 p.m.:This fact-check has been updated to include additional comment from Kimberly Klacik. The rating is not changed. Conservative commentator Kimberly Klacik posted a photograph of empty supermarket shelves, with a hashtag falsely suggesting they were depleted by President Joe Bidens policies. A look at #BuildBackBetter, Klacik wrote above the photograph in the Oct. 13 post shared on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram. The hashtag was an apparent reference toBuild Back Better,Bidens COVID-19 relief, economic and infrastructure plan. Supply chain disruptions have affected grocery stores throughout the pandemic and continue to hit some U.S. markets especially hard, theWall Street Journal reported in August. But the photograph that Klacik shared is not from a U.S. store, nor was it taken during the Biden administration. Kimberly Klacik's Oct. 13 tweet, since deleted, was missing context. The giveaway was the prices shown on the shelves. Theyrelistedin British pounds, not U.S. dollars. The original photograph appeared with aneditorial published by the Guardianon March 27, 2020, about supply-chain disruptions during the earliest wave of the pandemic. Empty shelves at a Tesco store in Worcester, the Guardians photo caption says. Klacik is a Republican who lost her 2020 campaign for a U.S. House seat representing most of Baltimore. She deleted the posts soon after posting them. Asked about the posts, she told PolitiFact: Build Back Better is used in the U.K. She didnt say whether her posts were meant to refer to U.K. stores or economic policies. British Prime Minister Boris Johnson has used the same slogan and hashtag to describehis Conservative governments pandemic recovery plan. The Independentreportedthat Biden formally launched his plan first, but Johnson had been using the phrase throughout 2020. But the March 2020 photo long predated either leaders economic recovery plans. After this fact-check was published, Klasic claimed that she deleted the posts to prevent confusion. Even after Klacik deleted her tweet, screenshots of it remained online. PolitiFact was able to view the Facebook and Instagram posts via CrowdTangle, a social media insights tool. They were flagged as part of Facebooks efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about ourpartnership with Facebook.) We rate the posts False.","['Corrections and Updates', 'Economy', 'Food', 'Pundits', 'Facebook Fact-checks', 'PunditFact', 'Coronavirus', 'Ask PolitiFact']",False,"A look at #BuildBackBetter, Klacik wrote above the photograph in the Oct. 13 post shared on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram. The hashtag was an apparent reference toBuild Back Better,Bidens COVID-19 relief, economic and infrastructure plan.Supply chain disruptions have affected grocery stores throughout the pandemic and continue to hit some U.S. markets especially hard, theWall Street Journal reported in August.The giveaway was the prices shown on the shelves. Theyrelistedin British pounds, not U.S. dollars. The original photograph appeared with aneditorial published by the Guardianon March 27, 2020, about supply-chain disruptions during the earliest wave of the pandemic. Empty shelves at a Tesco store in Worcester, the Guardians photo caption says.British Prime Minister Boris Johnson has used the same slogan and hashtag to describehis Conservative governments pandemic recovery plan. The Independentreportedthat Biden formally launched his plan first, but Johnson had been using the phrase throughout 2020.Even after Klacik deleted her tweet, screenshots of it remained online. PolitiFact was able to view the Facebook and Instagram posts via CrowdTangle, a social media insights tool. They were flagged as part of Facebooks efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about ourpartnership with Facebook.)"
The riches possessed by the Rothschild family.,"[""The Rothschild family is rich, but claims that they have a net worth of $500 trillion and own 80% of the world's wealth are grossly exaggerated.""]","Images reflecting an old rumor about the Rothschild Family's unimaginable accumulated global wealth hold that the Rothschilds are worth $500 trillion and hold more than 80% of the world's total wealth:   While the Rothschilds are indeed very wealthy, claims about their net worth such as the ones displayed above are grossly exaggerated. Conspiracy theories concerning the Rothschild family date back to the 18th century, and the family's wealth was largely responsible for the anti-semitic belief that ""Jews control the world's money supply."" The Rothschilds are frequently associated with theories about the Illuminati, the New World Order, and other dark money groups that supposedly pull the strings of world governments, and the Rothschilds have been blamed for everything from starting wars for personal gain to funding the Holocaust to assassinating U.S. presidents. Skeptoid delved into the Rothschild family history in 2012, noting that: history The greatest of these financial adepts was Mayer Amschel Rothschild, born in 1744 in a Jewish slum of Frankfurt. Not much is known about his early life, as his was one of tens of thousands of marginalized, outcast families. But once he came of age he became an apprentice at a small bank in Hamburg, where he learned the trade. Returning to Frankfurt at the age of 19, he offered his own banking services in a modest way, beginning with trading of rare coins and related investments. He was energetic, clever, and most of all he was charismatic. And he was smart, seeking out wealthy clientele, and associating with nobility whenever he could. By the age of 40, he had consolidated his most important business contact: the Landgrave William, the Elector of Hesse, one of only a tiny number of nobles empowered to elect the Holy Roman Emperor. When William was younger, he had engaged in the trading of rare coins with Mayer's father, and so the two had always known one another. When William inherited his own father's massive fortune, his friendship with Mayer Rothschild gave Mayer the ability to begin conducting larger international transactions. This was the point at which the Rothschild name became first involved with the manipulation of money behind the scenes of wars. Mayer was a firm believer in family business, and insisted on using his own sons  by then he had five  as his business partners. What he did next became the model for many powerful Jewish financiers who followed: He installed each of his five sons as his agents in the five major financial centers of Europe: the eldest Amschel Mayer Rothschild in Frankfurt, Salomon Mayer Rothschild in Vienna, Nathan Mayer Rothschild in London, Calmann Mayer Rothschild in Naples, and the youngest Jakob Mayer Rothschild in Paris. Although the Rothschild family has amassed great wealth since the 1700s, claims that they have a net worth of $500 trillion or that they own 80% of the world's wealth are problematic. For one, the world's total wealth was estimated as of 2015 to be only $250 trillion, half of what the Rothchilds alone are claimed to possess: wealth Global wealth reached 250 trillion US dollars in 2015, slightly less than a year earlier, due to adverse exchange rate movements. The underlying wealth trends do, however, generally remain positive, according to the Credit Suisse Research Institute's annual ""Global Wealth Report."" Also, the Rothschilds began acquiring their wealth in the 1700s, and since then the family has spawned hundreds of descendants, so there is no longer any centralized Rothschild family wealth.  The closest thing to a ""Rothschild Family"" business in 2016 is the Rothschild Group, a multinational investment banking company, but that firm does not in itself generate nearly enough income to back up claims about the family's wealth. In 2015, the Rothschild Group's annual revenue was approximately $500 million. In comparison, the world's largest company, Walmart, has an annual revenue of nearly $500 billion. annual Walmart It should also be noted that only one member of the Rothschild family is included among Forbes' 2015 list of the world's billionaires: Benjamin de Rothschild, who was ranked at number #1121 with a net worth of $1.61 billion.  list While the Rothschild family certainly was one of the world's most significant financial powers in centuries past, they no longer wield the same sort of influence over global affairs. Dunning, B.  ""The Rothschild Conspiracy."" 
  Skeptoid Media.  22 May 2012.  Kersley, Richard.  ""Global Wealth in 2015: Underlying Trends Remain Positive.""
  Credit Suisse.  13 October 2013.",['investment'],False,"Skeptoid delved into the Rothschild family history in 2012, noting that:For one, the world's total wealth was estimated as of 2015 to be only $250 trillion, half of what the Rothchilds alone are claimed to possess:Also, the Rothschilds began acquiring their wealth in the 1700s, and since then the family has spawned hundreds of descendants, so there is no longer any centralized Rothschild family wealth.  The closest thing to a ""Rothschild Family"" business in 2016 is the Rothschild Group, a multinational investment banking company, but that firm does not in itself generate nearly enough income to back up claims about the family's wealth. In 2015, the Rothschild Group's annual revenue was approximately $500 million. In comparison, the world's largest company, Walmart, has an annual revenue of nearly $500 billion.It should also be noted that only one member of the Rothschild family is included among Forbes' 2015 list of the world's billionaires: Benjamin de Rothschild, who was ranked at number #1121 with a net worth of $1.61 billion. "
Says the United States has the highest corporate tax rate in the world.,[],"Republican U.S. Senate hopeful Joe Kyrillos said increased revenues are needed to deal with the national debt, but the path to that goal isnt paved with tax hikes.Rather, Kyrillos said, he wants to lower taxes to stimulate growth.Well, we're going to have to raise revenue and I want to do it through growth. I want to lower tax rates. I want to make sure that America doesn't have the highest corporate tax rate in the world, which is what we have now, and lower the rates for everybody, Kyrillos said during a debate tonight with his Democratic rival, U.S. Sen. Robert Menendez, that aired on NJTV.Are corporations in the United States subject to the highest tax rate in the world?The statutory rate for businesses is the highest among industrialized nations. But for the rate businesses actually pay -- whats called the effective tax rate -- the United States ranks among the highest, but not at the very top, according to studies.We checked a nearly identical claim that Kyrillos made during an Aug. 20 interview on WOR-AM. Then he said, we've got the highest corporate tax rate in the world. We rated that statement Mostly True.At that time, a spokeswoman for Kyrillos cited the nations top statutory corporate tax rate of 39.2 percent. That rate is a combination of federal, state and local tax rates before any tax breaks are factored in.Japan used to have a higher statutory rate than the United States. But in April, Japan reduced its rate and the U.S. took first place among industrialized nations, according to the Tax Foundation, a business-backed group.So on that point, Kyrillos is right.Since businesses receive a number of tax breaks, the effective tax rate for corporations in the U.S. isnt the worlds highest, but its still up there.More than a dozen of the most recent studies on effective corporate tax rates across the world found businesses in the U.S. paid an effective rate between 23 percent and 34.9 percent, according to a September 2011 report from the Tax Foundation.The effective rate varied between the studies the Tax Foundation looked at because of different methodologies.In those studies, the U.S. never ranked first in the world. But in 10 of the studies, the nations effective corporate tax rate ranked among the top five highest.Its worth noting that an analysis by the left-leaning Citizens for Tax Justice along with the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, found that 30 Fortune 500 companies, including General Electric, didnt pay any federal corporate income taxes over the 2008-2010 period.As for what is the better measure -- statutory rates or effective rates -- we found mixed views.Scott Hodge, the president of the Tax Foundation, told PolitiFact New Jersey in August that because statutory rates are fixed they make for better comparisons, whereas effective rates are unpredictable and vary across different industries.But Joseph Rosenberg, a research associate at the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, said effective tax rates provide the best measure of comparison for overall tax burdens.Then Aparna Mathur, an economist with the conservative American Enterprise Institute, said in an e-mail that both are equally valid measures of looking at the burden of the corporate income tax.Our rulingKyrillos repeated a claim he made before that the United States has the highest corporate tax rate in the world.Thats true for the nations statutory corporate tax rate among industrialized nations. When Japan lowered its statutory rate, the United States moved into first place.Even when accounting for various tax breaks, the effective rate is still among the highest.On the Truth-O-Meter, we rate this statement Mostly True.To comment on this ruling, go toNJ.com.","['New Jersey', 'Corporations', 'Taxes']",True,"Republican U.S. Senate hopeful Joe Kyrillos said increased revenues are needed to deal with the national debt, but the path to that goal isnt paved with tax hikes.Rather, Kyrillos said, he wants to lower taxes to stimulate growth.Well, we're going to have to raise revenue and I want to do it through growth. I want to lower tax rates. I want to make sure that America doesn't have the highest corporate tax rate in the world, which is what we have now, and lower the rates for everybody, Kyrillos said during a debate tonight with his Democratic rival, U.S. Sen. Robert Menendez, that aired on NJTV.Are corporations in the United States subject to the highest tax rate in the world?The statutory rate for businesses is the highest among industrialized nations. But for the rate businesses actually pay -- whats called the effective tax rate -- the United States ranks among the highest, but not at the very top, according to studies.We checked a nearly identical claim that Kyrillos made during an Aug. 20 interview on WOR-AM. Then he said, we've got the highest corporate tax rate in the world. We rated that statement Mostly True.At that time, a spokeswoman for Kyrillos cited the nations top statutory corporate tax rate of 39.2 percent. That rate is a combination of federal, state and local tax rates before any tax breaks are factored in.Japan used to have a higher statutory rate than the United States. But in April, Japan reduced its rate and the U.S. took first place among industrialized nations, according to the Tax Foundation, a business-backed group.So on that point, Kyrillos is right.Since businesses receive a number of tax breaks, the effective tax rate for corporations in the U.S. isnt the worlds highest, but its still up there.More than a dozen of the most recent studies on effective corporate tax rates across the world found businesses in the U.S. paid an effective rate between 23 percent and 34.9 percent, according to a September 2011 report from the Tax Foundation.The effective rate varied between the studies the Tax Foundation looked at because of different methodologies.In those studies, the U.S. never ranked first in the world. But in 10 of the studies, the nations effective corporate tax rate ranked among the top five highest.Its worth noting that an analysis by the left-leaning Citizens for Tax Justice along with the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, found that 30 Fortune 500 companies, including General Electric, didnt pay any federal corporate income taxes over the 2008-2010 period.As for what is the better measure -- statutory rates or effective rates -- we found mixed views.Scott Hodge, the president of the Tax Foundation, told PolitiFact New Jersey in August that because statutory rates are fixed they make for better comparisons, whereas effective rates are unpredictable and vary across different industries.But Joseph Rosenberg, a research associate at the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, said effective tax rates provide the best measure of comparison for overall tax burdens.Then Aparna Mathur, an economist with the conservative American Enterprise Institute, said in an e-mail that both are equally valid measures of looking at the burden of the corporate income tax.Our rulingKyrillos repeated a claim he made before that the United States has the highest corporate tax rate in the world.Thats true for the nations statutory corporate tax rate among industrialized nations. When Japan lowered its statutory rate, the United States moved into first place.Even when accounting for various tax breaks, the effective rate is still among the highest.On the Truth-O-Meter, we rate this statement Mostly True.To comment on this ruling, go toNJ.com."
Alabama Mom's Obamacare Horror Story,"[""Alabama mom's Obamacare horror story gives America a glimpse of government run healthcare.""]"," Claim:  Alabama mom's Obamacare horror story gives America a glimpse of government run healthcare. CORRECTLY ATTRIBUTED Example:  [Collected on the Internet, December 2013] My family's journey with securing our new insurance under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) started on October 1, 2013.   I have decided to write this letter to let the American people know what it has been like for us.   We are a family of four, with two little boys' ages seven years old and three years old.   My husband and I have had full time jobs for 6 years and 13 years respectively.  We have been with the same two companies for those years.  We are a middle class family; we own our three bedroom two bath house, we own two cars, and previously provided our own insurance for the four of us.  We have coverage through Individual Blue from Blue Cross Blue Shield of Alabama until 12/31/13. Our premiums have been $380.00 a month, which also included dental coverage for all four of us.  On October, 1, 2013 we received our letters like other Alabamians about our new premiums and plans for 2014 from Blue Cross Blue Shield (BCBS) of Alabama.  When I opened our letter to say I had sticker shock was an understatement.  Our premiums for the Blue Saver Silver would now be $753.26. This included the ACA tax but did not include the additional $75.00 we would need to pay in order to keep dental for me and my husband.  So we would need to pay total $828.26 to keep health and dental insurance for the four of us.  This payment is roughly $64.00 less than what we pay for our mortgage each month.  I was outraged that anyone thought we could afford this.  Sure we have some savings, but with that price tag we would whittle it down to almost nothing very quickly.  I consider savings as a rainy day fund, a start to saving for the kids college, our retirement, etc.  I never dreamed in a million years we would need to use it to pay our insurance premiums each month  how in the world could this help the economy too?  [Rest of article here.] here Origins:  The item referenced above, an open detailing one Alabama woman's extreme difficulty and frustration in obtaining ACA-compliant health insurance coverage for her family (including her 7-year-old son with ADHD) was posted under the name of Karri Kinder on 23 December 2013 as the sole entry in a blog and was republished (without additional comment) by the Independent Journal Review on 31 December 2013. blog republished Certainly her experience is not unique in kind, as many residents of Alabama covered by Blue Cross and Blue Shield (BCBS) of Alabama (an insurer who has an 88% share of the state's health insurance market) found out at the end of 2013 that they would be paying much higher premiums for ACA-compliant coverage through BCBS: Doug Hoffman, who works statewide to help people sign up for benefits through the Affordable Care Act, just received a Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Alabama notice in the mail to find health insurance rates for his family have doubled. And  he's mad  at Blue Cross. ""I just got my benefits renewal from Blue Cross for next year and they doubled my rate!"" he wrote AL.com in an email. ""I was paying $675 for a family premium (2 adults, one 22 yo dependent) with a $1,500 deducible. The new rate for a comparable plan is $1,360 with a $3,000 deductible. Basically they have doubled my costs."" ""It appears as though Blue Cross is taking advantage of the ACA by hiking rates big time,"" said Hoffman, who is based in Birmingham with Enroll Alabama. Others, who have received the notices from the state's dominant health insurer are mad as well  at Obamacare. ""Obama thinks that he is making insurance affordable,"" wrote one reader to the Mobile Press Register Sound Off feature. ""I just got a letter from my Blue Cross Blue Shield that if I want to keep their insurance it's going to cost me $300 more a month. I already pay $300 a month now and they're wanting right at $600 a month for this Affordable Care Act."" Blue Cross posted an explanation for the rate hikes to its Facebook page, maintaining that several reasons are behind the increased premiums: more taxes and fees, a requirement to rate family members individually, and the elimination of health underwriting and waiting periods for preexisting conditions: explanation The new law requires all health insurance companies in the individual and small group markets to use a consistent rating method called ""member level rating."" For the individual market, this means each person on an insurance policy will now be rated based on age, whether he or she uses tobacco, and the county in which the policy holder lives. In the past Blue Cross was able to offer one family premium, no matter the size.  For family plans, most family members will now be rated individually. Once each person has been rated, the amounts are added together to get a family's premium cost. For children age 20 and younger, the oldest three children will be individually rated and included in the family premium amount.   As a result, larger families may experience higher premiums. As Mike Oliver noted in an article for AL.com, the elimination of health underwriting may have a substantial effect on health insurance premiums in that state: article ""Alabama has allowed medical underwriting  you're going to be quoted a high premium if you have something wrong with you,"" said Michael Morrisey, director of the University of Alabama at Birmingham Lister Hill Center for Health Policy. ""The Affordable Care Act abolishes medical underwriting."" This means that those with expensive health problems will likely now jump in and buy coverage because it will be less expensive for them  or if they already have coverage  their rates will go down. But that also means rates will go up for everyone else as the insurer spreads that new cost around. ""The thing that happens when you eliminate underwriting is that you lump dissimilar people together,"" Morrisey said. ""When you combine groups, one group is better off and the other group is worse off""  in terms of premium prices. As a policy, the elimination of medical underwriting and preexisting condition clauses helps broaden access to health care coverage and that was the aim of its inclusion in the Affordable Care Act. Reformers say it eliminates insurers from ""cherry-picking"" and reduces uncompensated care. Karri Kinder subsequently posted followups to her original blog entry about her insurance issue, the update of 4 January 2014 stating that: Karri Kinder blog entry I do have some good news.  Because I decided to write my letter and speak out, people stepped up and helped us.  We were contacted on January 1, 2014 by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.  I was told by the woman I spoke with that she had read my letter and wanted to get her team involved and see what they could do to help us.  I recounted to her what was happening and that I had been advised to go ahead and sign me and my husband up for a plan on healthcare.gov.  We went with a lower cost plan because it was going to just be the two of us.  We had no idea what it was going to cost for the children once we got some answers.  So we went with BCBS Blue Value Saver plan.  The cost of the plan is $459.19.  We qualified for $255.00 in subsidies so the final cost of the plan to us is $204.19 each month.  I told the lady that I would cancel that plan if I needed to.  What we wanted was to have all of us on one plan like we always have been.  She said, ""If the kids qualify for All Kids then I am pretty sure they have to go that route or you will have to buy them a plan at the normal rate.""  So again we were told more than likely we will have to go through All Kids.  She took the rest of our information down and said she was getting her team to work on it and would either call us back or All Kids would contact us. Last updated:  4 January 2014    Oliver, Mike.   ""Blue Cross in Alabama: We Didn't 'Cancel' Health Policies.""   AL.com.  2 December 2013.    Walsh, Alex.   ""Obamacare, Big Blue, and You.""   AL.com.  31 December 2013.",['economy'],True,"[Rest of article here.]Origins:  The item referenced above, an open detailing one Alabama woman's extreme difficulty and frustration in obtaining ACA-compliant health insurance coverage for her family (including her 7-year-old son with ADHD) was posted under the name of Karri Kinder on 23 December 2013 as the sole entry in a blog and was republished (without additional comment) by the Independent Journal Review on 31 December 2013.Blue Cross posted an explanation for the rate hikes to its Facebook page, maintaining that several reasons are behind the increased premiums: more taxes and fees, a requirement to rate family members individually, and the elimination of health underwriting and waiting periods for preexisting conditions:As Mike Oliver noted in an article for AL.com, the elimination of health underwriting may have a substantial effect on health insurance premiums in that state:Karri Kinder subsequently posted followups to her original blog entry about her insurance issue, the update of 4 January 2014 stating that:"
Did a governmental shutdown in Australia lead to the dismissal of all Members of Parliament?,"[""It's difficult to boil down one of the most turbulent periods in Australia's political history into a meme. ""]","On the heels of the longest federal government shutdown in United States history, and on the potential precipice of another shutdown in February 2019, Facebook users started to share a meme about how the country of Australia handled their own government shutdown back in 1975:   The text of the meme stated: ""In 1975 Australia had a government shutdown. In the end, all the members of Parliament were fired and then elections were held to restart from scratch. They haven't had another shutdown since."" This meme is largely accurate. Australia's government was effectively shutdown due to a budget impasse in October 1975, the prime minister was dismissed, both houses of Parliament were dissolved, and a new election was held. Since then, Australia has not had another government shutdown. However, Australia's constitutional crisis in 1975, often referred to as ""The Dismissal,"" was a bit more complicated than portrayed in this meme. Furthermore, the meme is often offered up on social media as a solution to government shutdowns in the United States, but Australia's government doesn't function in the same manner as the U.S. government. Some of the key differences that enabled ""The Dismissal"" to occur in Australia is that the country is both a representative democracy and a constitutional monarchy, which means that despite Australia's having elected officials, the head of state in Australia is still the Queen of the United Kingdom and the other Commonwealth realms, as represented by the governor-general). While the Queen rarely exercises her power and is often viewed as a mere figurehead in Australia, the monarch (and in turn the governor-general) is afforded some powers in the country's constitution. During the constitutional crisis of 1975, Governor-General Sir John Kerr used his constitutional authority to dismiss Prime Minister Gough Whitlam. constitutional monarchy Australia's constitution also permits a ""double dissolution"" procedure to resolve deadlocks between the House and Senate: The Australian Constitution gives almost identical powers to the House of Representatives and the Senate. A bill (proposed law) must be agreed to by both houses in order to become law. The drafters of the Constitution saw the possibility of a deadlock occurring between the two houses, in which there may be disagreement over a bill. Section 57 of the Constitution provides a mechanism to resolve the disagreement, by dissolving both houses of Parliament and calling an election to let the voters decide what the outcome will be. The double dissolution mechanism only relates to a bill that originates in the House of Representatives. While the viral meme states that members of parliament were ""fired"" due to the government shutdown, that isn't exactly accurate. Both houses of parliament were dissolved, so all of the seats in the House and Senate went up for election again. The ""fired"" lawmakers therefore still had a chance to retain their seats by winning them back in a subsequent election. In 1975, Prime Minister Whitlam and the Australian Labor Party (ALP) held a majority in the House of Representatives, but the Opposition controlled the Senate. When the two parties failed to pass appropriations bills to fund the government, Governor-General Kerr dismissed the prime minister and commissioned Malcom Fraser of the Liberal Party as the caretaker prime minister. Fraser then passed an appropriations bill, and Kerr dissolved Parliament, setting up a double dissolution election to be held the following month. Here's a summary of what took place from the Australian Broadcast Corporation: Australian Broadcast Corporation The Dismissal of the Whitlam Government by the Governor-General, on November 11, 1975, still stands as the most dramatic and controversial event in Australias political history. The decision of the Governor-General, Sir John Kerr, to dismiss the Labor Prime Minister, Gough Whitlam, and install the Liberal Opposition Leader, Malcolm Fraser, as caretaker prime minister, on condition that he called an election, was a sensational development that ended a three-week parliamentary stand-off. The crisis began on October 15, when the Opposition parties announced they would block the governments Supply Bills in the Senate, as a means of forcing the government to an election. Whitlam refused to call an election and three weeks of parliamentary debate and public campaigning convulsed the political system. On November 11, Whitlam sought a half-Senate election from the Governor-General. Kerr rejected the advice and dismissed Whitlam. He commissioned Malcolm Fraser as caretaker prime minister. Fraser immediately secured the passage of Supply through the Senate and recommended a double dissolution of the parliament. The election was held on December 13, 1975. The Fraser-led Coalition won the largest victory in Australias federal history. The Parliament of Australia website provided some additional context to this historic event: context Several weeks later, and after intense negotiations and a third attempt to enact the appropriation bills, the new Governor-General took the extraordinary and unprecedented step of acting at his own initiative to invoke his power under sec. 62 of the Constitution: There shall be a Federal Executive Council [in practice, the Government] to advise the GovernorGeneral in the government of the Commonwealth, and the members of the Council shall be chosen and summoned by the GovernorGeneral and sworn as Executive Councillors, and shall hold office during his pleasure. (emphasis added) Governor-General Kerr dismissed the Whitlam Government, even though it still enjoyed majority support in the House of Representatives to which, by constitutional convention, it was responsible. To replace it, Kerr appointed a caretaker Liberal Government with Fraser as prime minister. In justifying his decision, the Governor-General argued that, in the Australian system, the confidence of both Houses on supply is necessary to ensure its provision: When ... an Upper House possesses the power to reject a money bill including an appropriation bill, and exercises the power by denying supply, the principle that a government which has been denied supply by the Parliament should resign or go to an election must still applyit is a necessary consequence of Parliamentary control of appropriation and expenditure and of the expectation that the ordinary and necessary services of Government will continue to be provided. (quoted in Odgers Australian Senate Practice 2001: 104) In this position the Governor-General was supported by the Chief Justice, who wrote that: the Senate has constitutional power to refuse to pass a money bill; it has power to refuse supply to the Government of the day... a Prime Minister who cannot ensure supply to the Crown, including funds for carrying on the ordinary services of Government, must either advise a general election (of a kind which the constitutional situation may then allow) or resign. (quoted in Odgers Australian Senate Practice 2001: 105) Not surprisingly, the two houses reacted very differently. The Senate acted almost instantaneously to pass the stalled appropriation bills. The House agreed to a motion expressing its lack of confidence in the newly-designated prime minister and requesting the Speaker to ask the Governor-General to have Whitlam again form a government. But before the Speaker was allowed to deliver this message, the Governor-General declared, at Frasers request and by pre-arrangement, a double dissolution of both houses. As Solomon put it: In the 1975 double dissolution, the Governor-General had to dismiss a Prime Minister (who controlled a majority in the House of Representatives) and appoint another (who lacked the confidence of that House) to find an advisor who was prepared to recommend to him the course he wished to adoptnamely the dissolution of both Houses of Parliament under section 57. (Solomon 1978: 169) While some Americans may look at Australia's constitutional crisis of 1975 as a ""solution"" to modern U.S. government shutdowns, ""The Dismissal"" remains one of the most controversial events in Australia's history:  Australia.gov.au.  ""How Government Works.""
  Retrieved 14 February 2019. AustralianPolitics.com.  ""Comparing the American and Australian Political Systems.""
  Retrieved 14 February 2019. Whitlamdismissal.com.  ""What Happened.""
  Retrieved 14 February 2019. Barnett, Bronwyn.  ""The Dismissal: Through the News Camera Lens.""
  National Film and Sound Archive of Australia.  Retrieved 14 February 2019. Fisher, Max.  ""The Crisis of 1974-75.""
  Parliament of Australia.  Retrieved 14 February 2019. ABC.Net.Au.  ""The Dismissal, Australia's Constitutional Crisis.""
  Retrieved 14 February 2019. Fisher, Max.  ""Australia Had a Government Shutdown Once. In the End, the Queen Fired Everyone in Parliament.""
  The Washington Post.  1 October 2013.",['budget'],True,"Some of the key differences that enabled ""The Dismissal"" to occur in Australia is that the country is both a representative democracy and a constitutional monarchy, which means that despite Australia's having elected officials, the head of state in Australia is still the Queen of the United Kingdom and the other Commonwealth realms, as represented by the governor-general). While the Queen rarely exercises her power and is often viewed as a mere figurehead in Australia, the monarch (and in turn the governor-general) is afforded some powers in the country's constitution. During the constitutional crisis of 1975, Governor-General Sir John Kerr used his constitutional authority to dismiss Prime Minister Gough Whitlam.Here's a summary of what took place from the Australian Broadcast Corporation:The Parliament of Australia website provided some additional context to this historic event:"
Starving Child and Vulture,"['""Dear God, I promise I will never waste my food no matter how bad it can taste.""']","If a hundred of the most talented members of the advertising industry were tasked with creating an image to illustrate the concepts of poverty and famine, quite possibly none of them would come up with anything nearly as grippingly and devastatingly effective as a 1993 picture snapped by South African freelance photographer Kevin Carter: The PHOTO in the mail is the ""Pulitzer prize"" winning photo taken in 1994 during the Sudan famine. The picture depicts a famine stricken child crawling towards an United Nations food camp, located a kilometer away. The vulture is waiting for the child to die so that it can eat it. This picture shocked the whole world. No one knows what happened to the child, including the photographer Kevin Carter who left the place as soon as the photograph was taken. Three months later he committed suicide due to depression. This was found in his diary, ""Dear God, I promise I will never waste my food no matter how bad it can taste and how full I may be I pray that He will protect this little boy, guide and deliver him away from his misery. I pray that we will be more sensitive towards the world around us and not be blinded be our own selfish nature and interests."" I hope this picture will always serve as a reminder to us that how fortunate we are and that we must never ever take things for granted.  His poignant photograph of an emaciated toddler who collapsed from hunger on her way to a feeding center in famine-ravaged Sudan while a vulture ominously loomed in the background was originally published in the New York Times (which later described it as ""a metaphor for Africa's despair"") and earned Carter the 1994 Pulitzer Prize in the Feature Photography category, and the image has since become widely known as a metaphor for Africa's despair. Pulitzer Prize As described in Time magazine, the scene Carter captured in his now-famous photograph was one he stumbled across during a trip he made on his own in order to cover the civil strife in war-torn Sudan: In 1993 Carter headed north of the border with [friend and fellow journalist] Joo Silva to photograph the rebel movement in famine-stricken Sudan. To make the trip, Carter had taken a leave from the [South Africa] Weekly Mail and borrowed money for the air fare. Immediately after their plane touched down in the village of Ayod, Carter began snapping photos of famine victims. Seeking relief from the sight of masses of people starving to death, he wandered into the open bush. He heard a soft, high-pitched whimpering and saw a tiny girl trying to make her way to the feeding center. As he crouched to photograph her, a vulture landed in view. Careful not to disturb the bird, he positioned himself for the best possible image. He would later say he waited about 20 minutes, hoping the vulture would spread its wings. It did not, and after he took his photographs, he chased the bird away and watched as the little girl resumed her struggle. Afterward he sat under a tree, lit a cigarette, talked to God and cried. ""He was depressed afterward,"" Silva recalls. ""He kept saying he wanted to hug his daughter."" After another day in Sudan, Carter returned to Johannesburg. Coincidentally, the New York Times, which was looking for pictures of Sudan, bought his photograph and ran it on March 26, 1993. The picture immediately became an icon of Africa's anguish. Hundreds of people wrote and called the Times asking what had happened to the child (the paper reported that it was not known whether she reached the feeding center); and papers around the world reproduced the photo. Friends and colleagues complimented Carter on his feat. His self-confidence climbed. But Kevin Carter was also a troubled soul, struggling with issues such as financial insecurity, drug problems, failed relationships, and the horrors of having witnessed multiple scenes of death  enough of a burden for anyone to struggle with, but in Carter's case a burden made extra-heavy by the critical condemnation heaped upon him for taking the photograph that had made him world-famous: Though the photo helped draw enormous attention to the humanitarian crisis that was engulfing Sudan, it was criticized by others who felt that Carter should have helped the girl and was instead exploiting her suffering for his gain. The real vulture, they said in vitriolic hate mail, was Carter himself. Some photojournalists might have easily dismissed such criticism, but it hit Carter hard and fed his self-doubts. On 27 July 1994, barely two months after having received his Pulitzer Prize, 33-year-old Kevin Carter could shoulder that burden no more and took his own life: The Braamfonteinspruit is a small river that cuts southward through Johannesburg's northern suburbs  and through Parkmore, where the Carters once lived. At around 9 p.m., Kevin Carter backed his red Nissan pickup truck against a blue gum tree at the Field and Study Center. He had played there often as a little boy. The Sandton Bird Club was having its monthly meeting there, but nobody saw Carter as he used silver gaffer tape to attach a garden hose to the exhaust pipe and run it to the passenger-side window. Wearing unwashed Lee jeans and an Esquire T-shirt, he got in and switched on the engine. Then he put music on his Walkman and lay over on his side, using the knapsack as a pillow. The suicide note he left behind is a litany of nightmares and dark visions, a clutching attempt at autobiography, self-analysis, explanation, excuse. After coming home from New York, he wrote, he was ""depressed ... without phone ... money for rent ... money for child support ... money for debts ... money!!! ... I am haunted by the vivid memories of killings & corpses & anger & pain ... of starving or wounded children, of trigger-happy madmen, often police, of killer executioners ... "" Although the purported diary entry (beginning ""Dear God, I promise I will never waste my food"") that has been tacked onto this photograph may sound like something Kevin Carter might have written, those words were not recorded in his diary, nor are they known to have been written or spoken by him.  They were added to the photograph by an unknown hand after the picture had been circulating on the Internet for several years. Kevin Carter's life (and death) was the subject of the 2004 documentary, The Life of Kevin Carter. The Life of Kevin Carter Keller, Bill.  ""Kevin Carter, a Pulitzer Winner for Sudan Photo, Is Dead at 33.""
  The New York Times.  29 July 1994  (p. B8).

 MacLeod, Scott.  ""The Life and Death of Kevin Carter.""
  Time.  12 September 1994.

 McMurtrie, John.  ""A Photographer's Burden of Seeing the World's Despair.""
  San Francisco Chronicle.  2 May 2005.",['debt'],True,"His poignant photograph of an emaciated toddler who collapsed from hunger on her way to a feeding center in famine-ravaged Sudan while a vulture ominously loomed in the background was originally published in the New York Times (which later described it as ""a metaphor for Africa's despair"") and earned Carter the 1994 Pulitzer Prize in the Feature Photography category, and the image has since become widely known as a metaphor for Africa's despair.Kevin Carter's life (and death) was the subject of the 2004 documentary, The Life of Kevin Carter."
"""Was 11.6 million jobs added to the U.S. economy by Trump during the pandemic?""",['U.S. Vice President Mike Pence made the claim during a debate with Democratic rival U.S. Sen. Kamala Harris.'],"Voting in the 2020 U.S. Election may be over, but misinformation continues to circulate. Never stop fact-checking. Follow our post-election coverage here. Facing Democratic rival U.S. Sen. Kamala Harris in a debate in October 2020, Vice President Mike Pence attempted to credit his boss, President Donald Trump, for developing policies that helped rebound the economy after unprecedented losses due to the COVID-19 pandemic. In particular, Pence stated that the U.S. workforce added millions of jobs since the early days of the outbreak because of Trump's fiscal and regulatory policies. He said, ""We're going through a pandemic that lost 22 million jobs at the height; we've already added back 11.6 million jobs because we had a president who cut taxes, rolled back regulation, unleashed American energy, and fought for free and fair trade. [...] We literally have spared no expense to help the American people and the American worker through this."" In other words, he claimed the Trump administration spearheaded a variety of initiatives that added 11.6 million jobs in the summer and fall of 2020, regaining nearly half of the roughly 22 million jobs lost at the start of the pandemic. The comment echoed multiple statements by Trump in which he, too, attempted to praise the administration's successful balance of public health and economic interests. ""Our strategy to kill the China virus has focused on protecting those at greatest risk while allowing younger and healthy Americans to safely return to work and school,"" he said in August. ""We added 1.8 million new jobs in July, exceeding predictions for the third month in a row, and adding a total of over 9.3 million jobs since May."" To determine the legitimacy of such assertions, we referred to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) ""seasonally adjusted nonfarm payroll,"" which is the standard measurement for determining how U.S. wage and salary jobs change over time. The payroll data are compiled monthly via a survey of about 145,000 businesses and government agencies across the country, excluding people who are self-employed or work for farms or private households. When a news story stated that, for instance, the economy added ""661,000 new workers,"" that number typically referred to the month-to-month change in nonfarm payrolls—661,000 more jobs were added in September compared to August 2020. We obtained monthly nonfarm payroll data, which showed: According to our analysis of the month-by-month statistics, the economy tallied almost 1.4 million fewer jobs in March compared to February. Then, the recession deepened, and April recorded 20.8 million fewer jobs than the month prior—the steepest decline since the Great Depression. While Pence did not provide an explanation for his labor statistics at the debate, we assumed he was referencing the sum of job losses in March and April, showing employers cut about 22 million jobs during those two months, per the BLS data. After that, the country started a slow, steady recovery. The data show the following increases in job totals, all approximations, on a month-by-month basis: (We should note here that the monthly employment figures for August and September 2020 were both preliminary and subject to revision as of this writing.) Looking at the data, yes, about 11.4 million jobs were added to the U.S. economy between May and September, and the Trump administration's comments about the economy showing significant job growth since the early weeks of the pandemic were true at face value. However, that upward trend had little to do with the White House and everything to do with how businesses on a grand scale adapted to new rules on social distancing to curb the spread of the deadly virus. In March, for instance, California issued the first statewide ""stay-at-home order,"" and New York City closed all non-essential businesses—both decisions that contributed to April's historic job loss. Then, over the weeks, employers developed plans for operating under public health officials' recommendations to curb the spread of COVID-19 and, as a result, were able to bring back workers who had been furloughed or reopen after a temporary shutdown. Those trends significantly impacted job growth in the U.S., not Trump. Additionally, a Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) loan—which was developed by Congress, not the White House, via the March Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act—helped some small businesses bring back lost positions or keep workers who would otherwise have been laid off. That stimulus package's direct payments to Americans who earned $75,000 annually or less (or families that made up to $150,000 annually) may have also driven spending in the summer months and, consequently, kept some employers afloat after the initial shock to their profits earlier in the year. All of that said, no evidence showed that the Trump administration enacted policies—whether related to taxes or trade—that ""added back"" the jobs; rather, economic trends shifted from the early days of the outbreak during mass furloughs and business closures. Here's the bottom line: Presidential administrations often exaggerate their influence on the economy—especially when employment is showing somewhat positive signs—regardless of whether they're leading the country during a crisis like the COVID-19 outbreak or in comparatively normal times. As Neil Irwin wrote for The New York Times in January 2017, just days before Trump's inauguration: ""The reality is that presidents have far less control over the economy than you might imagine. Presidential economic records are highly dependent on the dumb luck of where the nation is in the economic cycle. And the White House has no control over the demographic and technological forces that influence the economy."" Additionally, the White House had little influence on how businesses quickly adapted to recommendations by public health officials to safely operate during the pandemic. For those reasons, we rate this claim a ""Mixture"" of truth and falsehoods. It was true that the country added back about half of the jobs lost during the early months of the pandemic, though it was a false misinterpretation of economic conditions to tie that job growth to Trump policies or to claim that he ""cut taxes, rolled back regulation, unleashed American energy, and fought for free and fair trade,"" as Pence alleged, and that those moves directly added jobs. Here's video footage of Pence making the claim on the vice presidential debate stage, courtesy of C-SPAN: https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4913299/user-clip-vp-pence-jobs-claim. Factba.se. ""Press Conference: Donald Trump Holds A Coronavirus Pandemic Briefing In Bedminster - August 7, 2020."" Accessed 9 October 2020. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. ""BLS Data Viewer."" 9 October 2020. Reuters staff. ""Timeline: How the Global Coronavirus Pandemic Unfolded."" Accessed 12 October 2020.",['loss'],NEI,"Voting in the 2020 U.S. Election may be over, but the misinformation keeps on ticking. Never stop fact-checking. Follow our post-election coverage here.Facing Democratic rival U.S. Sen. Kamala Harris for a debate in October 2020, Vice President Mike Pence attempted to give credit to his boss, President Donald Trump, for developing policies that rebounded the economy after unprecedented losses due to the COVID-19 pandemic.""Our strategy to kill the China virus has focused on protecting those at greatest risk while allowing younger and healthy Americans to safety return to work and safely return to school,"" he said in August. ""We added 1.8 million new jobs in July, exceeding predictions for the third month in a row, and adding a total of over 9.3 million jobs since May.""To determine the legitimacy of such assertions, we referred to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) ""seasonally adjusted nonfarm payroll,"" which is the standard measurement for determining how U.S. wage and salary jobs change over time. The payroll data are compiled monthly via a survey of about 145,000 businesses and government agencies across the country, excluding people who are self-employed, or work for farms or private households.When a news story stated that, for instance, the economy added ""661,000 new workers,"" that number was typically a reference to the month-to-month change in nonfarm payrolls  661,000 more jobs were added in September compared to August 2020.According to our analysis of the month-by-month statistics, the economy tallied almost 1.4 million less jobs in March compared to February. Then, the recession deepened, and April recorded 20.8 million less jobs than the month prior  the steepest decline since the Great Depression.However, that upward trend had little to do with the White House and everything to do with how businesses on a grand scale adapted to new rules on social distancing to curb the spread of the deadly virus. In March, for instance, California issued the first statewide ""stay at home order"" and New York City closed all non-essential businesses  both decisions that contributed to April's historic job loss.Additionally, a Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) loan  which was developed by Congress, not the White House, via the March Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act  helped some small businesses bring back lost positions or keep workers who would otherwise have been laid off. That stimulus packages direct payments to Americans who earned 75,000 annually or less (or families that made up to $150,000 annually) may have also driven spending in the summer months and, consequently, kept some employers afloat after initial shock to their profits earlier in the year.Here's the bottom line: Presidential administrations often exaggerate their influence on the economy  especially when employment is showing somewhat positive signs  no matter if they're leading the country during a crisis like the COVID-19 outbreak or comparatively normal times. As Neil Irwin wrote for The New York Times in January 2017, just days before Trumps inauguration:"
Is Starbucks Opening a Roasting Facility in China?,['The announcement that Starbucks is expanding its brand in Asia proved meme-worthy.'],"In mid-March 2020, the coffee brand Starbucks announced it would open a bean roasting facility in China, which prompted a spate of memes aimed at a U.S. audience about ""creating jobs for China."" announced   It's true that Starbucks is investing $130 million to open a coffee bean roasting plant in China, per a company announcement dated March 12, 2020. This will be an expansion of Starbucks' already-existing presence in China, where the chain has been doing business since 1999. Starbucks already has 4,200 stores in 177 cities in mainland China, with a total of 57,000 employees. announcement already has So, while the expansion will indeed create more jobs in China, it's not as if the company is shipping American jobs overseas. Instead, the new roasting facility is geared toward making beans for coffee drinkers purchasing the beverage locally in Asia. The announcement from Starbucks reads: Starbucks Coffee Company, the global roaster and retailer of specialty coffee, announced today it will invest approximately $130 million (USD) in China to open a state-of-the-art roasting facility in 2022 as part of its new Coffee Innovation Park (CIP). As Starbucks largest manufacturing investment outside of the U.S. and its first in Asia, the CIP will incorporate a roasting plant, warehouse and distribution center, creating highly-skilled jobs and new career opportunities that will further drive smart and sustainable coffee manufacturing in China. The plant will serve as a key component of the Companys global roasting network, and the bold infrastructure investment further deepens Starbucks multi-decade commitment to strengthen the specialty coffee industry in China, where it aims to have 6,000 stores by 2022. China Daily, an English-language, government-run newspaper, reported that the Coffee Innovation Park is slated to be built in Kunshan, a city in China's eastern Jiangsu province. reported Starbucks.""Starbucks Coffee Innovation Park in China Elevates Manufacturing and Extends Global Roasting Network.""
12 March 2020. China Daily.""Starbucks to Build Up Roasting Capacity in China.""
13 March 2020. Bajpai, Prableen.""How Starbucks (SBUX) Is Getting Itself Back On Track In China In Wake of COVID-19.""
Nasdaq.com.25 March 2020.",['investment'],True,"In mid-March 2020, the coffee brand Starbucks announced it would open a bean roasting facility in China, which prompted a spate of memes aimed at a U.S. audience about ""creating jobs for China.""It's true that Starbucks is investing $130 million to open a coffee bean roasting plant in China, per a company announcement dated March 12, 2020. This will be an expansion of Starbucks' already-existing presence in China, where the chain has been doing business since 1999. Starbucks already has 4,200 stores in 177 cities in mainland China, with a total of 57,000 employees.China Daily, an English-language, government-run newspaper, reported that the Coffee Innovation Park is slated to be built in Kunshan, a city in China's eastern Jiangsu province."
Kroger Free Coupon/Gift Card Scam,['Kroger is not giving away free grocery coupons or gift cards to Facebook users who like and share a post.'],"For years Facebook users have been seeing posts advertising giveaways for the Kroger grocery store chain such as ""Get $55 in Free Groceries"" coupon offers.  However, such posts are just versions of the common ""free coupon"" or ""free gift card"" scams that frequently plague social media. On more than one occasion the Kroger Company has taken to Facebook to warn customers that these coupon offers are not an authorized promotion and to advise them not to visit sites promoting them: Facebook  These fake coupon and gift card offers are typically scams that promise rewards to anyone who follows a simple three-step process: Share the message on Facebook, leave a comment, and like the message. These three steps ensure the scam message circulates to thousands of people on Facebook. @SocialNewsDaily That offer is a scam -- we are not affiliated w/ that website. Our Digital Coupons can be found at https://t.co/rvO3m1IXTf. @SocialNewsDaily https://t.co/rvO3m1IXTf  Kroger Support (@KrogerSupport) October 15, 2014 October 15, 2014  Previous versions of the scam, for example, featured a similar message that invaded Facebook promising a $250 gift card. The message redirected to a web page that was not affiliated with Kroger despite the fact that it was adorned with the company's logo:  This page instructed shoppers to follow ""three simple steps"" in order to get a free gift card. Once the steps were completed, however, users were not greeted with a coupon code. Instead, they were asked to fill out a brief survey and provide personal information such as home address, telephone number, e-mail address, and date of birth. Users were also required to sign up for credit cards or enroll in subscription programs in order to obtain their ""free"" gift cards. Kroger has repeatedly warned their customers not to fall victims to this form of scam:   These fraudulent surveys are quite popular on Facebook, and if you frequently use that social network there is a good chance that you'll run into one of these survey scams again. A July 2014 article from the Better Business Bureau lists key factors for identifying fraudulent Facebook posts: article Don't believe what you see. It's easy to steal the colors, logos and header of an established organization. Scammers can also make links look like they lead to legitimate websites and emails appear to come from a different sender. Legitimate businesses do not ask for credit card numbers or banking information on customer surveys. If they do ask for personal information, like an address or email, be sure there's a link to their privacy policy. When in doubt, do a quick web search. If the survey is a scam, you may find alerts or complaints from other consumers. The organization's real website may have further information. Watch out for a reward that's too good to be true. If the survey is real, you may be entered in a drawing to win a gift card or receive a small discount off your next purchase. Few businesses can afford to give away $50 gift cards for completing a few questions. Patterson, Emily.  ""Customer Survey Scam Lures Victims with Gift Card.""
  Better Business Bureau.  4 July 2014.",['credit'],False,"However, such posts are just versions of the common ""free coupon"" or ""free gift card"" scams that frequently plague social media. On more than one occasion the Kroger Company has taken to Facebook to warn customers that these coupon offers are not an authorized promotion and to advise them not to visit sites promoting them:@SocialNewsDaily That offer is a scam -- we are not affiliated w/ that website. Our Digital Coupons can be found at https://t.co/rvO3m1IXTf. Kroger Support (@KrogerSupport) October 15, 2014These fraudulent surveys are quite popular on Facebook, and if you frequently use that social network there is a good chance that you'll run into one of these survey scams again. A July 2014 article from the Better Business Bureau lists key factors for identifying fraudulent Facebook posts:"
Did Kurt Russell Share A Poem Opposing the Defunding of Police?,"['A poem titled ""The Badge"" circulated on social media in June 2020 following nationwide protests calling for the defunding of police. ']","Rumors surged in the wake of George Floyd's death and the resulting protests against police violence and racial injustice in the United States. Stay informed. Read our special coverage, contribute to support our mission, and submit any tips or claims you see here. A widely circulated poem dedicated to the work of law enforcement was shared more than 125,000 times in late summer 2020 after the original user insinuated that actor Kurt Russell had shared it, along with his alleged opposition to defunding the police. ""The Badge"" went viral in the months following the death of George Floyd, a Black man who died in Minneapolis, Minnesota, while in police custody. Protesters in the wake of Floyd's death called for the defunding of police in an effort to redirect funds to make law enforcement training more robust and to increase social services for communities that face a greater risk of police brutality and incarceration. We looked into the poem and found no evidence that Russell is connected to it in any way or that he had made political statements opposing the defunding of police. Russell is known for his distaste for social media and, despite dozens of fake profiles pretending to be the veteran actor, does not have verified accounts on Facebook, Twitter, or Instagram. In general, Russell is not active on social media and had not recently appeared in public making such declarations. In fact, since the poem's original posting in June 2020, the language and imagery shared alongside it underwent several changes that demonstrate the kind of manipulation a social media post may experience in a short amount of time. ""The Badge,"" a poem that recognizes police officers and their efforts to help society, was originally credited to an anonymous source and was first posted to social media on June 7. It begins: This badge ran towards certain death as the Towers collapsed on 9-11. This badge ran into the line of fire to save the people in the Pulse Night Club. This badge sheltered thousands as bullets rained down from the Mandalay Hotel in Las Vegas. This badge protected a BLM rally that left five officers dead in Dallas. This badge ran into the Sandy Hook School to stop a school shooter. The poem goes on to highlight other roles and responsibilities of law enforcement officers, including escorting the elderly across the street and helping to return crying children to their mothers. However, since it was originally shared on Facebook, the 22-line composition underwent several iterations. A second version of the poem surfaced in a post shared to the Victor Valley News Facebook page, a media outlet in Victorville, California, with an additional introduction that read: Yes ... let's all join in the hatred of all police for the sins of a few. Let's defund one of the most important public institutions in our country's history. Let's have all badges removed and allow people to tend to their own safety and security. This wording appears to have originated in a blog post titled, ""In Honor of Uncle Bob Roberts Killed in the Line of Duty,"" posted on June 14 by a self-described entrepreneur. The post in question that Snopes readers asked us about added the above introduction and, in its most recent iteration, social media users included a headshot of Russell accompanied by the following: Amazing Post!! Kurt Russell. The additional wording insinuated that the actor had an affiliation with the Aug. 6, 2020 post. In less than a week, the post had been shared over 125,000 times on Facebook. The libertarian actor has been at the heart of several viral claims falsely linking him to supporting U.S. President Donald Trump, including a 2016 image that showed him and partner Goldie Hawn wearing photoshopped pro-Trump shirts. In 2018, a fake Twitter account using Russell's face as a profile picture incorrectly quoted the actor as having called Trump relentless, dedicated, and determined. The following year, a right-leaning Facebook page posted a meme that falsely insinuated Russell referred to Democrats as enemies of the state.",['share'],False,"Rumors are surging in the wake of George Floyd's death and resulting protests against police violence and racial injustice in the United States. Stay informed. Read our special coverage, contribute to support our mission, and submit any tips or claims you see here.""The Badge"" went viral in the months following the death of George Floyd, a Black man who died in Minneapolis, Minnesota, while in police custody. Protesters in the wake of Floyds death called for the defunding of police in an effort to redirect funds to make law enforcement training more robust and increase social services for communities that face a greater risk of police brutality and incarceration.We looked into the poem and found no evidence Russell is connected to it in any way, or that he had made political statements opposing the defunding of police. Russell is known for his distaste of social media and, despite dozens of fake profiles pretending to be the veteran actor, does not have verified accounts on Facebook, Twitter, or Instagram. In general, Russell is not active on social media and had not recently appeared in public making such declarations.In fact, since the poem's original posting in June 2020, language and imagery shared alongside of it underwent several changes that show the kind of manipulation a social media post may experience in a short amount of time. ""The Badge,"" a poem that recognizes police officers and their efforts to help society, was originally credited to an anonymous source and was first posted to social media on June 7. It begins:A second version of the poem surfaced in a post shared to the Victor Valley News Facebook page, a media outlet in Victorville, California, with an additional introduction that read:This wording above appears to have originated in a blog post titled, ""In Honor of Uncle Bob Roberts Killed in the Line of Duty,"" posted on June 14 by a self-described entrepreneur.The post in question that Snopes readers asked us about added the above introduction and, in its most recent iteration, social media users included a headshot of Russell accompanied by the following: Amazing Post!! Kurt Russell. The additional wording insinuated that the actor had an affiliation with the Aug. 6, 2020 post. In less than a week, the post had been shared over 125,000 times on Facebook.The libertarian actor has been at the heart of several viral claims falsely linking him to supporting U.S. President Donald Trump, including a 2016 image that showed him and partner, Goldie Hawn, wearing photoshopped pro-Trump shirts. In 2018, a fake Twitter account using Russells face as a profile picture incorrectly quoted the actor as having called Trump relentless, dedicated, and determined. The following year, a right-leaning Facebook page posted a meme that falsely insinuated Russell referred to Democrats as enemies of the state."
1 Calorie Diet Sodas Rumor,['Do diet colas contain more calories than stated?']," Claim:  Diet Coke (or Diet Pepsi) contains more calories than claimed, but the company gets away with the deception by paying a yearly fine.  Examples:  [Collected on the Internet, 2003] There was an old rumour that stated that a particular diet soda company (Coke I believe) paid a fine to print their cans as stating that the soda had 'just one calorie'.  According to the rumour, companies who knowingly printed misinformation on the nutritional facts of their product would have to pay a fine.  The company in question figured it could make more money by convincing people the product only had 1 calorie than it would cost to pay the fine, meaning a higher profit margin for them.  [Collected on the Internet, 2002] I heard a rumor today that Diet Coke actually contains 40 calories, and the Coca-Cola company pays a huge fine to the FDA every year to keep ""0 calories"" on the can.  Have you heard anything of this?  [Collected on the Internet, 2004] Comment: Is it true that Pepsi One is really not one calorie and that Pepsi Co. pays a fine every year for false advertising (because the calorie count is a lot higher than that)? Origins:  How long this particular belief about low-calorie sodas has been around is anyone's guess, but we have recorded sightings of it dating back to 1990. We've encountered claims of Diet Coke, Diet Pepsi, or Pepsi One (which are listed as containing zero, zero, and one calories per 12-oz. can, respectively) actually containing 25, 50, 70, or 90 calories, in each case with the parent   company's paying an annual fine to continue falsely listing the beverage's caloric content.  (A can of non-diet cola typically contains about 120 calories.) The rumor associates most strongly with Diet Coke (which is known as Coca-Cola Light outside the U.S., Canada, Australia, and Great Britain).  In the U.S., laws governing the disclosure of nutritional and caloric content of ingestibles prevent the rumor from being true. The Federal Trade Commission serves as the watchdog in this area: under the Federal Trade Commission Act, it is empowered to ""prevent persons, partnerships, or corporations"" from using ""unfair methods of competition in or affecting commerce, and unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce."" At various times in its history it has fined corporations for their having made false or misleading nutritional claims about their products. Such fines are a reaction to what has already taken place; they are not grants of immunity against continued breaking of the rules. Consumers have legal remedy available to them against corporations that have deceived them through certain provisions of the Lanham Act. Many other countries have similar safeguards in place. Federal Trade Commission Act Lanham Act Common sense should also serve to rule out what the whispers say about an annual payoff.  For health reasons, many potential consumers of diet drinks have to carefully monitor what they ingest. Were the rumor true, diabetics with a love of Diet Coke, for instance, would experience glucose levels spiraling out of control. Imagine the lawsuits resulting from  that! This false belief enjoys a measure of popularity because of what it says about common perception of large companies and of the government agencies tasked with shielding consumers from harm: that one will bamboozle its customers for the sake of financial profit, the other will sell out those it is mandated to protect, and neither is to be trusted. Such misgivings also find voice in other rumors, such as the one about bananas imported from Costa Rica being infected with a flesh-eating bacteria. bananas If there is the tiniest bit of truth to this rumor, it's that even though sodas such as Diet Coke and Diet Pepsi are advertised as having zero calories, they do have some caloric content from ingredients such as artificial sweeteners, citric acid, and caramel coloring.  However, the number of calories per can is still less than one, and FDA regulations allow any food product that contains fewer than five calories per serving to be advertised as calorie-free. Barbara ""calorie countered"" Mikkelson Last updated:  26 August 2013 ",['profit'],False,"In the U.S., laws governing the disclosure of nutritional and caloric content of ingestibles prevent the rumor from being true. The Federal Trade Commission serves as the watchdog in this area: under the Federal Trade Commission Act, it is empowered to ""prevent persons, partnerships, or corporations"" from using ""unfair methods of competition in or affecting commerce, and unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce."" At various times in its history it has fined corporations for their having made false or misleading nutritional claims about their products. Such fines are a reaction to what has already taken place; they are not grants of immunity against continued breaking of the rules. Consumers have legal remedy available to them against corporations that have deceived them through certain provisions of the Lanham Act. Many other countries have similar safeguards in place.This false belief enjoys a measure of popularity because of what it says about common perception of large companies and of the government agencies tasked with shielding consumers from harm: that one will bamboozle its customers for the sake of financial profit, the other will sell out those it is mandated to protect, and neither is to be trusted. Such misgivings also find voice in other rumors, such as the one about bananas imported from Costa Rica being infected with a flesh-eating bacteria."
Did Elon Musk Create CBD Gummies that 'Reverse Dementia'?,['A Facebook ad claimed that Musk was experiencing media backlash over a new business announcement.'],"In April 2023, a rumor began to spread claiming that Twitter owner Elon Musk had introduced a new line of CBD gummies that could ""reverse dementia."" According to the story, Musk's gummy product sparked a ""huge lawsuit"" with Fox News. However, none of this was true. Musk was simply the latest famous person to have his image and likeness used by scammers without permission in an attempt to promote miracle claims about CBD or keto gummies. He has nothing to do with any of these products. While the answer here is a fairly simple ""it's all fake,"" the massive reach of these gummy scams might surprise some readers. As of May 18, the scam was still circulating in at least one paid ad on Facebook, Instagram, and Messenger. The ad on a Facebook page named Aromathy read, ""Media Backlash Over New Musk Business Announcement. Elon Has a Response. His New Business Venture Has Been Under Scrutiny By Media."" The ad led to a fake article on aromasense.shop that was designed to fool readers into believing they were reading from the Fox News website. Many of the Facebook users who commented on the ad believed that the post was a real news announcement. For example, one person commented, ""MEDIA IS AGAINST ANYTHING THAT IS GOOD!! IGNORE THEM!"" Some users also appeared to think that Musk made the post himself, with one person writing, ""Don't pay attention to the media! So many are fake and biased! Be true to yourself! I trust you."" In other words, Fox News and Elon Musk may have been included together by scammers to target easily influenced users who have conservative political leanings and a distrust of mainstream news media. To create the fake Fox News article, scammers copied the logo and article layout from foxnews.com and replicated it on the aromasense.shop website. Scammers have been using this design-replication process with the logos and designs of multiple publishers for years. The article began with the headline, ""Elon Musk reverses dementia, solution sparks huge lawsuit pressure on Fox, he finally fights back on air."" The body of the fictional story was a template that scammers had used many times before about various TV personalities who had their own shows. However, in this case, the article didn't really make sense to be associated with Musk since he didn't have a show. The fake article began as follows: (Fox) - In an Exclusive Interview, Elon Musk, a business magnate and investor, CEO of SpaceX, Tesla, Inc., and Twitter, Inc., reveals that the show will be ending after his latest business sparks tension with Martha MacCallum. During a heated episode last week, Elon Musk made headlines after revealing his new CBD line on Live TV. Martha MacCallum was outraged, saying she would be filing a lawsuit against Elon Musk and Fox for violating his contract and 'scaring off' sponsors. Elon Musk responded with this: ""I know Martha is just coming after my timeslot. I am not giving in to 'Cancel Culture.' When I started this whole thing back in 2018, it really was just a part-time passion project and a way for me to give back. After being given so much, I figured there was no better time to make Impact Garden CBD Gummies available to everyone, as it can help thousands of people experience life pain-free and live much happier lives."" His product, Impact Garden CBD Gummies, has been flying off the shelves within minutes, and Elon Musk says his number one struggle as CEO is being able to keep up with demand. His CBD wellness line is 90% cheaper and five times more effective than those offered by Bayer and other ""Big Pharma"" companies. Martha MacCallum was furious after seeing multiple sponsors sue Fox News Network. Martha is now calling for Elon Musk to be indicted, saying: ""I am happy Elon Musk found something to replace prescriptions, but his announcement was a direct breach of contract. Fox News should sue him immediately, and he should formally apologize."" ... Elon Musk eventually admitted that although Martha MacCallum is enraged, other Fox hosts have been supportive of him. Tucker Carlson even went on Live TV to say that: ""Impact Garden CBD Gummies has completely changed my life, and it's clear that MacCallum is attempting a coup."" Again, this article was fictional. The story about Musk, CBD gummies that can ""reverse dementia,"" Fox News, Martha MacCallum, and Tucker Carlson never happened. (Vitality Labs CBD Gummies, Organicore CBD Gummies, and other product names were also mentioned.) For more information on CBD and keto gummies scams, we recommend a recent story about Ree Drummond, another celebrity whose image and likeness were also used by scammers to promote these products. If any readers were scammed and ordered any gummy products after being led to believe that Musk or other celebrities endorsed them, we recommend filing a report with the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC). We also advise readers to call their credit card company to dispute the charges. It may be a good idea to block future charges from the sellers in question or to get a new card number altogether, as many of these scams sign customers up to be charged subscription fees of hundreds of dollars per month. Bear in mind that, while it is rare, scammers sometimes use the exact name or a similar name of a real CBD company without permission to push these sorts of scams. In those minority of cases, there's no evidence that the company had any involvement in the activity. We've received word from users in recent months who said that they were being charged for these sorts of gummy products despite having no recollection of ordering them. Some people who left messages for our reporters even said that along with having no memory of ordering the products, they also had no charges on their credit card, yet still received the products at their doorstep. It's possible that some of these apparently unauthorized purchases occurred in the aftermath of what's known as card skimming. The FBI has said of the practice, ""Skimming occurs when devices illegally installed on ATMs, point-of-sale (POS) terminals, or fuel pumps capture data or record cardholders' PINs. Criminals use the data to create fake debit or credit cards and then steal from victims' accounts. It is estimated that skimming costs financial institutions and consumers more than $1 billion each year."" We are continuing to look into various aspects of these CBD and keto scams, including something associated with purported ""fulfillment center"" P.O. Box addresses in Smyrna, Tennessee, and Las Vegas, Nevada, as well as some activity apparently occurring in Tampa, Florida. ""Elon Musk Reverses Dementia, Solution Sparks Huge Lawsuit Pressure on Fox, He Finally Fights Back on Air."" AromaSense, https://aromasense.shop/. Liles, Jordan. ""Is Ree Drummond Leaving Food Network to Sell Keto Gummies?"" Snopes, 15 May 2023, https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/ree-drummond-leave-food-network-keto-gummies/. ""Skimming."" Federal Bureau of Investigation, https://www.fbi.gov/how-we-can-help-you/safety-resources/scams-and-safety/common-scams-and-crimes/skimming. Smith, Daeshen. ""Better Business Bureau Warns Customers to Be Mindful of Card Skimming Schemes."" Fox 10 News, 25 Apr. 2023, https://www.fox10tv.com/2023/04/25/better-business-bureau-warns-customers-be-mindful-card-skimming-schemes/.",['credit'],False,"For more information on CBD and keto gummies scams, we recommend a recent story about Ree Drummond, another celebrity whose image and likeness were also used by scammers to push these products.If any readers were scammed and ordered any gummy products after being led to believe that Musk or other celebrities endorsed them, we recommend filing a report with the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC).It's possible that some of these apparently unauthorized purchases occurred in the aftermath of what's known as card skimming. The FBI has said of the practice, ""Skimming occurs when devices illegally installed on ATMs, point-of-sale (POS) terminals, or fuel pumps capture data or record cardholders' PINs. Criminals use the data to create fake debit or credit cards and then steal from victims' accounts. It is estimated that skimming costs financial institutions and consumers more than $1 billion each year."""
Has Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene asserted that California wildfires were triggered by 'Jewish Space Lasers'?,"['The Republican representative from Georgia has endorsed QAnon conspiracy theories, among others.']","Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene from Georgia has courted controversy on various issues by promoting QAnon conspiracy theories, alongside a history of anti-Muslim and anti-Semitic remarks. Years-old views, including a Facebook interaction in which she agreed with a comment that the Parkland shooting was a ""false flag"" staged event, and a video in which she pushed 9/11 conspiracy theories, have been unearthed. Marjorie Taylor Greene courted controversy interaction 9/11 conspiracy theories One post from 2018 in particular was reported on by Media Matters for America, a watchdog group, where she speculated about a conspiracy surrounding the November 2018 wildfires in California. In the now-deleted post, Greene theorized that a space-based solar generator, used in a clean-energy experiment with the goal of replacing coal and oil, could have beamed the sun's energy back to Earth and started the fires. We have covered similar claims surrounding the wildfires before. reported now-deleted theorized similar claims She said, ""there are too many coincidences to ignore"" and ""oddly there are all these people who have said they saw what looked like lasers or blue beams of light causing the fires.""   Greene also speculated that a range of people or groups were involved in this fire, including former California Gov. Jerry Brown, Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E), and Rothschild Inc., an investment firm. She said that Roger Kimmel, who was on the board of PG&E, was also ""Vice Chairman of Rothschild Inc,"" and ""If they are beaming the suns energy back to Earth, I'm sure they wouldn't ever miss a transmitter receiving station right??!! I mean mistakes are never made when anything new is invented. What would that look like anyway? A laser beam or light beam coming down to Earth I guess. Could that cause a fire? Hmmm, I don't know. I hope not! That wouldn't look so good for PG&E, Rothschild Inc, Solaren or Jerry Brown who sure does seem fond of PG&E."" The Rothschilds, a Jewish banking family, have long been the targets of anti-Semitic conspiracy theories claiming that Jewish people are in control of the entire world. While Greene specifically did not use the words ""Jewish space laser,"" she heavily implied that the Rothschilds were involved in the laser conspiracy. targets An investigation showed that the California wildfires of 2018 were ignited by PG&E power lines, and then spread with the help of warm temperatures, dry vegetation, and strong winds. showed In late January 2021, CNN reported that dozens of posts from 2018 and 2019 had been removed from Greene's Facebook page. removed Given that Greene did not directly state that ""Jewish lasers"" caused the fires, but did speculate that laser beams somehow connected to the Rothschild investment firm were a cause, we rate this claim as ""Mixture.""",['banking'],NEI,"Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene from Georgia has courted controversy on various issues by promoting QAnon conspiracy theories, alongside a history of anti-Muslim and anti-Semitic remarks. Years-old views, including a Facebook interaction in which she agreed with a comment that the Parkland shooting was a ""false flag"" staged event, and a video in which she pushed 9/11 conspiracy theories, have been unearthed.One post from 2018 in particular was reported on by Media Matters for America, a watchdog group, where she speculated about a conspiracy surrounding the November 2018 wildfires in California. In the now-deleted post, Greene theorized that a space-based solar generator, used in a clean-energy experiment with the goal of replacing coal and oil, could have beamed the sun's energy back to Earth and started the fires. We have covered similar claims surrounding the wildfires before.The Rothschilds, a Jewish banking family, have long been the targets of anti-Semitic conspiracy theories claiming that Jewish people are in control of the entire world. While Greene specifically did not use the words ""Jewish space laser,"" she heavily implied that the Rothschilds were involved in the laser conspiracy.An investigation showed that the California wildfires of 2018 were ignited by PG&E power lines, and then spread with the help of warm temperatures, dry vegetation, and strong winds.In late January 2021, CNN reported that dozens of posts from 2018 and 2019 had been removed from Greene's Facebook page."
Did Trump Tweet That Drug Testing Will Be Mandatory for Public Benefit Recipients?,['A fake tweet attributed to President Trump suggested mandatory drug testing would be imposed on recipients of public assistance.'],"In January 2017, a screenshot of a tweet purportedly sent by President Donald Trump (pledging ""mandatory drug testing"" for recipients of public assistance) circulated on social media.  The text of the suspiciously undated tweet read ""Drug test will be mandatory before receiving anything the government has to offer! We have to clean up these streets!"":  Twitter's advanced search tool returns no results for such a tweet, and the deleted tweet archive Politwoops also has no record of President Trump's issuing such a statement via Twitter. results Politwoops Although President Donald Trump has tweeted about drug tests and drug testing in the past, none of those tweets mentioned a connection to qualifying for public assistance: drug tests drug testing The San Fran crash was totally the pilot's fault - may be too late for drug testing, RIDICULOUS!  Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 9, 2013 July 9, 2013  Given the lack of standard Twitter formatting, and the lack of any attendant news  coverage about it (despite all the attention paid to Trump's Twitter feed by the news media), it's safe to say this tweet was fabricated and does not represent any statements made by President Trump via Twitter in January 2017.",['returns'],False,"Twitter's advanced search tool returns no results for such a tweet, and the deleted tweet archive Politwoops also has no record of President Trump's issuing such a statement via Twitter.Although President Donald Trump has tweeted about drug tests and drug testing in the past, none of those tweets mentioned a connection to qualifying for public assistance: Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 9, 2013"
Does This Photograph Show Che Guevara Executing Two Women?,['Claims that a photograph shows Che Guevara executing two women appear to be based solely on the fact that the pictured man is wearing a military beret.'],"A photograph supposedly showing two women moments before they were executed by an unidentified man is often shared with the claim that the gunman seen in the picture is the Argentine-born Cuban revolutionary figure Che Guevara, despite the fact that the executioner's face is not visible in the photograph. This image is nearly always shared with anti-socialist sentiments and is often posted alongside barbs directed at politicians such as Bernie Sanders or Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Most commonly, it is shared as a meme with the caption, ""This is the image of Che Guevara that should be seen on t-shirts."" Che Guevara is a controversial historical figure, regarded as anything from a cultural hero to little more than a wanton murderer. A number of articles, books, movies, and documentaries can assist those curious about the Marxist revolutionary in forming an educated opinion about his legacy, but this photograph should not be included in a hypothetical course on the subject, as it doesn't show Che Guevara. Our investigation into the origins of this photograph took us from baseless claims on social media to archival photographs documenting wars in places such as El Salvador and Yugoslavia. Ultimately, however, our search ended in an unlikely location: Atlanta, Georgia. Before this image was first associated with Che Guevara in late 2017, it was circulated with a different claim. In 2011, this picture was included in a gallery about the Farabundo Mart National Liberation Front (FMLN) during the Salvadoran Civil War, a bloody conflict that started in 1980, thirteen years after Guevara's death. However, we could not confirm that this photograph truly shows a member of the FMLN during the Salvadoran Civil War. When we reached out to Martín Álvarez Alberto, an El Salvadorian historian with a special interest in the FMLN, to ask if he was familiar with this photograph, he told us that he had never seen it and that he doubted the picture was taken in El Salvador. Alberto noted that the men looked Caucasian, not Salvadorian, and that the building in the background was more typical of locations in Europe or the United States. Susan Meiselas, a documentary photographer who worked in El Salvador during the Civil War, came to a similar conclusion: the buildings in this image did not resemble those in El Salvador. Meiselas also hypothesized that the photograph was taken in Eastern Europe. The relatively modern wardrobe of the two women and the suggestion that this photograph was taken in Eastern Europe led us to examine photographs of the Yugoslav Wars in the early 1990s. An image of Dragan Vasiljković, the commander of a Serb paramilitary unit called the Knindža, who was found guilty of war crimes by the Republic of Croatia, appears to show similar fatigues. This, of course, is not hard evidence that the photograph was taken during the Yugoslav Wars. In fact, when we talked to photojournalist Ron Haviv, who documented the Yugoslav Wars, he told us that he did not recognize the uniform of the man in the viral picture. So where was this photograph taken and whom does it show? Although our focus so far has been on war crimes, we had our doubts that this photograph even documented such a historical event. The nonchalant posture of the second man watching this alleged execution, the various people in the background who seem to be wearing backpacks, and the smoking bucket (which we hypothesize could be a makeshift fog machine) lead us to believe that this might be a photograph taken on the set of an obscure film production. As it turns out, that's pretty much what this photograph shows. We uncovered another copy of this image on the website for CISPES, the Committee in Solidarity with the People of El Salvador, where it is presented as a photograph taken in 1989 of a ""Guerrilla Theatre"" performance at Emory University in Atlanta, Georgia. We reached out to CISPES for more evidence that this was a theatrical production, and they provided us with images showing a physical copy of this photograph featuring the words ""Emory College Atlanta Mar 89"" scrawled on the back. This photograph does not document Che Guevara executing two women. It was taken in the late 1980s at Emory University in Atlanta, Georgia, and depicts a performance by a local ""guerrilla theater"" group.",['interest'],False,"This photograph is nearly always shared with anti-socialist sentiments and often posted along with barbs directed at politicians such as Bernie Sanders orAlexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Most commonly it is shared as a meme with the caption ""This is the image of Che Guevara that should be seen on t-shirts.""Che Guevara is a controversial historical figure, regarded as anything from a cultural hero to little more than a wanton murderer. A number of articles, books, movies, and documentaries can assist those curious about the Marxist revolutionary in forming an educated opinion about his legacy, but this photograph should not be included in a hypothetical course on the subject, as it doesn't show Che Guevara.Before this image was first associated with Che Guevara in late 2017, the photograph was circulated attached to a different claim. In 2011, this picture was included in a gallery about the Farabundo Mart National Liberation Front (FMLN) during the Salvadorian Civil War, a bloody conflict which started in 1980 (thirteen years after Guevara's death):The relatively modern wardrobe of the two women, and the suggestion that this photograph was taken in Eastern Europe, led us to examine photographs of theYugoslav Wars in the early 1990s. An image of DraganVasiljkovi, the commander of a Serb paramilitary unit called the Kninde who was found guilty of war crimes by the Republic of Croatia, appears to show similar fatigues:We uncovered another copy of this image on the web site for CISPES, the Committee in Solidarity with the People of El Salvador (CISPES), where it is presented as a photograph taken in 1989 of a ""Guerrilla Theatre"" performance at Emory University in Atlanta, Georgia:"
Do These Photographs Show the Same Spot in the Arctic 100 Years Apart?,['A glacier comparison project documented some stark changes in the Arctic landscape across the span of a century.'],"In early October 2018, the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released a dire report stating that unprecedented efforts were needed to prevent the destabilization of Earth's climate. The report reignited, at least briefly, interest in global warming and climate change and drew social media's attention toward an image comparison supposedly documenting the stark changes seen in photographs of the same spot in the Arctic taken 103 years apart. This image comparison was part of a 2003 series created by photographer Christian Slund and Greenpeace, titled ""Glacier Comparison Svalbard."" The series, which featured seven such comparisons, used archival photographs from the Norwegian Polar Institute taken in the early 1900s and contemporary photographs shot in the same locations by Slund. The photographer talked briefly about this project in an interview with National Geographic in 2017: ""What's the most remarkable assignment you've done for Greenpeace? It's got to be the glacier comparison that we did [at Svalbard] because it's interesting on so many levels—our access to the archives there from the early 1900s, and then being able to trace where the photographers were, because we didn't know exactly where they shot from. We had to track down where the photos were taken, then go on location and sort of follow their footsteps. It's been quite a few years. I shot this in 2003. Knowledge of climate change wasn't as common; our attitudes towards climate change were different. Now, more or less everyone knows it's a fact. It'd be interesting to go back and shoot from the exact same locations again."" We came across a few comments underneath a posting of this viral photograph expressing skepticism that these pictures documented the results of climate change, rather than simply capturing ordinary seasonal changes. The top image, they posited, was taken in the winter, while the bottom image was snapped during the summer. We reached out to Slund for more information about the viral comparison images, and he told us that both photographs were taken during the summer months: ""Both of the images are from the summer season. It was July when I took my image, and it should be around the same for the archive pic. You can see it on the lack of snow on the mountains; in winter, the peaks would be covered. Also, the lack of sea ice—there wouldn't be open water like that in the winter."" Of course, these photographs alone don't ""prove"" climate change, but they are nonetheless visual records that document some significant differences seen in the Arctic landscape across the span of a century. Irfan, Umair. ""Report: We Have Just 12 Years to Limit Devastating Global Warming."" Vox. 8 October 2018. Brown, Rachel. ""Pictures Show Climate Change's Dramatic Arctic Impact."" National Geographic. 13 March 2017.",['interest'],True,"In early October 2018, the United Nation's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released a dire report stating that unprecedented efforts were needed in order to prevent destabilization of Earth's climate. The report reignited (at least briefly) interest in global warming and climate change and drew social media's attention toward an image comparison supposedly documenting the stark changes seen in photographs of the same spot in the Arctic taken 103 years apart:This image comparison was part of a 2003 series created by photographer Christian slund and Greenpeace, titled ""Glacier comparison  Svalbard."" The series, which featured seven such comparisons, used archival photographs from the Norwegian Polar Institute taken in the early 1900s and contemporary photographs shot in the same locations by slund.The photographer talked briefly about this project in an interview with National Geographic in 2017:"
Alaskans' Opinions on Sarah Palin,['Letters from Alaskans offer viewpoints of Alaska governor Sarah Palin.'],"Claim:  Letters written by Alaskans offer viewpoints of Alaska governor and vice-presidential nominee Sarah Palin Origins:  In the immediate aftermath of the selection of Alaska governor Sarah Palin as the 2008 Republican vice-presidential nominee came a deluge of Internet-circulated open letters about her, each written by someone claiming a direct or indirect connection to the candidate (e.g., knowing her personally; having lived in the town of Wasilla, Alaska, where Palin served as mayor; or having been a long-time resident of Alaska), and each seemingly attempting to outdo its predecessors in terms of effusive praise or condemnatory criticism of her politics. The letter which was by far the most widely circulated (and which drew the most media attention) was a critical 31 August 2008 missive attributed to a Wasilla resident named Anne Kilkenny, who said she had known Sarah Palin since 1992: ABOUT SARAH PALIN I am a resident of Wasilla, Alaska. I have known Sarah since 1992. Everyone here knows Sarah, so it is nothing special to say we are on a first-name basis. Our children have attended the same schools. Her father was my child's favorite substitute teacher. I also am on a first name basis with her parents and mother-in-law. I attended more City Council meetings during her administration than about 99% of theresidents of the city. She is enormously popular; in every way shes like the most popular girl in middle school. Even men who think she is a poor choice and won't vote for her can't quit  smiling when talking about her because she is a ""babe"". It is astonishing and almost scary how well she can keep a secret. She kept her most recent pregnancy a secret from her children and parents for seven months. She is ""pro-life"". She recently gave birth to a Down's syndrome baby. There is no cover-up involved, here; Trig is her baby. She is energetic and hardworking. She regularly worked out at the gym. She is savvy. She doesn't take positions; she just ""puts things out there"" and if they prove to be popular, then she takes credit. Her husband works a union job on the North Slope for BP and is a champion snowmobile racer. Todd Palin's kind of job is highly sought-after because of the schedule and high pay. He arranges his work schedule so he can fish for salmon in Bristol Bay for a month or so in summer, but by no stretch of the imagination is fishing their major source of income. Nor has her life-style ever been anything like that of native Alaskans. [Remainder of letter here.] here This letter was indeed written, as claimed, by Wasilla resident Anne Kilkenny, who explained her motivations for drafting it to a Daily Journal reporter: Recently, we received a note about the Web post, ""Letter from Anne Kilkenny,"" about Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, the Republican vice presidential nominee. We thought for sure it was not really, ""a resident of Wasilla, Alaska"" who has known Palin since 1992 as the post claims. So, we checked it out. Kilkenny does exist, and she does live in Alaska. We reached her by phone and asked if she wrote the rather long note that calls Palin ""smart"" but also questions her abilities. We asked Kilkenny, ""Did you write that letter?"" She replied skeptically, ""Well, I don't know. Read me parts of it. I'll tell you if it's mine or not."" After we read it to her, she said, ""Yes, I wrote that."" She sent it out to 40 people, brothers, sisters and friends, on Sunday  two days after U.S. Sen. John McCain announced Palin as his choice. On Wednesday, if you enter Kilkenny and Palin's names on Google, about 200 sites refer to this letter. Why did she do it? Kilkenny told The Daily Journal she wanted to offer people information and her experiences. She does not flatter Palin, but she said she did vote for Palin when she ran for city council. ""How affirming it has been,"" she said. ""I am pleased to know how idealistic Americans are. They want information not just the politics of destruction."" Another popular entry was this 28 August 2008 letter by Wasilla resident Debbie Frost, which cast the Alaska governor as the ""US's answer to [British prime minister] Margaret Thatcher"": Sarah Palin is the US's answer to Margaret Thatcher! Anyone who thinks she cannot handle the job or deal briskly and efficiently with ANY issue, including foreign governments ... well, they haven't met our Sarah. As an Alaskan resident as well as a resident of Wasilla, AK, where Sarah Palin was at one time Mayor ... I can speak with confidence. Governor Sarah Palin of Alaska is exactly what she portrayed during her introduction this morning and exactly what our US Government needs. She is ethical to a fault (if there is such a thing), a refreshing change to the status-quo and as smart and determined a PERSON (gender really isn't an issue here as far as I'm concerned) as anyone could ask for at the head of government.  Sarah is no naive 'small town mayor'  she just *started out* there. BTW, as Mayor of Wasilla<, she brought this 'small town' through a lot of GOOD changes and left it at the end of her term having grown to the 4th largest CITY in Alaska  a lot of growth and a stronger economic base than ever before. She has EXECTUTIVE experience *running a government* (something NONE of the other candidates can actually boast, even John McCain) as Governor of Alaska and got there by defeating the *incumbent* Republican Governor, who was definitely part of the 'old school' and who WAS very much in the pocket of the big oil companies. We in Alaska wanted change  and we got it in the person of Sarah Palin! [Remainder of letter here.] here Yet another letter, this one attributed to Butch King, a ""lifetime Alaskan"" who is also a proprietor of the Wildman Lake Lodge, attempted to answer (positively) the question of ""Who is Sarah Palin?"": Many of our friends are asking us ""Who is Sarah Palin?"" Of course, as Alaskans, Kathy and I are extremely proud of her. We just want to let you know that Sarah ""Barracuda"" Palin is a straight shooting, hard charging, get it done gal. She knows when to listen, how to analyze the facts and how to make a decision, then implement the plan. She doesn't do a poll before jumping in with both feet like too many of the Washington types. She has little legislative experience because she has always held the EXECUTIVE position; in private life, as mayor of Anchorage 's largest bedroom community or more recently as Governor of our State. She is a smart, attractive home grown Alaska girl with excellent moral and family values. She can see what needs to be done and does not hesitate to get it done. One of our State's major problems is that its Capital is in Juneau, 500 miles from the nearest road and 800 air miles from the population base which is Anchorage, Wasilla and Fairbanks. Our legislature and most of the State government is in Juneau and they ALL behave like a bunch of freshmen in a college town. It has been this way since Statehood in 1959. When Sarah moved to Juneau, so did accountability and responsibility When the oil revenue started flowing and a barrel of North Slope Crude hit $23.00, these people began spending money like drunken sailors. You can only imagine what was happening when oil hit $100.00 a barrel, about the time Sarah took command. My wife Kathy has first-hand experience with this fiasco, as her father and also her ex-husband were Alaska Legislators who served in Juneau as Senators, Senate President, or members of the State House for a combined period spanning nearly three decades. About the time Sarah took the HELM as Governor of Alaska, about half of the State legislature was in the pocket of big oil companies or contractors doing big projects for Native Corporations around Alaska, all funded by State oil revenue. Alaska government was nothing but a good old boys club riding the perpetual wave of prosperity. This filtered down from the legislature, through the Department of Natural Resources, Department of Labor and even spilled in to the Public Safety who are supposed to ""preserve and protect"". [Remainder of letter here.] here Another entry, attributed only to an ""Alaskan"" named ""Jackie S."" (we haven't yet determined the author's true identity), cast Governor Palin as an environmentally unfriendly ""redneck"": As an Alaskan, I am writing to give all of you some information on Sarah Palin, Senator McCain's choice for VP. As an Alaska voter, I know more than most of you about her and, frankly, I am horrified that he picked her. The most accurate description of her is redneck. Her husband works in the oil fields of Prudhoe Bay and races snow mobiles. She is a life time member of the NRA and has worked tirelessly to allow indiscriminatehunting of wildlife in Alaska, particularly wolves and bears. She has spent millions of Alaska state dollars on aerial hunting of these predators from helicopters and airplanes, dollars that should have been spent, for example, on Alaska's failing school system. We have the lowest rate of high school graduation in the country. Not all of you may think aerial predator hunting is so bad, but how anyone (other than Alaskawolf-haters, of which there are many, most without teeth), could think this use of funds is appropriate is beyond me. If you want to know more about the aerial hunting travesty, let me know and I will send some links to informative web sites. She has been a strong supporter of increased use of fossil fuels, yet the  McCain campaign has the nerve to say she has ""green"" policies. The only thing green about Sarah Palin is her lack of experience. She hasconsistently supported drilling in ANWR, use of coal-burning power plants (as I write this, a new coal plant is being built in her home town of Wasilla), strip mining, and almost anything else that will unnecessarilyexploit the diminishing resources of Alaska and destroy its environment. [Remainder of letter here.] here Last updated:  13 September 2008    Sources:   Schultz, Susy.  ""Alaska Resident Writes About VP Nominee Palin.""   The [Illinois] Daily Journal.  4 September 2008.    White, Rindi.  ""Palin Asked Wasilla Librarian About Censoring Books.""   Anchorage Daily News.  4 September 2008.    The Nation.  ""The Word from Wasilla.""   4 September 2008.",['income'],NEI,"[Remainder of letter here.]Sarah is no naive 'small town mayor'  she just *started out* there. BTW, as Mayor of Wasilla<, she brought this 'small town' through a lot of GOOD changes and left it at the end of her term having grown to the 4th largest CITY in Alaska  a lot of growth and a stronger economic base than ever before. She has EXECTUTIVE experience *running a government* (something NONE of the other candidates can actually boast, even John McCain) as Governor of Alaska and got there by defeating the *incumbent* Republican Governor, who was definitely part of the 'old school' and who WAS very much in the pocket of the big oil companies. We in Alaska wanted change  and we got it in the person of Sarah Palin! [Remainder of letter here.][Remainder of letter here.][Remainder of letter here.]"
Parkland Memorial Hospital and undocumented migrants.,['Fact Check: Were 70% of the women who gave birth at Parkland Hospital in 2006 illegal immigrants?'],"Claim:  70% of the women who gave birth at Parkland Memorial Hospital in the first three months of 2006 were illegal immigrants. Example:  [Collected via e-mail, 2006] Parkland Memorial Hospital in Dallas, Texas is a fairly famous institution and for a variety of reasons:  1. John F. Kennedy died there in 19632. Lee Harvey Oswald died there shortly after3. Jack Ruby, who killed Lee Harvey Oswald, died there a few years later by coincidence On the flip side, Parkland is also home to the second busiest maternity ward in the country with almost 16,000 new babies arriving each year. (That's almost 44 per day  every day) A recent patient survey indicated that 70 percent of the women who gave birth at Parkland in the first three months of 2006 were illegal immigrants.' Crikey, that's 11,200 anchor babies born every year just in Dallas. According to the article, the hospital spent $70.7 million delivering 15,938 babies in 2004 but managed to end up with almost $8 million dollars in surplus funding. Medicaid kicked in $34.5 million, Dallas County taxpayers kicked in $31.3 million and the feds tossed in another $9.5 million. The average patient in Parkland's maternity wards is 25 years old, married and giving birth to her second child. She is also an illegal immigrant. By law, pregnant women cannot be denied medical care based on their immigration status or ability to pay. OK, fine. That doesn't mean they should receive better care than everyday, middle-class American citizens. But at Parkland Hospital, they do. Parkland Memorial Hospital has nine prenatal clinics. NINE. The Dallas Morning News article followed a Hispanic woman who was a patient at one of the clinics and pregnant with her third child  her previous two were also born at Parkland. Her first two deliveries werefree and the Mexican native was grateful because it would have cost $200 to have them in Mexico. This time, the hospital wants her to pay $10 per visit and $100 for the delivery but she was unsure if she could come up with the money. Not that it matters, the hospital won't turn her away. (I wonder why they even bother asking at this point.) How long has this been going on? What are the long-term effects? Well, another subject of the article was born at Parkland in 1986 shortly after her mother entered the U.S. illegally  now she is having her own child there as well. (That's right, she's technically a U.S. citizen.) These women receive free prenatal care including medication, nutrition, birthing classes and child care classes. They also get freebies such as car seats, bottles, diapers and formula. Most of these things are available to American citizens as well but only for low-income applicants and even then, the red tape involved is almost insurmountable. Because these women are illegal immigrants they do not have to provide any sort of legitimate  identification  no proof of income. An American citizen would have to provide a social security number which would reveal their annual income  an illegal immigrant need only claim to be poor and the hospital must take them at their word. My husband is a pilot for the United States Navy (yes, he fought in Iraq) and while the health care is good, we Navy wives don't get any of these perks! Car seats? Diapers? Not so much. So my question is this: Does our public medical care system treat illegal immigrants better than American citizens? Yes it does! As I mentioned, the care I have received is perfectly adequate but it's bare bones, meat and potato medical care  not top of line. Their (the illegals) medical care is free  simply because they are illegal immigrants? Once again, there is no way to verify their income. Parkland Hospital offers indigent care to Dallas County earn less than $40,000 per year. (They also have to prove that they did not refuse health coverage at their current job. Yeah, the 'free' care is not so easy for Americans.) There are about 140 patients who received roughly $4 million dollars for un-reimbursed medical care. As it turns out, they did not qualify for free treatment because they resided outside of Dallas County. So the hospital is going to sue them! Illegals get it all free! But U.S. citizens who live outside of Dallas County get sued! How stupid is this? As if that isn't annoying enough, the illegal immigrant patients are actually complaining about hospital staff not speaking Spanish. In this AP story, the author speaks with a woman who is upset that she had to translate comments from the hospital staff into Spanish for her husband. The doctor was trying to explain the situation to the family and the mother was forced to translate for her husband who only spoke Spanish. This was apparently a great injustice to her. In an attempt to create a Spanish-speaking staff, Parkland Hospital is now providing incentives in the form of extra pay for applicants who speak Spanish. Additionally, medical students at the University of Texas Southwestern for which Parkland Hospital is the training facility will now have a Spanish language requirement added to their already jammed-packed curriculum. No other school in the country boasts such a ridiculous multi-semester (multicultural) requirement. Origins:  Dallas' Parkland Memorial Hospital is familiar even to many non-Texans as the site where both President John F. Kennedy and his assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald (who was himself shot by Jack Ruby), were transported for emergency life-saving procedures in November 1963. Now, in 2006, Parkland Memorial is well known for its maternity program, which includes nine prenatal clinics and employs 72 doctors training to  become obstetricians-gynecologists and 45 nurse-midwives. According to the Dallas Morning News, in 2005 Parkland Memorial staff delivered 15,590 babies, an average of more than 42 infants per day. In a pair of June 2006 articles, the Morning News reported that a recent patient survey indicated 70% of the women who gave birth at Parkland in the first three months of 2006 were illegal immigrants (while a similar New York Times article pegged the yearly tally for 2005 as ""at least 56%"").  The hospital spent $70.7 million delivering babies born there in 2004, with taxpayers covering about 40% of the costs ($31.3 million) directly, and federal and state funds (primarily Medicaid) making up the remainder.  Because of large payments from the Medicaid system, Parkland still ended 2004 with a $7.9 million surplus in obstetrics. A recent hospital analysis concluded that the average maternity ward patient at Parkland is a 25-year-old, married Hispanic woman giving birth to her second child.  The Parkland staff does not ask maternity patients whether they are illegal immigrants, so the preponderance of illegal aliens among this group has to be inferred through other means.)  (Under the 1986 Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act [EMTALA], hospitals are obligated to provide care to pregnant women in need of emergency help, and those that fail to do so are subject to fines of up to $50,000 per violation and exclusion from Medicare and state health care programs.)  EMTALA Parkland's policies contrast with those of the public hospital system in neighboring Tarrant County: Uninsured Hispanic immigrants with uncertain immigration status have flocked in recent years to public hospital emergency rooms and maternity wards in Texas, California and other border states. Their care has swelled costs for struggling hospitals and increased the health care bills that fall to states and counties, giving ammunition to opponents of illegal immigration who complain of undue burdens on local taxpayers.  As a result, health care has become one of the sorest issues in the border states' debate over illegal immigration. Facing harsh criticism from residents, public hospitals are confronted with an uneasy decision: demand immigration documents from patients and deny subsidized care to those who lack them, or follow the public health principle of providing basic care to anyone who needs it.  In Texas, two of the biggest public hospitals chose differently.  The Parkland Health and Hospital System, which serves Dallas County, offers low-cost care to low-income residents with no questions asked about immigration status.  ""I don't want my doctors and nurses to be immigration agents,"" said Dr. Ron J. Anderson, the president of Parkland. ""We decided that these are folks living in our community and we needed to render the care."" In Fort Worth, in neighboring Tarrant County, JPS Health Network requires foreign-born patients to show legal immigration documents to receive financial assistance in nonemergencies, like elective surgery and the treatment of routine or chronic illnesses. Executives said that their first responsibility was to legal residents, but that they were uncomfortable about having to make such distinctions. Administrators from both hospital systems indicated that some of the common assumptions made about immigrants who seek medical care at those facilities (and at other Texas hospitals) are misconceptions: While Texas border hospitals often get ""anchor babies""  children of Mexican women who dart across the border to give birth to an American citizen  most illegal immigrants who go to major hospitals in Texas can show that they have been living here for years, said Ernie Schmid, policy director at the Texas Hospital Association. Many immigrant families have mixed status; often a patient with no documents has a spouse or children who are legal.  Most immigrant patients have jobs and pay taxes, through paycheck deductions or property taxes included in their rent, administrators at the Dallas and Fort Worth hospitals said. At both institutions, they have a better record of paying their bills than low-income Americans do, the administrators said.  The largest group of illegal immigrant patients is pregnant women, hospital figures show. Contrary to popular belief here, their care is not paid for through local taxes. Under a 2002 amendment to federal regulations, the births are covered by federal taxes through Medicaid because their children automatically become American citizens.  These cases are not affected by new regulations that went into effect on July 1 [2006] requiring Medicaid patients to provide proof of citizenship, Texas health officials said. They said they believed that only small numbers of illegal immigrants had received other Medicaid benefits.    Last updated:  25 August 2015     Sources:   Jacobsen, Sherry.  ""Parkland Is Brimming with Babies.""   Dallas Morning News.  11 June 2006.    Jacobsen, Sherry.  ""Parkland Will Treat All Moms-to-Be.""   Dallas Morning News.  12 June 2006.    Preston, Julia.  ""Texas Hospitals' Separate Paths Reflect the Debate on Immigration.""   The New York Times.  18 July 2006  (p. A1).",['income'],False,"A recent hospital analysis concluded that the average maternity ward patient at Parkland is a 25-year-old, married Hispanic woman giving birth to her second child.  The Parkland staff does not ask maternity patients whether they are illegal immigrants, so the preponderance of illegal aliens among this group has to be inferred through other means.)  (Under the 1986 Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act [EMTALA], hospitals are obligated to provide care to pregnant women in need of emergency help, and those that fail to do so are subject to fines of up to $50,000 per violation and exclusion from Medicare and state health care programs.) "
Was a Pixie Skeleton Discovered in the Rocky Mountains?,['A convincing depiction of a pixie skeleton had some social media users curious about real-life fairies. '],"An image supposedly showing a pixie skeleton is frequently shared online along with the claim that the strange remains were found in the Rocky Mountains and that ""scientific tests"" had concluded the bones were authentic: shared   James Cornan of Wilmington, North Carolina, claims to have discovered the remains of a pixie in a falcons nest while exploring the Rocky Mountains in 2017. Scientific tests have concluded the bones are indeed real. Although these skeletal remains may appear to be realistic, this image doesn't show a deceased pixie discovered in the Rocky Mountains. This photograph was originally shared on the website of Dan Baines, an artist whose work centers around mythological creatures and folklore artifacts. Baines, who was responsible for a similar hoax back in 2007 about a ""dead fairy,"" describes himself as a ""full time artist and blogger on fairy folklore"" on his Twitter profile and states on his website that he incorporates ""forgotten folklore, grim historical events and facets of the paranormal and occult into his work."" hoax Twitter The ""pixie skeleton"" image was posted to Baines' website in February 2017 along with a story that offered the artistic artifact as a genuine discovery. At the time, the images were presented as if this pixie skeleton had been discovered in England: story   Could these shocking images finally be proof of the existence of pixies and fairies? Hosts of The Mystic Menagerie, a UK based podcast were puzzled when a regular listener sent in a series of images he claims were found in a protected bird of prey next in Cornwall. In a 2018 update, Baines stated that the ""pixie bones now reside in a secure facility in Germany where biological specimens that defy conventional science are stored."" We reached out to Baines for more information about this pixie skeleton and the German facility reportedly holding its remains. stated While Baines has yet to admit that he created this convincing artwork, his statement from 2007 about a similar fairy hoax bears repeating: statement Even if you believe in fairies, as I personally do, there will always have been an element of doubt in your mind that would suggest the remains are a hoax. However, the magic created by the possibility of the fairy being real is something you will remember for the rest of your life. Alas the fairy is fake but my interest and belief has allowed me to create a work of art that is convincing and magical. I was also interested to see if fairy folklore is still a valid belief in modern society and I am pleased to say that yes it is! I have had more response from believers than I ever thought possible. Baines, Dan.  ""Disturbing Discovery of Pixie found in Falcon Nest.""
  Danbaines.com.  24 February 2017. Baines, Dan.  ""Pixie Skeleton Mystery Reappears in the US.""
  Danbaines.com.  10 February 2018.",['interest'],False,"An image supposedly showing a pixie skeleton is frequently shared online along with the claim that the strange remains were found in the Rocky Mountains and that ""scientific tests"" had concluded the bones were authentic:This photograph was originally shared on the website of Dan Baines, an artist whose work centers around mythological creatures and folklore artifacts. Baines, who was responsible for a similar hoax back in 2007 about a ""dead fairy,"" describes himself as a ""full time artist and blogger on fairy folklore"" on his Twitter profile and states on his website that he incorporates ""forgotten folklore, grim historical events and facets of the paranormal and occult into his work.""The ""pixie skeleton"" image was posted to Baines' website in February 2017 along with a story that offered the artistic artifact as a genuine discovery. At the time, the images were presented as if this pixie skeleton had been discovered in England:In a 2018 update, Baines stated that the ""pixie bones now reside in a secure facility in Germany where biological specimens that defy conventional science are stored."" We reached out to Baines for more information about this pixie skeleton and the German facility reportedly holding its remains.While Baines has yet to admit that he created this convincing artwork, his statement from 2007 about a similar fairy hoax bears repeating:"
Fraudulent ALDI Coupons Circulating on Facebook,['An offer on Facebook for free ALDI grocery coupons is not legitimate.'],"In July 2019, an $80 coupon began circulating on Facebook for the ALDI grocery store chain. These shared posts were the latest iteration of the common ""free coupon"" or ""free gift card"" scams that frequently plague social media and have also targeted shoppers of chains such as Kroger and Target. A different scam coupon offer also circulated with the ALDI logo in December 2015, advertising a ""get 40% off all purchases in store"" promise. Another displayed what appeared to be a free coupon for ""$60 off a minimum $70 purchase,"" and even one for $75 off: ""Aldi has a coupon for $60 off a minimum $70 purchase. Aldi has verified this is a scam, but people are sharing it all over Facebook."" These coupons are not legitimate, as ALDI noted on their Facebook page. These coupon offers are a form of survey scams that direct victims to either a survey on a website not owned by ALDI or what looks like a Facebook page for ALDI. The survey pages and the Facebook page have no affiliation with the company, despite being adorned with the ALDI logo. Both instruct people to share the bogus ALDI coupon offer on their Facebook timelines and submit comments about it. This page instructs shoppers to follow these ""two simple steps"" in order to get their coupons. Once the steps are completed, however, users are not greeted with information explaining how to claim their coupons. Instead, they're asked to take a brief survey that entails providing personal information such as home address, telephone number, email address, and date of birth, and are required to sign up for credit cards or enroll in a number of subscription programs to obtain their ""free"" gift cards. A version of the scam also surfaced in May 2016, and another later in 2018. ALDI responded to frustrated consumers on Facebook. In June 2017, a version of the scam touting discounts in honor of ALDI's purported anniversary also appeared on Facebook: ""HEY FRIENDS CHECK THIS OUT!!!!! Aldi is giving Free $75 Coupon to Everyone to celebrate 103rd Anniversary! Each Person (1)- Go & get yours! ALDI-COM.COM."" However, attempting to visit the linked domain (ALDI-COM.com) led to a ""deceptive site ahead"" warning and not to ALDI's official website. If you frequently use Facebook, there is a good chance that you'll encounter one of these survey scams again. A July 2014 article from the Better Business Bureau lists key factors for identifying fraudulent Facebook posts: """,['credit'],False,"In July 2019, an $80 coupon began making the rounds on Facebook for the ALDI grocery store chain. These shared posts were the latest iteration of the common ""free coupon"" or ""free gift card"" scams that frequently plague social media and have also preyed on shoppers of chains such as Kroger and Target:If you frequently use Facebook, there is a good chance that you'll run into one of these survey scams again. A July 2014 article from the Better Business Bureau lists key factors for identifying fraudulent Facebook posts:"
Oliver North Warned of Osama bin Laden in 1987,['Did Oliver North warn Congress about Osama bin Laden during the Iran-Contra hearings?'],"For most of us who watched the televised Joint Hearings Before the Senate Select Committee on Secret Military Assistance to Iran and the Nicaraguan Opposition and the House Select Committee to Investigate Covert Arms Transactions with Iran (better known as the ""Iran-Contra hearings,"" held by Congress to determine whether the Reagan administration had secretly and illegally sold arms to Iran in order to secure the release of American hostages, then used the profits from those sales to fund the contra rebels in Nicaragua) in 1987, the enduring image we came away with was a memory of an unapologetic and resolute Lt. Col. Oliver North delivering testimony in a Marine uniform. North, who was a central figure in the plan to secretly ship arms to Iran despite a U.S. trade and arms embargo, and who as a National Security Council aide directed efforts to raise private and foreign funds for the contras despite a Congressional prohibition on U.S. government agencies' providing military aid to the Nicaraguan rebels, testified before Congress under a grant of limited immunity in July 1987. Although North had been granted limited immunity for his testimony, he was later convicted of criminal charges related to Iran-Contra activities (a conviction that was eventually overturned on the grounds that witnesses had been influenced by his immunized testimony). One of the charges against North was that he had received a $16,000 home security system paid for out of the proceeds of the Iran-Contra affair and had forged documents to cover his receipt of an illegal gratuity. North admitted that he knew the security system was a ""gift"" but maintained he never inquired about who had paid for it or how it was financed, and he was insistent that he needed the security system because the government had failed to provide adequate protection against international terrorists for him and his family. The terrorist North mentioned in his testimony was not Osama bin Laden, however. To the extent that bin Laden was known to the western world in 1987, it was not as a ""terrorist"" but as one of the U.S.-backed ""freedom fighters"" participating in the war against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. Osama bin Laden's hatred of the U.S. and conversion to ""terrorist"" status is not believed to have come about until the Gulf War of 1990-91, when he was outspokenly critical of Saudi Arabian dependence upon the U.S. military and denounced U.S. support of a ""corrupt, materialist, and irreligious"" Saudi monarchy. (The Saudi Arabian government stripped bin Laden of his citizenship in 1994 for his funding of militant fundamentalist Islamic groups.) occupation Oliver North did not testify about or mention the name Osama bin Laden during the Iran-Contra hearings. He claimed that threats against his life had been made by terrorist Abu Nidal, telling a congressional committee: testify Abu Nidal Abu Nidal is, as I am sure you on the Intelligence Committee know, the principal, foremost assassin in the world today. He is a brutal murderer. And I would like to just, if I may, just read to you a little bit about Mr. Abu Nidal ... ""Abu Nidal, the radical Palestinian guerrilla leader, linked to last Friday's attacks in Rome and Vienna""  that was the so-called Christmas massacre in which 19 people died and 200 were wounded  ""is the world's most wanted terrorist."" That is the Christian Science Monitor. When you look at his whole career, Abu Nidal makes the infamous terrorist Carlos [the Jackal] look like a Boy Scout. Abu Nidal himself, quoted in Der Spiegel, ""Between America and us, there exists a war to the death. In the coming months and years, Americans will be thinking about us."" ""For sheer viciousness, Abu Nidal has few rivals in the underworld of terrorism."" Newseek. Our own State Department, and we have copies of these that we can make available for insertion in the record, but the State Department summary on Abu Nidal, not exactly an overstatement, notes that his followers, who number an estimated 500, have killed as many as 181 persons, and wounded more than 200, in two years. Abu Nidal does not deny these things. We also have an exhibit that we can provide for you that shows what Abu Nidal did in the Christmas Massacres. One of the people killed in the Christmas Massacre  and I do not wish to overdramatize this  but the Abu Nidal terrorists in Rome who blasted the 11-year-old American Natasha Simpson to her knees, deliberately zeroed in and fired an extra burst at her head just in case. I want you to know that I'd be more than willing ... to meet Abu Nidal on equal terms anywhere in the world. There's an even deal for him. OK? But I am not willing to have my wife and my four children meet Abu Nidal or his organization on his terms. To emphasize his point, North showed the committee a blow-up of a newspaper article detailing the atrocities of Abu Nidal and recalled that an 11-year-old girl named Natasha Simpson, the daughter of an Associated Press news editor, had been gunned down (along with four other Americans) during an attack by an Abu Nidal group on the El Al terminal at the Rome airport in December 1985. North also later claimed that an attempt on his life had been made five months before his congressional testimony at the instigation of Libyan leader Mohmmar Qadaffi: Mohmmar Qadaffi In February 1987, Muammar Ghadaffi ordered his thugs to carry out a threat made against me in 1986. Thankfully, the FBI intercepted the well-armed perpetrators on the way to our home, and my family and I were sequestered for a time on a military base. The orders from Tripoli were delivered to a terrorist cell in Virginia  at the offices of The People's Committee for Libyan Students. So no, Oliver North didn't warn us back in 1987 about Osama bin Laden's ""potential threat to the security of the world"" or suggest that bin Laden be hunted down by ""an assassin team,"" nor was he given the brush-off by a clueless senator ""who disagreed with this approach."" Eventually, Col. North drafted his own response to this piece of misinformation: FROM THE DESK OF LTCOL OLIVER L. NORTH (USMC) RET.NOVEMBER 28, 2001OVER THE COURSE OF THE LAST SEVERAL WEEKS, I HAVE RECEIVED SEVERAL THOUSAND E-MAILS FROM EVERY STATE IN THE U.S. AND 13 FOREIGN COUNTRIES IN WHICH THE ORIGINATOR PURPORTS TO HAVE RECENTLY VIEWED A VIDEOTAPE OF MY SWORN TESTIMONY BEFORE A CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE IN 1987. A COPY OF ONE OF THOSE E-MAILS IS ATTACHED BELOW. AS YOU WILL NOTE, THE ORIGINATOR ATTRIBUTES TO ME CERTAIN STATEMENTS REGARDING USAMA BIN LADEN AND OTHER MATTERS THAT ARE SIMPLY INACCURATE. THOUGH I WOULD LIKE TO CLAIM THE GIFT OF PROPHESY, I DON'T HAVE IT. I DON'T KNOW WHO SAW WHAT VIDEO ""AT UNC."" (OR ANYWHERE ELSE) BUT, FOR THE RECORD, HERE'S WHAT I DO KNOW: 1. IT WAS THE COMMITTEE COUNSEL, JOHN NIELDS, NOT A SENATOR WHO WAS DOING THE QUESTIONING. 2. THE SECURITY SYSTEM, INSTALLED AT MY HOME, JUST BEFORE I MADE A VERY SECRET TRIP TO TEHRAN, COST, ACCORDING TO THE COMMITTEE, $16K, NOT $60K. 3. THE TERRORIST WHO THREATENED TO KILL ME IN 1986, JUST BEFORE THAT SECRET TRIP TO TEHRAN, WAS NOT USAMA BIN LADEN, IT WAS ABU NIDAL (WHO WORKS FOR THE LIBYANS  NOT THE TALIBAN AND NOT IN AFGHANISTAN). 4. I NEVER SAID I WAS AFRAID OF ANYBODY. I DID SAY THAT I WOULD BE GLAD TO MEET ABU NIDAL ON EQUAL TERMS ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD BUT THAT I WAS UNWILLING TO HAVE HIM OR HIS OPERATIVES MEET MY WIFE AND CHILDREN ON HIS TERMS. 5. I DID SAY THAT THE TERRORISTS INTERCEPTED BY THE FBI ON THE WAY TO MY HOUSE IN FEB. 87 TO KILL MY WIFE, CHILDREN AND ME WERE LIBYANS, DISPATCHED FROM THE PEOPLE'S COMMITTEE FOR LIBYAN STUDENTS IN MCLEAN, VIRGINIA. 6. AND I DID SAY THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAD MOVED MY FAMILY OUT OF OUR HOME TO A MILITARY BASE (CAMP LEJEUNE, NC) UNTIL THEY COULD DISPATCH MORE THAN 30 AGENTS TO PROTECT MY FAMILY FROM THOSE TERRORISTS (BECAUSE A LIBERAL FEDERAL JUDGE HAD ALLOWED THE LYBIAN ASSASSINS TO POST BOND AND THEY FLED). 7. AND, FYI: THOSE FEDERAL AGENTS REMAINED AT OUR HOME UNTIL I RETIRED FROM THE MARINES AND WAS NO LONGER A ""GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL."" BY THEN, THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT HAD SPENT MORE THAN $2M PROTECTING THE NORTH FAMILY. THE TERRORISTS SENT TO KILL US WERE NEVER RE-APPREHENDED. SEMPER FIDELIS,OLIVER L. NORTH Variations:  One variant of this item concluded with the statement ""The senator disagreed with this approach and that was all that was shown of the clip. If anyone is interested, the Senator turned out to be none other than ... Al Gore."" Senator Al Gore of Tennessee was not a member of the United States Senate Select Committee on Secret Military Assistance to Iran and the Nicaraguan Opposition and therefore did not take part in the questioning of any witnesses before the Committee. Additional information:    Fisk, Robert.  ""Anti-Soviet Warrior Puts His Army on the Road to Peace.""
  The [London] Independent.  6 December 1993  (p. 10). Fritz, Sara and Karen Tumulty.  ""North's Attempt at Cover-Up Is Told.""
  Los Angeles Times.  24 June 1987  (p. A1). Ibrahim, Youssef.  ""Saudi Stripped of Citizenship for Funding Fundamentalists.""
  The [London] Guardian.  11 April 1994  (p. 8). North, Oliver.  ""Tackling Terrorism.""
  TownHall.com.  9 June 2000. Tackling Terrorism North, Oliver L.
 Under Fire: An American Story.  New York: HarperCollins, 1992  (pp. 341-344). Pincus, Walter.  ""North Says He and His Superiors Lied About Contra Aid.""
  The Washington Post.  9 July 1987  (p. A1).",['finance'],False,"The terrorist North mentioned in his testimony was not Osama bin Laden, however. To the extent that bin Laden was known to the western world in 1987, it was not as a ""terrorist"" but as one of the U.S.-backed ""freedom fighters"" participating in the war against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. Osama bin Laden's hatred of the U.S. and conversion to ""terrorist"" status is not believed to have come about until the Gulf War of 1990-91, when he was outspokenly critical of Saudi Arabian dependence upon the U.S. military and denounced U.S. support of a ""corrupt, materialist, and irreligious"" Saudi monarchy. (The Saudi Arabian government stripped bin Laden of his citizenship in 1994 for his funding of militant fundamentalist Islamic groups.)Oliver North did not testify about or mention the name Osama bin Laden during the Iran-Contra hearings. He claimed that threats against his life had been made by terrorist Abu Nidal, telling a congressional committee:To emphasize his point, North showed the committee a blow-up of a newspaper article detailing the atrocities of Abu Nidal and recalled that an 11-year-old girl named Natasha Simpson, the daughter of an Associated Press news editor, had been gunned down (along with four other Americans) during an attack by an Abu Nidal group on the El Al terminal at the Rome airport in December 1985. North also later claimed that an attempt on his life had been made five months before his congressional testimony at the instigation of Libyan leader Mohmmar Qadaffi:North, Oliver.  ""Tackling Terrorism.""
  TownHall.com.  9 June 2000."
Is 'QAnon Shaman' Jake Angeli Turning His Back on Trump?,"['Wearing horns and furs on his head, Jake Angeli was a highly visible figure in the U.S. Capitol insurrection.']","Weeks after the U.S. Capitol insurrection, reports surfaced claiming that a highly visible member of the right-wing mob  the self-described ""QAnon digital soldier"" who was photographed shirtless, wearing horns and furs on his head  was abandoning former President Donald Trump as a demagogue. reports QAnon digital soldier For example, a Jan. 29 Vice headline read: ""The 'QAnon Shaman' just Flipped On Trump."" headline read   The assertion had some truth to it. In an interview with The Associated Press, the lawyer representing the man  Jacob Chansley or ""Jake Angeli"" of Arizona  said his client's attitude toward the president had changed since the deadly siege, and he was willing to testify in Trump's historic second impeachment. That trial by the U.S. Senate was set to begin the week of Feb. 8 and would either convict or acquit the former president of inciting his supporters to break into the Capitol on Jan. 6 to try to halt a ceremonial vote to affirm the outcome of the 2020 presidential election. halt a ceremonial vote The attorney, Albert Watkins, said he wants senators to hear the perspective of someone who was incited by Trump, according to the Jan. 30 story. The Associated Press continued: Jan. 30 story Watkins said his client was previously 'horrendously smitten' by Mr. Trump but now feels let down after Mr. Trump's refusal to grant Chansley and others who participated in the insurrection a pardon. 'He felt like he was betrayed by the president,' Watkins said. Here is a full list of the people Trump pardoned or commuted during his final hours in office. full list We reached out to Watkins to determine the legitimacy of the news story. In an email, we sent him a link to The Associated Press reporting, asked him if it was indeed accurate, and, if so, inquired why or under what circumstances his party decided to offer Angeli's testimony. He responded in an email message to Snopes: ""My client is available if called upon to testify. No statement to the contrary has been made."" In other words, it was true to claim that Angeli  who was arrested and charged on Jan. 9 for insurrection-related crimes including civil disorder, obstruction of an official proceeding, and disorderly conduct  was willing to testify in Trump's Senate impeachment trial, which may determine whether Trump can run for political office in the future. Jan. 9 whether However, the nature of Angeli's testimony, should he be asked to speak during the trial, remained unknown as of this writing. ""The words of Trump supporters who are accused of participating in the riot may end up being used against him in his impeachment trial,"" The Associated Press reported, though no evidence existed to determine whether Angeli would indeed share his experience to help senators convict the former president. In sum, while it was true that Angeli was willing to testify at Trump's second impeachment trial, it was not known whether he was preparing to make a statement that would help or hurt the efforts of senators who believe the former president is guilty of inciting the insurrection. For those reasons, we rate this claim a ""mixture"" of truthful, false, and undetermined information.",['share'],NEI,"Weeks after the U.S. Capitol insurrection, reports surfaced claiming that a highly visible member of the right-wing mob  the self-described ""QAnon digital soldier"" who was photographed shirtless, wearing horns and furs on his head  was abandoning former President Donald Trump as a demagogue.For example, a Jan. 29 Vice headline read: ""The 'QAnon Shaman' just Flipped On Trump.""That trial by the U.S. Senate was set to begin the week of Feb. 8 and would either convict or acquit the former president of inciting his supporters to break into the Capitol on Jan. 6 to try to halt a ceremonial vote to affirm the outcome of the 2020 presidential election.The attorney, Albert Watkins, said he wants senators to hear the perspective of someone who was incited by Trump, according to the Jan. 30 story. The Associated Press continued:Here is a full list of the people Trump pardoned or commuted during his final hours in office.In other words, it was true to claim that Angeli  who was arrested and charged on Jan. 9 for insurrection-related crimes including civil disorder, obstruction of an official proceeding, and disorderly conduct  was willing to testify in Trump's Senate impeachment trial, which may determine whether Trump can run for political office in the future."
"Does Finland's Kummakivi Rock Weigh 500,000 Kg, and Is It 11K Years Old?","['According to Finnish folklore, giants and trolls left behind the massive balancing rock, but geologists explain the science behind it.']","For years, people have marveled at the sight of a massive rock resting on a smaller rock in Kummakivi, Ruokolahti, Finland. In 2022, several Reddit accounts posted a picture of this rock, known as Kummakivi Balancing Rock. Some of these posts, including this one from February 2023, claimed that the Kummakivi rock weighs 500,000 kg (1.1 million pounds) and ""has been balancing on top of another rock for 11,000 years."" several Reddit accounts this one   (Image Via r/Damnthatsinteresting/Reddit) Such claims about so-called ""precariously balanced rocks"" (PBRs) are not new, though. Various social media accounts and several online portals have discussed different aspects of the Kummakivi rock. Some articlesrefer to Finnish folklore attributing the rock's position ""to giants or trolls who are said to dwell in rocky landscapes and throw boulders around.""  social media several online portals refer to Finnish folklore Science, however, explains in less fanciful terms how one rock comes to rest on another. Precariously balanced rocks ""form as blocks preserved on cliffs, or when softer rocks erode and leave the harder rocks behind,"" noted an October 2020 article from Imperial College London. ""They can also form when landslides or retreating glaciers deposit them in strange positions."" article According to the aforementioned social media and online portals, the estimated age of the rock varies between 8,000 and 12,000 years. Saimaa Geoparkin Finland, which was awarded Global Geopark status by UNICEF in 2021, stated that the rock is 11,500 years old and approximately 7 meters (about 23 feet) long.  Saimaa Geopark (According to UNESCO, ""Global Geoparks are single, unified geographical areas where sites and landscapes of international geological significance are managed with a holistic concept of protection, education and sustainable development."" The designation is considered similar to UNESCO World Heritage sites.) UNESCO While some social media posts and online sources claim that the weight of Kummakivi rock is 500,000 kg (approximately 1.1 million pounds), we could not verify this information. As noted above, Kummakivi is not the only rock in such a peculiar situation. There are other examples of PBRs in different places. Photos of such PBRs can be found on several websites, like this one about the Balanced Rock in Colorado Springs, Colorado. Additionally, in 2017, the Lonely Planet travel guide published an article about the ""10 nerve-racking rocks."" Similarly, in October 2013, the BBC featured a photo of a PBR in Brittany, France, sent by a reader under the headline ""Your pictures: Resting."" one ""10 nerve-racking rocks."" featured In addition to being tourist attractions, these PBRs have drawn the interest of researchers, including those at Imperial College London. They suggested that such rocks could help in forecasting earthquakes. ""By tapping into ancient geological data locked within Californian PBRs, Imperial College London researchers have broken ground on a new technique to boost the precision of hazard estimates for large earthquakes by up to 49 per cent,"" noted thearticle from October 2020 on the university's website. article Considering that reputable sources report the age of the Kummakivi rock to be around 11,000 years but we were unable to verify the estimated weight of the rock, we rate the claim as ""Mixture."" ""A Rock like No Other  the Kummakivi of Ruokolahti."" FINLAND, NATURALLY, 20 Aug. 2017, https://finlandnaturally.com/mustsee/a-rock-like-no-other/. ""Earthquake Forecasting Clues Unearthed in Strange Precariously Balanced Rocks | Imperial News | Imperial College London."" Imperial News, 1 Oct. 2020, https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/205493/earthquake-forecasting-clues-unearthed-strange-precariously/. https://plus.google.com/+UNESCO. ""UNESCO Global Geoparks (UGGp)."" UNESCO, 25 Feb. 2019, https://en.unesco.org/global-geoparks. Ilya. ""The Mysterious Kummakivi Balancing Rock: A Natural Wonder Explained."" Unusual Places, 11 May 2013, https://unusualplaces.org/kummakivi/. Imbler, Sabrina. ""Why Scientists Fall for Precariously Balanced Rocks."" Atlas Obscura, 9 Jan. 2020, http://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/precariously-balanced-rocks. ""Kummakivi Balancing Rock."" Atlas Obscura, http://www.atlasobscura.com/places/kummakivi-balancing-rock. Accessed 16 May 2023. Kummakivi, Balancing Rock, Seems to Defy the Laws of Physics. https://www.geologyin.com/2022/11/kummakivi-balancing-rock-seems-to-defy.html. Accessed 16 May 2023. ""Kummakivi Erratic Boulder."" Saimaa Geopark, 5 July 2022, https://saimaageopark.fi/en/kummakivi-erratic-boulder/. Secret Marvels: Top 10 Nerve-Racking Rocks - Lonely Planet. 22 Mar. 2023, https://web.archive.org/web/20230322040417/https:/www.lonelyplanet.com/articles/secret-marvels-top-10-nerve-racking-rocks. ""Your Pictures: Resting."" BBC News, 23 Oct. 2013. www.bbc.com, https://www.bbc.com/news/in-pictures-24621801.",['interest'],NEI,"For years, people have marveled at the sight of a massive rock resting on a smaller rock in Kummakivi, Ruokolahti, Finland. In 2022, several Reddit accounts posted a picture of this rock, known as Kummakivi Balancing Rock. Some of these posts, including this one from February 2023, claimed that the Kummakivi rock weighs 500,000 kg (1.1 million pounds) and ""has been balancing on top of another rock for 11,000 years.""Such claims about so-called ""precariously balanced rocks"" (PBRs) are not new, though. Various social media accounts and several online portals have discussed different aspects of the Kummakivi rock. Some articlesrefer to Finnish folklore attributing the rock's position ""to giants or trolls who are said to dwell in rocky landscapes and throw boulders around."" Precariously balanced rocks ""form as blocks preserved on cliffs, or when softer rocks erode and leave the harder rocks behind,"" noted an October 2020 article from Imperial College London. ""They can also form when landslides or retreating glaciers deposit them in strange positions.""According to the aforementioned social media and online portals, the estimated age of the rock varies between 8,000 and 12,000 years. Saimaa Geoparkin Finland, which was awarded Global Geopark status by UNICEF in 2021, stated that the rock is 11,500 years old and approximately 7 meters (about 23 feet) long. (According to UNESCO, ""Global Geoparks are single, unified geographical areas where sites and landscapes of international geological significance are managed with a holistic concept of protection, education and sustainable development."" The designation is considered similar to UNESCO World Heritage sites.)Photos of such PBRs can be found on several websites, like this one about the Balanced Rock in Colorado Springs, Colorado. Additionally, in 2017, the Lonely Planet travel guide published an article about the ""10 nerve-racking rocks."" Similarly, in October 2013, the BBC featured a photo of a PBR in Brittany, France, sent by a reader under the headline ""Your pictures: Resting.""In addition to being tourist attractions, these PBRs have drawn the interest of researchers, including those at Imperial College London. They suggested that such rocks could help in forecasting earthquakes. ""By tapping into ancient geological data locked within Californian PBRs, Imperial College London researchers have broken ground on a new technique to boost the precision of hazard estimates for large earthquakes by up to 49 per cent,"" noted thearticle from October 2020 on the university's website."
Did Stanley Kubrick Fake the Moon Landings?,"[""Various edits of this infamous 'interview' have been circulating for years. ""]","On 10 December 2015, the website YourNewsWire.com published a video purportedly showing acclaimed film director Stanley Kubrick, who helmed groundbreaking films such as Dr. Strangelove, 2001: A Space Odyssey, and A Clockwork Orange, confessing to having helped NASA fake the Apollo program moon landings. A stunning new video emerged 15 years after Stanley Kubrick's death, in which he allegedly admits that the NASA moon landings were faked. Filmmaker T. Patrick Murray interviewed Kubrick three days before his death in March 1999. He was forced to sign an 88-page NDA to keep the contents of the interview a secret for 15 years. Below is a transcript from the interview with Stanley Kubrick, in which the director admits on camera that ""the moon landings ALL were faked, and that I was the person who filmed it."" In the interview, the alleged Stanley Kubrick figure confesses: 

Kubrick: I perpetrated a huge fraud on the American public, which I am now about to detail, involving the United States government and NASA, that the moon landings were faked, that the moon landings ALL were faked, and that I was the person who filmed it. 

Murray: Ok. (laughs) What are you talking ... You're serious. Ok. 

Kubrick: I'm serious. Dead serious. Yes, it was fake. 

Murray: Why are you telling the world? Why does the world need to know that the moon landings aren't real and you faked them? 

Kubrick: I consider them to be my masterpiece. 

Murray: And you can't take credit, or even talk about ... 

Kubrick: Well, I am now ... 

Murray: So, you can't talk to Roger Ebert about it. Does that frustrate you? Why did they have to fake it? Why would they have to do that? 

Kubrick: Because it is impossible to get there ... 2001 was very ambitious, but that's not to say that faking the moon landing was not ambitious. But I learned things from making 2001, and that's why I got this gig in the first place. 

Murray: That makes sense. 

Kubrick: Well, it was easy for me because I didn't think a whole lot about the morality of it. But I didn't. And I could see that Neil [Armstrong] was bothered by it. 

This video has been circulating online since at least August 2015 and is one of several clips purportedly showing Kubrick talking about his alleged involvement in faking the U.S. moon landings. While there are various edits of this infamous (and fake) interview circulating on YouTube, the videos all originated with a new film from T. Patrick Murray titled Shooting Kubrick. Murray claimed on the Shooting Kubrick website that he was granted unprecedented access to interview the director in May 1999, which would have been quite an impressive feat since Kubrick had passed away two months earlier. Although the date could be a simple typographical error, that was not the only questionable aspect of the interview. The man being interviewed simply doesn't look or sound like Stanley Kubrick when compared to a video of the real Kubrick accepting the D.W. Griffith Award in 1997. Furthermore, unedited versions of the interview contain hints that the ""Stanley Kubrick"" in the video is an actor. In a since-deleted clip, the interviewer called his subject ""Tom"" and instructed him on how to tell the next part of his story: ""You don't say he said anything. You say what he says. Tom, I'm giving you directions. You don't have to imitate him (Richard Nixon). You're not reporting it. You're repeating it ... We're doing exposition here. That's how we're going to sneak it in."" A spokesman for Kubrick's widow also proclaimed that ""[t]he interview is a lie; Stanley Kubrick has never been interviewed by T. Patrick Murray. The whole story is made up, fraudulent, and untrue."" T. Patrick Murray has not admitted that his interview with Stanley Kubrick is a hoax, but he certainly is banking on the mystery's driving interest in his project.",['credit'],False,"On 10 December 2015, the web site YourNewsWire.com published a video purportedly showing film acclaimed director Stanley Kubrick, who helmed such groundbreaking films as Dr. Strangelove, 2001: A Space Odyssey, and A Clockwork Orange, confessing to having helped NASA fake the Apollo program moon landings:This video has been circulating online since at least August 2015 and is one of several clips purportedly showing Kubrick talking about his alleged involvement in faking the U.S. moon landings. While there are various edits of this infamous (and fake) interview circulating on YouTube, the videos all originated with a new film from T. Patrick Murray titled Shooting Kubrick.Murray claimed on the Shooting Kubrick web site that he was granted unprecedented access to interview the director in May 1999, which would have been quite an impressive feat since Kubrick had passed away two months earlier:Although the date could be a simple typographical error, that was not the only questionable aspect of the interview. The man being interviewed simply doesn't look or sound like Stanley Kubrick when compared to a video of the real Kubrick accepting the D.W. Griffith Award in 1997:"
Speed Trap,['Photograph shows a traffic speed measurement unit embedded in a guardrail?'],"Claim:  Photograph shows a traffic speed measurement unit embedded in a guardrail.  Examples:  [Collected via Facebook, May 2013] This photo has shown up across Facebook and the interwebs getting Speeders in a panic since it claims to be a speed trap camera or radar. My own research into the matter has turned up little other than the rumor is far flung including England, Germany, and Malaysia.  New Police Radar Will Catch You Off Guard You know how when your late or on a trip trying to make time you become a little bit of a lead foot? Well now you not only have to watch for police cars. Here is the all new guardrail embedded radar system! Less staff needed. Which is good in one way, when you call for help more police will be available. Bad, because now you have to watch for bulging Guardrails as well!  Origins:  Although we can't say for sure exactly where it's located or whether it's currently operational, the object embedded in a roadside guardrail is an example of an automated LIDAR (light detection and ranging) device used for traffic speed enforcement.  LIDAR systems are similar to the radar systems currently employed for the detection of speeding motorists, but they use lasers rather than radio waves and therefore offer the advantages of working better in congested traffic conditions and are less detectable than radar (although the latter has greater range): LIDAR Lidar uses a time-of-flight method for taking measurements to determine the target vehicle's speed. When a pulse is transmitted, the timer starts, and when that pulse hits its target and returns, the timer stops. The calculation of distance traveled over time is computed to determine speed. In many respects, this sort of technology may not sound like anything new. After all, we've been using radar in a similar fashion for years. The difference lies in the type and shape of the pulse being transmitted. Radar shoots out a short, high-intensity burst of high-frequency radio waves in a cone-shaped pattern. Officers who have been through the painfully technical 40-hour Doppler radar training course know it will detect a variety of objects within that cone pattern, such as the closest target, the fastest moving target or the largest target. Officers are trained to differentiate and properly match targets down range to the radar readings they receive. Under most conditions, skilled users get good results with radar, and it is found to be most effective for open stretches of roadway. But for more congested areas, locking radar on a specific target is more difficult. Lidar utilizes laser technology, allowing for superior target acquisition in high-volume traffic areas. According to Carl Fors of Texas-based Speed Measurement Laboratories Inc., ""Laser systems are the most accurate means of providing traffic and speed analysis compared to other systems. A laser can pinpoint one vehicle in a group while radar can't. A laser beam is a mere 18 inches wide at 500 feet compared to a radar beam's width of some 150 feet."" In congested traffic areas, an officer can very effectively use lidar to pick out a specific target, site it and read its speed without any concern for interference from other close-by targets. This small beam width has another added benefit  it cannot be detected until after a speed measurement is already made. Testing of the most advanced detectors has shown that when officers aim properly (at the vehicle's front license plate instead of the windshield where the detector usually sits), the signal often goes undetected. A company sales brochure for the LMS-06 Traffic Observer digital traffic surveillance unit illustrates and explains how the particular LIDAR system shown above works: sales brochure    Note that the ""hidden"" guardrail unit shown in these photographs simply measures the speed of passing cars.  In this particular type of traffic enforcement system, a second and much more conspicuous unit is located slightly farther down the road from the speed measurement device to record and store images of offending vehicles:  Some older blog posts indicate the photographs displayed above were taken along the A8 motorway in Belgium in 2007.   A Google Maps Street View captured a view of a similar roadside LIDAR unit in Switzerland: blog posts Google Maps Street View  We note that LIDAR systems like the one shown above are not authorized for law enforcement use in all countries and jurisdictions, and that they can be employed for traffic monitoring purposes as well as speed limit enforcement.  As far as we know, the system pictured above is not currently being used in the United States. Last updated:  22 June 2013 <!--    National Home Center News.  ""Penny-Wise, (3,000) Pound Foolish.""    11 December 2000  (p. D1).   ISSN 0192-6772; Volume 26, Issue 22.",['returns'],True,"Origins:  Although we can't say for sure exactly where it's located or whether it's currently operational, the object embedded in a roadside guardrail is an example of an automated LIDAR (light detection and ranging) device used for traffic speed enforcement.  LIDAR systems are similar to the radar systems currently employed for the detection of speeding motorists, but they use lasers rather than radio waves and therefore offer the advantages of working better in congested traffic conditions and are less detectable than radar (although the latter has greater range):A company sales brochure for the LMS-06 Traffic Observer digital traffic surveillance unit illustrates and explains how the particular LIDAR system shown above works:Some older blog posts indicate the photographs displayed above were taken along the A8 motorway in Belgium in 2007.   A Google Maps Street View captured a view of a similar roadside LIDAR unit in Switzerland:"
Did a Shark Attack on a Missouri Highway?,['A creative photograph depicting a shark attacking a motorist on a Missouri highway went viral in December 2015.'],"On 28 December 2015, an image purportedly showing a shark attacking two motorists stranded on a flooded Missouri highway started going viral on Facebook:  Before we examine the origins of the above-displayed image, let's take a moment to judge the authenticity of the photograph based on simple common sense. The man in the above-displayed picture is standing in about thigh-high water, and since the average male in the United States is about5 foot 9, we can reasonably assume that the water is no more than a fewfeet deep. The rest of the lane is visible in the upper left-hand corner of the image, so it appears that this flood only affected a small portion of the roadway. Also, Missouri is a landlocked state in the central U.S. far from any ocean, so any flood waters in that area would likely be fresh water and not salt water. All of these factors make the pictured site a highly unlikely habitat for the ocean-going great white shark species. average In fact, a larger version of the image clearly shows that entire road is not flooded:  The text accompanying the image alleges that the incident took place in Missouri, a Midwestern state located about 400 miles north of the Gulf of Mexico:  While that is not an impossible distance for a great white shark to travel, it is highly implausible that a large sea creature such as a shark would be able to traverse a fresh water river all the way from the ocean up toMissouri. (A story earlier this year about a bull shark caught in the Missouri River turned out to bean April Fool's joke.) story The Facebook post also mentions that the shark attack victims pictured were recent recipients of Mark Zuckerberg's alleged $4.5 million giveaway. This is another indication that the photograph is a jape, since the claim that the founder of Facebook was giving away money to random people on Facebook was itself a hoax. money While Bill Tennison scored a viral hit in December 2015 when he claimed that a motorist was attacked by a shark on a flooded highway in Missouri, he wasn't the first person to sharethis fake photograph. This image has been circulatingonline since at least 2000 and has been attached to flood waters in Ireland, Houston, Englandand New Orleans. Ireland Houston England New Orleans Also, as many commenters have pointed out, the license plates, road signs, and cars seen in the image indicate the pictured road is more likely located somewhere in the United Kingdom than Missouri. Update: We received the following comment on 31 December 2015 from Stephen Rushbrook. Rushbrook This was taken by Computer game Artist Russell Hughes when he was working for Stainless Games back at our farmhouse offices in the Isle of Wight That spot is infamous for flooding. So on that stormy day we were all by the roadside laughing at those who didn't know how to drive through a flood. Later (after the pub, blacksmiths arms just up the road) he turned his photo into this. He then sent it to the company. It escaped when Matt Edmunds sent it to his friend at Reuters. It then became 'news picture of the day' and that was that. Within the day we were getting emails from our friends from round the world saying have you seen this ? Btw it was taken here Dropped pinnear The Middle Rd, Newport, Isle of Wight PO30 4HPhttps://goo.gl/maps/noY1ehkSvcS2 https://goo.gl/maps/noY1ehkSvcS2",['share'],False,"The man in the above-displayed picture is standing in about thigh-high water, and since the average male in the United States is about5 foot 9, we can reasonably assume that the water is no more than a fewfeet deep. The rest of the lane is visible in the upper left-hand corner of the image, so it appears that this flood only affected a small portion of the roadway. Also, Missouri is a landlocked state in the central U.S. far from any ocean, so any flood waters in that area would likely be fresh water and not salt water. All of these factors make the pictured site a highly unlikely habitat for the ocean-going great white shark species.While that is not an impossible distance for a great white shark to travel, it is highly implausible that a large sea creature such as a shark would be able to traverse a fresh water river all the way from the ocean up toMissouri. (A story earlier this year about a bull shark caught in the Missouri River turned out to bean April Fool's joke.)The Facebook post also mentions that the shark attack victims pictured were recent recipients of Mark Zuckerberg's alleged $4.5 million giveaway. This is another indication that the photograph is a jape, since the claim that the founder of Facebook was giving away money to random people on Facebook was itself a hoax.While Bill Tennison scored a viral hit in December 2015 when he claimed that a motorist was attacked by a shark on a flooded highway in Missouri, he wasn't the first person to sharethis fake photograph. This image has been circulatingonline since at least 2000 and has been attached to flood waters in Ireland, Houston, Englandand New Orleans.Update: We received the following comment on 31 December 2015 from Stephen Rushbrook.Dropped pinnear The Middle Rd, Newport, Isle of Wight PO30 4HPhttps://goo.gl/maps/noY1ehkSvcS2"
A white family is likely to have about six times as much wealth than a black or Hispanic family coming out of the recession.,[],"ABCsThis Weekspent much of their show Sunday discussing race issues, from affirmative action to racist comments allegedly made by Los Angeles Clippers owner Donald Sterling to economic disparity. During a roundtable segment on the difference between the middle class in the United States and Canada, Fusion reporter Alicia Menendez argued that differences in wealth arent just generational, theyre racial. We also know that there is a racial component to this, that a white family is likely to have about six times as much wealth than a black or Hispanic family coming out of the recession, she said. PunditFact finds her ratio correct. Menendez pointed us to anApril 2013 reportfrom the Urban Institute, a nonpartisan social policy think-tank. The institute measured mean wealth by race. Using 2010 data from the Survey of Consumer Finances, the Urban Institute looked at assets including cash savings, homes, retirement accounts and subtracted any debt. TheUrban Institute concluded that, post-recession, for every $1 an average black or Hispanic person has in wealth, an average white person has $6. Thats up from 1983, the farthest back the study goes, when the ratio was 5-to-1. Thomas Shapiro, a Brandeis University social policy professor who studies the wage gap, said the 6-to-1 ratio is correct, but represents the lower end of the wealth gap range researchers have come up with. At the higher end of the spectrum,Pew Research citeda 20-to-1 ratio in 2011. They took median wealth from the Census Bureaus Survey of Income and Program Participation 2009 data. So the data varies by survey used, year and measure of average (mean vs median). Theres debate among economists and social scientists about which ratio is the most accurate. Darrick Hamilton, an urban policy professor at The New School,said the Census Bureau surveys more low-income families, while the Survey of Consumer Financesoversamples high-income families where minorities arent as well represented. Overall, any ratio from 6-to-1 to 22-to-1 could be considered an accurate measure of the wealth gap, Shapiro told us. Our ruling Menendez said, A white family is likely to have about six times as much wealth than a black or Hispanic family coming out of the recession. A study from the Urban Institute supports her statistic. Other research shows an even wider gap, further proving her point that race is a factor in U.S. wealth. Menendez's statement is accurate, and might even understate the issue. We rate her claim True.","['Income', 'Jobs', 'PunditFact']",True,"Menendez pointed us to anApril 2013 reportfrom the Urban Institute, a nonpartisan social policy think-tank. The institute measured mean wealth by race. Using 2010 data from the Survey of Consumer Finances, the Urban Institute looked at assets including cash savings, homes, retirement accounts and subtracted any debt.At the higher end of the spectrum,Pew Research citeda 20-to-1 ratio in 2011. They took median wealth from the Census Bureaus Survey of Income and Program Participation 2009 data. So the data varies by survey used, year and measure of average (mean vs median)."
If upstate New York split from downstate the economic indicators of upstate New York would be among the lowest in the country.,[],"Former Lt. Governor Robert Duffy pennedan op-edpiece in the Rochester Business Journal urging upstate lawmakers to form their own caucus. Doing so would help them press upstate issues in a state legislature dominated by downstate lawmakers. But upstate New York breaking from downstate entirely? Duffy called the idea ludicrous. If we ever did that, the economic indicators of upstate New York would be among the lowest in the country, Duffy claimed. We do count on downstate to carry much of the load for the economic health of New York. Calls for upstate to secede from New York State are not new. But secession gained steam last year when upstate advocates pitched the idea at aprotestin the Southern Tier. Some were angry over gun control laws passed in 2013. Others were upset by the ban on hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, because they believe the gas drilling process would boost that regions struggling economy. One of the leading secession proponents, the Divide NYS Caucus, hopes for momentum to build ahead of a future Constitutional Convention in New York State. Voters will decide whether to hold a convention in the 2017 general election. Downstate hasa bigger populationthan upstate. The Assembly is comfortably in the hands of lawmakers from New York City and the surrounding area, most of whom are Democrats. The State Senate, meanwhile, is controlled by Republicans, mostly from upstate and Long Island. Is Duffy right? Would upstates economy rank low on its own? The Greater Rochester Chamber of Commerce was not able to tell us which economic indicators Duffy was referring to. We looked at two indicators typically used to measure the economy - unemployment and wages - to check his claim. The unemployment scorecard As ofJuly, the statewide unemployment rate was 4.7 percent, according to the U.S. Department of Labor. Thats better than the national average of 4.9 percent. But New York State still ranks 25th in the nation, tied with three other states. Duffy says the line dividing upstate from downstate is the same used in this yearsminimum wage hike. In that deal, New York City, Long Island, and Westchester County were given a different timeline to reach the higher wage than the rest of the state. Our analysis uses the same method: We define upstate as everything north of New York City except for Westchester County. Theres no data publicly available that shows unemployment for this definition of upstate. We used county-level data from state and federal databases to evaluate Duffys claim. The unemployment rate in upstate New York is 4.6 percent, according to the latest data from the state Department of Labor. That number is an average of thecountiesweve defined as upstate. Thats better than the statewide average and would rank 23rd in the nation - ahead of the statewide ranking. The wage scorecard Income per capita is different than the average wage. It measures how much money someone takes in, whether its earned at a job or not, instead of just measuring how much a job pays. We looked at both. In upstate, according to the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, the per capita income was $40,123 at the end of 2014, the latest county-level data. Upstate would have ranked 37th in the nation that year, below the national average of $46,049. New York State as a whole rankedfifththat year. As for wages, only Washington, D.C., had a higher average wage than New York States $67,521. The national average is $52,942. The average wage upstate was $42,287 by the end of 2015, according todatafrom the U.S. Department of Labor. If it was its own state, upstate would rank 44th for wages, ahead of South Carolina but behind New Mexico. Our ruling Duffy wrote in the Rochester Business Journal that the economic indicators of upstate New York would be among the lowest in the country if the region split from downstate. We compared national data on unemployment and wages to county-level data to rate his claim. With Duffys definition of upstate New York, unemployment is close to the national average while wages and income are among the lowest in the country according to the latest data. We rate this claim as Mostly True. https://www.sharethefacts.co/share/fa7c54fa-de00-4abc-9ed1-8e386ceaf46c","['Economy', 'Jobs', 'New York']",True,"Former Lt. Governor Robert Duffy pennedan op-edpiece in the Rochester Business Journal urging upstate lawmakers to form their own caucus. Doing so would help them press upstate issues in a state legislature dominated by downstate lawmakers.Calls for upstate to secede from New York State are not new. But secession gained steam last year when upstate advocates pitched the idea at aprotestin the Southern Tier. Some were angry over gun control laws passed in 2013. Others were upset by the ban on hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, because they believe the gas drilling process would boost that regions struggling economy.Downstate hasa bigger populationthan upstate. The Assembly is comfortably in the hands of lawmakers from New York City and the surrounding area, most of whom are Democrats. The State Senate, meanwhile, is controlled by Republicans, mostly from upstate and Long Island.As ofJuly, the statewide unemployment rate was 4.7 percent, according to the U.S. Department of Labor. Thats better than the national average of 4.9 percent. But New York State still ranks 25th in the nation, tied with three other states.Duffy says the line dividing upstate from downstate is the same used in this yearsminimum wage hike. In that deal, New York City, Long Island, and Westchester County were given a different timeline to reach the higher wage than the rest of the state. Our analysis uses the same method: We define upstate as everything north of New York City except for Westchester County.The unemployment rate in upstate New York is 4.6 percent, according to the latest data from the state Department of Labor. That number is an average of thecountiesweve defined as upstate. Thats better than the statewide average and would rank 23rd in the nation - ahead of the statewide ranking.In upstate, according to the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, the per capita income was $40,123 at the end of 2014, the latest county-level data. Upstate would have ranked 37th in the nation that year, below the national average of $46,049. New York State as a whole rankedfifththat year.The average wage upstate was $42,287 by the end of 2015, according todatafrom the U.S. Department of Labor. If it was its own state, upstate would rank 44th for wages, ahead of South Carolina but behind New Mexico.https://www.sharethefacts.co/share/fa7c54fa-de00-4abc-9ed1-8e386ceaf46c"
I have never supported cap and trade.,[],"Sen. Marco Rubio defended his past support of a cap-and-trade bill in the Florida House by stating it was an attempt to protect the state from future federal regulations. Fox News moderator Bret Baier asked Rubio about the issue at a Republican presidential primary debate in Des Moines, Iowa, on Jan. 28, 2016. Baier noted that Rubio had wanted Florida to get ahead of other states and establish a cap-and-trade system while he was House speaker in 2008, and he asked why Rubio had changed his mind. Rubio denied backing a popular plan supported by then-Gov. Charlie Crist, claiming he was looking to insulate Florida from restrictions a future president might impose. ""I have never supported cap and trade, and I never thought it was a good idea, and I was clear about that at the time,"" Rubio said. He has been very outspoken during this campaign about his opposition to cap and trade, which allows businesses to trade pollution credits if they do not meet emission caps. But is his retelling of what happened in 2008 accurate? 

We literally went to the tape to find out, because the key evidence in this claim is a snippet from a March 13, 2008, appearance Rubio made on WFSU's Florida Face to Face. Rubio was discussing HB 7135, an energy and climate change bill championed by Crist that included the Florida Climate Protection Act. That part of the law allowed the Florida Department of Environmental Protection to formulate a cap-and-trade program for greenhouse emissions from electric utilities. ""Florida should position itself for what I believe is inevitable, and that is a federal cap-and-trade program. Florida should do everything it can to be an early complier so it can access early compliance funds and so that it can help influence what that cap-and-trade looks like at the federal level,"" Rubio said on the show, which aired during the legislative session. ""And so I'm in favor of giving the Department of Environmental Protection a mandate that they go out and design a cap-and-trade or a carbon-tax program and bring it back to the Legislature for ratification sometime in the next two years."" 

Crist used a portion of this clip during his 2010 Senate primary campaign against Rubio in an attempt to show that Rubio favored a cap-and-trade program. WFSU, which operates The Florida Channel covering state government, demanded Crist stop using footage of the show because of a law barring the use of its footage in political campaigns. This limited portion of the show has been resurrected online during the presidential primary, leading some conservative sites to question Rubio's stance on the issue. But wait, as they say, there's more. Rubio's campaign had complained that the clip was out of context, and it appears it really was. They have pointed to a longer edit of the footage that shows Rubio going on to say: ""I'm in favor of them designing it. I'm not in favor of them designing it and implementing it. I'm in favor of them designing it and then bringing it back to the Legislature. The way we're going to clean up our environment, the way we're going to lower carbon emissions, is not through government mandates."" That certainly changes the context of his statement. 

Rubio's campaign did not respond to PolitiFact's questions about his potential support of cap and trade, but they have addressed this issue before. In 2007, Rubio wrote an op-ed for the Miami Herald that said Crist should be applauded for his efforts, but the government mandates he proposed would not only fail to achieve their desired result, they would carry actual negative consequences. Rubio did cite proposals from his book, 100 Innovative Ideas for Florida's Future, to increase ethanol production, develop biofuels, and provide tax incentives for better fuel efficiency. However, he concluded that instead of adopting measures that would have little if any impact on our environment and make life in Florida more expensive, we need a strategy that encourages environmental conservation, fuel efficiency, and energy diversity while continuing to stimulate our economy. 

Rubio also stated in a March 2007 speech that Florida was ripe to change energy policy because it was both environmentally sound and potentially lucrative. ""This nation, and ultimately the world, is headed towards emission caps and energy diversification,"" he said. ""Those changes will require technological advances that make those measures cost-effective. The demand for such advances will create an industry to meet it. Florida should become the Silicon Valley of that industry."" Rubio did seem to change his tune a bit by 2009 when he was criticized for his full-throated opposition to cap and trade after presiding over the passage of HB 7135. Environmentalists and scientists noted that Rubio had shepherded the entire process as House speaker. ""The legislation was passed to move forward on cap-and-trade policy, and certainly Marco Rubio didn't stand in the way of that legislation passing, and my understanding was that he was supportive of the process,"" John Reilly, a leading climate change expert from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology hired by Rubio to advise lawmakers, told the Miami Herald. ""He certainly seemed to accept the science of climate change."" 

Rubio argued then that he wanted to take executive authority away from Crist, although the DEP countered that they would have always needed legislative approval. Cap-and-trade planning fell by the wayside as Crist waged a losing Senate primary battle against Rubio. ""It has worked out as it was designed to work out, which was to stop a cap-and-trade system in Florida,"" Rubio said in 2009. Some critics at the time doubted that was Rubio's true plan, as it was a big gamble that the Legislature would shut down any proposed DEP cap-and-trade proposal. However, a 2015 article in the National Journal stated that while the bill passed (and it passed the House and Senate unanimously), Rubio did add wording that prevented the plan from being implemented. The final bill indeed only allowed DEP to develop a potential plan and required legislative approval to become practice. The National Journal quoted former House minority leader and state Rep. Dan Gelber, D-Miami Beach, who said, ""I fully credit him with the gutting of the bill."" 

Our ruling: Rubio said, ""I have never supported cap and trade."" As House speaker in Florida, Rubio did preside over the unanimous passage of an energy bill that allowed the state to develop a cap-and-trade plan for electric utility emissions. However, it appears his comments on the bill have been taken out of context, and there may have been some legislative craftiness at play. Rubio stated he wanted Florida to create a plan of its own before federal regulations were imposed on the state. He also voiced opposition to government mandates and inserted a roadblock to letting any plan actually be implemented, details that are often left out when Rubio is accused of supporting the measure. He is now much more vocal in his opposition to cap and trade, but it seems he has always favored a largely hands-off approach from the government. We rate Rubio's statement Mostly True.","['Candidate Biography', 'Cap and Trade', 'Florida']",True,"Rubio has been very outspoken during this campaign abouthis opposition to cap and trade, which lets businesses trade pollution credits if they don't meet emission caps. But is his retelling of what happened in 2008 accurate?We literally went to the tape to find out, because the key evidence in this claim is a snippet from aMarch 13, 2008, appearanceRubio made on WFSUsFlorida Face to Face.Rubio was discussingHB 7135, an energy and climate change billchampioned by Cristthat included the Florida Climate Protection Act. That part of the law allowed the Florida Department of Environmental Protection to formulate a cap-and-trade program for greenhouse emissions from electric utilities.Crist used a portion of this clip during his 2010 Senate primary campaign against Rubio in an attempt to show Rubio favored a cap-and-trade program. WFSU, which operates The Florida Channel covering state government, demanded Criststop using footage of the showbecause of a law barring use of its footage in political campaigns.This limited portion of the show has been resurrected online during the presidential primary, leading someconservative sitesto question Rubios stance on the issue.But wait, as they say, theres more. Rubios campaign had complained the clip was out of context, and it appears it really was. They havepointed to a longer edit of the footagethat shows Rubio going on to say:That certainly changes the context of his statement. Rubios campaign did not respond to PolitiFacts questions about his potential support of cap and trade, but they haveaddressed this issue before.In 2007, Rubio wrote anop-ed for theMiami Heraldthat said Crist should be applauded for his efforts, but the government mandates he has proposed will not only fail to achieve their desired result, they carry actual negative consequences.Rubio also said in aMarch 2007 speechthat Florida was ripe to change energy policy because it was both environmentally sound and potentially lucrative.The legislation was passed to move forward on cap-and-trade policy, and certainly Marco Rubio didn't stand in the way of that legislation passing and my understanding was that he was supportive of the process, John Reilly, a leading climate change expert from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology hired by Rubio to advise lawmakers,told theMiami Herald. He certainly seemed to accept the science of climate change.But a2015 article in theNational Journalsaid that while the bill passed (and it passed the House and Senate unanimously), Rubio did add wording that prevented the plan from being implemented. The final bill indeed only allowed DEP to develop a potential plan, and required legislative approval to become practice."
Bill Cosby's Write-In Candidate Platform,"[""Comedian Bill Cosby's platform as a write-in candidate in the 2008 Presidential election?""]","Claim: E-mail reproduces comedian Bill Cosby's platform as a write-in candidate in an upcoming presidential election. INCORRECTLY ATTRIBUTED Example: [Collected via e-mail, July 2008] I HAVE DECIDED TO BECOME A WRITE-IN CANDIDATE. HERE IS MY PLATFORM: (1.) Press 1 for English is immediately banned. English is the official language; speak it or wait at the border until you can. (2.) We will immediately adopt a two-year isolationist posture to straighten out the country's attitude. NO imports, no exports. We will use the 'Walmart' policy: 'If we ain't got it, you don't need it.' (3.) When imports are allowed, there will be a 100% import tax on them. (4.) All retired military personnel will be required to man one of our many observation towers on the southern border (six-month tour). They will be under strict orders not to fire on SOUTHBOUND aliens. (5.) Social Security will immediately return to its original state. If you didn't put anything in, you ain't getting anything out. The president nor any other politician will be able to touch it. (6.) Welfare checks will be handed out on Fridays at the end of the 40-hour school week and upon the successful completion of urinalysis and a passing grade. (7.) Professional Athletes - Steroids: The FIRST time you test positive, you're banned for life. (8.) Crime: We will adopt the Turkish method; the first time you steal, you lose your right hand. There will be no more life sentences. If convicted, you will be put to death by the same method you chose for your victim: gun, knife, strangulation, etc. (9.) One export will be allowed: Wheat. The world needs to eat. A bushel of wheat will be the exact price of a barrel of oil. (10.) All foreign aid using American taxpayer money will immediately cease, and the saved money will pay off the national debt and ultimately lower taxes. When disasters occur around the world, we'll ask the American people if they want to donate to a disaster fund, and each citizen can decide whether it's a worthy cause. (11.) The Pledge of Allegiance will be recited every day at school and every day in Congress. (12.) The National Anthem will be played at all appropriate ceremonies, sporting events, outings, etc. Sorry if I stepped on anyone's toes, but a vote for me will get you better than what you have and better than what you're going to get. Thanks for listening, and remember to write in my name on the ballot in November. God Bless America!!!!!!!!!!! Bill Cosby!!!!!!!! Origins: This piece, setting out a hypothetical reactionary ""platform"" for a potential write-in U.S. presidential candidate, was originally circulated prior to the 2008 elections and commonly attributed to entertainer Bill Cosby. Although the identity of the original author remains unknown, this piece is most assuredly not the work of the popular comedian. When Dr. Cosby speaks out politically, it is generally to urge blacks to take responsibility for making the most of educational opportunities and to eschew choices that limit their potential for success. Immigration, imports, foreign aid, steroid use in sports, and insufficient recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance and the national anthem are not his political bêtes noires. (This ""platform"" has also been attributed to comic George Carlin, and it is equally out of tune with that late comedian's commonly expressed political views.) Bill Cosby speaks out Just before the 2008 U.S. presidential election, Bill Cosby himself disclaimed involvement with this ""write-in candidate"" e-mail on his website: BILL COSBY IS NOT A WRITE-IN CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT. I am not a write-in candidate for President. The statement purportedly from me stating that I am a candidate is a hoax. The platform attributed to me (and at various times to Robin Williams, Andy Rooney, and George Carlin) does not represent my views and, in many respects, is abhorrent to me. Apparently, those bloggers and websites that continue to spread this hoax do not care to do even minimal fact-checking. This piece has continued to circulate well beyond the 2008 elections and has since been updated to suggest that it is a platform for a potential candidate in the upcoming 2012 elections, a change that prompted the posting of yet another disclaimer on Dr. Cosby's site in September 2009: disclaimer Whatever I say is on Twitter, Facebook, or BillCosby.com. A viral email is appearing on the internet purporting to be a Bill Cosby statement that he is running for President of the United States in 2012 and outlining his platform. This is a hoax, completely false and with no factual basis. Bill Cosby says, ""False Bill Cosby statements are not funny nor fun and sometimes mean-spirited."" Last updated: 25 September 2010.",['taxes'],False,"Bill Cosby.  Although the identity of the original author remains unknown, this piece is most assuredly not the work of the popular comedian:  When Dr. Cosby speaks out politically, it is generally to urge blacks to take responsibility for making the most of educational opportunities and eschewing choices that limit their potential for success.  Immigration, imports, foreign aid, steroid use in sports, and insufficient recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance and the national anthem are not his political btes noires.  (This ""platform"" has also been attributed to comic George Carlin, and it's equally out of tune with that late comedian's commonly expressed political views.)This piece has continued to circulate well beyond the 2008 elections and has since been updated to suggest that it is a platform for a potential candidate in the upcoming 2012 elections, a change which prompted the posting of yet another disclaimer on Dr. Cosby's site in September 2009:"
Is Pic of Antelope With Spiderweb Between Its Horns Real?,"[""A spider's home is where the heart is.""]","In March 2021, a photograph supposedly showing an antelope with a large spiderweb between its horns started to circulate on social media:   These are genuine photographs of a gemsbok, a large antelope that lives in South Africa, with spiderwebs between its horns. photographs These photographs were taken by Dr. Jess Isden, a research associate with the animal conservation group WildCRU, during a safari at the Central Kalahari Game Reserve in Botswana. Isden originally shared these pictures to ""The Spider Club of Southern Africa"" Facebook page in an attempt to find more information about what sort of spider would make this web. While we still don't know the type of spider  some users suggested it could be a golden orb spider  Isden's post did provide some additional information about these photographs.  Isden wrote: At first I thought the gemsbok must have walked through the web, but on closer inspection it was clear that it was much more intricate than that, and there were living spiders in the webs too. Seen on several animals. They could have easily wiped the webs off their face and horns, yet seem to tolerate it. We also saw the same animal multiple times over 4 days with the web still intact! Seen in the Central Kalahari Game Reserve, Botswana.   This is not the first time a spider has chosen an animal's horns or antlers for placement of a web. Photographer Frank Solomon has also captured pictures showing spiderwebs between an animals antlers. You can see those images here. Below is a a photograph from wildlife photographer Hector Astorga: here   Correction [30 March 2021]: Previous version of this article mistakenly said ""antlers"" instead of horns.

",['share'],True,"These are genuine photographs of a gemsbok, a large antelope that lives in South Africa, with spiderwebs between its horns.This is not the first time a spider has chosen an animal's horns or antlers for placement of a web. Photographer Frank Solomon has also captured pictures showing spiderwebs between an animals antlers. You can see those images here. Below is a a photograph from wildlife photographer Hector Astorga:"
"""A nation established by brilliant minds, yet governed by fools.""","['Did a list of ""A Country Founded by Geniuses but Run by Idiots"" entries originate with comedian Jeff Foxworthy?']","Collected via email, 2013: A Country Founded by Geniuses but Run by Idiots Attributed to Jeff Foxworthy: If you can get arrested for hunting or fishing without a license, but not for entering and remaining in the country illegally  you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots. If you have to get your parents permission to go on a field trip or to take an aspirin in school, but not to get an abortion  you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots. If you MUST show your identification to board an airplane, cash a check, buy liquor, or check out a library book and rent a video, but not to vote for who runs the government  you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots. If the government wants to prevent stable, law-abiding citizens from owning gun magazines that hold more than ten rounds, but gives twenty F-16 fighter jets to the crazy new leaders in Egypt  you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots. If, in the nations largest city, you can buy two 16-ounce sodas, but not one 24-ounce soda, because 24-ounces of a sugary drink might make you fat  you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots. If an 80-year-old woman or a three-year-old girl who is confined to a wheelchair can be strip-searched by the TSA at the airport, but a woman in a burka or a hijab is only subject to having her neck and head searched  you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots. If your government believes that the best way to eradicate trillions of dollars of debt is to spend trillions more  you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots. If a seven-year-old boy can be thrown out of school for saying his teacher is ""cute,"" but hosting a sexual exploration or diversity class ingrade school is perfectly acceptable  you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots. If hard work and success are met with higher taxes and more government regulation and intrusion, while not working is rewarded with Food Stamps, WIC checks, Medicaid benefits, subsidized housing, and free cell phones  you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots. If the governments plan for getting people back to work is to provide incentives for not working, by granting 99 weeks of unemployment checks, without any requirement to prove that gainful employment was diligently sought, but couldnt be found  you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots. If you pay your mortgage faithfully, denying yourself the newest big-screen TV, while your neighbor buys iPhones, time shares, a wall-sized do-it-all plasma screen TV and new cars, and the government forgives his debt when he defaults on his mortgage  you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots. If being stripped of your Constitutional right to defend yourself makes you more ""safe"" according to the government  you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots. What a country! How about we give God a reason to continue blessing America! The above-referenced list of entries detailing ""A Country Founded by Geniuses But Run by Idiots"" was widely circulated via the internet in early 2013 with an ""Attributed to Jeff Foxworthy"" tag at its head, leading many to believe it was actually the work of that nationally famous comedian. Jeff Foxworthy However, othen than its basic ""If you ... you might be ..."" pattern that mimics Jeff Foxworthy's popular ""You might be a redneck"" routines, this item bears little resemblance to anything produced by Foxworthy: his comedic material is typically affectionate and self-deprecating and involves poking fun at his own milieu; his brand of humor is much more apolitical and non-partisan than the list reproduced above. (Nonetheless, Jeff's name has been falsely attached to other similar political pieces that have little in common with the tenor and substance of his comedy material.) attached Jeff's brother, Jay, confirmed for us that this material was not written by his sibling. The original compiler of this list appears to be Fritz Edmunds, who posted it to his ""Politically True"" blog back on Feb. 3, 2013 (albeit with a disclaimer noting that ""some of the ideas were from an email that did not contain any copyright""). Politically True As usual, the list has seen numerous alterations in the process of being passed around the Internet, and several of the entries appearing in earlier versions have since dropped off: If the only school curriculum allowed to explain how we got here is evolution, but your government stops a $15 million construction project to keep a rare spider from evolving to extinction  you might live in a country founded by geniuses and run by idiots. If your government believes that using steroids or other drugs will ruin your life, but throwing you in prison for years will not  you might live in a country founded by geniuses and run by idiots. If children are forcibly removed from parents who discipline them with spankings while children of addicts are left in filth and drug infested homes  you might live in a country founded by geniuses and run by idiots. If your government believes that the way to make a school of unarmed children safe is to pass another law, this time with the illusion that three 10-round magazines in a rifle is safer than a 30-round magazine  you might live in a country founded by geniuses and run by idiots. The phrase ""founded by geniuses and run by idiots"" appears to be a variant of a similar statement that appeared in Herman Wouk's 1951 novel ""The Caine Mutiny"": ""The Navy is a master plan designed by geniuses for execution by idiots."" In the 1954 film of the same name, the line was rendered, ""The first thing you've got to learn about this ship is that she was designed by geniuses to be run by idiots."" <!-- Sources:    Metz, Ken.  ""It's Never Wise to Insult the Police Officer.""   The Bath County News-Outlook.  30 August 2007. Update [Aug. 2, 2022]: Updated SEO and title.",['debt'],False,"The above-referenced list of entries detailing ""A Country Founded by Geniuses But Run by Idiots"" was widely circulated via the internet in early 2013 with an ""Attributed to Jeff Foxworthy"" tag at its head, leading many to believe it was actually the work of that nationally famous comedian.However, othen than its basic ""If you ... you might be ..."" pattern that mimics Jeff Foxworthy's popular ""You might be a redneck"" routines, this item bears little resemblance to anything produced by Foxworthy: his comedic material is typically affectionate and self-deprecating and involves poking fun at his own milieu; his brand of humor is much more apolitical and non-partisan than the list reproduced above. (Nonetheless, Jeff's name has been falsely attached to other similar political pieces that have little in common with the tenor and substance of his comedy material.)Jeff's brother, Jay, confirmed for us that this material was not written by his sibling. The original compiler of this list appears to be Fritz Edmunds, who posted it to his ""Politically True"" blog back on Feb. 3, 2013 (albeit with a disclaimer noting that ""some of the ideas were from an email that did not contain any copyright"")."
"Did a Power Surge in a Plugged-In Air Fryer Cause a Fire, as Claimed in Viral Facebook Post?",['Readers asked us to verify the contents of a Facebook post that described a purported fire hazard involving air fryers and power surges.'],"On June 18, 2022, Facebook user Cindy Jennings posted that her kitchen had experienced what appeared to be a large fire, as shown in a picture. According to her post, the fire was caused by a plugged-in air fryer that had undergone a power surge when electricity was restored in her home. ""So please unplug your air fryers when not in use,"" the post concluded. Readers asked us if this story was true, as it was being copied and pasted by other users. The post in question was being shared as follows: FROM CINDY- Ughhh, the one thing I wanted to tell everyone in my last post but forgot to mention is that my mind's not working right yet. What caused this was our air fryer. We left it plugged in, and when the electricity came back on, it surged through it. We even had it plugged into a special outlet for protection, but it failed anyway. What I wanted to tell you was that the fire inspector said this was the sixth air fryer fire he has had to deal with; they (firefighters) are trying to get air fryer companies investigated because of all the fires. So please unplug your air fryers when not in use. Note: Jennings' post mentioned a previous post; however, that previous post was not visible to users who were not her Facebook friends. We sought to verify three key pieces of information for the readers who asked us to look into this story. We wanted to confirm that a power surge in an air fryer, which was said to have been plugged in with a surge protection product, was the cause of a fire in Jennings' home. Second, we aimed to verify with the firefighters she claimed to have spoken with that they had seen several air fryer fires similar to this one and that they were trying to get the problem investigated. We also wanted to find more details about any past recalls of air fryers. According to publicly available information on Jennings' Facebook profile, she appeared to live in Surfside Beach, South Carolina. We attempted to reach out by phone and email using contact information we found online. We also sent her a message through Messenger. One of our questions was whether the fire she described occurred in the town listed on her profile or if it had happened elsewhere. We did not receive any responses. In the event that the kitchen fire involving the air fryer and the power surge did happen in Surfside Beach, we contacted the Surfside Beach Fire Department. The day after we first published this story, we spoke by phone with Keith Williams, the department's fire marshal. ""We can find no calls that we have run that would match this nature,"" Williams told us. ""We can't find a call in our county database or in our municipal database that would correspond to this call Ms. Jennings would have had."" By email, Williams also added that he would bring the supposed incident up at an upcoming fire marshal meeting for Horry County to find out if any other members were aware of an air fryer fire under the name of Jennings. After finding no success with our Surfside Beach search, we noticed that Jennings' profile also mentioned that she was apparently originally ""from Chesterville, Ohio."" An online search for Jennings' name on the public-information website WhitePages.com showed a person with the same name supposedly residing in Marengo, Ohio. The listing showed an address at a mobile home park named Bennington Springs. Chesterville and Marengo are both located within the jurisdiction of the Big Walnut Joint Fire District. On the Facebook page for the Big Walnut Joint Fire District, a post was made on the morning of June 15, just three days before Jennings' air fryer fire post. The post stated that a storm had caused a power loss in the area and mentioned that there had been a structure fire at the Bennington Springs mobile home park. This information seemed to align with the details in Jennings' post. The Big Walnut Joint Fire District had been busy in the last 24 hours due to the storm and power loss, responding to 18 calls for service, including two structure fires. The first fire was with Fredericktown Fire on Yankee Road, and the second was in the Bennington Springs mobile home park. Many of our members had gone almost 24 hours without sleep. We want to thank the community for continuing to support the Big Walnut Fire District so we can be there for you in times like this. We soon received confirmation from the fire department that Jennings' story was true. Here's what a spokesperson for the Big Walnut Joint Fire District had to say via email: Our department, Big Walnut Joint Fire District, did have a fire on 6/14/2022 at Bennington Springs mobile home park. The picture you included is from that scene. It followed a power outage that was county-wide due to several tornadoes. The power had been restored to the area approximately three hours prior to the fire. The residents had left the premises before the power returned. Our investigator, who is with multiple agencies, ruled the cause as the air fryer. This is the only fire our department has experienced with the origin being an air fryer. He stated there have been others, based on his experience at other departments. This individual is no longer with our department. I do not know the final findings declared by their insurance investigator. The air fryer had been left plugged into a standard residential GFI outlet. The extension cord [visible in the picture] was for the refrigerator, which was being powered by a generator. With the mystery solved, we were also curious to find information on air fryer recalls that had occurred in 2022. On April 21, 2022, Best Buy recalled around 772,000 Insignia air fryers and air fryer ovens, stating it was because they could ""overheat, posing fire and burn hazards."" Later, on October 13, 2022, NewAir recalled 11,750 of its own Magic Chef air fryers for the same reason. It's unclear what make and model of air fryer appeared in the picture posted by Jennings. Note: We also found this picture and story being discussed and shared in other posts on Reddit, Twitter, and Facebook. ""Best Buy Recalls Insignia Air Fryers and Air Fryer Ovens Due to Fire and Burn Hazards."" U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, April 21, 2022, https://www.cpsc.gov/Recalls/2022/Best-Buy-Recalls-Insignia-Air-Fryers-and-Air-Fryer-Ovens-Due-to-Fire-and-Burn-Hazards. ""Big Walnut Joint Fire District."" Facebook, June 15, 2022, https://www.facebook.com/bwjfd/posts/pfbid0XpieRQdCq8y6MrHNpKzkc3BSmRNZgm2qHD8tvkhefAA5Snr1jWdjCoirhkQ2H9TWl. ---. https://www.bwjfd.org/. Jennings, Cindy. Facebook, June 18, 2022, https://www.facebook.com/cindy.jennings.7798/posts/pfbid02o56oU9vsVh7nwphhcwyVXyz3YcTxq91thTYXMk8uLLigFPSjRvcLv3hFnJJm5JbUl. ""Newair Recalls Magic Chef Air Fryers Due to Fire and Burn Hazards."" U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, October 13, 2022, https://www.cpsc.gov/Recalls/2023/Newair-Recalls-Magic-Chef-Air-Fryers-Due-to-Fire-and-Burn-Hazards. Surfside Beach Fire. https://www.surfsidebeach.org/182/Fire. White Pages. https://www.whitepages.com/. December 1, 2022: This story was updated after the fire marshal for the Surfside Beach Fire Department responded to our inquiry to let us know they found no record of an air fryer fire under the name of Jennings. December 1, 2022: This story was updated after we found a link between an address in Ohio and a Facebook post from the Big Walnut Joint Fire District. December 5, 2022: This story has been updated from ""Research In Progress"" to ""True"" after we established with the Big Walnut Joint Fire District that the story was true.",['insurance'],True,"On the Facebook page for the Big Walnut Joint Fire District, a post was made on the morning of June 15, just three days before the air fryer fire post from Jennings. The post said that a storm had caused a power loss in the area. It also mentioned that there had been a structure fire at the Bennington Springs mobile home park. This information seemed to line up with the details in Jennings' post.On April 21, 2022, Best Buy recalled around 772,000 Insignia air fryers and air fryer ovens, saying it was because they could ""overheat, posing fire and burn hazards."" Later, on Oct. 13, 2022, NewAirrecalled 11,750 of its own Magic Chef air fryers too, also because of the same reason.It's unclear what make and model of air fryer appeared in the picture posted by Jennings.Note: We also found this picture and story being discussed and shared in other posts on Reddit, Twitter, and Facebook."
Comparing the price of oil and gas in June 2008 to March 2022 shows that oil companies are price gouging.,"['Experts who study the price of oil and gas said it can take weeks for gasoline prices to respond to changes in crude oil costs., In 2008, an economic recession caused a supply shortage that drove up oil and gas prices., Currently, Russias invasion of Ukraine, increased labor costs, the pandemic and additional taxes and inflation have all contributed to rising gasoline prices.', 'The same factors werent at play in 2008, making direct comparisons misleading.']","In early March, the price of oil shot up rapidly in response to Russias invasion of Ukraine and the United States decision to ban imports of Russian energy. Coupled with inflation, increased labor costs and other factors that had already raised the price of gasoline, drivers in the U.S. quickly saw much higher prices at the pump. By March 14, the price of oil started todrop, but gasoline prices have been slow to follow, prompting some social media users to make comparisons to 2008 and accuse oil and gas companies of price gouging. Thetermis generally used when businesses take advantage of rising demand during a crisis and charge exorbitant prices for necessities. One Facebook post claimed that the price of oil was $141.71 per barrel in June 2008 while gas cost $4.10 per gallon on average. In March 2022, the post said oil cost $99.76 per barrel, while the average price of gas was $4.32 per gallon. If youre blaming anyone but greedy oil companies for their price gouging, youve bought into propaganda that hurts you more than anyone else, theMarch 14 postsaid. The post was flagged as part of Facebooks efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more aboutour partnership with Facebook.) Other posts similarly claimed that because oil prices fell and gas prices didnt, companies must be exploiting consumers. Posts with misleading claims about the relationship between the price of oil and the price of gasoline. Experts who study the price of oil and gas told PolitiFact that it takes more time for gas prices to respond to changes in crude oil costs  and noted that there are factors in 2022 that werent at play in 2008, which make direct comparisons misleading. The numbers are also cherry-picked, and the difference in pricing between 2008 and 2022 isnt as large as the post suggests. Crude oil prices are set in the global market. And the price of crude oil has the biggest impact on the price of gasoline  thats been the case for nearly all changes in retail gasoline prices in the past 35 years, said Mark Finley, afellowin energy and global oil at Rice Universitys Baker Institute for Public Policy. When Russia  the worldsthird-largestoil producer  attacked Ukraine at the end of February, the uncertainty, fear of further conflict and international efforts to reduce reliance on Russian oil drove upcrude oil prices. High oil prices can quickly drive up prices at gas stations nationwide, experts said. After oil prices fall, it typically takes a while for gas prices to decrease and consumers often assume foul play even when there isnt any, said Nicole Petersen, a GasBuddy spokesperson. Gas stations lose profit when oil prices increase sharply because they cannot drastically lift gas prices due to local competition, Petersen said. Then, when oil prices fall, gas stations try to recoup any losses before lowering their prices, she said. Unique factors in each states gasoline market also affect gas prices, said Devin Gladden, a AAA spokesperson. Locally, gas stations might have contracts with gasoline dealers that lock in prices at a certain rate for set periods of time  sometimes weeks or months, he said. The March 14 Facebook postcorrectlycited the average priceof a gallon of gas that day: $4.32. But it cherry-picked its $99.76 figure for the price of crude oil. West Texas Intermediate crude oil is traditionally used as a U.S. benchmark when discussing and comparing oil prices. On March 14, WTI crude oil hit a low of $99.76, but the closing price was$103.01. Gas rose to $4.32 per gallon on March 14 as a result of oil prices being around $130 per barrel at times in the first half of March, Gladden said. The Facebook post was wrong about prices in June 2008. Themonthly averageprice of a gallon of gasoline was $4.05, and the average price ofWTI crude oilwas $133.88 per barrel, less than what the post claimed. The data set in this posting is misleading because it gives people this impression that crude prices are more stationary than they are, Gladden said. In all actuality, they are highly volatile. Posts comparing June 2008 prices to current prices also mislead because they compare a full month of data to half a month in 2022, experts said. Different global conditions are also at play. In 2008, the spike in oil and gas prices was tied to the financial crisis. The recession caused a drop in demand for gasoline, and as the economic recovery began, there was an immediate ramp-up in production to meet growing supply needs. That supply crunch, caused prices to spike, Gladden said. In March, the Russia-Ukraine conflict caused panic and speculation that contributed to the rapid price rises, Gladden said. But its also normal for prices to rise this time of year due to the demand from the spring and summer driving season, he said. In part, that will keep prices elevated even though oil prices have declined, Gladden said. Also, an ongoing truck driver shortage, increased labor costs and high inflation in the U.S. have caused gas prices to rise. On top of that, Gladden said the oil industry is still recovering from the COVID-19 pandemic, which decreased gas prices due to decreased demand. State-level taxes on gasoline are also about 7 centshigherper gallon now than they were in2008, Finley said. A Facebook post claimed that comparing the price of oil and gas in June 2008 to March 2022 shows that oil companies are price gouging. Experts said it takes time for gas prices to respond to drops in crude oil costs, and thats not necessarily indicative of price gouging. The posts numbers are cherry-picked; the difference in prices isnt as great as it suggests. The current situation differs from 2008 because increased labor costs, the pandemic, additional taxes and inflation were all already contributing to rising gasoline prices before Russia invaded Ukraine in February. Direct comparisons lack important context, experts said. We rate these posts False. RELATED:Ask PolitiFact: Why are gas prices going up? RELATED:How much blame does Putin deserve for high gasoline prices?","['National', 'Economy', 'Energy', 'Gas Prices', 'Russia']",False,"By March 14, the price of oil started todrop, but gasoline prices have been slow to follow, prompting some social media users to make comparisons to 2008 and accuse oil and gas companies of price gouging. Thetermis generally used when businesses take advantage of rising demand during a crisis and charge exorbitant prices for necessities.If youre blaming anyone but greedy oil companies for their price gouging, youve bought into propaganda that hurts you more than anyone else, theMarch 14 postsaid.The post was flagged as part of Facebooks efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more aboutour partnership with Facebook.) Other posts similarly claimed that because oil prices fell and gas prices didnt, companies must be exploiting consumers.Crude oil prices are set in the global market. And the price of crude oil has the biggest impact on the price of gasoline  thats been the case for nearly all changes in retail gasoline prices in the past 35 years, said Mark Finley, afellowin energy and global oil at Rice Universitys Baker Institute for Public Policy.When Russia  the worldsthird-largestoil producer  attacked Ukraine at the end of February, the uncertainty, fear of further conflict and international efforts to reduce reliance on Russian oil drove upcrude oil prices.The March 14 Facebook postcorrectlycited the average priceof a gallon of gas that day: $4.32.But it cherry-picked its $99.76 figure for the price of crude oil. West Texas Intermediate crude oil is traditionally used as a U.S. benchmark when discussing and comparing oil prices. On March 14, WTI crude oil hit a low of $99.76, but the closing price was$103.01.The Facebook post was wrong about prices in June 2008. Themonthly averageprice of a gallon of gasoline was $4.05, and the average price ofWTI crude oilwas $133.88 per barrel, less than what the post claimed.State-level taxes on gasoline are also about 7 centshigherper gallon now than they were in2008, Finley said.RELATED:Ask PolitiFact: Why are gas prices going up?RELATED:How much blame does Putin deserve for high gasoline prices?"
Did Obama Apologize for Dropping the Atomic Bomb on Japan?,"[""While President Obama offered his sympathies during a visit to Hiroshima, he did not apologize for the United States' 1945 actions.""]","On 27 May 2016, President Obama became the first sitting president to visit Hiroshima, Japan, since the end of World War II. While some media outlets portrayed the historic visit as another stop on Obama's ""apology tour,"" the president did not actually apologize. Still, social media users were outraged at the President's supposed apology. On 26 May 2016, the New York Post published an article criticizing the president for his ""shameful"" apology tour. While the author assumed that Obama would apologize (despite the White House stating that an apology would not be forthcoming), the article was published a day before Obama's speech and therefore did not serve as evidence. An American president's highest moral, constitutional, and political duty is to protect his fellow citizens from foreign threats. Presidents should adhere to our values and the Constitution and not treat America's enemies as morally equivalent to us. If they do, they need not apologize to anyone. The White House stated that President Obama wouldn't apologize during his visit to Hiroshima. But who believes his press representatives? The president did express regret while he was in Japan, but it wasn't for the atomic bomb. On 25 May 2016, the President offered his ""deepest regrets"" for the death of a Japanese woman who reportedly had been murdered by a former U.S. Marine. ""The U.S. will continue to cooperate fully"" and will ensure ""justice is done under the Japanese legal system,"" Obama said. While critics of President Obama preemptively condemned him for apologizing for the United States' 1945 actions (which collectively killed more than 100,000 people), and while the President did express regret for an unrelated incident, he did not actually offer an apology during his speech. Obama did offer condolences for the loss of those who died at Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but nowhere in the full text of his remarks did he offer an apology. Seventy-one years ago, on a bright, cloudless morning, death fell from the sky, and the world was changed. A flash of light and a wall of fire destroyed a city and demonstrated that mankind possessed the means to destroy itself. Why do we come to this place, to Hiroshima? We come to ponder a terrible force unleashed in a not-so-distant past. We come to mourn the dead, including over 100,000 Japanese men, women, and children, thousands of Koreans, and a dozen Americans held prisoner. Their souls speak to us. They ask us to look inward, to take stock of who we are and what we might become.",['loss'],False,"On 27 May 2016, President Obama became the first sitting president to visit Hiroshima, Japan since the end of World War II. While some media outlets painted the historic visit as another stop on Obama's ""apology tour,"" the president did not actually apologize.On 26 May 2016, the New York Post published an article criticizing the president for his ""shameful"" apology tour. While the author assumed that Obama would apologize (despite the White House saying that an apology would not be forthcoming), the article came out a day before Obama's speech and therefore did not serve as evidence:The president did make an apology while he was in Japan, but it wasn't for the atomic bomb. On 25 May 2016, the President offered his ""deepest regrets"" for the death of a Japanese woman who reportedly had been murdered by a former U.S. Marine:While critics of President Obama preemptively condemned him for apologizing for the United States' 1945 actions (which collectively killed more than 100,000 people), and while the President did apologize for an unrelated incident, he did not actually offer an apology during his speech. Obama did offer condolences for the loss of those who died at Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but nowhere in the full text of his remarks did he offer an apology:"
Research funded by Komen and the salary of the CEO,"['Online criticism claims the Susan G. Komen breast cancer organization only gives 20% of their donations to cancer research and pays their CEO $684,000 per year.']"," When Susan Goodman Komen died of breast cancer at the age of 33 in 1980, her younger sister, Nancy Goodman Brinker promised she would do whatever she could to help end that disease.  Brinker fulfilled that promise by founding The Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation (later known as Susan G. Komen for the Cure, then just Susan G. Komen) in 1982, a group that has since become the largest and most well known breast cancer organization in the United States: breast cancer Brinker fulfilled a promise to her sister that she would do everything she could to help eradicate the disease  a disease that Brinker also was diagnosed with and successfully fought. ""At that time, there was a stigma and shame around breast cancer,"" Brinker said. ""You didn't talk about it. There were no 800-numbers, no Internet. Our government didn't spend much on breast cancer research. There were few major cancer centers with expertise about breast cancer. That's the world we faced when Suzy was diagnosed. It's a world I watched her suffer in, and it's a world she wanted us to change."" In 2012, Komen founder and CEO Nancy Brinker became the focus of controversy when she announced Komen would be pulling the grants the organization had been providing to Planned Parenthood for breast cancer screenings, then quickly reversed that decision.  Several months later Brinker announced she would be stepping down as Komen's CEO, but the following year she was again the focus of controversy when news outlets reported that not only did she still hold her CEO position, but she had received a hefty raise to boot that brought her annual compensation up to $684,000 per year: In early 2012, Komen announced it was pulling its grants for breast-cancer screenings from Planned Parenthood, drawing an immediate backlash from Komen supporters and abortion rights advocates. Within days, Nancy Brinker, the groups founder and CEO, reversed the decision to defund the organization. Then, in August, Brinker announced that she would be stepping down. But 10 months later, Brinker still holds her position and tax documents reveal that she received a 64 percent raise and now makes $684,000 a year, according to the charitys latest available tax filing.  Komen says the raise came in November 2010, prior to last year's controversy. Ken Berger, president and CEO of Charity Navigator, which evaluates and rates charities, called Brinker's salary ""extremely high."" ""This pay package is way outside the norm,"" he said. ""It's about a quarter of a million dollars more than what we see for charities of this size. This is more than the head of the Red Cross is making, for an organization that is one-tenth the size of the Red Cross.""  The American Red Cross had revenue of about $3.4 billion, while Komens was about $340 million last year.  Red Cross CEO Gail McGovern makes $500,000, according to the most recent financial documents available for the charity. Charity Navigator's last compensation figure for Nancy Brinker was $560,896 per year, which at the time put her below Komen president Elizabeth Thompson's reported annual compensation of $606,461.   In June 2013, Komen finally announced that Brinker would be stepping down as president and CEO of that organization and named Judith A. Salerno, M.D. as her successor.  In June 2015, Brinker reportedly resigned from her paid position to assume an unpaid role role as a top volunteer with Komen. Dr. Salerno's most recently reported compensation (in August 2017) was $479,858, while Nancy Brinker was still listed as a ""founder"" receiving a salary of $397,093. compensation announced unpaid In September 2017, Paula Schneider took over as president and CEO of Komen, with compensation of $137,155 reported as of the end of the fiscal year in March 2018. Paula Schneider The reference to Komen's applying only 20% of donated money to breast cancer research likely comes from a pie chart displayed in the ""Use of Funds"" section of Wikipedia's article about Susan G. Komen for the Cure, which showed Komen's 2009-2010 Expenses: Use of Funds  While it may have been true that breast cancer research comprised only a 21% share of Komen's program expenses (Charity Navigator puts the figure at 28.8% as of March 2018), citing that figure as a criticism of the organization reflects a common misbelief that groups dedicated to addressing particular diseases (e.g., the Muscular Dystrophy Association, the ALS Association) exist solely or primarily to fund and direct research into curing and/or preventing those diseases.  This perception is inaccurate: Komen and other groups like it have goals that include delivering a wide array of services to the communities they support beyond the funding of research, such as funding educational awareness and outreach programs, providing screening and diagnostic procedures, and arranging medical treatment and home care for persons currently living with those diseases.  A more relevant metric for assessing a charity's overall financial effectiveness is the percentage of the organization's budget that is actually spent on all the programs and services the charity delivers, and in this area the Charity Navigator charity evaluation site gives  Komen an 80.3 rating (as well as a 96.0 rating for Accountability & Transparency).  Charity Navigator does rank many other breast cancer charities higher than Susan G. Komen for the Cure, however. Komen breast cancer Regarding the seemingly excessively high level of CEO salaries at some charities, Charity Navigator advises that: advises While there are certainly some charities that overpay their leaders, Charity Navigator's data shows that those organizations are the minority. Among the charities we've evaluated (those being mid to large-sized charities), the typical CEO's annual compensation is in the low to mid six figures. Before you make any judgments about salaries higher or lower than that range, we encourage you to keep in mind that these charities are complex organizations, with multi-million dollar budgets, hundreds of employees, and thousands of constituents. These leaders could inevitably make much more running similarly sized for-profit firms. Furthermore, when making your decision it is important to consider that it takes a certain level of professionalism to effectively run a charity and charities must offer a competitive salary if they want to attract and retain that level of leadership.",['profit'],NEI,"When Susan Goodman Komen died of breast cancer at the age of 33 in 1980, her younger sister, Nancy Goodman Brinker promised she would do whatever she could to help end that disease.  Brinker fulfilled that promise by founding The Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation (later known as Susan G. Komen for the Cure, then just Susan G. Komen) in 1982, a group that has since become the largest and most well known breast cancer organization in the United States:Charity Navigator's last compensation figure for Nancy Brinker was $560,896 per year, which at the time put her below Komen president Elizabeth Thompson's reported annual compensation of $606,461.   In June 2013, Komen finally announced that Brinker would be stepping down as president and CEO of that organization and named Judith A. Salerno, M.D. as her successor.  In June 2015, Brinker reportedly resigned from her paid position to assume an unpaid role role as a top volunteer with Komen. Dr. Salerno's most recently reported compensation (in August 2017) was $479,858, while Nancy Brinker was still listed as a ""founder"" receiving a salary of $397,093.In September 2017, Paula Schneider took over as president and CEO of Komen, with compensation of $137,155 reported as of the end of the fiscal year in March 2018.The reference to Komen's applying only 20% of donated money to breast cancer research likely comes from a pie chart displayed in the ""Use of Funds"" section of Wikipedia's article about Susan G. Komen for the Cure, which showed Komen's 2009-2010 Expenses:A more relevant metric for assessing a charity's overall financial effectiveness is the percentage of the organization's budget that is actually spent on all the programs and services the charity delivers, and in this area the Charity Navigator charity evaluation site gives  Komen an 80.3 rating (as well as a 96.0 rating for Accountability & Transparency).  Charity Navigator does rank many other breast cancer charities higher than Susan G. Komen for the Cure, however.Regarding the seemingly excessively high level of CEO salaries at some charities, Charity Navigator advises that:"
Did the picture depict Stephen Hawking attending a conference in the Caribbean organized by Jeffrey Epstein?,['Epstein had hosted numerous scientific luminaries at the island gathering.'],"On May 18, 2023, a Twitter user shared a photograph of the late physicist Stephen Hawking sitting with a group of people in what appeared to be a tropical setting. The user claimed that Hawking was on the Caribbean island owned by convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.  In a tweet, @dom_lucre asked, ""Serious question, why the hell was Stephen Hawking on Jeffrey Epstein's Island?"" asked  (@@dom_lucre/X)  This is a real photograph of Hawking that shows him either on one of Epstein's private islands or on nearby St. Thomas Island, at an Epstein-sponsored conference. It was taken in March 2006, a few months before Epstein was charged with multiple counts of unlawful sex with a minor.  March 2006 charged Epstein, a financier who was later charged with sex trafficking, died in his prison cell in 2021 while awaiting trial (he previously had been convicted of other sex offenses). But before his fall, he was known for his parties and his extensive connections with high-profile celebrities, politicians, and intellectuals. He owned two private islands, Great St. James and Little St. James, which were prominent features in the civil and criminal cases against him. Numerous young women said in court papers that they were taken via private jet to Little St. James, where they were ordered to perform sex acts with Epstein and other men.  died owned said Hawking was just one of many scientists and intellectuals invited to these islands for less-sinister reasons  a scientific conference Epstein paid for. So how was Hawking brought into Epstein's orbit? For years, Epstein financed the Edge Foundation, billed as a salon for elite thinkers, which hosted prominent gatherings of scientists and intellectuals, and gave Epstein access to such circles. According to a Buzzfeed News investigation, Epstein's donations helped Edge carry out most of its activities, including an annual ""billionaires dinner"" that ceased to take place after his last contribution in 2015.  financed billed investigation An archived page from Edge.org describing Epstein's involvement can be seen here, where he was described as ""a financier and science philanthropist."" The website stated, ""He is one of the largest supporters of individual scientists, including theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking and Nobel Laureates Gerard 't Hooft, David Gross and Frank Wilczek.""  Edge.org here In 2006, Epstein sponsored a conference at the neighboring St. Thomas Island. Per a March 2006 report in the St. Thomas Source, a local newspaper, prominent scientists gathered in a series of private meetings dubbed ""Confronting Gravity: A workshop to explore fundamental questions in physics and cosmology."" Among those scientists was Hawking.  March 2006 Epstein was also described by the local report as the ""driving force behind the conference."" He reportedly said to the paper that he brought the group to St. Thomas with hopes that the relaxed setting would free the physicists' minds to explore one of the 20th century's last unanswered physics questions: What is gravity? described ""There is no agenda except fun and physics, and that's fun with a capital 'F,'"" Epstein reportedly said. reportedly The New York Times also reported in 2019 on Hawking's trip to this island (emphasis, ours): reported It was a five-day gathering in the Caribbean of some of the world's top scientists, including Dr. Hawking, to share ideas about gravity and cosmology, with scuba and catamaran excursions on the side. One evening, the participants had dinner on the beach at Mr. Epstein's private island. Some of the scientists noticed that Mr. Epstein ""was always followed by a group of something like three or four young women,"" as Alan Guth, a physicist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, put it in an email to The Times, but they did not probe further. In another 2019 report, The New York Times described how, ""Once, the scientists  including Mr. Hawking  crowded on board a submarine that Mr. Epstein had chartered.""  2019 report But where did the photograph come from? In 2006, The Edge Foundation also published a blog post on the conference and interviewed an attendee and organizer, theoretical physicist Lawrence Krauss. Per the post (emphasis, ours): The Edge Foundation post The topic of the meeting was ""Confronting Gravity."" Krauss intended to have ""a meeting where people would look forward to the key issues facing fundamental physics and cosmology"". They could meet, discuss, relax on the beach, and take a trip to the nearby private island retreat of the science philanthropist Jeffrey Epstein, who funded the event. We scrolled to the bottom of the page and found photographs of Hawking and more from the gathering. The photograph in question showed Hawking seated alongside Nobel Prize winner David Gross, and physicists Kip Thorne and Lisa Randall. Yet another shows Hawking on what appears to be the interior of a boat, captioned, ""Lawrence Krauss and Stephen Hawking on the way to Atlantis Submarine.""  page (Screenshot via Edge.org) The New York Times described Epstein's allure for these scientists: The New York Times The lure for some of the scientists was Mr. Epstein's money. He dangled financing for their pet projects. Some of the scientists said that the prospect of financing blinded them to the seriousness of his sexual transgressions, and even led them to give credence to some of Mr. Epstein's half-baked scientific musings. The photograph of Hawking has been disseminated in the media, and is also publicly available on the website of the foundation once financed by Epstein, along with a description of the conference he attended, with the dates and details of the gathering matching up with reliable media reports. We thus rate this claim    ""A Timeline of the Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell Scandal."" AP NEWS, 28 June 2022, https://apnews.com/article/epstein-maxwell-timeline-b9f15710fabb72e8581c71e94acf513e. Accessed 19 May 2023. Aldhous, Peter. ""How Jeffrey Epstein Bankrolled An Exclusive Intellectual Boys Club And Reaped The Benefits."" BuzzFeed News, 26 Sept. 2019, https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/peteraldhous/jeffrey-epstein-john-brockman-edge-foundation.Accessed 19 May 2023. Chappell, Bill. ""Financier Buys Jeffrey Epstein's Private Islands, with Plans to Create a Resort."" NPR, 4 May 2023. NPR, https://www.npr.org/2023/05/04/1173956903/jeffrey-epstein-island-sold-st-james.Accessed 19 May 2023. ""Jeffrey Epstein."" Edge.Org. 5 Apr. 2019, https://web.archive.org/web/20190405211237/https:/www.edge.org/memberbio/jeffrey_epstein.Accessed 19 May 2023. Kantor, Jodi, et al. ""Jeffrey Epstein Was a Sex Offender. The Powerful Welcomed Him Anyway."" The New York Times, 13 July 2019. NYTimes.com, https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/13/nyregion/jeffrey-epstein-new-york-elite.html.Accessed 19 May 2023. ""Physicists Debate Gravity at St. Thomas Symposium."" St. Thomas Source, 17 Mar. 2006, https://stthomassource.com/content/2006/03/17/physicists-debate-gravity-st-thomas-symposium/.Accessed 19 May 2023. ""Pictured: Stephen Hawking on Jeffrey Epsteins 'Sex-Slave Island.'"" The Independent, 13 Jan. 2015, https://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/stephen-hawking-pictured-on-jeffrey-epstein-s-sex-slave-caribbean-island-9974955.html.Accessed 19 May 2023. ""Stephen Hawking Pictured on Jeffrey Epstein's ""Island of Sin."""" Telegraph, 12 Jan. 2015. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/stephen-hawking/11340494/Stephen-Hawking-pictured-on-Jeffrey-Epsteins-Island-of-Sin.html. Accessed 19 May 2023. Stewart, James B., et al. ""Jeffrey Epstein Hoped to Seed Human Race With His DNA."" The New York Times, 31 July 2019. NYTimes.com, https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/31/business/jeffrey-epstein-eugenics.html.Accessed 19 May 2023. ""THE ENERGY OF EMPTY SPACE THAT ISN'T ZERO."" Edge.Org. 6 Mar. 2023, https://web.archive.org/web/20230306164658/https://www.edge.org/conversation/lawrence_m_krauss-the-energy-of-empty-space-that-isnt-zero.Accessed 19 May 2023. ""Who Was Jeffrey Epstein? The Financier Charged with Sex Trafficking."" BBC News, 8 July 2019. www.bbc.com, https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-48913377.Accessed 19 May 2023.",['finance'],True,"In a tweet, @dom_lucre asked, ""Serious question, why the hell was Stephen Hawking on Jeffrey Epstein's Island?""This is a real photograph of Hawking that shows him either on one of Epstein's private islands or on nearby St. Thomas Island, at an Epstein-sponsored conference. It was taken in March 2006, a few months before Epstein was charged with multiple counts of unlawful sex with a minor. Epstein, a financier who was later charged with sex trafficking, died in his prison cell in 2021 while awaiting trial (he previously had been convicted of other sex offenses). But before his fall, he was known for his parties and his extensive connections with high-profile celebrities, politicians, and intellectuals. He owned two private islands, Great St. James and Little St. James, which were prominent features in the civil and criminal cases against him. Numerous young women said in court papers that they were taken via private jet to Little St. James, where they were ordered to perform sex acts with Epstein and other men. For years, Epstein financed the Edge Foundation, billed as a salon for elite thinkers, which hosted prominent gatherings of scientists and intellectuals, and gave Epstein access to such circles. According to a Buzzfeed News investigation, Epstein's donations helped Edge carry out most of its activities, including an annual ""billionaires dinner"" that ceased to take place after his last contribution in 2015. An archived page from Edge.org describing Epstein's involvement can be seen here, where he was described as ""a financier and science philanthropist."" The website stated, ""He is one of the largest supporters of individual scientists, including theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking and Nobel Laureates Gerard 't Hooft, David Gross and Frank Wilczek."" In 2006, Epstein sponsored a conference at the neighboring St. Thomas Island. Per a March 2006 report in the St. Thomas Source, a local newspaper, prominent scientists gathered in a series of private meetings dubbed ""Confronting Gravity: A workshop to explore fundamental questions in physics and cosmology."" Among those scientists was Hawking. Epstein was also described by the local report as the ""driving force behind the conference."" He reportedly said to the paper that he brought the group to St. Thomas with hopes that the relaxed setting would free the physicists' minds to explore one of the 20th century's last unanswered physics questions: What is gravity?""There is no agenda except fun and physics, and that's fun with a capital 'F,'"" Epstein reportedly said.The New York Times also reported in 2019 on Hawking's trip to this island (emphasis, ours):In another 2019 report, The New York Times described how, ""Once, the scientists  including Mr. Hawking  crowded on board a submarine that Mr. Epstein had chartered."" But where did the photograph come from? In 2006, The Edge Foundation also published a blog post on the conference and interviewed an attendee and organizer, theoretical physicist Lawrence Krauss. Per the post (emphasis, ours):We scrolled to the bottom of the page and found photographs of Hawking and more from the gathering. The photograph in question showed Hawking seated alongside Nobel Prize winner David Gross, and physicists Kip Thorne and Lisa Randall. Yet another shows Hawking on what appears to be the interior of a boat, captioned, ""Lawrence Krauss and Stephen Hawking on the way to Atlantis Submarine."" The New York Times described Epstein's allure for these scientists:"
"No, 'Dog the Bounty Hunter' has not passed away.","[""Highly dubious websites posted false and distasteful articles that prompted unwarranted concern among the reality TV star's many fans.""]","In late 2019, readers asked us about blog posts that were widely shared on social media and falsely claimed that the reality television star Duane Chapman, known as ""Dog the Bounty Hunter,"" had died either by suicide or from a pulmonary embolism.  Those reports were false. Beginning on Nov. 20, admirers of Chapman and his late wife, Beth, who died in June after herself being the subject of death hoaxes, began posting tributes to him and sharing one of two blog posts.  hoaxes The first purported to be hosted by a website with the domain name whatnow.actual-events.com, but when internet users clicked on the story on social media, they were redirected to the domain newspanel.suzeraincollections.com. There, the story carried the headline ""Duane 'Dog' Chapman Died of Pulmonary Embolism. He Didn't Survive His Second Attack. He Was 66 -- WGN.""  first   The highly dubious website falsely attributed the claim about Chapman's death to WGN America, a real U.S. television network that broadcast the Chapmans' most recent reality show ""Dog's Most Wanted."" The hoax article also misleadingly used WGN America's logo in a sharebait video that purported to be a television news report about Chapman's death, but that paused after a few seconds and required users to share the article on social media in order to continue watching:   In reality, WGN America had no connection to the story and did not report on Chapman's death in November 2019, because Chapman did not die in November 2019. The specific claim that Chapman had died from a pulmonary embolism (a blocked artery in the lungs) was rather insidious. At first glance, it appeared especially plausible to many fans of the television star because he was in fact diagnosed with that very problem in September 2019. diagnosed The second blog post shared by social media users was even more distasteful than the first. It falsely and misleadingly used the logo of BBC News, a highly reputable and widely trusted information source, to report that Chapman had taken his own life.  In this instance, social media users shared an article that appeared to be hosted on the domain bbc-newsroom.actualeventstv.com, but which redirected to news-room.easystepsdiy.info. On social media, the post carried the headline ""Duane 'Dog' Chapman Died of Suicide After Depression Attack on His Sickness -- BBC News"" but when users redirected to the source, the article's headline proclaimed: shared proclaimed ""Breaking: (Actual Suicide Video) Duane 'Dog' Chapman Died of Suicide After Depression Attack on His Sickness -- BBC News."" Despite the extremely distasteful claim that the video in the article contained footage of Chapman's suicide, it contained nothing of the sort and, just as in the first article, the video stopped after a second or two and required viewers to share the post on social media in order to continue watching.     The claim that Chapman had taken his own life was, like the claim he had died of a pulmonary embolism, particularly insidious. In the season finale of ""Dog's Most Wanted,"" broadcast by WGN America on Nov. 6, Chapman spoke about the recent death of his wife from cancer, and the considerable difficulty he was experiencing in coping with her loss.  At one moment in the episode, he reportedly discussed how he had contemplated taking his own life, such was his grief. People magazine quoted Chapman as saying: People ""I just hope that I dont live very much longer without her, because now she made the first step, shes through the gate,"" he added. She paved a way for me. I want to take a [god damn] pain pill so bad. I feel like if I did something to myself right now and passed away suicidal and I got to heaven and was like, Hi honey, and would she go, You [dumb ass], why would you do that? Or would she go, Wow, youre here. Ill be like Of course Im here. You left me. Im here. So, am I obligated to do that?  Because of that widely reported revelation, a report that Chapman had died by suicide would have appeared somewhat plausible to many readers.  The dubious nature of the websites involved, and the absence of any corroborating evidence or reports by actual news organizations, meant that some readers would have immediately recognized the stories as hoaxes. However, a significant number were taken in by them, and shared them on social media, to the extent that Chapman himself intervened. He provided the gossip website TMZ a photograph of himself holding the Nov. 19 edition of the Denver Post, and a handwritten sign that read ""I'm alive!"" Chapman then posted a screenshot of that article to his own Instagram page the next day. photograph Instagram If you need help, call the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline: 1-800-273-8255. Or contact Crisis Text Line by texting HOME to 741741. Kasprak, Alex. ""Outdated: Beth Chapman Death Hoax.""
 Snopes.com. 22 April 2019. Lee, Ashley. ""Dog the Bounty Hunter Reveals Pulmonary Embolism Diagnosis.""
 The Los Angeles Times. 28 September 2019. Dugan, Christina. ""Dog the Bounty Hunter Contemplates Suicide After Wife Beth's Death on 'Dog's Most Wanted' Finale.""
 People. 6 November 2019. TMZ. ""Dog the Bounty Hunter: Nope, He's Not Dead...Look, I'm Alive!""
 20 November 2019.",['loss'],False,"Those reports were false. Beginning on Nov. 20, admirers of Chapman and his late wife, Beth, who died in June after herself being the subject of death hoaxes, began posting tributes to him and sharing one of two blog posts. The first purported to be hosted by a website with the domain name whatnow.actual-events.com, but when internet users clicked on the story on social media, they were redirected to the domain newspanel.suzeraincollections.com. There, the story carried the headline ""Duane 'Dog' Chapman Died of Pulmonary Embolism. He Didn't Survive His Second Attack. He Was 66 -- WGN."" The specific claim that Chapman had died from a pulmonary embolism (a blocked artery in the lungs) was rather insidious. At first glance, it appeared especially plausible to many fans of the television star because he was in fact diagnosed with that very problem in September 2019.In this instance, social media users shared an article that appeared to be hosted on the domain bbc-newsroom.actualeventstv.com, but which redirected to news-room.easystepsdiy.info. On social media, the post carried the headline ""Duane 'Dog' Chapman Died of Suicide After Depression Attack on His Sickness -- BBC News"" but when users redirected to the source, the article's headline proclaimed: At one moment in the episode, he reportedly discussed how he had contemplated taking his own life, such was his grief. People magazine quoted Chapman as saying:He provided the gossip website TMZ a photograph of himself holding the Nov. 19 edition of the Denver Post, and a handwritten sign that read ""I'm alive!"" Chapman then posted a screenshot of that article to his own Instagram page the next day."
"Says that as Massachusetts governor, Mitt Romney condemned coal-fired plants, saying they kill people.",[],"Mitt Romney came to coal country on Aug. 14, standing before a crowd of miners in eastern Ohio and pledging to fight for their jobs. You could be forgiven for thinking this was much ado about 3,150 jobs—the number employed directly by coal operations in Ohio, at least before two mines announced layoffs recently. But Romney's greater point was about how coal fuels many power plants in Ohio and the region, and how, he says, environmental regulation from President Barack Obama's administration threatens jobs at those plants, too. This could drive up the cost of electricity for every Ohioan, Romney said. This debate—over the cost of electricity, the shift among power plants to natural gas, the environmental and health risks, and the role the government should or shouldn't play—has been building for years. After the event, the Obama campaign responded, saying that Romney's position on coal has changed substantially since he was governor of Massachusetts. 

Immediately after becoming governor, Romney condemned coal-fired plants, saying they kill people, according to an Obama campaign news release. The claim was similar to one the Obama team made in a radio ad, and Obama reelection aides backed it with specific quotes Romney made in February 2003, when he was the freshly elected governor of Massachusetts. The Obama campaign also highlighted a Romney quote that had no lethal references but was just as strong. It came from a Massachusetts news release in which Romney said, ""If the choice is between dirty power plants or protecting the health of the people of Massachusetts, there is no choice in my mind. I will always come down on the side of public health."" Romney made each of these statements during a Feb. 6, 2003, showdown over the future of the controversial, coal-burning Salem Harbor Power Station. 

In 2001, Massachusetts passed new rules to reduce power plant emissions of nitrogen oxide, sulfur dioxide, carbon dioxide, and mercury, to be phased in over several years. The mercury standard would not be finalized until 2004. Romney supported the rules, as he made clear repeatedly. Massachusetts singled out its most egregious polluters as the Filthy Five plants, including Salem Harbor. Public health and environmental scientists at Harvard studied the emissions from two of the plants in 2000 and concluded that Salem Harbor was responsible for 53 deaths, 570 emergency room visits, 14,400 asthma attacks, and 99,000 incidents of upper respiratory symptoms—all per year. 

As occurs with similar studies that health authorities cite, local residents and others who wanted to keep the Salem Harbor plant open (for jobs and tax revenue) disputed those figures, saying they resulted from unproven modeling. It turned out that the Harvard scientists had revised their figures in 2002, putting premature deaths from Salem Harbor's pollution at 30 per year and reducing the number of emergency room visits to 400 and the asthma attacks to 2,000, according to the Boston Globe and the Boston Herald. But the scientists stood by the broader conclusion—that emissions from dirty power plants can be deadly. The Harvard methodology has now been widely replicated and is respected by health scientists, according to several environmental authorities we spoke with. Romney appeared to accept their findings, too. In the above-mentioned news release, the commonwealth of Massachusetts quoted Romney in the third person on the danger factor: Romney said that the Salem Harbor plant is responsible for 53 premature deaths, 570 emergency room visits, and 14,400 asthma attacks each year. He also pointed out that coal and oil-fired plants contribute significantly more air pollution than their gas-fired counterparts, exacerbating acid rain and global warming. 

This was in a news release issued by the governor's aides, not some radical outside instigator. It was issued under the name of Romney, Lt. Gov. Kerry Healey, and Romney's development chief, Douglas Foy. According to the Boston Globe, Romney hired Foy from the Conservation Law Foundation, a leading environmental advocacy group in Massachusetts. The spat with Salem Harbor turned into a testy exchange that February day after Salem Harbor's then-owner, Pacific Gas and Electric, sought an extension until 2006 to comply with Massachusetts emissions rules—and plant supporters showed up to demand that the governor back off. Romney was adamant that the company comply by 2004. His statements that day show how he felt: ""That plant kills people."" And to those, including city officials, who argued that this would cost jobs: ""I will not create jobs that kill people."" 

Based on some of the quotes, it might appear that Romney was speaking only about that single plant (which a new owner, Dominion, is phasing out, after which a subsequent third owner will build a natural gas plant there). That's what we thought when we began looking into this. It is also what the Romney campaign told us in an email. So was it accurate for the Obama campaign to imply that Romney's words characterized his broader attitude toward coal emissions when he was governor? We kept looking because people in the environmental community told us it was a valid claim. The news release under Romney's name suggested it as well. 

Romney spoke of plants, not just a single one, when he pointed out that coal and oil-fired plants contribute significantly more air pollution than their gas-fired counterparts, exacerbating acid rain and global warming. Still, to give him the benefit of the doubt, what if he really just meant the Salem Harbor plant? Wasn't that plant particularly egregious when compared with coal-fired plants under attack by federal regulators today? No, say environmentalists, including authorities from the Conservation Law Foundation. Their claims are supported by U.S. EPA emissions data we verified independently. ""When he said that this plant kills people, he was talking about a plant that produced pollution comparable to the emissions of plants in the Midwest,"" said Seth Kaplan, vice president for policy and climate advocacy at the Conservation Law Foundation. Jonathan Peress, an environmental and regulatory attorney who works for the CLF and was recently chairman of the American Bar Association's air quality committee, added in a separate interview with PolitiFact Ohio that Romney promoted Massachusetts air standards that were almost identical to those the U.S. EPA wants to enforce—and that Romney now criticizes. ""The levels of emissions that he was talking about were levels that were virtually identical to what the EPA has proposed,"" Kaplan agreed. ""He was steadfastly standing behind emissions reductions that are the same as those currently attacked."" 

To see if this was accurate—that the emissions Romney decried were similar to or even weaker than those under current attack now by the EPA (whose rules Romney now attacks)—we examined the emissions cuts that Massachusetts wanted and data on the level of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides emissions at Salem Harbor and in the Midwest. The U.S. EPA keeps the information in its extensive Clean Air Markets database. Nitrogen oxides react with sunlight to create ozone and smog. Sulfur dioxide is tied to particulate matter and is considered particularly dangerous to health, said Jonathan Walke, a senior attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council Action Fund. The level of both these substances was multiple times lower at Salem Harbor, even when Romney was trying to force the plant to reduce emissions, than at Eastlake in Northeast Ohio and several other Ohio plants we checked. Our comparisons included multiple years, including Salem Harbor in 2003 with Ohio plants in 2011. To compensate for differences in electricity output, number of boilers, and hours of operation at different power plants, we checked the data for emissions per megawatt-hour. The pattern held. ""It's all the same pollution, albeit in higher quantities in Ohio,"" Walke said. 

You might ask why we looked at Eastlake. It's because FirstEnergy Corp. plans to shut down two of that plant's boilers rather than spend heavily on scrubbers to comply with EPA rules. This is one of several coal-burning plants at the heart of the current jobs-versus-pollution debate, although Romney did not mention it specifically. It's important to note that the rules on nitrogen and sulfur are not what is prompting the FirstEnergy shutdowns. New EPA rules on mercury and toxic metals are the cause of planned closures in Eastlake. The tougher limits won't take effect until 2014. The EPA aims to cut mercury emissions by 79 percent. 

But as the Massachusetts governor, Romney supported mercury reductions in his state, too. In 2004, he signed off on a rule aiming to reduce mercury emissions by 95 percent by 2012. With Romney's name on the letterhead, Massachusetts in May 2004 issued a lengthy set of justifications for the mercury rule. Among them: ""First, [new research] confirms and extends our understanding of mercury's harmful effects on learning, attention, and other critical cognitive skills in children. Recent studies have found that children exposed to mercury levels may show signs of attention deficit disorder, impaired visual-spatial skills, and poor coordination."" Romney was a champion of those mercury regulations, said Shanna Cleveland, a staff attorney with the Conservation Law Foundation. ""He was one of the reasons we got them through."" 

Time to clean up: Romney was discussing a specific power plant, Salem Harbor, when he said, ""That plant kills people."" But the public record shows that his comments were part of a broad emissions-cutting program he embraced. And the power plant that he considered deadly had emissions that were no worse, and in many cases lower, than at Midwest plants that he would now want left alone, citing the use of affordable and abundant coal. If one were to have supported the regulations Romney wanted in 2003, it's fairly safe to assume that one would also support such things nationally, said Jonathan Levy, an environmental scientist at Boston University and Harvard and co-author of the now heavily replicated study on the correlation between coal-burning power plants and respiratory health. 

The Obama campaign claimed that as governor, Romney condemned coal plants as killers. He spoke at times of a single plant, but at other times made clear that other plants also needed to cut emissions for the sake of public health. This even included new rules for mercury reductions—the same substance from coal plants that now is prompting closures in Ohio. The debate over coal involves calculations of costs, the abundance or scarcity of natural resources, health and environmental risks, and attitudes about government regulation. It is not our role to say whether Romney was right or wrong at one time. 

But with additional information from emissions data, interviews, and the public record of his governorship, the Obama campaign's claim about Romney's coal position of nine years ago is nearly as clear as a haze-free day. On the Truth-O-Meter, it rates Mostly True.","['Environment', 'Ohio', 'Economy', 'Energy']",True,"The Obama campaign also highlighted a Romney quote that had no lethal references but was just as strong. It came from astate of Massachusetts newsreleasein which Romney said:  If the choice is between dirty power plants or protecting the health of the people of Massachusetts, there is no choice in my mind. I will always come down on the side of public health.Romney made each of these statements during a Feb. 6, 2003, showdown over the future of the controversial, coal-burning Salem Harbor Power Station.In 2001, Massachusetts passed new rules to reduce power plant emissions of nitrogen oxide, sulfur dioxide, carbon dioxide and mercury, to be phased in over several years. The mercury standard would not be finalized until 2004. Romney supported the rules, as he made clear repeatedly.Massachusetts singled out its most egregious polluters as the Filthy Five plants, including Salem Harbor. Public health and environmental scientists at Harvard studied the emissions from two of the plants in 2000 and concluded that Salem Harbor was responsible for 53 deaths, 570 emergency room visits, 14,400 asthma attacks and 99,000 incidents of upper respiratory symptoms -- all per year.As occurs with similar studies that health authorities cite, local residents and others who wanted to keep the Salem Harbor plant open (for jobs and tax revenue) disputed those figures, saying they resulted from unproven modeling. It turned out that the Harvard scientists had revised their figures in 2002, putting premature deaths from Salem Harbors pollution at 30 per year and reducing the number of emergency room visits to 400 and the asthma attacks at 2,000, according to the Boston Globe and the Boston Herald.But the scientists stood by the broader conclusion -- that emissions from dirty power plants can be deadly.  The Harvard methodology has now been widely replicated and is respected by health scientists, according to several environmental authorities we spoke with. Romney appeared to accept their findings, too. In the above-mentionednews release, the commonwealth of Massachusetts quoted Romney in the third person on the danger factor:Romney said that the Salem Harbor plant is responsible for 53 premature deaths, 570 emergency room visits and 14,400 asthma attacks each year. He also pointed out that coal and oil fired plants contribute significantly more air pollution than their gas fired counterparts, exacerbating acid rain and global warming.This was in a news release issued by the governors aides, not some radical outside instigator. It was issued under the name of Romney, Lt. Gov. Kerry Healey and Romneys development chief, Douglas Foy.  According to the Boston Globe, Romney hired Foy from the  Conservation Law Foundation, or CLF, a leading environmental advocacy group in Massachusetts.The spat with Salem Harbor turned into a testy exchange that February day after Salem Harbors then-owner, Pacific Gas and Electric, sought an extension until 2006 to comply with Massachusetts emissions rules -- and plant supporters showed up to to demand that the governor back off. Romney was adamant that the company comply by 2004. His statements that day show how he felt: That plant kills people. And to those including city officials who argued that this would cost jobs: I will not create jobs that kill people.Based on some of the quotes, it might appear that Romney was speaking only about that single plant (which a new owner, Dominion, is phasing out, after which a subsequent third ownerwill build a natural gas plantthere). Thats what we thought when we began looking into this. It is also what the Romney campaign told us in email.So was it accurate for the Obama campaign to imply that Romneys words characterized his broader attitude toward coal emissions when he was governor?We kept looking, because people in the environmental community told us it was a valid claim. And the news release under Romneys name suggested it as well.Romney spoke of plants, not just a single one, when he pointed out that coal and oil fired plants contribute significantly more air pollution than their gas fired counterparts, exacerbating acid rain and global warming.Still, to give him the benefit of doubt, what if he really just meant the Salem Harbor plant? Wasnt that plant particularly egregious when compared with coal-fired plants under attack by federal regulators today?No, say environmentalists who include authorities from the CLF.Their claims are supported by U.S. EPA emissions data we verified independently.When he said that this plant kills people, he was talking about a plant that produced pollution comparable to the emissions of plants in the Midwest, said Seth Kaplan, vice president for policy and climate advocacy at the conservation foundation.Jonathan Peress, an environmental and regulatory attorney who works for the CLF and was recently chairman of the American Bar Associations air quality committee, added in a separate interview with PolitiFact Ohio that Romney promoted Massachusetts air standards that were almost identical to those the U.S. EPA wants to enforce -- and that Romney now criticizes.The levels of emissions that he was talking about were levels that were virtually identical to what the EPA has proposed, Kaplan agreed. He was steadfastly standing behind emissions reductions that are the same as those currently attacked.To see if this was accurate -- that the emissions Romney decried were similar to or even weaker than those under current attack now by the EPA (whose rules Romney now attacks) -- we examined the emissions cuts that Massachusetts wanted and data on the level of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides emissions at Salem Harbor and in the Midwest. The U.S. EPA keeps the information in its extensiveClean Air Marketsdatabase.Nitrogen oxides react with sunlight to create ozone and smog. Sulfur dioxide is tied to particulate matter and is considered particularly dangerous to health, said Jonathan Walke, a senior attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council Action Fund.The level of both these substances was multiple times lower at Salem Harbor, even when Romney was trying to force the plant to reduce emissions, than at Eastlake in Northeast Ohio and several other Ohio plants we checked. Our comparisons included multiple years, including Salem Harbor in 2003 with Ohio plants in 2011. To compensate for differences in electricity output, number of boilers and hours of operation at different power plants, we checked the data for emissions per megawatt-hour. The pattern held.Its all the same pollution, albeit in higher quantities in Ohio, Walke said.You might ask why we looked at Eastlake. Its because FirstEnergy Corp. plans to shut down two of that plants boilers rather than spend heavily on scrubbers to comply with EPA rules. This is one of several coal-burning plants at the heart of the current jobs-versus-pollution debate, although Romney did not mention it specifically.Its important to note that the rules on nitrogen and sulfur are not what is prompting the FirstEnergy shutdowns. New EPA rules on mercury and toxic metals are the cause of planned closures in Eastlake. The tougher limits wont take effect until 2014. The EPA aims to cut mercury emissions by 79 percent.But as the Massachusetts governor, Romney supported mercury reductions in his state, too. In 2004, he signed off on a rule aiming to reduce mercury emissions by 95 percent by 2012. With Romneys name on the letterhead, Massachusetts in May, 2004, issued a lengthy set of justifications for the mercury rule. Among them:First, [new research] confirms and extends our understanding of mercury's harmful effects on learning, attention and other critical cognitive skills in children.  Recent studies have found that children exposed to mercury levels may show signs of attention deficit disorder, impaired visual-spatial skills and poor coordination.Romney was a champion of those mercury regulations, said Shanna Cleveland, a staff attorney with the Conservation Law Foundation. He was one of the reasons we got them through.Time to clean up: Romney was discussing a specific power plant, Salem Harbor, when he said,  That plant kills people. But the public record shows that his comments were part of a broad emissions-cutting program he embraced.And the power plant that he considered deadly had emissions that were no worse, and in many cases lower, than at Midwest plants that he would now wants left alone, citing the use of affordable and abundant coal.If one were to have supported the regulations Romney wanted in 2003, its fairly safe to assume that one would also support such things nationally, said Jonathan Levy, an environmental scientist at  Boston University and Harvard and co-author of the now heavily replicated study on the correlation between coal-burning power plants and respiratory health.The Obama campaign claimed that as governor, Romney condemned coal plants as killers. He spoke at times of a single plant, but at other times made clear that other plants also needed to cut emissions for the sake of public health. This even included new rules for mercury reductions -- the same substance from coal plants that now is prompting closures in Ohio.The debate over coal involves calculations of costs, the abundance or scarcity of natural resources, health and environmental risks, and attitudes about government regulation. It is not our role to say Romney was right or wrong at one time.But with additional information from emissions data, interviews and the public record of his governorship,  the Obama campaign claim about Romneys coal position of nine years ago is nearly as clear as a haze-free day.On the Truth-O-Meter, it rates Mostly True."
Says spending in the fiscal 2009 budget was lower than spending in the fiscal 2014 budget,[],"Chris Christie has spent months emphasizing how high New Jersey's spending was when his gubernatorial challenger, Barbara Buono, chaired a Senate budget panel a few years ago. Now, Buono, a Democratic state senator from Metuchen, is taking her shot at spending under Christie. Buono made her move at a June 26 Senate budget hearing when she spoke against Christie's $32.9 billion budget for fiscal year 2014. The Legislature approved the plan that afternoon, and Christie signed it two days later. Buono noted in her speech that the fiscal year 2009 budget, crafted during her tenure as chair of the Senate's Budget and Appropriations Committee, spent less than what has been approved for fiscal year 2014. We wondered if that was true, especially since Christie has frequently criticized spending levels when Buono led the budget panel, particularly for fiscal year 2008. However, in this case, Buono's claim about higher spending in Christie's just-approved budget is accurate. Let's review the numbers. Patrick Giordano, Buono's chief of staff, said in an email that Buono's figures were confirmed by the nonpartisan Office of Legislative Services. We reviewed an email sent by David J. Rosen, the OLS budget and finance officer, to Giordano, and then confirmed the data separately with Rosen. The result? Spending in the fiscal year 2009 appropriations act was $32.86 billion, compared with $32.97 billion for the fiscal year 2014 spending plan, Rosen wrote to Giordano. That's a difference of $108,491,000, or one-third of 1 percent. So, Buono's claim is correct: spending for the fiscal year 2014 budget is higher than for fiscal year 2009. For context, let's also look at spending under the fiscal year 2008 budget—the other spending plan that Buono helped craft during her chairmanship of the Senate budget panel. Buono referenced both budgets during her speech on the Senate floor. Former Gov. Jon Corzine had final approval of the fiscal years 2008 and 2009 budgets. Now, let's look at spending for every fiscal year since 2008: 

FISCAL YEAR TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS  
FY2008 $33.47 billion  
FY2009 $32.86 billion  
FY2010 $28.99 billion  
FY2011 $28.36 billion  
FY2012 $29.69 billion  
FY2013 $31.65 billion  
FY2014 $32.97 billion  

Sources: New Jersey Office of Legislative Services Summary of Appropriations Acts for fiscal years 2008-2014  

So, state spending dropped from fiscal year 2008 to 2009, but state spending has increased in each of Christie's budgets. It's worth noting that the recession had a major impact on decreased spending from 2008 to 2009. The National Bureau of Economic Research has defined the recession as beginning in December 2007 and ending in June 2009. New Jersey Senate Republicans spokesman Ben Sparks did not respond to our request for comment. Our ruling: Buono said during a speech on the Senate floor about the fiscal year 2014 budget that its spending level is higher than spending under the fiscal year 2009 budget. Buono chaired the Senate Budget and Appropriations Committee when the 2009 plan was drafted and ultimately approved by Corzine. The OLS confirmed Buono's claim, noting that spending for fiscal year 2009 was $32.86 billion, compared with $32.97 billion for fiscal year 2014. We rate Buono's claim True. To comment on this story, go to NJ.com.","['New Jersey', 'State Budget']",True,"To comment on this story, go toNJ.com."
Is Sheryl Underwood Leaving 'The Talk' After Making CBS 'Furious' for Endorsing Weight Loss Gummies?,"['An online article purportedly published by People magazine said Underwood had ""shocked everyone when she announced her departure from the show.""']","In November 2023, multiple Facebook ads were displayed to users that led to an article that bore the People magazine logo and claimed that Sheryl Underwood, the longtime co-host of ""The Talk,"" would be leaving the TV talk show to work on expanding her own line of keto gummies for weight loss. However, this was not true. Underwood has nothing to do with any keto gummies for weight loss, nor did People magazine ever publish any such story. Underwood was simply the latest person in a long line of famous people who had had their image and likeness used without permission to sell keto gummies. Further, this false rumor that mentioned Underwood led to a dangerous scam that could potentially cost victims thousands of dollars per year. a long line of famous people One version of the Facebook ad claimed, ""Producers are furious that she came forward."" The headline in the ads read, ""Sheryl Abandons 'The Talk' After Confessing Her Trick."" Two of the false Facebook ads that promoted the scam. These ads led to a fake People magazine article on scam websites including emperorsland.pro, sizzlingpear.pro, mindfulmovement.pro and chillytreats.info. (We were unable to provide an archived link to the article since scammers design these websites so that the scam version of the page is cloaked from prying eyes  that is, unless users specifically came from a Facebook ad.) This is not a true story, nor did People.com ever publish any such article. The fake People magazine article, which was nothing more than fiction and a scam, began as follows: Sheryl Underwood Confirms She Is Leaving 'The Talk' After Her Accidental 'Live' Confession On-Air... The host said that it was 'time for a break', but she may actually have bigger things in mind. (People) - Sheryl Underwood, the 60-year-old host on CBS's show 'The Talk', shocked everyone when she announced her departure from the show after 12 record-breaking years on-air. Sheryl, who has earned the reputation of being one of the most business savvy women in the industry, made sponsors (and CBS) FURIOUS. Why? Because Sheryl failed to disclose her new weight loss line to the network. Sheryl's new company is actually a HUGE competitor to CBS's current sponsor Weight Watchers because Sheryl's product is 90% cheaper and five times more effective than Weight Watchers's competing product. According to sources, CBS made Sheryl decide on which direction she was going to focus on in the future. Being so turned off by the reaction of the network and their power move she has decided to pursue her new weight loss line and dream. The scam article went on to falsely claim that other celebrities had joined with Underwood to promote the products, whether they be Belly Blast Keto Gummies, Total Fit Keto Gummies or other products. It is a fact that no celebrities have ever endorsed keto gummies that are purportedly intended for use in weight loss. Websites that promote sales of keto gummies for weight loss usually lack information about the true creators of the products and the source of where they were packaged. In the past, some consumers who fell victim to these scams told Snopes that the post office box numbers included in return addresses for the products don't exist. The rabbit hole for keto gummies goes even deeper, however. Two odd scenarios have been laid out by numerous victims of the scams, which usually involve monthly subscription fees often reported as being around $200 or more, or around $2,400 per year. Some consumers said that they never ordered the products but kept receiving shipments that they had no way of returning, due to fake return addresses. On the flip side, other customers said that they received charges for the products on their credit card statements despite never having ordered them, and then never received any products in the mail. Further, listings for keto gummies for weight loss on Amazon.com and Walmart.com often feature the words ""Shark"" and ""Tank,"" although not consecutively as ""Shark Tank."" The two words are included in product listings on Amazon.com and Walmart.com so that any customers searching online for keto gummies with the words ""Shark Tank""  after those same customers saw false claims that said the TV show's investors endorsed the products  would then fall victim to the scam and purchase the products based on the ""Shark Tank"" lie. Again, to be clear, no investors associated with ""Shark Tank"" ever endorsed gummies. false claims If any readers have been victimized by these scams, we recommend contacting your credit card company immediately, reporting fraud to the FTC and also searching the U.S. Better Business Bureau's (BBB) website to perform a search for the product name associated with the purchase on your account or the product that arrived at your doorstep, so that you can find the company or LLC connected with the scam. reporting fraud to the FTC website Liles, Jordan. Shark Tank Keto Gummies Weight Loss Reviews Are a Scam. Snopes, 14 Mar. 2023, https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/shark-tank-keto-gummies-weight-loss-reviews/.",['credit'],False,"However, this was not true. Underwood has nothing to do with any keto gummies for weight loss, nor did People magazine ever publish any such story. Underwood was simply the latest person in a long line of famous people who had had their image and likeness used without permission to sell keto gummies. Further, this false rumor that mentioned Underwood led to a dangerous scam that could potentially cost victims thousands of dollars per year.Further, listings for keto gummies for weight loss on Amazon.com and Walmart.com often feature the words ""Shark"" and ""Tank,"" although not consecutively as ""Shark Tank."" The two words are included in product listings on Amazon.com and Walmart.com so that any customers searching online for keto gummies with the words ""Shark Tank""  after those same customers saw false claims that said the TV show's investors endorsed the products  would then fall victim to the scam and purchase the products based on the ""Shark Tank"" lie. Again, to be clear, no investors associated with ""Shark Tank"" ever endorsed gummies.If any readers have been victimized by these scams, we recommend contacting your credit card company immediately, reporting fraud to the FTC and also searching the U.S. Better Business Bureau's (BBB) website to perform a search for the product name associated with the purchase on your account or the product that arrived at your doorstep, so that you can find the company or LLC connected with the scam."
Security provided to John Kerry by the Secret Service,"[""Would the Secret Service have to provide lifetime protection for all of John Kerry's homes?""]","Claim:  If John Kerry were elected President, the Secret Service would have to protect him and every property he owns for the rest of his life.  Example:  [Collected on the Internet, 2004] You will pay upkeep/Secret Service for 5 Kerry mansions.  It is good to be John F. Kerry....... The F stands for Forbes in case you ever wondered. He is one of the richest Senators in Government. When someone is elected president, it means the Secret Service has to protect the President and his family as well as his property. The Kerry's have five US properties not counting the several foreign properties they own too. The cost to run these homes are more than what the average American could afford, even if the rent was free, and all you had to pay the water, gas & electric. Including ground keepers, maintenance, pool, and house keepers. To be President would require the taxpayers to pay for all that now if elected. Including a complete staffed Secret Service security 24 hours a day. In addition to that we will have to pay for each of their homes for security improvements even if they never go to them all there is that just in case. Who do you think will pay for all this? We Pay! This takes all the expense off Kerry and puts it on us. Nevertheless, factor another major cost to Americans that Kerry does not want you to know about. Becoming president would automatically include taking care of all their properties with Secret Service Agents that includes 5 agents per 6 hour shift 4 times a day 365 days of the year for the rest of their lives so long as they own those properties. It comes with being President once you are elected. It requires us the taxpayers, to pay for this as well as his annual salary as well as his retirements including the cost of living adjustments to boot.  These salaries and agents protect all their real estate property with Secret Service Agents and pay the bills for the rest of his life. In addition, feed the Secret Service Agents and rotate new ones every 6 hours for the rest of his life. Do the math. Five properties need to be protected. This requires five Secret Service Agents per shift, daily every six hours, per property! That is 20 Secret Service Agents per day per property everyday including Holidays. Wow, what does that cost? Lets say an average of 20 agents per property, each earning a about $60K per agent to survey the perimeters and protect. Now times that by five properties so far. That is if the Kerry's do not buy any more properties afterwards. This also includes the Agents vehicles and repairs, gas, meals, days off, paid vacation, and medical plan visits etc per agent. Who pays? YOU pay, the whole time they are alive after becoming President! Is this the best use of our tax money electing Kerry to take care of all their properties both foreign and domestic? On the other hand, shouldn't he pay for his own? Yet, the Presidential salary could not afford it. The more I think about paying for Kerry's properties everyday, just makes me happy keeping President Bush all the more merrier. Without raising taxes to boot. How on earth would Kerry pay for everyone to have Healthcare, increase our military, and have us pay to protect his investments, all without raising our taxes? Tax and spend Kerry is his party motto. Which really has to make you wonder why anyone with his wealth, would take a salary of that of a U.S. Senator, never mind wanna be President? Do you believe him now why he needs to be the Prez? To serve the people? On the other hand, the people serve Him and his wife! IF YOU AREN'T COMPLETELY APPALLED, THEN YOU HAVEN'T BEEN PAYING ATTENTION Origins:   The fact that Senator John Kerry's middle name is ""Forbes"" is about the only piece of information this latest political diatribe gets  right. John Kerry and his wife, Teresa Heinz Kerry, together own several homes, but since they signed a prenuptial agreement and have kept their premarital assets separate,  a Boston townhouse (which John Kerry mortgaged in 2003 to finance his presidential bid) is the only one of these homes that they technically own as a couple.  The government is obligated to provide Secret Service protection to the President and his immediate family, so if John Kerry were elected to that office, of course he and his family would be entitled to the same level of security detail that the Secret Service provides to every President.  That protection might indeed include the use of public funds to pay the costs of installation and maintenance for security systems at some of the Kerrys' homes, because the protection of First Families is viewed as a right and proper charge upon the nation.  Security measures of this level would not be specific to the Kerrys; the homes of all Presidents are treated this way, as (to a lesser extent) are the homes of all former Presidents.  homes It is not true, however, that every single residence owned by the either of the Kerrys (whether it be in America or abroad) would be staffed by five Secret Service agents around the clock, and that those agents would be guarding the Kerrys and all their properties for the rest of John Kerry's life.  Secret Service staffing levels vary as the situation requires, and lifetime protection for former Presidents and their spouses was eliminated by Congressional legislation in 1997.  President Clinton and his wife, Hillary, are the last First Couple who will receive such a benefit; President George W. Bush and all who succeed him in the White House will be limited to receiving Secret Service protection for a period of not more than 10 years from the time they leave office.  protection In any case, the idea that U.S. voters would have to pay higher taxes if John Kerry were elected President in order to ""protect his investments"" is just silly.  The projected U.S. federal budget for 2005 is $2.4 trillion  the amount of money spent to protect the President and his family (whoever that President might be) is but a teeny-tiny fraction of a drop in that vast bucket.  The only thing sillier than that notion that taxes would have to be raised to protect a putative President Kerry is the suggestion that the cost of Secret Service protection should be a factor in voters' choosing who should serve as President of the United States. budget For more information about the protection afforded former Presidents, see our article about a similar rumor that was attached to the previous First Couple when President Bill Clinton left office in 2001. article Last updated:  2 October 2004    Sources:   Burger, Timothy and Kenneth Bazinet.  ""Hil and Bill Buy 3M Home, Sweet Home in Capital.""   [New York] Daily News.  30 December 2000  (p. 6).     DeFrank, Thomas.  ""1st Family's N.Y. Bunker.""    Fuchs, Marek.  ""First Family's Arrival Changes the Focus of Secret Service Office.""   The New York Times.  29 October 2000  (Weekend Calendar; p. 5).     Grove, Lloyd.  ""The Reliable Source.""   The Washington Post.  12 January 2001  (p. C3).",['budget'],False,"John Kerry and his wife, Teresa Heinz Kerry, together own several homes, but since they signed a prenuptial agreement and have kept their premarital assets separate,  a Boston townhouse (which John Kerry mortgaged in 2003 to finance his presidential bid) is the only one of these homes that they technically own as a couple.  The government is obligated to provide Secret Service protection to the President and his immediate family, so if John Kerry were elected to that office, of course he and his family would be entitled to the same level of security detail that the Secret Service provides to every President.  That protection might indeed include the use of public funds to pay the costs of installation and maintenance for security systems at some of the Kerrys' homes, because the protection of First Families is viewed as a right and proper charge upon the nation.  Security measures of this level would not be specific to the Kerrys; the homes of all Presidents are treated this way, as (to a lesser extent) are the homes of all former Presidents. It is not true, however, that every single residence owned by the either of the Kerrys (whether it be in America or abroad) would be staffed by five Secret Service agents around the clock, and that those agents would be guarding the Kerrys and all their properties for the rest of John Kerry's life.  Secret Service staffing levels vary as the situation requires, and lifetime protection for former Presidents and their spouses was eliminated by Congressional legislation in 1997.  President Clinton and his wife, Hillary, are the last First Couple who will receive such a benefit; President George W. Bush and all who succeed him in the White House will be limited to receiving Secret Service protection for a period of not more than 10 years from the time they leave office. In any case, the idea that U.S. voters would have to pay higher taxes if John Kerry were elected President in order to ""protect his investments"" is just silly.  The projected U.S. federal budget for 2005 is $2.4 trillion  the amount of money spent to protect the President and his family (whoever that President might be) is but a teeny-tiny fraction of a drop in that vast bucket.  The only thing sillier than that notion that taxes would have to be raised to protect a putative President Kerry is the suggestion that the cost of Secret Service protection should be a factor in voters' choosing who should serve as President of the United States.For more information about the protection afforded former Presidents, see our article about a similar rumor that was attached to the previous First Couple when President Bill Clinton left office in 2001."
Did Eric Trump Say His Father Would Cancel Taxes for Wealthy People?,['A fake news article that fabricated statements by Eric Trump got picked up by hyper-partisan web site Democratic Moms.'],"On 16 April 2017 Politicalo.com published an article suggesting that the President's son Eric Trump claimed his father was going to discontinue taxation on wealthy Americans, thereby rendering debate over the elder Trump's tax returns irrelevant: Politicalo.com article As always, his son Eric was there to provide a helping hand in defending his father. During an brief phone interview with KYXL Radio based out of Orlando, Florida, President Trumps second son argued that his fathers tax return is irrelevant, largely because he knows all there is to know about following the letter of the law, especially when it comes to paying taxes. He said, When you come from a background like the one my father comes from, you have to know all there is about paying taxes and doing your part to make this country a better place. Eric continued, And while were on the subject, I kind of have to say, its funny how taxes work. They sort of punish the hardest working and most productive members of our society while taking nothing from those who would rather be lazy and beg on the streets. Thats kind of not fair. What he have here is a system that flat out punishes those who want to contribute and make their lives better and at the same time, rewards those who want to be nothing more than dead weight. The worst part is, Im not saying something thats revolutionary here; this system has been in place ever since the country was established. My father, regardless of the fact that hes president, is just one person out of millions of those who are capable enough to be successful but are simultaneously struck down by our tax system. Thats a catastrophe ... At the end of the day, its irrelevant whether my father choses to disclose his tax return or not. It wont matter soon anyway Although Newslo (and its sibling sites Religionlo, Politicops, and Politicalo) are often identified as fake news by social media users, the claim was picked up by the hyper-partisan web site Democratic Moms and spread with fewer obvious red flags. Newslo and related sites normally start each article with a paragraph of factual information followed by the embellishments featured in its headlines. Newslos ""hybrid"" fake news sites include a clickable feature enabling readers to ""show facts"" or ""hide facts."" When a reader clicks ""show facts,"" the factual portions of the article are highlighted. However, by default, all articles first appear in ""hide facts"" mode: Newslo Religionlo Politicops Politicalo Democratic Moms fake news   As the article indicated, President Trump tweeted about his tax returns and currency manipulation on 16 April 2017: Why would I call China a currency manipulator when they are working with us on the North Korean problem? We will see what happens!  Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) April 16, 2017 April 16, 2017  I did what was an almost an impossible thing to do for a Republican-easily won the Electoral College! Now Tax Returns are brought up again?  Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) April 16, 2017 April 16, 2017  But as the ""Show Facts"" button demonstrated when activated, the Eric Trump's purported statements on taxation and wealth were fabricated:  ",['returns'],False,"On 16 April 2017 Politicalo.com published an article suggesting that the President's son Eric Trump claimed his father was going to discontinue taxation on wealthy Americans, thereby rendering debate over the elder Trump's tax returns irrelevant:Although Newslo (and its sibling sites Religionlo, Politicops, and Politicalo) are often identified as fake news by social media users, the claim was picked up by the hyper-partisan web site Democratic Moms and spread with fewer obvious red flags. Newslo and related sites normally start each article with a paragraph of factual information followed by the embellishments featured in its headlines. Newslos ""hybrid"" fake news sites include a clickable feature enabling readers to ""show facts"" or ""hide facts."" When a reader clicks ""show facts,"" the factual portions of the article are highlighted. However, by default, all articles first appear in ""hide facts"" mode: Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) April 16, 2017 Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) April 16, 2017"
The new tax will make soda sold in Chicago among the most expensive in the country.,[],"On Aug. 2, Cook County became the largest government in the United States to charge a tax on sweetened drinks. The debut of the penny-an-ounce charge for drinks sweetened with sugar or non-caloric sweetenerswasnt exactly smooth, nor was it particularly well received with the soft drink-consuming public. Customers who examined their receipts at some stores found they had been charged extra for flavored seltzer water -- which is not subject to the new tax -- while restaurant patrons discovered those free refills now cost one cent per ounce. Cook County sweetened beverage tax applies to free refills of lemonade.pic.twitter.com/PDztyTDIBl As soft drink consumers and sellers came to grips with the new charges, the libertarian Illinois Policy Institute  never a fan of any tax, and a particularly harsh critic of the tax habits of Cook County and Chicago  framed the drink tax in a consumer unfriendly light. The new tax will make soda sold in Chicago among the most expensive in the country, the institute said in a tweet and in theheadline of an articleon its website. That is a little like proclaiming the sun rises in the east, but given intense public interest in the soda tax we thought it was a worth a look anyway. Accompanying the institutes tweets were graphics illustrating the various taxes that now will be paid by those purchasing sweetened drinks in Chicago. The new soda tax makes soda sold in#Chicagoamong the most expensive in the countryhttps://t.co/2JYANKDrcspic.twitter.com/KiUS5vzIYT The new soda tax makes soda sold in#Chicagoamong the most expensive in the countryhttps://t.co/2JYANKDrcspic.twitter.com/KiUS5vzIYT Chicago already charged a 3 percent soft drink sales tax, and that was on top of a10.25 percent sales taxthat includes state and local portions and is thehighest of any major city in the United States. For a 12-pack of 12-ounce cans or bottles of any sweetened soft drink, regular or diet, the sweetened beverage tax adds another $1.44. Thus, a 12-pack priced at $4 costs $5.97 at the register. The new tax adds 67 cents to a two-liter bottle. If marked on the shelf at $2.49, the new tax means youll pay 40 percent more at checkout. Thats how it works in Chicago, where the total price figures to be slightly higher than in the rest of Cook County even though the soda tax applies in the suburbs as well. Does that make Chicago-bought soda among the most expensive in the country? The institute grants its statement a lot of leeway by using the word among. Wherever the thirsty buy it, a Big Gulp is a Big Gulp is a Big Gulp. So the add-on cost of taxes is likely the prime factor behind any significant price differences. To date, the list of places embracing a soda tax is an extremely short one, hence Chicagos (and Cook Countys) emergence as among the most expensive places to pop for a pop. As it stands today, Cook County is one of only eight U.S. locations to impose or plan to impose a per-ounce tax on sweetened drinks. The other seven are cities and, with a population of 5.2 million, Cook County is by far the largest jurisdiction to adopt such a tax. Issue-wise, this is right in the Illinois Policy Institutes wheelhouse. It not only piles expense onto an extremely popular category of consumer products, but it also comes swathed in nanny state good intentions for the health of Cook County residents. By strange coincidence, this health concern arrives just as Cook County finds itself in desperate financial straits. (Inanother article,the institute claims Cook County cant even get its nanny state act right, as federal rules prohibit applying the new tax to sweetened drinks purchased with food stamps. It notes that polling shows people with lower incomes are more likely to drink soda.) At one cent per ounce, Cook County is on the lower end of the soda tax scale. In Boulder, Colo., that two-liter soda will cost an extra $1.35 and a 12-pack will be $2.88 more. Cook County is also one of the three jurisdictions in which voters did not voluntarily adopt the tax by referendum. (Illinois has no provision for such referenda.) There have been many complaints that Cook Countys soda tax was sold to voters as an anti-obesity measure but also includes drinks containing non-caloric sweeteners. But theordinance itselfcontains extensive language citing studies that link even diet drink consumption to kidney disease, metabolic syndrome, type 2 diabetes and obesity. Cook County and the city of Philadelphia are the only places where drinks sweetened with non-caloric sweeteners also are subject to the tax. Thus, even among the eight places in the nation taxing or preparing to tax consumers by the ounce for sweetened soft drinks, Cook Countys measure reaches an especially broad swath of consumers. The Illinois Policy Institute cites Cook Countys new sweetened drink tax as making soda sold in the city of Chicago among the most expensive in the country. With Chicago already charging the nations highest sales tax of any major city plus a 3-percent soft drink tax, its almost certain that consumers in the city paid among the highest prices for soft drinks in the country even before the Aug. 2 arrival of the sweetened drink tax. But Chicago truly moved into a select group when its home county joined the seven other cities that have enacted or are poised to enact by-the-ounce taxes on sweetened soft drinks. With a nod toCaptain Obvious, we raise a glass of flattened, left-out-in-the-open Coke in the direction of the Illinois Policy Institute as we rate this statement True.","['Taxes', 'Illinois']",True,"The debut of the penny-an-ounce charge for drinks sweetened with sugar or non-caloric sweetenerswasnt exactly smooth, nor was it particularly well received with the soft drink-consuming public. Customers who examined their receipts at some stores found they had been charged extra for flavored seltzer water -- which is not subject to the new tax -- while restaurant patrons discovered those free refills now cost one cent per ounce.Cook County sweetened beverage tax applies to free refills of lemonade.pic.twitter.com/PDztyTDIBlThe new tax will make soda sold in Chicago among the most expensive in the country, the institute said in a tweet and in theheadline of an articleon its website.The new soda tax makes soda sold in#Chicagoamong the most expensive in the countryhttps://t.co/2JYANKDrcspic.twitter.com/KiUS5vzIYTThe new soda tax makes soda sold in#Chicagoamong the most expensive in the countryhttps://t.co/2JYANKDrcspic.twitter.com/KiUS5vzIYTChicago already charged a 3 percent soft drink sales tax, and that was on top of a10.25 percent sales taxthat includes state and local portions and is thehighest of any major city in the United States.Issue-wise, this is right in the Illinois Policy Institutes wheelhouse. It not only piles expense onto an extremely popular category of consumer products, but it also comes swathed in nanny state good intentions for the health of Cook County residents. By strange coincidence, this health concern arrives just as Cook County finds itself in desperate financial straits. (Inanother article,the institute claims Cook County cant even get its nanny state act right, as federal rules prohibit applying the new tax to sweetened drinks purchased with food stamps. It notes that polling shows people with lower incomes are more likely to drink soda.)There have been many complaints that Cook Countys soda tax was sold to voters as an anti-obesity measure but also includes drinks containing non-caloric sweeteners. But theordinance itselfcontains extensive language citing studies that link even diet drink consumption to kidney disease, metabolic syndrome, type 2 diabetes and obesity.With a nod toCaptain Obvious, we raise a glass of flattened, left-out-in-the-open Coke in the direction of the Illinois Policy Institute as we rate this statement True."
Bush Salutes Birdwell,"['During a hospital visit, did President George W. Bush salute an Army officer who had been badly injured during the terrorist attack on the Pentagon?']","Claim:  During a hospital visit, President George W. Bush saluted an Army officer who had been badly injured during the September 11 terrorist attack on the Pentagon.    . Example:  [Collected on the Internet, 2001] As you may know, the President and Mrs. Bush visited the Washington Burn Center on Friday 14 September. Among those they visited was LTC Brian Birdwell, who was badly burned in the Pentagon attack. Mrs. Bush went into Brian's room, spoke to him for about a minute, all the time as if they had been long acquaintances. She then turned to Brian's wife Mel, who at this time had been at the hospital for probably 2 1/2 days, and apparently, according to Mel herself, was dirty, grimy and had blood on her shirt.  Mrs. Bush hugged Mel for what Mel said seemed like an eternity, just as if Mel were one of her closest family members.  Mrs. Bush then told Brian and Mel that there was ""someone"" there to see him.  The President then walked in, stood by Brian's bedside, asked Brian how he was doing, told him that he was very proud of them both and that they were his heroes.  The President then saluted Brian. Now, at this point in time, Brian is bandaged up pretty well. His hands are burned very badly as well as the back of him from the head down. His movements were very restricted.  Upon seeing the President saluting him, Brian began to slowly return the salute, taking, from the accounts so far, about 15-20 seconds to get his hand up to his head.  During all of this, 15-20 seconds, President Bush never moved, never dropped his salute. The President dropped his salute only when Brian was finished with his, and then gave Mel a huge hug for what also probably seemed like an eternity.  Pray for our leadership. Thank God for what we are, have, and will be.  As a note to those of you who might not be familiar with military protocol, the subordinate normally initiates a salute and will hold it until the superior officer returns the salute.  In the above incident, President Bush acted in the role of the subordinate to show his respect and high regard for the injured man. Origins:  Glurge   should always be taken with a grain of salt, and  given previous fabrications such as The Evangelical Prez and Keep the Change  glurge involving President Bush and military or religious matters should call for a few extra grains.  We're happy to report that this item requires no seasoning at all, however. The Evangelical Prez Keep the Change Lieutenant Colonel Brian Birdwell, an Army officer a few months short of his 40th birthday, was just leaving a Pentagon restroom on the morning of September 11 when hijacked American Airlines Flight 77 was slammed into the building by terrorists.  Lt. Col. Birdwell was badly injured by the ensuing explosion and fire; fortunately, he collapsed under a hallway sprinkler, which helped douse the flames engulfing his prone body before rescuers pulled him from the collapsed section of the Pentagon.  Birdwell ended up in the burn treatment center at Washington Hospital Center with smoke-damaged lungs and burns over nearly half his body.  A couple of days later, as reported by several news outlets, Birdwell received an unexpected visit from his commander-in-chief, the President of the United States of America, who offered him the honor of a salute: Not long after Sept. 11, Birdwell had met the president.  He was awake for President Bush's visit, as it turned out  and aware enough to strain to return the salute the president had offered. He lifted his badly burned hand toward his injured forehead. When he could not quite reach it, he tried to bend his body toward his hand.  The president's eyes filled with tears.  Bush held firm until the wounded soldier let go.2   Two days later, Birdwell got a visit from his boss  President Bush, commander-in-chief of the armed forces.  ""The president comes in and he says, 'Col. Birdwell,' and he salutes,"" [wife] Mel Birdwell recalled. ""And Brian attempts to return the salute, and the president sees that he's returning the salute and he stands there and holds his salute with tears in his eyes.""1 Birdwell's older brother, Wade, also confirmed the story via e-mail: I cannot tell you how grateful and truly proud I am that when Brian started to return that salute, despite his wounds, the president held his salute firmly and thereby permitted my brother the honor of demonstrating his and the true character of so very many others of our fighting men and women. Indeed, you should know that it was this very character that likely saved Brian's life in the first place. As Brian crawled through the fire, certain brave men and women pulled him from the carnage, carried him out to the parking lot, then into the adjoining street."" After months of treatment and therapy, Lt. Col. Birdwell, who was awarded the Purple Heart, was able to leave the hospital to attend Thanksgiving Day services at his church in Springfield, Virginia, and to begin making trips home. Last updated:  22 February 2007    Sources:   1.  Aiken, Johnathan.  ""A Pentagon Survivor's Story.""   CNN.com.  15 December 2001.    2.   St. George, Donna.  ""Hope Breathes Beneath Wounds.""   The Washington Post.  2 December 2001  (p. A1).",['returns'],True,"should always be taken with a grain of salt, and  given previous fabrications such as The Evangelical Prez and Keep the Change  glurge involving President Bush and military or religious matters should call for a few extra grains.  We're happy to report that this item requires no seasoning at all, however."
Jang Sung-taek Executed by Hungry Dogs?,['Was North Korean official Jang Sung-taek executed by being thrown into a cage with 120 starved dogs?'],"Claim: North Korean official Jang Sung-taek was executed by being thrown into a cage with 120 starved dogs. Example: [Collected via e-mail, January 2014] Did North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un kill his uncle by feeding him and his assistants to starving dogs? Origins: On December 13, 2013, North Korean state media announced that Jang Sung-taek, the uncle of North Korean supreme leader Kim Jong-un, had been tried by a special military tribunal of the Ministry of State Security and executed. Jang, who was vice-chairman of North Korea's National Defence Commission (a very high political position) and considered to be North Korea's second most powerful man, had been accused of ""anti-party, counter-revolutionary factional acts,"" including affairs with multiple women, harboring ""politically motivated ambition,"" obstructing ""the party's guidance over judicial, prosecution, and people's security bodies,"" and hampering ""the nation's economic affairs."" Jang Sung-taek's execution was perceived in the Western press as evidence that Kim Jong-un was engaging in a ruthless purge of potential political rivals, providing ""another example of the extreme brutality of the North Korean regime."" The South Korean press and similar news outlets initially reported that Jang had (presumably) been executed by a machine gun firing squad, as two of his confidants had been the previous week. The North's official media, the Korean Central News Agency (KCNA), reported that Jang Song-thaek, who served as a vice chairman of the powerful National Defense Commission, was executed shortly after a military trial found him guilty of ""anti-party, counter-revolutionary factional"" charges. ""The accused is a traitor to the nation for all ages who perpetrated anti-party, counter-revolutionary factional acts in a bid to overthrow the leadership of our party and state and the socialist system,"" the viciously worded report stated. Jang ""would be sentenced to death,"" as the special military tribunal confirmed that his subversion attempt ""is a crime punishable by Article 60 of the DPRK Criminal Code,"" citing its official name, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. The decision for capital punishment ""was immediately executed,"" the report said, condemning him as ""a wicked political careerist, trickster, and traitor for all ages in the name of the revolution and the people."" Seoul's ruling Saenuri Party lawmaker Seo Sang-kee, head of the legislature's Intelligence Committee, said the North is presumed to have used a machine gun in executing Jang, just as it did when removing his two close confidants the previous week. However, the Hong Kong newspaper Wen Wei Po reported (in an account picked up two weeks later by Singapore's Straits Times and then spread by Western news outlets) that Jang had been executed via a process known as quan jue (i.e., execution by dogs), in which he and five of his aides were stripped naked and thrown into a cage with 120 dogs that had been starved for three days. The famished dogs then proceeded to tear apart and devour Jang and his aides in an hour-long process that was personally supervised by Kim Jong-un and witnessed by 300 senior officials. Beijing's displeasure was expressed through the publication of a detailed account of Jang's brutal execution in Wen Wei Po, its official mouthpiece in Hong Kong, on December 12. Unlike previous executions of political prisoners, which were carried out by firing squads with machine guns, Jang was stripped naked and thrown into a cage along with his five closest aides. Then, 120 hounds, starved for three days, were allowed to prey on them until they were completely consumed. This is called ""quan jue,"" or execution by dogs. The report stated that the entire process lasted for an hour, with Mr. Kim Jong-un, the supreme leader of North Korea, supervising it along with 300 senior officials. The horrifying report vividly depicted the brutality of the young North Korean leader. However, this item stemmed from a single source (Wen Wei Po), which has a poor reputation for reliability (it ranked 19th out of 21 print media sources for reliability in a survey of Hong Kong residents) and cited no source for its reporting. As it turned out, the tale was nothing more than a bit of fiction that originated from a social media post by a satirist in China. As blogger Trevor Powell pointed out, the original report lifted the story nearly word-for-word from an 11 December social media post by Pyongyang Choi Seongho, a China-based satirist with millions of followers. The background of the personality's page on Tencent Weibo, China's second most popular microblog, shows a cartoon Kim Jong-un standing on a balcony flanked by military aides, his arms raised and his middle fingers extended. Trevor Powell noted that Choi's post included all of the grisly details that made their way into the American press: Jang and five of his aides were stripped naked, thrown into a giant cage, and ""entirely devoured"" by 120 Manchurian hunting dogs that had been starved for three days. Kim conducted the hour-long spectacle himself before an audience of 300 North Korean officials, it added. Last updated: January 6, 2014. Fisher, Max. ""No, Kim Jong Un Probably Didn't Feed His Uncle to 120 Hungry Dogs."" The Washington Post. January 3, 2014. O'Carroll, Chad. ""Rumor Jang Song Thaek Was Killed by Hungry Dogs Re-Emerges."" NKNews.org. January 3, 2014. Shears, Richard. ""Stripped Naked, Thrown Into a Cage and Torn Apart by 120 Starving Dogs."" The Daily Mail. January 3, 2014. Zurcher, Anthony. ""Did Kim Jong Un Feed His Uncle to Dogs?"" BBC News. January 3, 2014. South China Morning Post. ""Post Tops Survey on Newspaper Credibility."" January 2, 2014.",['liability'],False,"The South Korean press and similar news outlets initially reported that Jang had (presumably) been executed by a machine gun firing squad, as two of his confidants had been the previous week:However, this item stemmed from a single source (Wen Wei Po) which has a poor reputation for reliability (it ranked 19th out of 21 print media sources for reliability in a survey of Hong Kong residents), and which itself cited no source for its reporting.  As it turned out, the tale was nothing more than a bit of fiction that stemmed from a social media post by a satirist in China:As blogger Trevor Powell pointed out, the original report lifted the story nearly word-for-word from an 11 December social media post by Pyongyang Choi Seongho, a China-based satirist with millions of followers. The background of the personality's page on Tencent Weibo, China's second most-popular microblog, shows a cartoon Kim Jong-un standing on a balcony flanked by military aides, his arms raised and his middle fingers extended."
Rattlesnake Fang in Boot,['Rattlesnake fang embedded in a pair of boots kills owner after owner.'],"Legend:  A rattlesnake fang embedded in a pair of boots kills generations of owners. Examples:  [Brunvand, 1989] There is a rancher or cowboy who stomps the head of a rattlesnake after stunning it with a rope or quirt. The man sickens and dies within days. The man's son or nephew inherits the boots, and he too soon sickens and dies.  Then yet another male relative begins to wear the boots, then dies. And so it goes until someone takes a good look at the heels on the boots and discovers the rattlesnake's fangs broken off and still seeping venom!  [Benton, 1937] There's a crazy, far-fetched tale of an old cattleman who bought a new pair of boots. On his way homefrom town he got off his horse for some reason or other and was bitten by a rattlesnake. He died. Some time later his son, seeing the old man's boots in a corner, put them on and went to work. That night he got sick, swelled up, and died. There was a scratch on one of his legs. Nobody knew why he died. A little later another member of the family put on the boots, which were still new. He died also with a scratch on his leg. I've forgotten how many people died from wearing the boots, but the tale has it that the mystery was finally solved by discovering a couple of rattlesnake fangs in the boots. They had broken off there when the old man had been bitten and had continued to bite all those who wore the boots later! Variations:  The apocryphal boots of lore are often said to have killed three generations of the same family, or to have done away with three brothers.  Origins:  This   legend is even older than the 1937 print sighting (quoted above) would lead one to believe. Another sighting surfaces in a 1782 book, making it easily the oldest intact urban legend in existence. Snake experts dismiss this story as mere lore due to what's known about the structure of rattlesnake fangs and the potency of that varmint's venom. Although people have been poisoned by the broken or shed fang of a rattler, the tip of such an implement is highly unlikely to contain enough dried venom to do serious damage to the victim, let alone strike him dead. Cases on record have the scratched victim experiencing throbbing and sharp pain in the injured extremity, but only for a few hours. For the injury to be fatal, a much larger amount of venom would have to be injected into the victim  a surface scratch by the tip of a fang would introduce only whatever venom happened to be present on the part of the fang's surface that caused the scratch. Although there's no truth to the legend about a fatal pair of boots killing one family member after another, its underlying message that it always pays to be careful around rattlesnakes is worth heeding. Though a fang left that long in a boot wouldn't do much harm, supposedly ""dead"" snakes have been known to bite, sending a number of victims to the hospital every year.  Never assume the head of a decapitated snake  is safe to handle. Bites from dead snakes are more common than you might think, said Dr. Jeffrey R. Suchard, a medical toxicologist at Good Samaritan Regional Medical Center in Phoenix. Nearly 15% (5 of 34) snakebite victims admitted to that hospital between June 1997 and April 1998 were bitten by dead snakes.  Documented cases of deceased slitherers' delivering fatal bites can be traced back several hundred years to Spanish explorers. In 1956, rattlesnake researcher L.M. Klauber published a study showing that rattlesnake heads are dangerous for 20 minutes to an hour after decapitation.  Says Bill Sloan of the Arizona Herpetological Association: ""As you go down the evolutionary scale, the functions of the brain and functions of the body become a little more separated. There's a reflex action involved when you touch a snake's mouth. The fang is like a hypodermic needle. It's going to continue to work if you put your hand near it."" Which it did in the case of Justin Cluff: [Arizona Republic, 1999] Justin Cluff isn't surprised. The 21-year-old Queen Creek man could have died after picking up the decapitated head of a Mojave rattler a friend had shot with a .22-caliber rifle. The snake head rallied and sank a fang into Cluff's knuckle. ""I had been around snakes so much I felt comfortable with them,"" Cluff said. ""I guess I loosened up on my grip. That's when it bit me. The pain was terrible."" Cluff ended up losing part of his right index finger. Barbara ""fangs for the memory"" Mikkelson Last updated:  29 June 2007    Sources:   Benton, Thomas Hart.  An Artist in America.   New York: Robert M. McBride, 1937  (pp. 210-211).   Brunvand, Jan Harold.  Curses! Broiled Again!  New York: W. W. Norton, 1989.   ISBN 0-393-30711-5   (pp. 76-78). Curses! Broiled Again!    Buckland, Francis.  Curiosities of Natural History (First Series, 4th ed.)   London: Richard Bentley and Son, 1883  (p. 200).    Ropp, Thomas.  ""Dead Snakes Still Bite.""     Also told in:   Cohen, Daniel.  The Beheaded Freshman and Other Nasty Rumors The Beheaded Freshman and Other Nasty Rumors   The Big Book of Urban Legends.  New York: Paradox Press, 1994.  ISBN 1-56389-165-4  (p. 56). The Big Book of Urban Legends",['loan'],NEI,"  Brunvand, Jan Harold.  Curses! Broiled Again!  New York: W. W. Norton, 1989.   ISBN 0-393-30711-5   (pp. 76-78).  Also told in:   Cohen, Daniel.  The Beheaded Freshman and Other Nasty Rumors  The Big Book of Urban Legends.  New York: Paradox Press, 1994.  ISBN 1-56389-165-4  (p. 56)."
Who is responsible for the escalation of the debt?,['A chart from 2011 compared changes in the U.S. national debt over the last several presidencies.'],"Debt is typically a major campaign issue in elections, from the municipal level all the way up to the office of the President of the United States. Candidates tout their accomplishments in balancing budgets or reducing government debt as examples of fiscal prudence while pointing to increased debts during their opponents' administrations as indicators of profligate and wasteful spending of taxpayers' money. The chart reproduced above, which was posted to the Flickr account of House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, attempts to reverse conventional political stereotypes by portraying recent Republican presidents as responsible for significant increases in the national debt, while showing recent Democratic presidents as responsible for much lower increases in the level of debt. As a first step in evaluating this chart, we must determine the applicable definition of ""debt."" In general, the term ""public debt"" (or ""debt held by the public"") refers to money borrowed by the government through the issuance and sale of securities, government bonds, and bills. It includes federal debt held by all investors outside of the federal government, including individuals, corporations, state or local governments, the Federal Reserve banking system, and foreign governments. Another form of debt is ""intragovernmental debt"" (or ""debt held by government accounts""), which refers to money that the government has borrowed from itself, such as when the U.S. government invests money from federal savings programs like Medicare and the Social Security trust fund by purchasing its own treasury securities. A variety of names have been applied to the total of these two forms of debt, including ""gross federal debt,"" ""total public debt,"" and ""national debt."" Although this chart is labeled as presenting a ""percent increase in public debt,"" it actually uses figures corresponding to the total described as ""gross federal debt"" above (i.e., a combination of debt held by the public and debt held by government accounts, rather than just the former). We checked the numbers in this chart by using (for pre-1993 years) the U.S. Treasury's Monthly Statement of the Public Debt (MSPD), noting the total debt reported as of January 31 of each relevant year, and (for 1993 onwards) the Treasury's The Debt to the Penny and Who Holds It application, noting the total debt reported as of Inauguration Day of each relevant year. From these records, we gleaned the following information: Ronald Reagan: Took office January 1981. Total debt: $848 billion. Left office January 1989. Total debt: $2,698 billion. Percent change in total debt: +218%. George H.W. Bush: Took office January 1989. Total debt: $2,698 billion. Left office January 20, 1993. Total debt: $4,188 billion. Percent change in total debt: +55%. Bill Clinton: Took office January 20, 1993. Total debt: $4,188 billion. Left office January 20, 2001. Total debt: $5,728 billion. Percent change in total debt: +37%. George W. Bush: Took office January 20, 2001. Total debt: $5,728 billion. Left office January 20, 2009. Total debt: $10,627 billion. Percent change in total debt: +86%. Barack Obama: Took office January 20, 2009. Total debt: $10,627 billion. Total debt (as of the end of April 2011): $14,288 billion. Percent change in total debt: +34%. So, as far as raw numbers go, the chart is reasonably accurate (although our calculations produced a somewhat higher debt increase for Ronald Reagan than reported). That said, we must consider how valuable these numbers are; whether by themselves they present a reasonable comparative measure of presidential fiscal responsibility. In that regard, one could find several aspects to take issue with: The chart isn't a true comparison of equals, as it includes three presidents who served two full terms (Reagan, Clinton, and George W. Bush), a president who served one term (George H.W. Bush), and a president who served half a term (Obama). Obviously, the longer a president holds office, the greater the opportunity for him to influence the debt, and certainly (barring a radical change in current circumstances) the increase reported for Barack Obama would be considerably higher by the time he left office. All presidents come into office with policies and budgets that were put into place by their predecessors in the White House and Congress, and they all pass the same along to their successors when they leave office. Therefore, determining how much of the change in debt that occurs during a given president's administration is actually the result of his actions (rather than the consequence of factors over which he had little or no influence) would require a much more complex analysis than the one presented here. Which is the best measure of debt for this purpose: public debt, intragovernmental debt, or a combination of the two? As noted in the General Accounting Office's FAQ on Federal Debt, they represent rather different concepts: Debt held by the public approximates current federal demand on credit markets. It represents a burden on today's economy, and the interest paid on this debt represents a burden on current taxpayers. Federal borrowing from the public absorbs resources available for private investment and may put upward pressure on interest rates. Further, debt held by the public is the accumulation of what the federal government borrowed in the past and is reported as a liability on the balance sheet of the government's consolidated financial statements. In contrast, debt held by government accounts (intragovernmental debt) and the interest on it represent a claim on future resources. This debt performs largely an internal accounting function. Special federal securities credited to government accounts (primarily trust funds) represent the cumulative surpluses of these accounts that have been lent to the general fund. These transactions net out on the government's consolidated financial statements. Debt issued to government accounts does not affect today's economy and does not currently compete with the private sector for available funds in the credit market. Are plain percentage changes in the national debt level a useful figure, or do they need to be placed in context to have relevance? Some would argue, for example, that the Debt-to-GDP ratio is a better measure of economic health relative to the national debt than raw debt figures alone, and a chart that tracked the change in that ratio over the last several presidencies would paint a significantly different picture of debt levels than the one displayed above. All in all, this is a case of relatively accurate information that is of marginal value due to a lack of proper comparative context.",['investment'],True,"The chart reproduced above, which was posted to the Flickr account of House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, attempted to reverse conventional political stereotypes by portraying recent Republican presidents as responsible for huge increases in the national debt, while showing recent Democratic presidents as responsible for much lower increases in the level of debt.  Although this chart is labeled as presenting a ""percent increase in public debt,"" it actually uses figures corresponding to the total described as ""gross federal debt"" above (i.e., a combination of debt held by the public and debt held by government accounts, rather than just the former).  We checked the numbers in this chart by using (for pre-1993 years) the U.S. Treasury's Monthly Statement of the Public Debt (MSPD), noting the total debt reported as of January 31 of each relevant year, and (for 1993 onwards) the Treasury's The Debt to the Penny and Who Holds It application, noting the total debt reported as of Inauguration Day of each relevant year. Which is the best measure of debt for this purpose: public debt, intragovernmental debt, or a combination of the two?  As noted in the General Accounting Office's FAQ on Federal Debt, they represent rather different concepts: Are plain percentage changes in the national debt level a useful figure, or do they need to be placed in context to have relevance?  Some would argue, for example, that the Debt-to-GDP ratio is a better measure of economic health relative to the national debt than raw debt figures alone, and a chart which tracked the change in that ratio over the last several presidencies would paint a significantly different picture of debt levels than the one displayed above."
Is Facebook Removing Military Amputee Photos?,['Cognitive dissonance: Using Facebook to share a photograph that has supposedly been banned by Facebook.'],"Since at least August 2013 a message has been circulated via Facebook claiming the social networking site was removing posted photographs of military veterans who had lost limbs due to amputation or injury, reportedly because Facebook has deemed such images to be ""offensive"" and a violation of the company's community standards: Facebook is removing Veteran Amputees photos' and calling them offensive and against the Community Standards of Facebook. Please like and share.  However, there is absolutely no basis for asserting that Facebook has taken such an action or implemented such a policy. No published Facebook guidelines make reference (directly or indirectly) to this class of photograph being unacceptable, and many images featuring amputees and other persons with missing limbs (including both military personnel and civilians) have long been plainly viewable on that social networking site. (In fact, one of the more popular images commonly shared on Facebook in recent years is one that is identified, albeit incorrectly, as showing a group of female veteran amputees.)  amputees amputees Moreover, the content of the warning message itself belies its claim, as it has been posted and shared on Facebook countless times despite its inclusion of a supposedly-banned photograph of a military amputee. The image shown above is a picture of Casey Owens, a U.S. Marine whose legs were amputated after he was injured by shrapnel from an anti-tank mine while he was taking part in a rescue mission in Iraq in September 2004. This particular photograph was taken while Owens was attending the inauguration of President George W. Bush in January 2005: inauguration Casey Owens, a wounded Marine, salutes as his mother Janna Owens cries during the inaugural speech by President Bush. The president pledged to work to heal a country divided by the Iraq war. ""We have known divisions, which must be healed to move forward in great purposes, and I will strive in good faith to heal them.""  Sydiongco, David.  ""Don't Bother Posting the 'Facebook Privacy Notice' That's Spreading Around.""
  Slate.  5 June 2012.",['share'],False,"No published Facebook guidelines make reference (directly or indirectly) to this class of photograph being unacceptable, and many images featuring amputees and other persons with missing limbs (including both military personnel and civilians) have long been plainly viewable on that social networking site. (In fact, one of the more popular images commonly shared on Facebook in recent years is one that is identified, albeit incorrectly, as showing a group of female veteran amputees.) The image shown above is a picture of Casey Owens, a U.S. Marine whose legs were amputated after he was injured by shrapnel from an anti-tank mine while he was taking part in a rescue mission in Iraq in September 2004. This particular photograph was taken while Owens was attending the inauguration of President George W. Bush in January 2005:"
"Amy Roloff Is Not Dead, Despite 'Sad News' Death Hoax on Facebook and YouTube","['An obscure Facebook page falsely claimed in a video that one of the stars of the reality TV show ""Little People, Big World"" had died.']","On Nov. 19, 2022, the Facebook page Video Pivot posted a video with the caption, ""With a heavy heart at the tearful farewell to 'Dwarf' Amy Roloff, goodbye Amy Roloff."" However, Roloff was not dead, nor was there any indication she had just experienced a stroke, as the narrator in the video claimed. This was nothing more than a death hoax. Roloff is one of the stars of the TLC reality TV series, ""Little People, Big World,"" which has often been referred to by fans with the acronym, ""LPBW."" The Facebook page that posted the death hoax was managed from Indonesia. Its purpose may have been ""like-farming,"" something that the U.S. Better Business Bureau (BBB) has warned about in the past. If the page is able to build up a large following without being removed by the platform, it's possible that it will be sold on the black market in the future. It may also be stripped of its past posts and start promoting scammy products. warned As for the misleading video about Roloff, the thumbnail was doctored to show her ex-husband, Matt, holding a picture of her next to men carrying a casket. As of Nov. 21, the video had been viewed more than 53,000 times.  Note: It's unclear what the photograph originally showed, as a reverse image search for the men carrying the casket didn't find any matches for the picture. Days earlier, a video was posted to YouTube that also falsely claimed Roloff had died. The video had the title, ""10 minutes ago / We announce very sad news about 'dwarf' Amy Roloff, She has been confirmed as."" We found no shortage of these YouTube videos, either. Other examples of misleading YouTube videos from past months that we found were titled as""Official News/ R.I.P/ Amy Roloff Passed Away Last Night At The Hospital After A Health Battle,"" ""Sad News Amy Roloff Is Pass Away Expected Soon Family Prepare To Say Goodbye,"" and ""Sad News Amy Roloff Is Pass Away Expected Soon Family Prepare To Say Goodbye.""  One good way to check whether a celebrity has truly died is to check the person's verified presence on social media. While Roloff hasn't posted on her Facebook or Instagram pages since Nov. 18, we note again that the misleading YouTube videos we found were all published prior to that date. We found no credible reporting that said anything about Roloff recently experiencing a stroke or dying. We previously published another story that debunked a death hoax for the Roloff couple's son, Zach.We also reported about misleading online ads that claimed the cast of ""Little People, Big World"" had experienced a ""sudden loss."" story reported ""Amy Roloff."" Facebook, https://www.facebook.com/amyroloffofficalpage/. ""---."" Instagram, https://www.instagram.com/amyjroloff/. BBB Tip: Like-Farming Is a Facebook Scam Still Going Strong. 10 June 2020, https://www.bbb.org/article/news-releases/17149-like-farming-a-facebook-scam-still-going-strong. Grinberg, Emanuella. ""Stars of 'Little People, Big World' File for Divorce.""CNN.Com, 6 June 2015, https://www.cnn.com/2015/06/06/entertainment/matt-amy-roloff-little-people-big-world-split-feat/index.html. Liles, Jordan. ""'Little People, Big World' Posts About a 'Loss' Are Misleading."" Snopes, 5 Jan. 2022, https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/little-people-big-world-loss-death/. ---. ""Zach Roloff Death Hoax: False Suicide Claims Came from Obscure Website."" Snopes, 5 Jan. 2022, https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/zach-roloff-death-hoax/.",['loss'],False,"The Facebook page that posted the death hoax was managed from Indonesia. Its purpose may have been ""like-farming,"" something that the U.S. Better Business Bureau (BBB) has warned about in the past. If the page is able to build up a large following without being removed by the platform, it's possible that it will be sold on the black market in the future. It may also be stripped of its past posts and start promoting scammy products.We previously published another story that debunked a death hoax for the Roloff couple's son, Zach.We also reported about misleading online ads that claimed the cast of ""Little People, Big World"" had experienced a ""sudden loss."""
More Texans have jobs today than ever before in the history of our state.,[],"Texas Gov. Greg Abbott drew cheers from supporters in San Antonio as he vowed to keep the Texas economy rocking and laid a claim to history. The Republican governor, kicking off hisre-election campaign, said in July 2017: And since I took office, in just the last two and a half years, in Texas, weve added more than 450,000 new jobs. More Texans have jobs today than ever before in the history of our state. That jobs-gained number sounded a little low. According toBureau of Labor Statistics figureswe drew from a bureau economist, Cheryl Abbot, when Abbott took office in January 2015, the state was home to nearly 11.8 million non-farm jobs. As of June 2017, that count was up by about 507,500, exceeding 12.3 million. We decided to check whether more Texas residents have jobs than ever before. Abbotts campaign didnt answer requests for the basis of the claim. Meantime, economists concurred that according tobureau figures drawing on U.S. Census Bureau surveys, more than 12.8 million Texas residents had jobs from April 2017 through June 2017--with the April 2017 count of 12,872,506 employed people setting a record, though the tally subsequently slid marginally, reaching 12,848,980 in June 2017. A bureau-provided chart shows the dip in employment after that count had mostly steadily increased since January 2015: SOURCE:Chartshowing Texas Local Area Unemployment Statistics, BLS (received by email from Cheryl Abbot, regional economist, BLS, July 21, 2017) The economists we queried noted that because Texas continues to grow in population, it makes sense, barring economic disaster, that youd see more people having jobs year after year. Status quo in Texas,Mark J. Perry,an economist at the University of Michigan-Flint, told us by email, its always had steady job growth. Perry passed along a chart showing the nearly uniform annual upticks in employed Texas since 1939: SOURCE:Chart based ondata posted by Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis(provided by email from Mark J. Perry, Ph.D., scholar atThe American Enterprise Institute, professor of Finance and Business Economics, School of Management, University of Michigan-Flint, July 28, 2017) So, Abbott was mostly right about the record count of Texans with jobs at the time he spoke. Jobless rate, employment-population ratio Other indicators provide context, however. For instance, the month before Abbott kicked off his re-election effort, the states unemployment rate of 4.6 percent--as in the share of able workers unsuccessfully seeking employment--was not a record low. We counted 59 months since 1976 when the Texas jobless rate was lower, per an Abbot-providedchart. Also, a ratio that compares the number of people with jobs to the population as a whole was higher for Texas and other states in the 1990s, a facetexploredby PolitiFact in Washington in July 2016. That story also noted that nationally since the end of the Great Recession, the U.S. employment-to-population ratio had climbed, slowly but fairly steadily. When we asked, Abbot shared bureau figures rooted inCensus Bureau survey findingsto represent changes in the Texas employment-population ratio. Similarly, economistTara Sinclair, an associate professor at George Washington University, drew onbureau figuresshowing that the states employment-population ratio exceeded 65 percent from 1995 through 2000 but fell to 61.5 percent in 2014 and to to 60.9 percent and 60.7 percent, respectively, in 2015 and 2016. In the latter year, the bureau says, that ratio reflected 12,671,801 Texans with jobs out of 20,861,611 residents. By email, Sinclair wrote that similar to thenational pattern for the employment-population ratio,Texasis still low relative to its historical peak (although doing a bit better than the national ratio). SOURCE: Chart drawing on BLS annual data for Texas (received by email fromTara Sinclair, associate professor of Economics and International Affairs, Columbian College of Arts and Sciences, George Washington University, July 21, 2017) Our ruling Abbott said: More Texans have jobs today than ever before in the history of our state. By raw numbers, the more than 12.87 million employed Texans in April 2017 set a record though that count had dipped to 12.85 million by the time Abbott spoke. Also, the states June 2017 jobless rate, 4.6 percent, exceeded the rate in more than 50 months since 1976 while Texas in 2016 (like the nation) had an employment-population ratio trailing what it used to be. We rate this claim Mostly True. MOSTLY TRUE The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information. Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check.","['Economy', 'Jobs', 'Texas']",True,"The Republican governor, kicking off hisre-election campaign, said in July 2017: And since I took office, in just the last two and a half years, in Texas, weve added more than 450,000 new jobs. More Texans have jobs today than ever before in the history of our state.That jobs-gained number sounded a little low. According toBureau of Labor Statistics figureswe drew from a bureau economist, Cheryl Abbot, when Abbott took office in January 2015, the state was home to nearly 11.8 million non-farm jobs. As of June 2017, that count was up by about 507,500, exceeding 12.3 million.Abbotts campaign didnt answer requests for the basis of the claim. Meantime, economists concurred that according tobureau figures drawing on U.S. Census Bureau surveys, more than 12.8 million Texas residents had jobs from April 2017 through June 2017--with the April 2017 count of 12,872,506 employed people setting a record, though the tally subsequently slid marginally, reaching 12,848,980 in June 2017.SOURCE:Chartshowing Texas Local Area Unemployment Statistics, BLS (received by email from Cheryl Abbot, regional economist, BLS, July 21, 2017)Status quo in Texas,Mark J. Perry,an economist at the University of Michigan-Flint, told us by email, its always had steady job growth.SOURCE:Chart based ondata posted by Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis(provided by email from Mark J. Perry, Ph.D., scholar atThe American Enterprise Institute, professor of Finance and Business Economics, School of Management, University of Michigan-Flint, July 28, 2017)For instance, the month before Abbott kicked off his re-election effort, the states unemployment rate of 4.6 percent--as in the share of able workers unsuccessfully seeking employment--was not a record low. We counted 59 months since 1976 when the Texas jobless rate was lower, per an Abbot-providedchart.Also, a ratio that compares the number of people with jobs to the population as a whole was higher for Texas and other states in the 1990s, a facetexploredby PolitiFact in Washington in July 2016. That story also noted that nationally since the end of the Great Recession, the U.S. employment-to-population ratio had climbed, slowly but fairly steadily.When we asked, Abbot shared bureau figures rooted inCensus Bureau survey findingsto represent changes in the Texas employment-population ratio. Similarly, economistTara Sinclair, an associate professor at George Washington University, drew onbureau figuresshowing that the states employment-population ratio exceeded 65 percent from 1995 through 2000 but fell to 61.5 percent in 2014 and to to 60.9 percent and 60.7 percent, respectively, in 2015 and 2016. In the latter year, the bureau says, that ratio reflected 12,671,801 Texans with jobs out of 20,861,611 residents.By email, Sinclair wrote that similar to thenational pattern for the employment-population ratio,Texasis still low relative to its historical peak (although doing a bit better than the national ratio).SOURCE: Chart drawing on BLS annual data for Texas (received by email fromTara Sinclair, associate professor of Economics and International Affairs, Columbian College of Arts and Sciences, George Washington University, July 21, 2017)MOSTLY TRUE The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information. Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check."
When a Writer Falls in Love with You,['Rumor: Canadian rapper Drake penned a viral quote about falling in love with a writer.'],"Claim: The viral quote ""If a writer falls in love with you, you can never die"" was written by Canadian rapper Drake. Example: [Collected via Twitter, January 2015] If a Writer Falls in Love with you, You shall Never Die #ReadSomewhere #ReadSomewhere Gaonka6hhora (@Gaonka6hhora) February 9, 2015 February 9, 2015 Origins: In January 2015, Canadian musician Aubrey Drake Graham, better known as the rapper Drake, incorrectly attributed a viral Tumblr quote about a writer's falling in love to Mustafa the Poet when he posted the meme to his Instagram page: @mustafathepoet A photo posted by champagnepapi (@champagnepapi) on Jan 14, 2015, at 9:11 PM PST. Hundreds of thousands of viewers liked the photo, and many who saw the above-displayed Instagram post believed it was written by Drake, while others noticed the musician's attempt to credit the original author and praised Mustafa the Poet for penning the viral phrase. However, the phrase ""If a writer falls in love with you, you can never die"" was written neither by Drake nor by Mustafa the Poet. The true author is Mik Everett, who first published the quote back in 2011 on her blog: Mik Everett blog. Lots of things might happen. That's the thing about writers. They're unpredictable. They might bring you eggs in bed for breakfast, or they might all but ignore you for days. They might bring you eggs in bed at three in the morning, or they might wake you up for sex at three in the morning, or make love at four in the afternoon. They might not sleep at all, or they might sleep right through the alarm and forget to get you up for work, or call you home from work to kill a spider, or refuse to speak to you after finding out you've never seen To Kill a Mockingbird, or spend the last of the rent money on five kinds of soap, or sell your textbooks for cash halfway through the semester, or leave you love notes in your pockets, or wash your pants with Post-It notes in the pockets so your laundry comes out covered in bits of wet paper. They might cry if the Post-It notes are unread all over your pants. It's an unpredictable life. But what happens if a writer falls in love with you? This is a little more predictable. You will find your hemp necklace with the glass mushroom pendant around the neck of someone at a bus stop in a short story. Your favorite shoes will mysteriously disappear and show up in a poem. The watch you always wear, the watch you own but never wear, the fact that you've never worn a watch: they suddenly belong to characters you've never known. And yet they're you. They're not you; they're someone else entirely, but they toss their hair like you. They use the same colloquialisms as you. They scratch their nose when they lie like you. Sometimes they will be narrators; sometimes protagonists, sometimes villains. Sometimes they will be nobodies, an unimportant, static prop. This might amuse you at first or confuse you. You might be bewildered when books turn into mirrors. You might try to see yourself as your beloved writer sees you when you read a poem about someone who has your middle name or prose about someone who has never seen To Kill a Mockingbird. These poems and novels and short stories will scatter into the wind. You will wonder if you're wandering through the pages of some story you've never even read. There's no way to know and no way to erase it. Even if you leave, a part of you will always be left behind. If a writer falls in love with you, you can never die. Vibe NY Mag On 23 January 2015, Mik Everett took to her website to express her frustrations with being a virally famous yet unknown author. A portion of Everett's article is republished below: website Last Monday, I woke up to something weirder than I could possibly imagine. I woke up to find that Drake had posted a quote by me on Instagram and that he'd credited the quote to another author. There is no Thought Catalog article entitled What to Do If a Famous Rapper Steals Your Quote. There is no Buzzfeed article on how to cope with the rabid fans of a rockstar insisting that you've stolen from him. To the best of my knowledge, this isn't a very common problem to have. Sure, I've heard of academic and artistic plagiarism before, usually involving two high-profile entertainment news celebrities. But I'm not a celebrity. I've sold, like, two hundred copies of each of my books. I live well below the poverty line. I'm a regular person who said something kinda catchy once on the internet, and lots of people liked it. And Drake liked it. I am so disconnected from that quote and the people who use it; I am simultaneously on the outside looking in on the very idea of fame and in the very middle of it. To be clear here, nobody broke any laws. Drake did not take credit for the quote. He attempted to cite the quote, like we all learned how to do in middle school. He just cited the wrong poet. That poet (he goes by Mustafa) did give me appropriate credit for the quote eventually. After Drake had reposted the quote and attributed it to Mustafa, I think it kinda blew up in his face, and people started hounding him to give me credit. And he did add my name in. But on the internet, that doesn't matter. Everyone else is still attributing the quote to Mustafa. And there's no way to fix it. Just try messaging Drake on Instagram. On one hand, it's not that big of a deal. The quote has been used several million times on the internet and is rarely credited to me. On the other hand, I would really, really, really like to make a living as an author. And in our day and age, there are no more camera-shy Thomas Pynchons. To be a financially successful author is inextricable from being a famous author. We hope this helps Mik Everett garner some of the recognition she deserves. Last updated: 10 February 2015.",['credit'],False,"If a Writer Falls in Love with you, You shall Never Die #ReadSomewhere Gaonka6hhora (@Gaonka6hhora) February 9, 2015 @mustafathepoetBut the phrase ""If a writer falls in love with you, you can never die"" was written neither by Drake nor by Mustafa the Poet. The true author is Mik Everett, who first published the quote back in 2011 on her blog: On 23 January 2015, Mik Everett took to her website to express her frustrations with being a virally famous, yet unknown, author. A portion of Everett's article is republished below:"
"Says, when this governor came to office, he had (an) 11 billion dollar - I call it mismanagement  deficit.",[],"Its the number that keeps on giving.Assembly Minority Leader Jon Bramnick is the latest public official to get mileage from a claim about an $11 billion albatross that was hanging around Chris Christies neck when he became governor in 2010.Bramnick, a Republican representing parts of Union, Somerset and Morris counties, mentioned the number during a roundtable discussion Feb. 8 for NJTVs On The Record with Michael Aron. PolitiFact New Jersey has checked the existence of such a deficit on several occasions when Christie made similar claims.Why did Bramnick bring up the number?Bramnick and several other legislators were discussing the concept of the state returning money to municipalities that utilities pay towns for hosting utility poles, facilities and more. That money is paid to the state, which is supposed to then send the money  estimated in the hundreds of millions -- to the municipalities. That hasnt happened, however, as the state grapples with various economic issues. Bramnick said the theory of returning the money is an idea no one would disagree with, but he questioned where the millions would come from.When this governor came to office, he had (an) 11 billion dollar  -- I call it mismanagement  deficit, Bramnick said, adding that Christie has been working to improve the states finances.Bramnicks right that Christie took office with an $11 billion deficit, but that number is a theoretical figure only.Lets explain the deficit.The $11 billion refers to a $10.7 billion structural deficit the states nonpartisan Office of Legislative Services projected for the fiscal 2011 budget year. That budget was put together under then-Gov. Jon Corzine. Christies first budget was for fiscal year 2012.A structural deficit measures how much money the state would need if current services and revenues remained the same and all statutory spending obligations were fully funded.The state, however, does not have to meet all of its obligations since the budget supersedes statute.That means that while a state statute may require certain levels of spending on different programs, the governor can sign a budget that does otherwise.And like his predecessor, thats basically what Christie did when it was his turn to craft a spending plan. In Christies case, he skipped a $3 billion pension payment and didnt fully fund the school-aid formula or the states property tax rebate program.The result? New Jersey still had a projected structural deficit for the fiscal 2012 budget year, but slightly smaller. It was $10.5 billion, according to the OLS.So there was an approximate $11 billion deficit when Christie took office, but in theory only.Bramnick acknowledged that the deficit in place when Christie took office was a structural deficit, and said he cited it during the discussion to illustrate the states financial woes.Our rulingBramnick said during a roundtable discussion on NJTVs On The Record with Michael Aron that when this governor came to office, he had (an) 11 billion dollar  -- I call it mismanagement -- deficit.The OLS projected a nearly $11 billion structural deficit for the fiscal year 2011 budget created under Corzine, but its the type of deficit that measures how much money the state would need to maintain funding for services, if all required spending was fully funded and revenues stayed the same.Bramnicks right that a deficit existed when Christie came into office, but it was a theoretical one that resulted because administrations prior to Christies didnt spend all of the money needed to fully fund required expenses -- a move Christie repeated for his first budget as governor. We rate Bramnick's claim Mostly True. To comment on this story, go toNJ.com.","['New Jersey', 'Debt', 'Deficit', 'State Budget']",True,"To comment on this story, go toNJ.com."
DoD Suspension of Brass Cartridge Casing Sales,['Has the Department of Defense cut off sales of spent cartridge cases to U.S. ammunition manufacturers?'],"Claim:  The Department of Defense has cut off sales of spent cartridge cases to U.S. ammunition manufacturers.  OF AND  OUTDATED INFORMATION Example:  [Collected via e-mail, March 2009] Georgia Arms is the 5th largest retailer of .223 Ammo in America.  (they sell 9 mm, .45, etc ammo) They normally buy spent brass from the US Dept of Defense - 'one time used' shell casings by our Military - from training on Military bases, etc.  They buy the brass and then re-load for resale to Law Enforcement, Gun Shops, Gun Clubs, Wal-Mart, and etc. They normally buy 30,000 lbs of spent brass at a time. This week the DoD wrote a letter to the owner of Georgia Arms and said that from now on the DoD will be destroying the brass - shredding it. It is no longer available to the Ammo makers - unless they just buy it in a scrap shredded condition (which they have No use for).  The shredded brass is NOW going to be sold by the DoD to China as scrap metal.... after the DoD pays for it to be shredded. The DoD is selling the brass to China for less money than Ammo manufacturers have been paying... plus the DoD has to pay to have the brass shredded and do all the accounting paperwork.  That sure helps the US economy now, doesn't it?  Sell cheaper to China - and do not sell shells at all to a proven US business.  Any agenda working here???? Obama going after our ammunition!!!!! The Georgia Arms owner even related a story that one of his competitors had already purchased a load of brass last week - and the DoD contacted him this week and said they were sending someone over to make sure it was destroyed.  Shell Casings he had already bought!  THE BRASS HAS NO VALUE TO THE AMMO MAKER IF IT IS DESTROYED/SHREDDED/MELTED.  THE AMMO MANUFACTURER ONLY USES THE EMPTY BRASS SHELLS TO RELOAD DIFFERENT CALIBERS - MAINLY .223 BULLETS. Georgia Arms owner says that he will have to lay off at least Half of his 60 workers, within 2 - 3 months if the DoD no longer sells their spent brass to him. He has 2 - 3 months inventory of shells to use.  By summer - he's out. If he has to buy new manufactured brass shells, then the cost of ammunitioin to the buyer will double and triple. Origins:  The Defense Reutilization and Marketing Service (DRMS), which is part of the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA), which in turn is part of the Department of Defense (DoD), is the service ""responsible for the disposition of excess and surplus DoD property"" and is tasked with ""protecting national security by ensuring property is properly identified for reutilization and disposition and not released for public sale when to do so would jeopardize national security."" DRMS In March 2009, while reviewing a policy change issued by the DoD the previous year, the DLA halted or reclassified the sale of a broad category of items, a  category which included spent cartridge cases. This event caused consternation among manufacturers and purchasers of ammunition because it cut off some ammunition manufacturers from their largest supply of brass casings, as U.S. senators Max Baucas and Jon Tester noted in a letter on the  subject to the DLA: ""This reclassification has an impact on small businesses who sell reloaded ammunition utilizing these fired casings, and upon individual gun owners who purchase spent military brass at considerable cost savings for their personal use."" letter The issue was quickly resolved, however: a week later the DLA issued a press release announcing that upon completion of their review, they had determined that cartridge cases ""could be appropriately placed in a category of government property allowing for their release for sale"": press release Small arms cartridge cases are identified as a sensitive Munitions List item and were held pending review of the policy relating to the category of items in which cartridge cases were included. Upon review, the Defense Logistics Agency has determined the cartridge cases could be appropriately placed in a category of government property allowing for their release for sale. The DRMS sales contractor has been notified of this decision and has begun the process of reoffering the cases that have been held pending completion of the policy review. The National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA) also issued a statement on 18 March 2009  which noted (in part): statement [T]he Department of Defense informed NRA-ILA that fired military small arms cartridge cases are once again eligible for sale, following a temporary suspension in such sales instituted last week. NRA-ILA began discussions with DoD shortly after the suspension took effect, and we were assured from the beginning that efforts were underway to resolve the issue favorably.  In announcing that the suspension has been lifted, DoD also made clear that no cartridge cases that, in the absence of the suspension, would have been sold for reloading purposes were destroyed while the suspension was in effect. Such cases were instead protected by DoD during the suspension, and are again eligible for sale. With ammunition currently in short supply, that was welcome news, to be sure.  DLA also put to rest various theories and rumors that were circulated on the internet concerning the reason for the suspension. As DLA explained to Senators Baucus and Tester, and to NRA-ILA, DoD officials responsible for the demilitarization of military property temporarily halted the release of the cartridge cases last week pending review of a policy change issued last year by the Office of the Secretary of Defense, which, in the interest of national security, halted the sale of items within a broad category of government property including, but not limited to, surplus small arms cartridge cases.  To make cartridge cases eligible for sale once again, DoD demilitarization officials verified that the cases could be appropriately placed in a category of government property allowing for their release for use within the United States, and then executed the recategorization. Whereas during the brief suspension, fired cartridge cases would have been releaseable only if the purchaser crushed or smelted them, now the cases may be sold as before, intact and reloadable. Last updated:  19 April 2009    Gonsalves, Chris.  ""Feds Lift Rule That Threatened Ammo Shortages.""   Newsmax.  19 March 2009.     Johnson, Tonya.  ""Small Arms Cartridge Case Policy Revised.""   Defense Logistics Agency   20 March 2009.",['economy'],False,"Origins:  The Defense Reutilization and Marketing Service (DRMS), which is part of the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA), which in turn is part of the Department of Defense (DoD), is the service ""responsible for the disposition of excess and surplus DoD property"" and is tasked with ""protecting national security by ensuring property is properly identified for reutilization and disposition and not released for public sale when to do so would jeopardize national security.""category which included spent cartridge cases. This event caused consternation among manufacturers and purchasers of ammunition because it cut off some ammunition manufacturers from their largest supply of brass casings, as U.S. senators Max Baucas and Jon Tester noted in a letter on the  subject to the DLA: ""This reclassification has an impact on small businesses who sell reloaded ammunition utilizing these fired casings, and upon individual gun owners who purchase spent military brass at considerable cost savings for their personal use.""The issue was quickly resolved, however: a week later the DLA issued a press release announcing that upon completion of their review, they had determined that cartridge cases ""could be appropriately placed in a category of government property allowing for their release for sale"":The National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA) also issued a statement on 18 March 2009  which noted (in part):"
Seller of Beechcraft aircraft,['Did the U.S. government unfairly exclude Hawker Beechcraft from bidding to supply military aircraft for Afghanistan?'],"Claim:  The U.S. government unfairly excluded Hawker Beechcraft from bidding to supply military aircraft for Afghanistan. Examples:  [Collected via e-mail, December 2011] ""Any president whose actions so consistently refute his own words must have deep contempt for the intelligence of the American public."" The obama administration told U.S. owned Hawker Beechcraft earlier this week they are being excluded from bidding on the US Air Force contract for a light attack aircraft. That leaves Brazilian owned Embraer as the likely recipient of the lucrative deal. I found this one hard to believe so I did a little research. It was tough because this was completely ignored by the main stream media.  This is a double slap in the face of the United States. At a time when jobs, the economy, and security are the most critical priorities for our country, the Obama administration decides to send a defense contract to a foreign owned company. This has to be the stupidest thing this administration has done to date. This is not just a dumb decision, it is a perfect example of why this president is such a poor leader. He talks about wanting jobs. He says we need to force companies to repatriate billions of dollars that Americans keep overseas. He wants to raise taxes so he can spend billions on stimulus that does nothing to stimulate anything. And when it's time to act, he sends our tax dollars overseas at the expense of American jobs and income for an American company. This is nothing more than a Chicago-style political pay back; but this time it is at the expense of our national security. How much more damage will obama be allowed to do in the next 14 months? One of the lead stories in the media this week blasted congress for insider trading. If this contract goes to Embraer it will be a huge pay off to another George Soros company. When will the 4th estate do it's constitutionally protected job and expose the real obama to the American people?   Origins:   On 30 December 2011, the U.S. Department of Defense announced that it had awarded a $355 million contract to Sierra Nevada Corp. (SNC) for 20 light air-support/single-engine turboprop aircraft that will serve as both trainers and ground-attack planes for Afghanistan's air force.  Wichita-based aircraft manufacturer Hawker Beechcraft (HBDC) had hoped that their AT-6 aircraft, an armed version of their T-6 trainer which is currently used by the U.S. military, would be chosen for the contract, but the U.S. Air Force (USAF) excluded the AT-6 from the running, leaving the A-29 Super Tucano built by Sierra Nevada Corp. in partnership with Brazil-based Embraer as the lone eligible supplier. Hawker Beechcraft Corp. has since filed suit against the U.S. government over the exclusion, maintaining that the Air Force had not provided them with sufficient detail about the reasons behind their exclusion and that Embraer had been unfairly favored: The suit alleges the exclusion was ""arbitrary and capricious"" and seeks to prevent the government from awarding a contract until Beechcraft can make its case in court. ""This is yet another example of the Air Force's lack of transparency throughout this competition,"" said Bill Boisture, Hawker Beechcraft chairman and CEO, in a statement. ""With this development, it now seems even clearer that the Air Force intended to award the contract to Embraer from early in this process."" ""We think we were wrongfully excluded from the competition,"" Boisture said. ""We don't understand the basis for the exclusion, and frankly, we think we've got the best airplane. ""So we're going to take every avenue available to us to make sure our product is fully evaluated and recognized for what it is. There are several issues here that just, frankly, don't make sense."" The Air Force maintains that the process was fair, that Hawker Beechcraft was excluded because ""multiple deficiencies and significant weaknesses found in HBDC's proposal make it technically unacceptable and results in unacceptable mission capability risk,"" and that the company failed to respond to its notice of exclusion in time to request a debriefing or file a protest: respond Lt. Col. Wesley Miller, an Air Force spokesman, said the contest ""was conducted in accordance with all applicable laws and regulations"" and that the evaluation of the aircraft ""was fair, open and transparent."" In dismissing Hawker Beechcraft Corp from the competition, the Air Force found Hawker Beechcraft's bid ""technically unacceptable,"" one that would result in an ""unacceptable mission capability risk.""  The Air Force said the company missed a three-day deadline to file a request for a debriefing and a 10-day deadline to file a protest. It is not possible at this point to definitively determine why the USAF excluded Hawker Beechcraft from the Light Aircraft Support (LAS) bidding, as ongoing litigation prevents the Air Force from releasing information regarding the competition, but according to industry observers the primary issue behind Hawker Beechcraft's disqualification was that the LAS contract called for a non-developmental, production-ready aircraft, and Hawker Beechcraft's AT-6 was still a developmental aircraft.   observers According to SNC's own statement on the issue: statement In its Request for Proposal, the Air Force specifically sought a non-developmental, in-production aircraft so that warfighters in-theater could have an advanced solution quickly and so that American taxpayers would not have to pay development costs. The plane proposed by SNC's competitor is a developmental aircraft that is not in production and has never been used for light air support or any other purpose. The AT-6 is a developmental aircraft.  With only two prototypes in existence, it has never been in production. In contrast, the aircraft selected by the Air Force and to be provided by SNC, Embraer's A-29 Super Tucano, is a light air support aircraft that is currently in use with six air forces around the world.   Unlike the AT-6, the A-29 Super Tucano has more than seven years of real-world combat and training experience behind it.  This means that its operational costs are known and that all costly development issues related to weapons load, maneuverability and operations have already been worked out.  Only the A-29 Super Tucano has actually flown in combat.  More significantly, only the A-29 was built from the ground up to perform counterinsurgency and light air support operations.  The A-29 is larger in size allowing it to make full use of the 1,600-hp engine without power limitations due to torque.  It sits higher off the ground and has a broader stance, increasing stability on unprepared airfields.  The A-29's longer tail section increases longitudinal stability and provides exceptional accuracy for the delivery of weapons.  Only the A-29 delivery system is specifically designed with the five NATO hard points for external stores, translating into maximum operational flexibility for the war fighters in the theater.  The AT-6 carries no munitions in its native configuration. This is a critical difference.  The A-29 also is munitions-certified with over 130 operational external load configurations.  The AT-6 is not yet munitions-certified. In February 2012, the Air Force announced it was canceling the contract with Sierra Nevada Corp. pending an investigation of the award: General Donald Hoffman, commander of the Air Force Materiel Command, has started an investigation, Jennifer Cassidy, an Air Force Spokeswoman, said. She said she didn't know whether the contract would be re-opened for competition and didn't elaborate on the reason for the cancellation. ""While we pursue perfection, we sometimes fall short, and when we do we will take corrective action,"" Michael B. Donley, the Air Force secretary, said in a statement. ""Since the acquisition is still in litigation, I can only say that the Air Force Senior Acquisition Executive, David Van Buren, is not satisfied with the quality of the documentation supporting the award decision."" The awarding of the Air Force contract to a partner of Brazil-based Embraer did not necessarily mean that all the jobs connected with the contract would be sent overseas, as Embraer said that its partner, Nevada-based Sierra Nevada Corp., would build the turboprops in Jacksonville, Florida, if it won the contract: The A-29 Super Tucano will be built in America.  Embraer will make the plane at a new production facility in Jacksonville, Fla.  Over 88 percent of the dollar value of the A-29 Super Tucano comes from components supplied by U.S. companies or countries that qualify under the Buy America Act. No new jobs are being created in Brazil as a result of this contract. Despite the claim made in the example text reproduced above that the subject of Hawker Beechcraft's exclusion was ""completely ignored by the mainstream media,"" it has in fact received widespread news coverage in a variety of media sources, including at least five of the nine highest-circulation newspapers in the U.S. (The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, the San Jose Mercury News, the New York Post, and the Chicago Tribune). widespread Also, we found no evidence to support the claim that ""If this contract goes to Embraer it will be a huge pay off to another George Soros company,""  as we turned up no information indicating that George Soros holds an ownership stake in Embraer.  The closest connection we found between George Soros and Embraer seems to be that the former is one of the leading shareholders in China's Hainan Airlines Group (HNA), and HNA bought ERJ-145 jets from Harbin Embraer, a partnership between Embraer and the Harbin Aircraft Manufacturing Corporation of Harbin, China. However, that connection makes Soros a customer of Embraer, not an owner, and therefore does not put him in a position to profit from the awarding of an Air Force contact to Embraer. shareholders Last updated:  5 March 2012    Hodge, Nathan.  ""Hawker Beechcraft Sues Over Air Force Bidding.""   The Wall Street Journal.  28 December 2011.    Hodge, Nathan.  ""Embraer Hits Defense Barrier.""   The Wall Street Journal.  11 January 2012.    Ivory, Danielle.  ""Air Force Cancels Contract to Sierra After Hawker Protest.""   San Francisco Chronicle.  1 March 2012.    McMillin, Molly.  ""Hawker Requests GAO Review of Air Force Deal.""   The Wichita Eagle.  22 November 2011.    McMillin, Molly.  ""Hawker Beechcraft Files Suit Over Air Force Contract.""   The Wichita Eagle.  28 December 2011.    Associated Press.  ""Hawker Beechcraft Sues Over Air Force Contract.""   28 December 2011.    Associated Press.  ""Air Force Temporarily Halts Work After Hawker Beechcraft Lawsuit.""   The Washington Post.  5 January 2012.",['taxes'],NEI,"The Air Force maintains that the process was fair, that Hawker Beechcraft was excluded because ""multiple deficiencies and significant weaknesses found in HBDC's proposal make it technically unacceptable and results in unacceptable mission capability risk,"" and that the company failed to respond to its notice of exclusion in time to request a debriefing or file a protest:It is not possible at this point to definitively determine why the USAF excluded Hawker Beechcraft from the Light Aircraft Support (LAS) bidding, as ongoing litigation prevents the Air Force from releasing information regarding the competition, but according to industry observers the primary issue behind Hawker Beechcraft's disqualification was that the LAS contract called for a non-developmental, production-ready aircraft, and Hawker Beechcraft's AT-6 was still a developmental aircraft.  According to SNC's own statement on the issue:Despite the claim made in the example text reproduced above that the subject of Hawker Beechcraft's exclusion was ""completely ignored by the mainstream media,"" it has in fact received widespread news coverage in a variety of media sources, including at least five of the nine highest-circulation newspapers in the U.S. (The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, the San Jose Mercury News, the New York Post, and the Chicago Tribune).Also, we found no evidence to support the claim that ""If this contract goes to Embraer it will be a huge pay off to another George Soros company,""  as we turned up no information indicating that George Soros holds an ownership stake in Embraer.  The closest connection we found between George Soros and Embraer seems to be that the former is one of the leading shareholders in China's Hainan Airlines Group (HNA), and HNA bought ERJ-145 jets from Harbin Embraer, a partnership between Embraer and the Harbin Aircraft Manufacturing Corporation of Harbin, China. However, that connection makes Soros a customer of Embraer, not an owner, and therefore does not put him in a position to profit from the awarding of an Air Force contact to Embraer."
Does Video Offer Real Footage of the Titanic Sinking?,['The unsinkable vessel sunk in 1912.'],"More than a century after the infamous sinking of the RMS Titanic, which resulted in the death of more than 1,500 passengers, the internet continues to obsess over the tragedy. Case in point: July 2022, a fake video shared to TikTok that claimed to show the sinking of the cruise liner racked up nearly a half-million likes. A caption accompanying the video read, Rare footage of the 1912 sinking of the Titanic. However, the video is a fake.   Titanic left its port of Southhampton, England, for its transatlantic maiden voyage on April 10, 1912. Four days later, the nearly 900-foot vessel collided with an iceberg near Newfoundland, Canada, at 11:40 p.m. Two hours and 40 minutes later, the vessel broke in two and sank, according to the Titanic Inquiry Project. Because many of its passengers were noteworthy individuals, the sinking of Titanic quickly became one of the first international news stories of the 20th-century  and along with it came a slew of misinformation, notes the Titanic Newspaper Archives. Newfoundland, Canada Titanic Inquiry Project Titanic Newspaper Archives Apparently, that legacy of misinformation has followed the wreckage 110 years later. The room that appears in the video presumably contains the Grand Staircase, which was described as one of the most impressive features on board the RMS Titanic and the center of first-class activity. James Camerons 1997 film classic ""Titanic"" resurfaced the fame of the centerpiece.  described Titanic  Public Domain Back to the TikTok video. How do we know that is is fake? First, listen to the audio. You can hear dramatic screaming in the background, but there are no visible people in the frames. Lets also mention that handheld video cameras werent a thing in 1912. Sure, cameras in the 1910s were more mobile than those of previous decades, but The Living Image vintage camera museum notes that cameras of this era [were] still mainly of wooden, folding construction  heavy and not easily mobile. There is surprisingly little genuine film footage of the Titanic both right before and after the disaster, but it does exist. British Path was a producer of newsreels throughout the 20th century, reported the pop-science website IFLScience. A six-minute newsreel produced in the aftermath of the disaster spans multiple scenes after the vessel sunk and the ensuing search for survivors. The first scenes from the footage below depict the Titanic as it left port for disaster. cameras in the 1910s notes British Path IFLScience the vessel sunk  As you can see, authentic film footage from 1912 is much different than the clips shared to TikTok. Lastly, we checked the Instagram account associated with the TikTok profile. It led us to a person presumably named Taylor Tituss, who has a description in the profile reading, I make video edits for fun.  Taylor Tituss ""So, to clear things up, the video is fake,"" Tituss told Snopes, adding that he took the footage from a YouTube clip posted to the platform in May 2021. A caption accompanying the video, which had over 1.5 million views as of this writing, claimed the following:  Mr Joseph Davies a 17 year old boy who was a Photographer on the Titanic the day it perished down in the Atlantic ocean in 1912.This footage was recovered in 2020 by a historian Investigating the sinking of the titanic.He commented ""A camera was found in the Atlantic ocean where the titanic sits to rest. It was a miracle the camera was still intact after it was found in 1989.""""After years and years of trying to recover the footage found in the films, they were unsuccessful until in 2020 when they became successful recovering the footage using state of the art technology."" Mr Joseph died during the sinking of the titanic, the end bit where the video cuts out is when Mr Joseph drowned to his death trying to capture the sinking of the titanic. His remains were never found. We previously fact-checked the claim that an ""old camera"" from the Titanic was found deep in the ocean. That's also false, as is the below video: ""old camera  As we previously reported, a young girl named Bernice Palmer did capture photographs of the iceberg  that Titanic collided with, as well as images of survivors. The Natural Museum of American History published that Palmer carried a handheld camera on the ship that responded to the Titanics distress call: reported published In 1900, the Eastman Kodak Company came out with the handheld box camera known as the Brownie. An immediate hit, more than 100,000 were sold in its first year. Canadian Bernice Bernie Palmer received a Kodak Brownie box camera, either for Christmas 1911 or for her birthday on January 10th, 1912. In early April, Bernie and her mother boarded the Cunard liner Carpathia in New York, for a Mediterranean cruise. Carpathia had scarcely cleared New York, when it received a distress call from the White Star liner Titanic on 14 April. It raced to the scene of the sinking and managed to rescue over 700 survivors from the icy North Atlantic. With her new camera, Bernice took pictures of the iceberg that sliced open the Titanics hull below the waterline and also took snapshots of some of the Titanic survivors.  We've looked into a number of rumors and claims surrounding the sinking of Titanic (did we mention that the internet is obsessed?). Let's sink these rumors once and for all. Here are some other Snopes fact checks that you may enjoy:  Was the Hidden Truth of Titanic Covered Up for Decades? Is This the Final Photograph of the Titanic? Were These Actual Mistakes in the 1997 Titanic Film? Did Divers Exploring Titanic Make Deeply Shocking New Discovery? Is the Door from Titanic on Display at Disney Springs? Sources Apr 15, 1912 CE: Titanic Sinks | National Geographic Society. https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/titanic-sinks. Accessed 2 Aug. 2022. Cameras of 1910s Era. Old Vintage Cameras, Old Fashion Camera. https://licm.org.uk/livingImage/1910Room.html. Accessed 2 Aug. 2022. Cameron, James. Titanic. Twentieth Century Fox, Paramount Pictures, Lightstorm Entertainment, 1997. Grand Staircase. Titanic Wiki, https://titanic.fandom.com/wiki/Grand_Staircase. Accessed 2 Aug. 2022. Grand Staircase of the Titanic. Wikipedia, 29 June 2022. Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Grand_Staircase_of_the_Titanic&oldid=1095579315. Interesting Clips on TikTok. TikTok, https://www.tiktok.com/@clipz_r_us_/video/7123906717020278062?_r=1&_d=secCgYIASAHKAESPgo8l7jDOO69%2F8FwrVlvu2ep8xdlY7z%2BELF9%2FTqCesNUwIiXYwhQ2PZfUzJ4G27YFO7FJsTC1abD8k5j58W4GgA%3D&checksum=4302d0d8b587eafda1c7e917ee37f34a2a7c46f1be0920292ec1b49166236792&language=en&preview_pb=0&sec_user_id=MS4wLjABAAAA-lkqwAHfStUeZkapDd_k_rjsEJRnnBbKhvq05zi0bVTQSKzFBdqKThheOb99NdEv&share_app_id=1233&share_item_id=7123906717020278062&share_link_id=f95dae62-97b3-4e7b-83c9-248e6b8c6dde&source=h5_m&timestamp=1659422273&u_code=dd6mf0739ffej6&ugbiz_name=Main&user_id=6844018106214646789&utm_campaign=client_share&utm_medium=android&utm_source=copy. Accessed 2 Aug. 2022. This Haunting Video Is The Only Genuine Footage Of The Titanic Before And After It Sank. IFLScience, https://iflscience.com/this-haunting-video-is-the-only-genuine-footage-of-the-titanic-before-and-after-it-sank-59628. Accessed 2 Aug. 2022. Titanic Disaster Newspaper Archive. https://www.paperlessarchives.com/titanic_newspaper_archive.html. Accessed 2 Aug. 2022. Titanic Inquiry Project - Main Page. https://www.titanicinquiry.org/. Accessed 2 Aug. 2022. Titanic Real Footage: Leaving Belfast for Disaster (1911-1912) | British Path. www.youtube.com, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=05o7sOAjtXE. Accessed 2 Aug. 2022. www.youtube.com, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=05o7sOAjtXE. Accessed 2 Aug. 2022.",['share'],False,"Titanic left its port of Southhampton, England, for its transatlantic maiden voyage on April 10, 1912. Four days later, the nearly 900-foot vessel collided with an iceberg near Newfoundland, Canada, at 11:40 p.m. Two hours and 40 minutes later, the vessel broke in two and sank, according to the Titanic Inquiry Project. Because many of its passengers were noteworthy individuals, the sinking of Titanic quickly became one of the first international news stories of the 20th-century  and along with it came a slew of misinformation, notes the Titanic Newspaper Archives.The room that appears in the video presumably contains the Grand Staircase, which was described as one of the most impressive features on board the RMS Titanic and the center of first-class activity. James Camerons 1997 film classic ""Titanic"" resurfaced the fame of the centerpiece. Lets also mention that handheld video cameras werent a thing in 1912. Sure, cameras in the 1910s were more mobile than those of previous decades, but The Living Image vintage camera museum notes that cameras of this era [were] still mainly of wooden, folding construction  heavy and not easily mobile. There is surprisingly little genuine film footage of the Titanic both right before and after the disaster, but it does exist. British Path was a producer of newsreels throughout the 20th century, reported the pop-science website IFLScience. A six-minute newsreel produced in the aftermath of the disaster spans multiple scenes after the vessel sunk and the ensuing search for survivors. The first scenes from the footage below depict the Titanic as it left port for disaster.Lastly, we checked the Instagram account associated with the TikTok profile. It led us to a person presumably named Taylor Tituss, who has a description in the profile reading, I make video edits for fun. We previously fact-checked the claim that an ""old camera"" from the Titanic was found deep in the ocean. That's also false, as is the below video:As we previously reported, a young girl named Bernice Palmer did capture photographs of the iceberg  that Titanic collided with, as well as images of survivors. The Natural Museum of American History published that Palmer carried a handheld camera on the ship that responded to the Titanics distress call:"
"No, Ben and Jerry's Did Not Honor Rittenhouse Shooting Victim with New Flavor","[""A Twitter post spoofed Ben & Jerry's public statement on the Kyle Rittenhouse trial. ""]","On Nov. 13, 2021, Victory News Network (VNN) Twitter account published a graphic positing that Ben & Jerry's honored one of Kyle Rittenhouse's shooting victims, Joseph Rosenbaum, with a new flavor: Victory News Network Ben & Jerry's Honors Rittenhouse Shooting Victim All profits from 'Rosenbaum's Heroic Hazelnut' will be donated to the Black Lives Matter organization.  This item was not a factual recounting of real-life events. The article originated with a Twitter account website that describes its output as being humorous or satirical in nature, as follows: follows   Simlarly, the corresponding website, VictoryNews.online, describes its content this way: ""This is a parody website, dummy."" Rosenbaum, one of the men shot and killed by Rittenhouse during a riot stemming from an August 2020 protest in Kenosha, Wisconsin, had previously been sentenced to prison for sexually abusing five boys, according to court records. There is, however, no ice cream flavor from Ben & Jerry's known as ""Rosenbaum's Heroic Hazelnut."" The satirical tweet from VNN emerged after Ben & Jerry's Twitter account criticized the proceedings of the Rittenhouse trial.  sentenced  In response, Twitter and Facebook users shared the satirical post about ""Rosenbaum's Heroic Hazelnut"" -- often with no satire or parody disclaimer -- as a commentary on Ben & Jerry's announcement:    For background, here is why we sometimes write about satire/humor. why Twitter, Nov. 13, 2021. https://twitter.com/VictoryNewsNet/status/1459574391042236423. Accessed 16 Nov. 2021. Victory News Network. Victory News Network, https://www.victorynews.online/. Accessed 16 Nov. 2021. Whats True and False About Kyle Rittenhouses Alleged Victims. Snopes.Com, https://www.snopes.com/news/2020/09/11/rittenhouse-victims-records/. Accessed 16 Nov. 2021.",['profit'],False,"On Nov. 13, 2021, Victory News Network (VNN) Twitter account published a graphic positing that Ben & Jerry's honored one of Kyle Rittenhouse's shooting victims, Joseph Rosenbaum, with a new flavor:This item was not a factual recounting of real-life events. The article originated with a Twitter account website that describes its output as being humorous or satirical in nature, as follows:Rosenbaum, one of the men shot and killed by Rittenhouse during a riot stemming from an August 2020 protest in Kenosha, Wisconsin, had previously been sentenced to prison for sexually abusing five boys, according to court records. There is, however, no ice cream flavor from Ben & Jerry's known as ""Rosenbaum's Heroic Hazelnut."" The satirical tweet from VNN emerged after Ben & Jerry's Twitter account criticized the proceedings of the Rittenhouse trial. For background, here is why we sometimes write about satire/humor."
"After taking hundreds of thousands of dollars from Goldman Sachs and other Wall Street banks, (Debbie Wasserman Schultz) has voted to prevent the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau from regulating payday loans and addressing racial discrimination in car loans.",[],"A law professor running against U.S. Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz of South Florida says she is in the pocket of big banks and isnt looking out for consumers who get crushed by debt from payday loans. My opponent, after taking hundreds of thousands of dollars from Goldman Sachs and other Wall Street banks, has voted to prevent the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFTP) from regulating payday loans and addressing racial discrimination in car loans, said Tim Canova on hiswebsite. Canova, a first-time candidate and professor at Nova Southeastern University, is challenging Wasserman Schultz in the August Democratic primary in a Broward/Miami-Dade district. The race has drawn national attention because Wasserman Schultz is the Democratic National Committee chair. Did Canova accurately describe her donations from banks and her votes related to payday loans and car loans? There is some truth to his attack, but each one requires explanation. Donations from Wall Street banks Canovas campaign pointed to donations from banks, securities/investment firms and finance/credit companies to Wasserman Schultzs campaign committee and her political action committee, or PAC. At PolitiFact Floridas request, the Center for Responsive Politics compiled the large individual donations (more than $200) and donations to her PAC starting with her 2006 election. The center found she received $309,020 from commercial banks, which represented about 2 percent of the total; $408,450 from securities/investment firms, and $325,850 from finance/credit companies. Her leadership PAC, Democrats Win Seats, received donations from the Goldman Sachs PAC:$5,000 in 2016and$10,000in 2014. Wasserman Schultz spokesman Sean Bartlett pointed to donations only to her campaign and plucked out what he said were the big bank donations. That totaled $15,400, including $4,000 from Goldman Sachs. But the Center for Responsive Politics shows a longer list of bank donations even if we only examine her campaign committee. It shows$171,303 for commercial bankindustry donations. Payday loan bill Payday loans are small, short-term loans that borrowers promise to repay out of their next paycheck at ahigh rateof interest. It is a controversial industry that targets the poor and is disproportionately located in minority communities. For years, payday loans were unregulated by the federal government, although some states had their own laws. President Barack Obama took a step toward regulating the industry when he signed a bill in 2010 that included the creation of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Republicans have targeted the bureau for years. Enter some Democrats into the fray -- including Wasserman Schultz, who has gotten about $68,000 from payday lenders, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Wasserman Schultz is among Florida lawmakers who have defended Floridas payday law despite the fact that some consumer advocates have bashed it and say it traps the poor in a debt cycle. Wasserman Schultzs position is to give precedence to the state law, her spokesman said. On the federal level, the bureau released anoutline of payday loan rulesin March 2015 and is expected to announce a more complete proposal within the next several months. Congress doesnt have to approve it but can introduce legislation to kill it. All but one member of Floridas congressional delegation (Tom Rooney) signed aletterin April 2015 pushing back against the proposed rules. Instead, they want the bureau to look at Floridas law as a model. That led U.S. Rep. Dennis Ross, a Florida Republican, to file the Consumer Protection and Choice Act,H.R. 4018in November. Half of the 24 cosponsors are from Florida, including Wasserman Schultz, and nine of the cosponsors are Democrats. Canovas website said Wasserman Schultz voted on the bill, but it was only referred to a committee without a vote. (After we pointed that out to Canova senior adviser Richard Bell, the campaign changed the website to say co-sponsored instead of voted.) The bill states that if the bureau determines that a states law meets the federal requirements, then only state law will apply. It would also delay federal regulations for two years, which would allow states to come up with their own laws. More than 200 consumer or civil rights groups -- including the NAACP, National Council of La Raza, Southern Poverty Law Center and the Consumer Federation of America -- wrote aletterto Congress urging them to defeat the bill. They argued that the bill favors an industry-backed Florida law and would hurt consumers. Floridas 2001 payday loan law was a compromise and included protections that were intended to help the poor avoid an endless cycle of debt. But the loans leave consumers stuck on a debt treadmill in Florida, where they have racked up $2.5 billion in fees since 2005, according to the Center for Responsible Lendings Marchreport. In the past year, the average Florida payday loan had an annual rate of 278 percent. Richard Cordray, head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, disputed Ross description of Floridas law as the gold standard during a congressional hearing on March 16. In Florida, these loans are still being made above the 300 percent, and they are being rolled over on average nine times, Cordraysaid. Bartlett argued that Wasserman Schultz has fought against abusive payday lending practices and pointed to her vote on a separate bill in 2015. She voted against HR 766, the Financial Institution Customer Protection Act, which opponents argued would have prevented the Justice Department from going after the financial industry. Racial discrimination in car loans Canova also said Wasserman Schultz prevented action to stop racial discrimination for car loans. This part of Canovas attack relates to a2013 bulletinfrom the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which recommended steps for auto lenders to avoid discrimination. The bulletin was intended to provide clarity about existing law. But theHouse of Representativespushed back against the bureau by passing a bill to nullify the bulletin. The bill passed the House 332-96 in November 2015 and hasnt had a vote in the Senate. Wasserman Schultz was one of 88 Democrats who voted in favor of it, while 96 Democrats opposed it. Proponentsof the bill -- including auto dealers -- said the bureaus efforts would increase costs for consumers. Groups that representedminoritieswanted the new guidelines. This legislation in no way prevented the CFPB from addressing racial discrimination in car loans, and the congresswoman does not support that as a policy position, her spokesman said. The bill hasnt been acted on, and discrimination investigations can continue. A few months after the House vote,Toyotaagreed to a $21.9 million settlement to black and Asian buyers. Our ruling Canova says Wasserman Schultz after taking hundreds of thousands of dollars from Goldman Sachs and other Wall Street banks, has voted to prevent the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau from regulating payday loans and addressing racial discrimination in car loans. Her campaign committee and PAC have taken $309,020 from commercial banks since her re-election campaign in 2006 -- about 2 percent of the total. That includes $15,000 in donations from Goldman Sachs to her leadership PAC. The payday loan bill hasnt had a vote in the House yet, although Wasserman Schultz is a co-sponsor. The bill would not prevent the bureau from regulating payday loans entirely, but it would cede power to the states, including Florida, which has its own payday law that some advocates have criticized as weak. She voted for a bill that squashed bureau guidelines that were intended to provide clarity about the law on racial discrimination related to car loans. We rate this claim Mostly True.","['Campaign Finance', 'Congress', 'Race and Ethnicity', 'Poverty', 'Florida']",True,"My opponent, after taking hundreds of thousands of dollars from Goldman Sachs and other Wall Street banks, has voted to prevent the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFTP) from regulating payday loans and addressing racial discrimination in car loans, said Tim Canova on hiswebsite.Her leadership PAC, Democrats Win Seats, received donations from the Goldman Sachs PAC:$5,000 in 2016and$10,000in 2014.But the Center for Responsive Politics shows a longer list of bank donations even if we only examine her campaign committee. It shows$171,303 for commercial bankindustry donations.Payday loans are small, short-term loans that borrowers promise to repay out of their next paycheck at ahigh rateof interest. It is a controversial industry that targets the poor and is disproportionately located in minority communities.On the federal level, the bureau released anoutline of payday loan rulesin March 2015 and is expected to announce a more complete proposal within the next several months. Congress doesnt have to approve it but can introduce legislation to kill it.All but one member of Floridas congressional delegation (Tom Rooney) signed aletterin April 2015 pushing back against the proposed rules. Instead, they want the bureau to look at Floridas law as a model.That led U.S. Rep. Dennis Ross, a Florida Republican, to file the Consumer Protection and Choice Act,H.R. 4018in November. Half of the 24 cosponsors are from Florida, including Wasserman Schultz, and nine of the cosponsors are Democrats.More than 200 consumer or civil rights groups -- including the NAACP, National Council of La Raza, Southern Poverty Law Center and the Consumer Federation of America -- wrote aletterto Congress urging them to defeat the bill. They argued that the bill favors an industry-backed Florida law and would hurt consumers.Floridas 2001 payday loan law was a compromise and included protections that were intended to help the poor avoid an endless cycle of debt. But the loans leave consumers stuck on a debt treadmill in Florida, where they have racked up $2.5 billion in fees since 2005, according to the Center for Responsible Lendings Marchreport. In the past year, the average Florida payday loan had an annual rate of 278 percent.In Florida, these loans are still being made above the 300 percent, and they are being rolled over on average nine times, Cordraysaid.Canova also said Wasserman Schultz prevented action to stop racial discrimination for car loans. This part of Canovas attack relates to a2013 bulletinfrom the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which recommended steps for auto lenders to avoid discrimination. The bulletin was intended to provide clarity about existing law.But theHouse of Representativespushed back against the bureau by passing a bill to nullify the bulletin. The bill passed the House 332-96 in November 2015 and hasnt had a vote in the Senate. Wasserman Schultz was one of 88 Democrats who voted in favor of it, while 96 Democrats opposed it.Proponentsof the bill -- including auto dealers -- said the bureaus efforts would increase costs for consumers. Groups that representedminoritieswanted the new guidelines.The bill hasnt been acted on, and discrimination investigations can continue. A few months after the House vote,Toyotaagreed to a $21.9 million settlement to black and Asian buyers."
Did Pelosi Pass a Bill Allowing Her Husband To Make Millions Selling USPS Property?,['A meme circulating on Facebook appears to be a rehash of another version from 2013.'],"In late August 2020, readers inquired about a meme circulating on Facebook that claimed falsely that U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi had rigged legislation to help her husband benefit financially from selling off property belonging to the U.S. Postal Service.   The meme's text reads: This is Paul Pelosi (aka, Nancys Husband). He owns Financial Leasing Services LLC, a San Francisco based Real Estate and Venture Capitalist Firm. His net worth is 120 million. Why is this important? His wife sits on the House Appropriations committee. This committee appropriates funds to the United States Postal Service ( and others). Why is this important? Easy. She passed a bill to sell off 9 billion dollars ( yes 9 BILLION WITH a [smile emoji] worth of FEDERALLY OWNED POST OFFICE PROPERTY AND AWARDED THE THE CONTRACT TO, none other, Financial Leasing Services LLC. Her husbands firm. Why is this important? The commissions rate was set at 9%. That is almost a 1 BILLION dollar contract. If thats not enough, lets look at the new stimulus package. Nancy wants 25 billion in the stimulus package for the postal service where only 1.25 billion goes to making sure voting ballots are legit. The other 23.5 billion is going to upgrading the facilities so they are more attractive to potential buyers for her husbands firm. Corrupt to the core. It's true that Speaker Pelosi's husband Paul Pelosi owns and operates Financial Leasing Services, a San Francisco-based investment company. Financial disclosures in 2018, the most recent available, show Speaker Pelosi's estimated net worth to be $114 million. owns estimated But Speaker Pelosi doesn't sit on the House Appropriations Committee. Her spokesman Drew Hammill told us by email she hasn't been on the committee since 2002. Furthermore, we found no evidence that a bill to sell off $9 billion-worth of federally-owned U.S. Postal Service property exists. doesn't sit It's true that the U.S. House of Representatives passed a bill that would, if signed into law, provide $25 billion to shore up the Postal Service and rectify delays in mail delivery service, but it doesn't allocate $1.25 billion toward ""making sure voting ballots are legit."" The funding was originally on the table during negotiations over a coronavirus stimulus package, but those negotiations broke down. Whether the stand-alone Postal Service funding bill will be signed into law by U.S. President Donald Trump seems unlikely. bill originally unlikely The meme seems to be a rehash of a similar one that dates back to 2013  except in that case the subject of the claim was Richard Blum, the husband of U.S. Sen. Diane Feinstein, D-Calif., who like Pelosi hails from San Francisco. similar one Mikkelson, David.  ""Did Dianne Feinstein Get Her Husbands Company a USPS Contract?""   Snopes. 23 April 2013. Rayome, Alison DeNisco.  ""What the New USPS Bill Means for the Next Stimulus Package.""   CNET.  24 August 2020. Pramuk, Jacob.  ""House Passes Bill to Put $25 Billion Into USPS and Reverse Changes Amid Uproar.""   CNBC.  22 August 2020. Henney, Megan.  ""How Much Money is Nancy Pelosi Worth?""   Yahoo! News.  17 July 2020. Wildermuth, John.  ""Pelosi's Husband Prefers a Low Profile.""   San Francisco Chronicle.  1 January 2007.",['funds'],False,"It's true that Speaker Pelosi's husband Paul Pelosi owns and operates Financial Leasing Services, a San Francisco-based investment company. Financial disclosures in 2018, the most recent available, show Speaker Pelosi's estimated net worth to be $114 million.But Speaker Pelosi doesn't sit on the House Appropriations Committee. Her spokesman Drew Hammill told us by email she hasn't been on the committee since 2002. Furthermore, we found no evidence that a bill to sell off $9 billion-worth of federally-owned U.S. Postal Service property exists.It's true that the U.S. House of Representatives passed a bill that would, if signed into law, provide $25 billion to shore up the Postal Service and rectify delays in mail delivery service, but it doesn't allocate $1.25 billion toward ""making sure voting ballots are legit."" The funding was originally on the table during negotiations over a coronavirus stimulus package, but those negotiations broke down. Whether the stand-alone Postal Service funding bill will be signed into law by U.S. President Donald Trump seems unlikely.The meme seems to be a rehash of a similar one that dates back to 2013  except in that case the subject of the claim was Richard Blum, the husband of U.S. Sen. Diane Feinstein, D-Calif., who like Pelosi hails from San Francisco."
Theodore Roosevelt on Immigration,"[""Former president Theodore Roosevelt's words regarding the assimilation of immigrants into American culture.""]","Theodore Roosevelt's ideas on immigrants and being an American in 1907 are as follows: ""In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person's becoming, in every facet, an American, and nothing but an American. There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag. We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language. We have room for but one sole loyalty, and that is a loyalty to the American people."" 

Theodore Roosevelt was about to finish his first two-year term as governor of the state of New York when the Republican Party chose him as its candidate for vice president in the 1900 national election. The Republicans were victorious at the ballot box that year, but Roosevelt held the vice-presidency for less than a year before he was elevated to the White House upon the assassination of President William McKinley on September 14, 1901, thereby becoming the youngest person ever to hold the office of President of the United States. Roosevelt was elected to a full term as president in 1904, and among his many notable achievements was his selection as a Nobel Peace Prize Laureate for his part in the negotiations leading to the Treaty of Portsmouth that ended the Russo-Japanese War in 1905.

Although Roosevelt did not hold public office again after leaving the presidency in 1909 (his efforts to regain the White House as a third-party candidate in 1912 proving unsuccessful), he remained active in the public political sphere. In the waning years of his life, as World War I raged in Europe and America entered the conflict on the side of the Allies, he frequently spoke of his belief that immigrants taking up residence in the U.S. should assimilate into American society as quickly as possible, learn the English language, eschew hyphenated national identities (e.g., ""Italian-American""), and declare their primary national allegiance to the United States of America. 

On February 1, 1916, for example, Roosevelt advocated measures for strengthening and ensuring the ""loyalty"" of American immigrants. Speaking at a luncheon given by Mrs. Vincent Astor for the National Americanization Committee in the Astor Court Building, he declared that one of the reasons why many German-Americans have shown greater love for their native land than for their adopted country is that the German system demands greater loyalty than is demanded in this country, and a greater contribution to the common welfare. ""And all of you know I am free from a taint of neutrality,"" he added, ""so I can say this without suspicion."" 

The encouragement of better housing conditions and a compulsion to learn the English language, Colonel Roosevelt said, would help the process of Americanization. ""We cannot make the Americanization movement a success,"" Colonel Roosevelt said, ""unless we approach it from the economic standpoint. It is true that governmentally Germany is an autocracy. But there has been a great deal more industrial freedom there than in many of our old industrial communities. The German Government says we expect you to work out good results, to get together with the laborer, and yourselves decide what you are going to pay to the doctors who are to pass upon the health of the employees, and the amount of damages any employee merits. The Government insists upon a great amount of self-government by the people themselves. 

""I feel that by insisting upon proper housing conditions we shall indirectly approach this. I want to see the immigrant know that he has got to spend a certain amount of his money on decent housing; that he will not be allowed to live on a $2.50 per month board basis. ""Let us say to the immigrant not that we hope he will learn English, but that he has got to learn it. Let the immigrant who does not learn it go back. He has got to consider the interest of the United States or he should not stay here. He must be made to see that his opportunities in this country depend upon his knowing English and observing American standards. The employer cannot be permitted to regard him only as an industrial asset. 

""We must in every way possible encourage the immigrant to rise, help him up, and give him a chance to help himself. If we try to carry him, he may well prove not worth carrying. We must, in turn, insist upon his showing the same standard of fealty to this country and joining with us in raising the level of our common American citizenship. 

""If I could, I would have the kind of restriction which would not allow any immigrant to come here unless I was content that his grandchildren would be fellow citizens of my grandchildren. They will not be so if he lives in a boarding house at $2.50 per month with ten other boarders and contracts tuberculosis, contributing to the next generation a body of citizens inferior not only morally and spiritually but also physically."" 

A few months later, Roosevelt expanded on this theme in a series of Memorial Day speeches he delivered in St. Louis. Moral treason to the United States was charged by Mr. Roosevelt, in an address delivered before the City Club, against German-Americans who seek to make their governmental representatives act in the interests of Germany rather than this country. He characterized the German-American Alliance as ""an anti-American alliance,"" but added that he believed its members ""not only do not represent but scandalously misrepresent"" the great majority of real Americans of German origin. 

Using the motto ""America for Americans"" for all Americans, whether they were born here or abroad, the former President declared that ""the salvation of our people lies in having a nationalized and unified America, ready for the tremendous tasks of both war and peace."" ""I appeal to all our citizens,"" the colonel said, ""no matter from what land their forefathers came, to keep this ever in mind, and to shun with scorn and contempt the sinister intriguers and mischief-makers who would seek to divide them along lines of creed, or birthplace, or national origin."" 

Col. Roosevelt said he came to St. Louis to speak on Americanism to condemn the use of the hyphen ""whenever it represents an effort to form political parties along racial lines or to bring pressure to bear on parties and politicians, not for American purposes, but in the interest of some group of voters of a certain national origin or of the country from which they or their fathers came."" He was equally against the native American of the wrong kind and for the immigrant of the right kind, the former President declared, but the immigrant who did not become, in good faith, an American ""is out of place"" in the United States. 

He said each nation should be judged by its conduct and that the United States should oppose encroachment on its own rights, whether Germany, England, France, or Russia be guilty of misconduct. ""The effort to keep our citizenship divided against itself,"" the colonel continued, ""by the use of the hyphen and along the lines of national origin is certain to breed a spirit of bitterness, prejudice, and dislike between great bodies of our citizens. If some citizens band together as German-Americans or Irish-Americans, then after a while others are certain to band together as English-Americans or Scandinavian-Americans, and every such banding together, every attempt to make for political purposes a German-American alliance or a Scandinavian-American alliance, means, at the bottom, an effort against the interest of straight-out American citizenship, an effort to bring into our nation the bitter Old World rivalries, jealousies, and hatreds."" 

In a Fourth of July speech in 1917, Roosevelt urged the adoption of linguistic uniformity, including a requirement that all foreign-language newspapers published in the U.S. should also include English translations. Touching on the matter of language, Col. Roosevelt declared that ""We must have in this country but one flag, and for the speech of the people but one language, the English language. During the present war, all newspapers published in German, or in the speech of any of our foes, should be required to publish, side by side with the foreign text, columns in English containing the exact translation of everything said in the foreign language. Ultimately, this should be done with all newspapers published in foreign languages in this country."" 

Likewise, on May 27, 1918, Roosevelt urged in a speech at Des Moines, Iowa, that English be the sole language of instruction used in American schools. English as the sole language for schools, newspapers, and other usage in this country was urged by Theodore Roosevelt in an address here tonight under the direction of the National Security League. In voicing his approval of the recent proclamation by Gov. Harding, ordering that English be the only medium of instruction in public or private schools in Iowa, Col. Roosevelt said: ""This is a nation, not a polyglot boarding house. There is not room in the country for any 50-50 American, nor can there be but one loyalty to the Stars and Stripes."" 

The comments quoted at the head of the page are more in the same vein; excerpts not from a statement made by Theodore Roosevelt in 1907 (while he was still President), but from a letter written shortly before his death in January 1919, just a few months after the armistice that ended the fighting in World War I: NEW YORK, Jan. 6. What was the last public statement by Col. Roosevelt was read last night at an ""All-American concert"" here under the auspices of the American Defense Society, of which he was honorary president. ""I cannot be with you, and so all I can do is to wish you Godspeed,"" it read. ""There may be no sagging back in the fight for Americanism merely because the war is over. 

""There are plenty of persons who have already made the assertion that they believe the American people have a short memory and that they intend to revive all the foreign associations which more directly interfere with the complete Americanization of our people. Our principle in this matter should be absolutely simple. 

""In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here does in good faith become an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the man's becoming, in very fact, an American and nothing but an American. 

""If he tries to keep segregated with men of his own origin and separated from the rest of America, then he isn't doing his part as an American. 

""We have room for but one flag, the American flag, and this excludes the red flag which symbolizes all wars against liberty and civilization just as much as it excludes any foreign flag of a nation to which we are hostile. We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language, for we intend to see that the crucible turns our people out as Americans, and American nationality, and not as dwellers in a polyglot boarding house; and we have room for but one sole loyalty, and that is loyalty to the American people.""",['asset'],True,"Theodore Roosevelt was about to finish his first two-year term as governor of the state of New York when the Republican Party chose him as its candidate for vice president in the 1900 national election. The Republicans were victorious at the ballot box that year, but Roosevelt held the vice-presidency for less than a year before he was elevated to the White House upon the assassination of President William McKinley on 14 September 1901, thereby becoming the youngest person ever to hold the office of President of the United States. Roosevelt was elected to a full term as president in 1904, and among his many notable achievements was his selection as a Nobel Peace Prize Laureate for his part in the negotiations leading to the Treaty of Portsmouth that ended the Russo-Japanese War in 1905.A copy of this letter, obtained from the Manuscript Division of the Library of Congress, can be viewed here."
Did Dave Ramsey Write This 'Wake Up America' Op-Ed?,"['A months-old opinion piece was recirculated on social media in January 2021, this time with a famous name (incorrectly) attached to it. ']","On Jan. 7, 2021, a lengthy piece of text urging Americans to ""wake up"" was widely circulated on social media, accompanied by the claim that it had been penned by radio host Dave Ramsey. Scott Baio, a conservative pundit best known for playing Chachi on the 1970s sitcom ""Happy Days,"" was one social media user who misattributed this text to Ramsey. However, this post was not written by Ramsey. The radio host clarified on Facebook on Jan. 7 that he did not author this post. In addition to Ramsey's denial, we found versions of this text posted on the internet as far back as October 2020, at which time Ramsey was not credited as the author. This text was originally penned by ""Bruce Hendry"" and published on the right-wing website FrontPageMag.com on Oct. 7, 2020, under the title ""Living in the Left's Upside Down World."" Here’s an excerpt from the article, which is essentially a list of grievances that Hendry finds confusing or hypocritical: This morning, I realized that everything is about to change. No matter how I vote, no matter what I say, lives are never going to be the same. [...] We see other countries going socialist and collapsing, but it seems like a great plan for us. Somehow it's un-American for the census to count how many Americans are in America. [...] If a dude pretends to be a woman, you are required to pretend with him. It was acceptable for Joe Biden to ""blackmail"" the President of Ukraine, but it's an impeachable offense if Donald Trump inquires about it. [...] And pointing out all this hypocrisy somehow makes you a ""racist."" Nothing makes sense anymore. No values, no morals, no civility, and people are dying of a Chinese virus, but it is racist to refer to it as Chinese even though it originated in China. [...] Wake up America, the great unsinkable ship Titanic America has hit an iceberg, is taking on water, and sinking fast. While Hendry prefaced this article with a paragraph insisting that this information was ""factual,"" not ""political,"" many of the items listed above are based on misinformation. For example, President-elect Joe Biden did not blackmail the President of Ukraine, viruses don't have nationalities, transgender people are not ""pretending,"" and the U.S. Census counts ""every resident in the United States."" So, what does Dave Ramsey have to do with this? One common tactic of purveyors of disinformation is to falsely claim that an extreme view was espoused by a well-known and respected voice. This gives the extreme opinion an air of credibility and makes it more palatable to a mainstream audience. The article above originated on a right-wing website and initially gained traction among a like-minded crowd on conservative forums and social media networks like 4chan. In January 2021, someone attempted to present this article to a larger audience by falsely claiming that this opinion originated with Ramsey, a popular radio host and finance guru with mainstream appeal. By attaching Ramsey's name to these opinions, the article was spread as if it had been ""endorsed"" by someone in the mainstream, thereby making it more acceptable to people who might have initially balked at this article if they encountered it on a hyperpartisan website. But Ramsey, of course, did not actually write this article.",['finance'],False,"The radio host posted a message to Facebook on Jan. 7 to clarify that he did not author this post:This text was originally penned by ""Bruce Hendry"" and published on the right-wing website FrontPageMag.com on Oct. 7, 2020, under the title ""Living in the Left's Upside Down World.""While Hendry prefaced this article with a paragraph insisting that this information was ""factual,"" not ""political,"" many of the items listed above are based on misinformation. For example, President-elect Joe Biden did not blackmail the President of Ukraine, viruses don't have nationalities, transgender people are not ""pretending,"" and the U.S. Census counts ""every resident in the United States.""The article above originated on a right-wing website and initially gained currency among a similar-minded crowd on conservative forums and social media networks like 4chan. In January 2021, someone tried to get this article in front of a larger audience by falsely claiming that this opinion originated with Ramsey, a popular radio host and finance guru with mainstream appeal. By attaching Ramsey's name to these opinions, the article was spread as if it had been ""endorsed"" by someone in the mainstream, therefore making it more palatable to people who might have initially balked at this article if they encountered it on a hyperpartisan website. "
Did Senator Tom Cotton advocate for drug testing individuals receiving Social Security benefits?,"['The Arkansas Republican has supported drug screening for welfare programs, but never for Social Security.']","Amid tense talks between Congressional Republicans and Democrats over the 2018 federal budget, the attention of many observers turned to each side's record on government spending, benefits and entitlements, and fiscal priorities. In that vein, a widely shared Facebook meme targeted Republican Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas, accusing him of supporting a modified version of a long-standing liberal bugbear: drug testing for welfare recipients. On January 21, 2018, Facebook user Ken Stanley wrote, ""Tom Cotton calls for every person who receives Social Security to be drug tested; those who test positive will lose benefits."" This claim is false. We searched Cotton's speeches, op-eds, and press releases, as well as the Congressional Record and news archives, and found no evidence of the Senator ever having advocated such a policy. In an email, a spokesperson for Cotton told us the meme was ""completely false"": Senator Cotton does not support (nor has he ever supported) drug testing for Social Security recipients. Indeed, even those who call for drug testing for welfare recipients do not typically propose the same policy for Social Security. This is because Social Security is more widely regarded as an earned benefit (workers contribute to it through payroll taxes), while programs such as housing assistance or the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (formerly known as food stamps) are regarded as welfare. Senator Cotton does, however, have a record of making statements and advocating policies around welfare assistance that have raised eyebrows. In 2015, Salon and Raw Story headlines accused Cotton of ""blaming"" drug addiction on Social Security benefits and claiming that receiving Social Security disability benefits causes individuals to ""spiral"" into drug addiction. The articles, as well as Cotton's actual comments, were more nuanced. In a speech at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, Cotton advocated for reform of the Social Security disability system and drew a link between population decline and social ills (including drug addiction) in certain counties and regions, and rates of Social Security disability insurance uptake: ""It's hard to say what came first or caused the other: population decline or increased disability usage. Or maybe economic stagnation caused both. Regardless, there seems to be, at least at the county and regional level, something like a disability tipping point. When a county hits a certain level of disability usage, disability becomes a norm. It becomes an acceptable way of life and an alternative source of income to a good-paying, full-time job. After a certain point, when disability keeps climbing and becomes endemic, employers will struggle to find employees or begin or continue to move out of the area. Population continues to fall, and a downward spiral kicks in, driving once-thriving communities into further decline. Not only that, but once this kind of spiral begins, communities could begin to suffer other social plagues as well, such as heroin or meth addiction and associated crime."" In 2014, while running for the Senate, a Huffington Post writer accused Cotton of ""calling food stamp recipients addicts."" Again, his comments were much more nuanced than that description. According to a Huffington Post transcript of a virtual town hall hosted by Cotton in July 2014, the then-Congressman defended voting down a Democratic bill relating to agricultural payments and federal food aid on the basis that it did not sufficiently reform the food stamps program, including by requiring drug testing for applicants: ""I don't think that we should be using farmers as a way to pack more welfare spending into Barack Obama's government,"" Cotton said. ""Nor should we have a food stamp program that isn't reformed, that doesn't have job training and work requirements, that doesn't have drug testing requirements, so we can get people who are addicted the help they need. Or make sure that long-term addicts or recidivists are not abusing taxpayer dollars."" In March 2017, Cotton joined with Republican Senate colleagues in voting to nullify an Obama-era Department of Labor rule that limited the circumstances under which states could conduct drug testing for individuals applying for unemployment insurance. President Donald Trump later formally reversed the guideline, effectively giving states greater powers in conducting drug screening for jobless benefits. So Senator Cotton has certainly supported drug testing for welfare programs but never for Social Security.",['taxes'],False,"On 21 January 2018, Facebook user Ken Stanley wrote: In 2015, Salon and Raw Story headlines accused Cotton of ""blaming"" drug addiction on Social Security benefits, and claiming that receiving Social Security disability benefits causes individuals to ""spiral"" into drug addiction. The articles, as well as Cotton's actually comments were more nuanced. In 2014, while running for the Senate, a Huffington Post writer accused Cotton of ""calling food stamp recipients addicts."" Again, his comments were much more nuanced than that description. According to a Huffington Post transcript of a virtual town hall hosted by Cotton in July 2014, the then-Congressman defended voting down a Democratic bill relating to agricultural payments and federal food aid, on the basis that it did not sufficiently reform the food stamps program, including by requiring drug testing for applicants:In March 2017, Cotton joined with Republican Senate colleagues in voting to nullify an Obama-era Department of Labor rule which limited the circumstances under which states could conduct drug-testing for individuals applying for unemployment insurance. President Donald Trump later formally reversed the guideline, effectively giving states greater powers in conducting drug screening for jobless benefits. So Senator Cotton has certainly supported drug testing for welfare programs  but never for Social Security. "
"It is reported that Governor John Kasich, a Republican presidential candidate, has been away from his home state for 177 days and has utilized $350,000 of public funds for his expensive campaign.",[],"In recent weeks, the national media has poked fun at John Kasich for chomping through Italian subs and pasta in the Bronx and eating pizza in Queens with a knife and fork. Back home, Ohio Democrats discussed something else: the governor's out-of-state travel and what it costs taxpayers in the only state he has won. The Ohio Democratic Party posted a graphic on its Facebook page on April 8, 2016, to bolster its complaint. Kasich's costly campaign, the image states, entails 177 days spent out of state and a tab of $350,000 to taxpayers. How did they calculate the days and dollars? We decided to look into it. The party's communications director, Kirstin Alvanitakis, pointed us to a March 26 Columbus Dispatch story reporting that Kasich has been out of state for at least 177 days as he pursued the presidency. The Dispatch tally includes days he spent exploring the bid before his official announcement on July 21, 2015. An Associated Press story contains the $350,000 figure. By law, a special unit within the state department of public safety is assigned to protect the governor, and nine state troopers guard him 24/7. So when he goes to Mike's Deli, so do they. State funds from the public safety department's non-highway program, which includes the governor's security detail, are likely paying for rental cars, hotel rooms, flights, fuel, per diems, and overtime while Kasich crisscrosses the country chasing delegates. However, the Dispatch story describes how cagey state agencies are being with these specifics. Information that was public in the years before Kasich's run is now shielded. On payroll records, the governor's detail was previously listed as the executive protection unit. Officials told the Dispatch that this designation has been dropped to shield the troopers' identities. ""To ensure safety and security, we do not discuss any of the resources used as part of the executive security detail,"" is the response repeated by agency spokespersons and the governor's campaign staff alike. The Associated Press used another tool to approximate the cost: an interactive, searchable checkbook of state spending hosted on the website of Ohio Treasurer Josh Mandel, part of his nationally recognized transparency initiative. We used the Ohio Checkbook to drill down into the data, which has been updated since the AP checked. Isolating the travel costs of the non-highway program, which currently shows expenditures from July 1, 2015, through February 2, 2016, the total now comes to $403,638. This chart shows how disproportionate the travel spending has been in 2016 so far compared to prior years. Most of the transactions shown through the Ohio Checkbook lack details (General Travel Expenses is a recurring line item), but there are some expenditures that coincide with Kasich's campaign stops. For example, a batch of hotel rooms was booked over a series of days in December at the Wynn Las Vegas, the Renaissance Des Moines, the Doubletree Salt Lake City, and the Hampton Inn of Waterloo, all around the time last December when Kasich bounced from a debate in Nevada to a town hall in Iowa, to a fundraiser in Utah, and back to Iowa. It's not a staggering total, though some taxpayers might argue that $403,638 could be better spent on other state services. Kasich has dismissed any suggestions that he should drop out of the race before the Republican National Convention in July, which means the total taxpayer share from his campaign travel could continue to swell. (The average monthly spending from this fund in fiscal year 2016 is about $57,663. By comparison, $57,562 was the total spent in all of fiscal year 2014.) Other governors who ran for president have also left taxpayers with hefty bills. Chris Christie's security detail cost New Jersey taxpayers an estimated $614,000. Bobby Jindal racked up $400,000 in Louisiana during his considerably shorter run through November 2015. Wisconsin taxpayers paid Scott Walker's security team $577,000 in overtime alone before he dropped out in September 2015. Walker reimbursed about $260,000 to the state for expenses his campaign incurred. So far, the Kasich campaign has refused to disclose details about his security detail or its resources, or whether he similarly intends to give taxpayers a refund. We did not hear a response from Kasich's campaign or spokesman Rob Nichols. Our ruling: The Ohio Democratic Party stated that in 177 days on the campaign trail, Kasich's security detail cost taxpayers $350,000. Our analysis confirmed that $350,000 is most likely a conservative estimate. At the current rate, the total could be twice that by the RNC in July. Since neither state officials nor Kasich's camp will confirm any details on the governor's security, we have to rely on what we learned from the treasurer's open records data. We rate this claim True.","['Ohio', 'Campaign Finance', 'Taxes']",True,"The Ohio Democratic Party posted a graphic on itsFacebookpage on April 8, 2016, to bolster its complaint. Kasichs costly campaign, the image says, entails 177 days spent out of state and a tab of $350,000 to taxpayers.The partys communications director, Kirstin Alvanitakis, pointed us to aMarch 26Columbus Dispatchstoryreporting that Kasich has been out of state at least 177 days as he pursued the presidency. TheDispatchtally includes days he spent exploring the bid before his official announcement July 21, 2015.AnAssociated Press storycontains the $350,000 figure. By law, a special unit within the state department of public safety is assigned to protect the governor, and nine state troopers guard him 24/7. So when he goes to Mikes Deli, so do they.The Associated Press used another tool to approximate the cost: an interactive, searchable checkbook of state spending hosted on the website of Ohio Treasurer Josh Mandel, part of hisnationally recognizedtransparency initiative.Other governors who ran for president have stuck taxpayers with tabs, too. Chris Christies security detail cost New Jersey taxpayers an estimated$614,000. Bobby Jindal racked up$400,000in Louisiana during his considerably shorter run through November 2015. Wisconsin taxpayers paid Scott Walkers security team$577,000in overtime alone before he dropped out in September 2015.https://www.sharethefacts.co/share/f55505e5-5211-4178-9fd0-7d1b2854c596"
Is This Carl Sagan Holding a 'No Billboards in Space' Sign?,"['An image purportedly showing famed astronomer Carl Sagan holding a sign reading ""No Billboards in Space"" is fake.']","When Elon Musk launched the Falcon Heavy rocket (and its payload of a Tesla Roadster) in February 2018, many saw it as a giant step toward commercial space travel and sending a human to Mars. Tesla Roadster Others saw something slightly more cynical, namely a giant advertisement: advertisement Elon Musk pulled off a double marketing coup with the first successful test launch of his Falcon Heavy rocket, the flagship of his private space-flight company SpaceX, and the subsequent debut of its payloada Tesla Roadster driven by a dummy nicknamed Starmanas the first car in space. While the launch was clearly one of the most dramatic moments of livestreaming in recent memory, its the live YouTube feed of Musks own cherry-red Roadster circling the Earth that will perhaps generate the biggest publicity boost for Musks emerging electric-car company. With a famously nonexistent ad budget, Tesla just secured a place in auto marketing history. In the wake of this monumental achievement of space travel advertising, a photograph purportedly showing a disapproving Carl Sagan holding a ""No Billboards in Space"" sign started recirculating on the internet:   This image isn't real. This photograph has been circulating online since at least 2010. A Redditor claimed in a 2011 posting of the image that they had created it for a photoshop contest on the web site Fark, but we were unable to locate the original contest.  2010 claimed created Regardless, this has image has been doctored. The original image showed Sagan holding one of the ""Pioneer Plaques,"" not a sign reading ""No Billboards in Space.""  The Pioneer Plaques were launched into space in the early 1970s aboard the Pioneer 10 and Pioneer 11 spacecrafts. The idea was that the plaques, which contained a pictorial message, would relay some information about the spacecraft's origins in case it was intercepted by an extraterrestrial life form: message   It seemed to us appropriate that this spacecraft, the first man-made object to leave the solar system, should carry some indication of the locale, epoch, and nature of its builders. We do not know the likelihood of the Galaxy being filled with advanced technological societies capable of and interested in intercepting such a spacecraft. It is clear, however, that such interception is a very long term proposition.  Griner, David.  ""With a $0 Ad Budget, Tesla Just Pulled Off One of the Greatest Marketing Stunts Ever""
  Adweek.  7 February 2018. Sagan, Carl.  ""A Message from Earth.""
  Science Magazine.  25 February 1972.",['budget'],False,"When Elon Musk launched the Falcon Heavy rocket (and its payload of a Tesla Roadster) in February 2018, many saw it as a giant step toward commercial space travel and sending a human to Mars.Others saw something slightly more cynical, namely a giant advertisement:This photograph has been circulating online since at least 2010. A Redditor claimed in a 2011 posting of the image that they had created it for a photoshop contest on the web site Fark, but we were unable to locate the original contest. The Pioneer Plaques were launched into space in the early 1970s aboard the Pioneer 10 and Pioneer 11 spacecrafts. The idea was that the plaques, which contained a pictorial message, would relay some information about the spacecraft's origins in case it was intercepted by an extraterrestrial life form:"
Is the Island from the Allstate TV Ad Real?,['Perhaps a golf cart might suffice on an island this small.'],"On Oct. 11, 2020, Allstate insurance company released a new television advertisement that showed a man going about his day on what turned out to be a tiny island. The aim of the commercial appeared to highlight a new payment option that allowed drivers to only pay for miles driven. This meant smaller bills for drivers who don't drive a lot. released  The ad featured Babe Rainbow's ""Morning Song."" In the final shot, it was revealed that the man lived on a very small island. We found no shortage of tweets that asked if the island was real: ""Morning Song.""    The island in the Allstate video is indeed real. It is Ona, located in Norway. RepublicWorld.com reported the news in October. reported  Norway, Ona island lighthouse. (Courtesy: Andrea Pistolesi/Getty Images)  According to Fjords.com: ""Ona is the name of the island community which consists of the two islands Ona and Husya. The two islands are connected with a small bridge."" Fjords.com VisitNorway.com published a page with information for what tourists could expect when visiting the island: published Norway's southernmost living fishing village. The island serves as a year-round residence for 11 people and has a beauty that attracts travelers from far and near. Ona Fyr is a 15-meter high landmark built in 1865, located on the island's highest point, Onakalven. It is possible to go inside the lighthouse, and from the top, there is a fantastic view out over the sea and towards the mainland. You will also find the exclusive Ona Chocolate here, a small summer caf, two pottery workshops, a craft shop, a chapel, and a long, white sandy beach. The island is a peaceful place where you can enjoy the silence and tranquility. On the island, there are holiday homes located directly on the dock, and local suppliers offer a wide range of activities on-site, including various forms of fishing. While Ona is a real island, it appeared that the final shot of the Allstate advertisement might have been altered in editing to give the island a bit of a cleaner look. For instance, here is the view of the island from the end opposite the one shown in the Allstate advertisement:  Ona, Norway. (Courtesy: Andrea Pistolesi/Getty Images)  A number of YouTube videos also showed that small patches of rock surround Ona, which did not appear in the Allstate video. For example, small patches of rock appeared here at 0:23, but not in the advertisement: number of YouTube videos appeared here at 0:23 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UP5X-OxbUFI?t=23 Digitally altered or not, Ona appeared to be a quiet, lovely vacation destination for anyone visiting Norway in the future. Speaking of islands, we previously reported about a photograph of a purported ""Violin Island"" in Costa Rica. That picture first arrived in our inboxes in 2017. reported",['insurance'],True,"On Oct. 11, 2020, Allstate insurance company released a new television advertisement that showed a man going about his day on what turned out to be a tiny island. The aim of the commercial appeared to highlight a new payment option that allowed drivers to only pay for miles driven. This meant smaller bills for drivers who don't drive a lot.The ad featured Babe Rainbow's ""Morning Song."" In the final shot, it was revealed that the man lived on a very small island. We found no shortage of tweets that asked if the island was real:The island in the Allstate video is indeed real. It is Ona, located in Norway. RepublicWorld.com reported the news in October. Norway, Ona island lighthouse. (Courtesy: Andrea Pistolesi/Getty Images)According to Fjords.com: ""Ona is the name of the island community which consists of the two islands Ona and Husya. The two islands are connected with a small bridge.""VisitNorway.com published a page with information for what tourists could expect when visiting the island: Ona, Norway. (Courtesy: Andrea Pistolesi/Getty Images)A number of YouTube videos also showed that small patches of rock surround Ona, which did not appear in the Allstate video. For example, small patches of rock appeared here at 0:23, but not in the advertisement:Speaking of islands, we previously reported about a photograph of a purported ""Violin Island"" in Costa Rica. That picture first arrived in our inboxes in 2017."
"No, Dominion Voting Systems is not owned by Joe Biden's nephew.",['The claim is just one iteration of a conspiracy theory about Dominion Voting Systems.'],"Voting in the 2020 U.S. Election may be over, but the misinformation keeps on ticking. Never stop fact-checking. Follow our post-election coverage here. here On Dec. 11, 2020, a Twitter user posted a new permutation of a conspiracy theory about Dominion Voting Systems, the technology firm that provided voting systems in multiple U.S. jurisdictions in the November 2020 election, and which has also been the target of a disinformation campaign falsely claiming its systems were used to perpetrate widespread voter fraud. technology firm falsely claiming One of the narratives in the election fraud conspiracy theory holds that voting machines provided by Dominion switched votes from ballots cast for U.S. President Donald Trump to his challenger, Joe Biden, who is now president-elect. Trump has refused to accept his electoral loss, and has perpetuated the lie that Dominion machines were used en masse to flip votes. perpetuated Hence, more than a month after Biden was declared winner of the election, conspiracy theories continued to flourish. In this case, a Twitter user falsely claimed that Dominion is owned by a member of Biden family, namely his nephew. But the tweet in question is nothing but a patchwork of misleading screenshots and assumptions, based on people sharing a common surname. We cropped the user's name out below: falsely claimed   The screenshots in the meme above contain what appear to be the professional biographies of two men, Stephen Owens and R. Kevin Owens, neither of which mentions Dominion. The meme included in the tweet points to President-elect Biden's sister and campaign manager Valerie Biden Owens, with the alleged clincher being that Stephen Owens, a co-founder of Staple Street Capital, an investment firm that owns 75% stake in Dominion, shares a surname. However, ""Owens"" is a common last name, so that hardly serves as proof at all. co-founder owns Valerie and her husband, John T. Owens, have three children, none named Stephen. A spokesperson for Staple Street confirmed in an email to Snopes that Stephen Owens has no relation to the Biden family. three children And although the meme includes mention of R. Kevin Owens, an attorney who is related to Valerie's husband, we see no connection between this person and Dominion. related In other iterations of this conspiracy theory, the voting systems company has been falsely linked to deceased Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, as well as various Democratic politicians, including U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, California U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, and the Clinton Foundation, the charitable foundation run by former President Bill and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Hugo Chavez including Trump's own administration has undermined his post-election disinformation blitz by stating the November 2020 election was ""the most secure in American history."" undermined ""There is no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes, or was in any way compromised,"" the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, which is a component of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, said in a Nov. 12, 2020, statement. statement Updated to note that a Staples Street representative confirmed Stephen Owens isn't related to the Bidens.",['loss'],False,"Voting in the 2020 U.S. Election may be over, but the misinformation keeps on ticking. Never stop fact-checking. Follow our post-election coverage here.On Dec. 11, 2020, a Twitter user posted a new permutation of a conspiracy theory about Dominion Voting Systems, the technology firm that provided voting systems in multiple U.S. jurisdictions in the November 2020 election, and which has also been the target of a disinformation campaign falsely claiming its systems were used to perpetrate widespread voter fraud.One of the narratives in the election fraud conspiracy theory holds that voting machines provided by Dominion switched votes from ballots cast for U.S. President Donald Trump to his challenger, Joe Biden, who is now president-elect. Trump has refused to accept his electoral loss, and has perpetuated the lie that Dominion machines were used en masse to flip votes.Hence, more than a month after Biden was declared winner of the election, conspiracy theories continued to flourish. In this case, a Twitter user falsely claimed that Dominion is owned by a member of Biden family, namely his nephew. But the tweet in question is nothing but a patchwork of misleading screenshots and assumptions, based on people sharing a common surname. We cropped the user's name out below:The meme included in the tweet points to President-elect Biden's sister and campaign manager Valerie Biden Owens, with the alleged clincher being that Stephen Owens, a co-founder of Staple Street Capital, an investment firm that owns 75% stake in Dominion, shares a surname. However, ""Owens"" is a common last name, so that hardly serves as proof at all.Valerie and her husband, John T. Owens, have three children, none named Stephen. A spokesperson for Staple Street confirmed in an email to Snopes that Stephen Owens has no relation to the Biden family.And although the meme includes mention of R. Kevin Owens, an attorney who is related to Valerie's husband, we see no connection between this person and Dominion.In other iterations of this conspiracy theory, the voting systems company has been falsely linked to deceased Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, as well as various Democratic politicians, including U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, California U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, and the Clinton Foundation, the charitable foundation run by former President Bill and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.Trump's own administration has undermined his post-election disinformation blitz by stating the November 2020 election was ""the most secure in American history.""""There is no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes, or was in any way compromised,"" the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, which is a component of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, said in a Nov. 12, 2020, statement."
All of Donald Trump's achievements within a mere four-month timeframe?,"[""We looked into the accuracy of a viral list touting President Trump's accomplishments during his first four months in office.""]","In May 2017, a Reddit user posted a graphic that purported to list all of President Trump's accomplishments during his first four months in office. It was then widely shared on social media: ""Reddit TRUMP ACCOMPLISHMENTS ..Retweet the hell out of this to annoy @ABC @CBS @cnn @cnbc @MSNBC @nbc @nytimes @washingtonpost #dishonestmedia."" Creating homebrew visual aids touting the accomplishments (or failures) of top politicians is a popular online pastime, not least because it's a cheap and easy way to propagandize, and because there are no pesky standards of fairness and accuracy to meet. As we've noted with regard to previous specimens (for example, a late-2016 meme touting the alleged economic achievements of President Obama), the graphic format lends itself to the display of cherry-picked facts to make a simplistic case with no semblance of context or nuance. In this case, the claim is that, despite all the carping in the mainstream press about ""chaos"" and ""ineptitude"" in the Oval Office, President Trump has actually accomplished quite a lot during his first four months as chief executive. Thus, you will not find mention of major campaign promises Trump has had difficulty keeping so far, such as instituting a Muslim immigration ban and building a wall on the Mexican border. Also, since it's very much a partisan case being made, there will be disagreement over what constitutes an ""accomplishment."" Some feats, such as reducing unemployment, are uncontroversial, while others, such as dismantling entire government agencies, aren't likely to be regarded as accomplishments by those who find the functions of those agencies critical. Here are the claims: 4.4 percent - lowest since May 2007. As reported in the Washington Post, government data released on May 5, 2017, indicated that the national unemployment rate hit a new low in April: The U.S. job market rebounded strongly last month, and the unemployment rate fell to the lowest level seen in a decade, government data released Friday morning showed, calming fears that had bubbled up in the past month about the state of the economy. Employers added 211,000 jobs in April as the unemployment rate ticked down to 4.4 percent, the lowest level since May 2007. It bears pointing out that the jobless rate had already been on a steady decline since 2010. Further, unemployment hit a previous nine-year low of 4.6 percent in December 2016 when President Obama was still in office. It climbed back up to 4.8 percent in January, dipped to 4.7 percent in February, and to 4.5 percent in March 2017. To what degree short-term improvements in the economy since January can be attributed to a new chief executive whose economic policies remain nascent is perennially up for debate, though according to The New York Times' senior economic correspondent Neil Irwin, a ""Trump effect"" that is buoying corporate hiring policies after the election cannot be ruled out. So does Mr. Trump deserve any credit for solid economic results? If you think the economy is driven by concrete, specific policies around taxes, spending, monetary policy, and regulation, the answer is no. If you think that what really matters is the mood in the executive suite, then just maybe. This is a mostly accurate, partial list of corporations that have announced investments in American facilities and/or jobs since the election of Donald Trump. With the exception of Bayer AG (which announced $8 billion in new investments, not $1 billion as claimed), the dollar amounts match those cited in press reports between January and April 2017 (sources: Softbank, Exxon Mobil Corp., Hyundai-Kia, Apple, Fiat Chrysler, General Motors, Bayer AG, Toyota, LG Electronics). It's not necessarily accurate to characterize all of these commitments as ""accomplishments"" of President Trump, however. As CBS Moneywatch's Irina Ivanova reported in January 2017, few of the jobs companies are promising to create in the U.S. can be attributed to a sudden renewed commitment to USA Inc. inspired by Trump's America First policies. Indeed, the businesses Trump has been quick to praise have been careful not to characterize their recent hiring announcements as new. And as usual with corporate investments of this scale, such plans are typically months or even years in the making, suggesting they long predate the presidential election. For example, Fiat Chrysler said their promise of a $1 billion investment in Michigan and Ohio plants, projected to create 2,000 jobs, was the ""second phase"" of an industrialization plan announced in 2016. GM's $1 billion investment was ""several years in the making,"" according to sources cited by CBS. The largest of all the announced commitments, SoftBank's pledge of $50 billion, was also in the works long before Trump won the election: Another widely publicized corporate initiative that Trump trumpeted—a promise by SoftBank to create 50,000 high-tech jobs in the U.S.—was the result of a tech fund the company announced on October 14, three weeks before the election. Given the massive tech industry in the U.S., economists say much of the planned $50 billion investment would have found its way to the states regardless of who occupied the White House. You don't just decide overnight to invest $3 billion, said Nathan Jensen, a professor at the University of Texas who studies interactions between government and corporations. Bayer AG's commitment to an $8 billion investment and the creation of 3,000 U.S. jobs was announced by the Trump transition team after the president-elect met in January 2017 with the CEOs of Bayer AG and Monsanto, who are planning a merger. Transition spokesman Sean Spicer credited Trump's negotiating skills for the pledge, but some analysts were skeptical that the companies had actually promised anything that wasn't already on the table when plans for the merger were first revealed in September 2016. Bayer and Monsanto said in a joint statement after Spicer's remarks that the ""combined company expects to spend approximately $16 billion in R&D in agriculture over the next six years with at least half of this investment made in the United States."" That amounts to about $2.7 billion a year, which roughly equates to what the combined companies already spend in that area globally, [Wall Street analyst Jeremy] Redenius said. As for the U.S. breakdown, he estimates it's likely close to half already; Monsanto spends $1.5 billion a year, the majority of which is in the U.S., he said, and Bayer already invests in R&D here as well. ""Not an increase, but not substantially cutting,"" he said of the global figure. The merger, which awaits U.S. regulatory approval, is not likely to be completed until 2018, CNBC reported. It is true that the U.S. Treasury reported a $182 billion budget surplus in April 2017, the largest April surplus since 2001 (and the second-largest in history), according to MarketWatch. It's unclear exactly how that surplus is attributable to President Trump, however. April is typically a surplus month because of tax receipts. In addition, citing a Congressional Budget Office (CBO) review as its source, the Associated Press reported that the April 2017 surplus was ""inflated"" because of a tax deadline change allowing corporations to pay federal taxes in April that in previous years were paid in March. It remains to be seen what effect Trump's policies will have on the budget deficit for 2017 as a whole (the fiscal year ends on September 30). The CBO projects a 4.6 percent drop in the deficit from what it was in 2016, but that is based on laws and policies already in effect when Trump took office. The stock market can be fickle. As of April 29, the Dow Jones Industrial Average was at 20,940.51, 6.12 percent higher than when Trump took office—positive movement, unquestionably. That number had risen to 20,981.94 by May 16, then plummeted 372 points the next day as the market was shaken by news that Trump had shared classified information with Russian diplomats in the White House and attempted to divert FBI Director James Comey from an investigation of Trump's alleged ties to Russia before he fired him. It's true that the Consumer Confidence Index, a metric assessing how ordinary consumers feel about the strength of the economy, hit 125.6 in March 2017, its highest point since 2000. It is also true that it fell five points to 120.3 the following month. Even so, it showed that consumers (as of April) had more confidence in the economy under Trump than under Obama, during whose administration the index never exceeded 113.7 (although it did manage to rise to that point after bottoming out in 2009 at 25). As of May 17, 2017, President Trump had signed 34 bills passed by Congress, a comparatively high number in such a short period of time (since Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who signed 76 pieces of legislation in his first 100 days, only Harry Truman, at 55, signed more). That's not to say that all of the legislation signed by Trump between January and May 2017 was necessarily noteworthy, however. One bill changed the name of a Veterans Affairs outpatient clinic in Pago Pago, American Samoa; another renamed a VA health center in Pennsylvania; another approved the location of a memorial honoring Desert Storm and Desert Shield veterans; three appointed citizen regents to the board of the Smithsonian Institution. Nor should it be assumed that Trump's signing of a given bill meant he or his administration was actively involved in its passage. Thirteen such bills nullifying federal regulations enacted during the Obama administration (such as H.J. Res. 69, reversing a U.S. Fish and Wildlife rule pertaining to Alaska's National Wildlife Refuges and S.J. Res. 34, reversing FCC Internet privacy rules) were rushed through Congress and quickly signed because they made use of the Congressional Review Act of 1996, which imposes a 60-day limit on the time allowed to overrule previously passed laws. This is true. Gorsuch was confirmed by the U.S. Senate on April 7, 2017. This is true. Trump fulfilled a campaign promise by signing an executive order withdrawing the U.S. from the Trans-Pacific Partnership international trade agreement on January 23, 2017, one day after announcing he would renegotiate it. Despite President Obama's fervent support for the deal, many groups, including labor unions, were critical of the TPP, and CNN reported that its chances of approval by Congress were already ""bleak."" The number of illegal border crossings from Mexico into the U.S. in February 2017 was indeed down 40 percent from the previous month, according to statistics provided by the Department of Homeland Security, and that downward trend, which had actually started the previous November, continued in March and April 2017. It's true that in March 2017, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) awarded a $100 million grant to the state of Michigan to upgrade the drinking water infrastructure in Flint, which experienced a lead pollution crisis potentially affecting as many as 100,000 people beginning in 2014. There has been some dispute, however, over whether this ought to be labeled a ""Trump accomplishment"" or an ""Obama accomplishment."" As we noted in a previous article, funding for the grant came from a bill signed by President Obama in 2016, though the monies weren't officially awarded until after he left office, hence some prefer to credit it to Trump. Although President Trump pledged to ""strengthen"" overseas relationships going into office and he had already met with several important foreign leaders by mid-May 2017, it is too soon to tell to what degree his promise will bear fruit. The president-elect got off to a rocky start with China in December by accepting a congratulatory call from the leader of Taiwan, which China views as a province, not an independent nation, and with which the U.S. does not have diplomatic relations. China lodged a formal complaint. In April, Trump met with Chinese President Xi Jinping, with whom he said he made ""tremendous progress"" but no breakthroughs. A trade deal negotiated by the Trump administration with China in May was rated ""pretty good"" by The Wall Street Journal. Japanese Prime Minister Abe, who has met twice with Trump, issued a joint statement with him reaffirming the ""unshakable alliance"" between the U.S. and Japan. That is despite Trump having called Japan a ""currency manipulator"" during the presidential campaign and pulling out of the TPP, which Abe supported. Whether the ""very, very good chemistry"" Trump says he has with Abe will improve the relationship between the two countries over the long haul remains to be seen. U.S.-Russia relations have been strained for many years, a situation not improved by Russia's attempts to meddle in the U.S. presidential election, nor by the fact that Trump associates are under investigation for possible collusion in that effort. A U.S. missile strike by Trump against Syria, with whose government Russia is closely allied, was strongly condemned by Russian leaders, who warned there could be ""extremely serious"" consequences. British Prime Minister Theresa May was the first foreign leader to visit the Trump White House, and their cordial meeting was portrayed by both countries as a renewal of the ""special relationship"" between the U.S. and the U.K. According to the BBC, Obama was seen by many Britons as more interested in the European Union as a whole than in the U.K. itself, while Trump, who was in favor of Brexit, is perceived as the opposite. President Trump has employed what the Washington Post calls ""hard-line rhetoric"" against North Korea, including threats of force, in hopes of squelching that country's increasing militarism, a strategy some experts dismiss as ""macho posturing"" that could escalate into a Cuban Missile Crisis-like confrontation. In April 2017, Trump ordered U.S. missile strikes against an air base in Syria in response to an alleged chemical weapons attack on civilians by the Syrian government, which has been known to brutalize its own people during the ongoing civil war there. Trump's gesture came up short, however, in that the Syrian Air Force was able to launch a new attack against rebel forces from that same base just hours later. In April 2017, President Trump negotiated the release of U.S. citizen Aya Hijazi, her Egyptian husband, and four other humanitarian workers from a prison in Cairo, Egypt, where they had been locked up since 2014, without evidence or trial, on charges of child abuse and trafficking. Although it is true that President Trump signed an executive order on March 13, 2017, directing the heads of executive branch departments to eliminate all ""unnecessary"" agencies and reorganize those that remain to improve their ""efficiency, effectiveness, and accountability,"" the order gave said department heads six months from the date of signing to come up with suggestions for this process, so not much fat has been trimmed thus far despite the groundwork being laid. Regarding efforts to ""reign in"" the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), a CNN report confirms that's been among Trump's top priorities from the start. President Donald Trump made a campaign trail promise to eliminate the Environmental Protection Agency—a department once looked to as an important national force tackling climate change—and during his first 100 days in office has held true to his word, taking swift strides towards dismantling the agency and rolling back regulations. Alongside EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, a former Oklahoma attorney general who once worked tangentially with the fossil fuel industry to oppose Obama-era regulations, the Trump administration has so far issued a flurry of EPA-focused executive orders, proposed employee buyouts, handed down a social media gag order, and is proposing significant cuts to the EPA budget. The National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB), a small business advocacy group, has hailed Trump's commitment to cutting ""burdensome regulations,"" while environmental protection groups see it as a threat to public health and the future of the planet. The controversial Dakota Access Pipeline project, halted under President Obama, was revived by President Trump and will begin commercial operations on June 1, 2017. Trump also issued an executive order directing a review of lands designated as national monuments. Specifically, the review will consider all national monument designations of federal public lands since 1996 that are 100,000 acres or larger. Mr. Trump singled out former President Barack Obama's egregious use of federal power in using the Antiquities Act to unilaterally place swaths of American land and water under federal control, adding, ""it's time we ended this abusive practice."" As with many of the other items discussed above, whether or not one regards this as an ""accomplishment"" (as opposed, say, to a travesty) will depend almost entirely on one's political views going in.",['budget'],NEI,"In May 2017, a Reddit user posted a graphic that purported to list all of President Trump's accomplishments during his first four months in office. It was then widely shared on social media:TRUMP ACCOMPLISHMENTS ..Retweet the hell out of this to annoy @ABC @CBS @cnn @cnbc @MSNBC @nbc @nytimes @washingtonpost #dishonestmedia. pic.twitter.com/ITArBQgcmJ Small Biz for Trump (@SmallBiz4Trump) May 15, 2017Creating homebrew visual aids touting the accomplishments (or failures) of top politicians is a popular online pastime, not least because it's a cheap and easy way to propagandize, and because there are no pesky standards of fairness and accuracy to meet. As we've noted with regard to previous specimens (for example, a late-2016 meme touting the alleged economic achievements of President Obama), the graphic format lends itself to the display of cherry-picked facts to make a simplistic case with no semblance of context or nuance.As reported in the Washington Post, government data released on 5 May 2017 indicated that the national unemployment rate hit a new low in April:It bears pointing out that the jobless rate had already been on a steady decline since 2010. Further, unemployment hit a previous nine-year low of 4.6 percent in December 2016 when President Obama was still in office. It climbed back up to 4.8 percent in January, dipped to 4.7 percent in February, and to 4.5 percent in March 2017.To what degree short-term improvements in the economy since January can be attributed to a new chief executive whose economic policies remain nascent is perennially up for debate, though according to The New York Times' senior economic correspondent Neil Irwin, a ""Trump effect"" that is buoying corporate hiring policies after the election cannot be ruled out:This is a mostly-accurate, partial list of corporations who have announced investments in American facilities and/or jobs since the election of Donald Trump. With the exception of Bayer AG (which announced $8 billion in new investments, not $1 billion as claimed), the dollar amounts match those cited in press reports between January and April 2017 (sources: Softbank, Exxon Mobil Corp., Hyundai-Kia, Apple, Fiat Chrysler, General Motors, Bayer AG, Toyota, LG Electronics).It's not necessarily accurate to characterize all of these commitments as ""accomplishments"" of President Trump, however. As CBS Moneywatch's Irina Ivanova reported in January 2017:For example, Fiat Chrysler said their promise of a $1 billion investment in Michigan and Ohio plants, projected to create 2,000 jobs, was the ""second phase"" of an industrialization plan announced in 2016. GM's $1 billion investment was ""several years in the making,"" according to sources cited by CBS.Bayer AG's commitment to an $8 billion investment and the creation of 3,000 U.S. jobs was announced by the Trump transition team after the president-elect met in January 2017 with the CEOs of Bayer AG and Monsanto, who are planning a merger. Transition spokesman Sean Spicer credited Trump's negotiating skills for the pledge, but some analysts were skeptical that the companies had actually promised anything that wasn't already on the table when plans for the merger were first revealed in September 2016:The merger, which awaits U.S. regulatory approval, is not likely to be completed until 2018, CNBC reported.It is true that the U.S. Treasury reported a $182 billion budget surplus in April 2017, the largest April surplus since 2001 (and the second-largest in history), according to MarketWatch. It's unclear exactly how that surplus is attributable to President Trump, however. April is typically a surplus month because of tax receipts. In addition, citing a Congressional Budget Office (CBO) review as its source, Associated Press reported that the April 2017 surplus was ""inflated"" because of a tax deadline change allowing corporations to pay federal taxes in April that in previous years were paid in March. The stock market can be fickle. As of April 29, the Dow Jones Industrial Average was at 20,940.51, 6.12 percent higher than when Trump took office  positive movement, unquestionably. That number had risen to 20,981.94 by 16 May, then plummeted 372 points the next day as the market was shaken by news that Trump had shared classified information with Russian diplomats in the White House and attempted to divert FBI Director James Comey from an investigation of Trump's alleged ties to Russia before he fired him.It's true that the Consumer Confidence Index, a metric assessing how ordinary consumers feel about the strength of the economy, hit 125.6 in March 2017, its highest point since 2000. It is also true that it fell five points to 120.3 the following month. Even so, it showed that consumers (as of April) had more confidence in the economy under Trump than under Obama, during whose administration the index never exceeded 113.7 (although it did manage to rise to that point after bottoming out in 2009 at 25).As of 17 May 2017, President Trump had signed 34 bills passed by Congress, a comparatively high number in such a short period of time (since Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who signed 76 pieces of legislation in his first 100 days, only Harry Truman, at 55, signed more).That's not to say that all of the legislation signed by Trump between January and May 2017 was necessarily noteworthy, however. One bill changed the name of a Veterans Affairs outpatient clinic in Pago Pago, American Samoa; another renamed a VA health center in Pennsylvania; another approves the location of a memorial honoring Desert Storm and Desert Shield veterans; three appointed citizen regents to the board of the Smithsonian Institution.This is true. Gorsuch was confirmed by the U.S. Senate on 7 April 2017.This is true. Trump fulfilled a campaign promise by signing an executive order withdrawing the U.S. from the Trans-Pacific Partnership international trade agreement on 23 January 2017, one day after announcing he would renegotiate it. Despite President Obama's fervent support for the deal, many groups, including labor unions, were critical of the TPP, and CNN reported that its chances of approval by Congress were already ""bleak."" The number of illegal border crossings from Mexico into the U.S. in February 2017 were indeed down 40 percent from the previous month, according to statistics provided by the Department of Homeland Security, and that downward trend, which had actually started the previous November, continued in March and April 2017. This U.S. Customs and Border Protection chart shows how striking the change was compared to the previous five years:It's true that in March 2017, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) awarded a $100 million grant to the state of Michigan to upgrade the drinking water infrastructure in Flint, which experienced a lead pollution crisis potentially affecting as many as 100,000 people beginning in 2014. There has been some dispute, however, over whether this ought to be labeled a ""Trump accomplishment"" or an ""Obama accomplishment."" As we noted in a previous article, funding for the grant came from a bill signed by President Obama in 2016, though the monies weren't officially awarded until after he left office, hence some prefer to credit it to Trump.China: The president-elect got off to a rocky start with China in December by accepting a congratulatory call from the leader of Taiwan, which China views as a province,not an independent nation, and with which the U.S. does not have diplomatic relations. China lodged a formal complaint. In April, Trump met with Chinese President Xi Jinping, with whom he said he made ""tremendous progress"" but no breakthroughs. A trade deal negotiated by the Trump administration with China in May was rated ""pretty good"" by The Wall Street Journal.U.K.: British Prime Minister Theresa May was the first foreign leader to visit the Trump White House, and their cordial meeting was portrayed by both countries as a renewal of the ""special relationship"" between the U.S and the U.K. According to the BBC, Obama was seen by many Britons as more interested in the European Union as a whole than in the U.K. itself, while Trump, who was in favor of Brexit, is perceived as the opposite.Tough on Korea? President Trump has employed what the Washington Post calls ""hard-line rhetoric"" against North Korea, including threats of force, in hopes of squelching that county's increasing militarism, a strategy some experts dismiss as ""macho posturing"" that could escalate into a Cuban Missile Crisis-like confrontation. Tough on Syria? In April 2017, Trump ordered U.S. missile strikes against an air base in Syria in response to an alleged chemical weapons attack on civilians by the Syrian government, which has been known to brutalize its own people during the ongoing civil war there. Trump's gesture came up short, however, in that the Syrian Air Force was able to launch a new attack against rebel forces from that same base just hours later.Humanitarian workers in Egypt: In April 2017 President Trump negotiated the release of U.S.. citizen Aya Hijazi, her Egyptian husband, and four other humanitarian workers from a prison in Cairo, Egypt, where they had been locked up since 2014, without evidence or trial, on charges of child abuse and trafficking. Although it is true that President Trump signed an executive order on 13 March 2017 directing the heads of executive branch departments to eliminate all ""unnecessary"" agencies and reorganize those that remain to improve their ""efficiency, effectiveness, and accountability,"" the order gave said department heads six months from the date of signing to come up with suggestions for this process, so not much fat has been trimmed thus far despite the groundwork being laid.Regarding efforts to ""reign in"" the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), a CNN report confirms that's been among Trump's top priorities from the start:The National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB), a small business advocacy group, has hailed Trump's commitment to cutting ""burdensome regulations,"" while environmental protection groups see it as a threat to public health and the future of the planet.The controversial Dakota Access Pipeline project, halted under President Obama, was revived by President Trump and will begin commercial operations on 1 June 2017. Trump also issued an executive order directing a review of lands designated as national monuments:Specifically, the review will consider all national monument designations of federal public lands since 1996 that are 100,000 acres or larger. Mr Trump singled out former President Barack Obamas egregious use of federal power in using the Antiquities Act to unilaterally place swaths of American land and water under federal control, adding, its time we ended this abusive practice."
Photograph Shows President Obama with His Feet on Oval Office Desk?,"['A photograph of President Obama with his feet on his Oval Office desk is genuine, but the act it captures is neither ""desecration"" nor unprecedented.']","The above-displayed image is a genuine photograph of President Obama conversing with some of his staff in the Oval Office, with his feet up on his desk. However, most of the accompanying text that was reproduced with this image was contrived and subjective invective intended to stir up partisan outrage. It is true that in some parts of the world, showing the bottom of one's shoes (even accidentally) is considered rude, but this is not the case in American culture. Furthermore, the areas where it is considered rude—primarily the Middle East, Korea, Thailand, and some parts of Africa—do not comprise anything close to ""over half of the cultures of the world."" While this posture may not be the norm, it is far from ""absolutely never done."" For example, consider this anecdote from a book about one of America's most prominent business executives, Apple's late co-founder and CEO Steve Jobs: Bill Curley, a middle-aged Apple marketing manager, recalls an incident from his very first week on the job at Apple. ""I was at a meeting with [Apple CEO Steve] Jobs and several other managers, and he was in shorts, running shoes, and no socks. He was disagreeing with a guy, so he kicked off his shoes and put his bare feet on the table. He framed the guy's face with his feet."" An executive's act of putting his feet up on a desk or table can be interpreted quite differently depending on the context: Doing so in the middle of a staff meeting might be seen as demonstrating rudeness, arrogance, or disrespect; conversely, doing so at the end of a long workday while engaging in friendly chit-chat with a few subordinates might be perceived as showing oneself to be a warm, folksy, regular guy. If a U.S. President putting his feet up on the Oval Office desk is seen as an indication that ""he thinks of himself as a king"" and should be ""inundated"" with mail ""demanding he stop desecrating his office,"" then we seem to have missed the boat on that issue. Identical actions by President Obama's predecessors in the White House provoked no such outrage, as demonstrated by the following unremarked-upon photographs of Presidents George W. Bush and Gerald Ford. This photograph became the subject of renewed interest after President Trump's adviser Kellyanne Conway was photographed kneeling with her feet on an Oval Office couch.",['interest'],NEI,"It is true that in some parts of the world showing the bottom of one's shoes (even accidentally) is considered rude, but it isn't true of American culture, nor do the areas where it does hold true (primarily the Middle East, Korea, Thailand, some parts of Africa) comprise anything close to ""over half of the cultures of the world.""This photograph became the subject of renewed interest after President Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway was photographed kneeling with her feet on an Oval Office couch."
"At the beginning of the last decade ... America had a budget surplus of over $200 billion. By the time I took office, we had a one-year deficit of over $1 trillion and projected deficits of $8 trillion over the next decade.",[],"A big part of President Barack Obama's first State of the Union speech on Jan. 27, 2010, focused on the economy.To set the stage, he said his predecessor was largely responsible for the country's fiscal shape.At the beginning of the last decade ... America had a budget surplus of over $200 billion, Obama said. By the time I took office, we had a one-year deficit of over $1 trillion and projected deficits of $8 trillion over the next decade. Most of this was the result of not paying for two wars, two tax cuts, and an expensive prescription drug program.We've checked several claims to this effect in the last year,most recently one by Obama adviser David Axelrod. Indeed, we found that the government was enjoying a surplus of about $236 billion circa 2001. Later, when Obama took office, the Congressional Budget Office reported the deficit was over $1.2 trillion. A good chunk of the deficits racked up by the Bush administration came from tax cuts, the war in Iraq and actions that Bush and a Democratic Congress took to prop up the economy right before he left office.In the same report, the CBO projected a 10-year deficit of about $3.1 trillion. But Obama said $8 trillion, based on budget numbers published by the White House Office of Management and Budget shortly after Obama took office.Why the discrepancy? When we checked the similar claim by Axelrod, we spoke with Josh Gordon, policy director for the Concord Coalition. He said it has to do with how the two offices estimate the future. The CBO bases its projections on the assumption that the Bush tax cuts would expire in 2010 and that a patch to fix the alternative minimum tax would expire, among other things. The White House does not; instead, it assumes that nothing changes in current law.So, Obama's overall point is correct that the government was enjoying a substantial surplus when Bush took office and had a big deficit when he departed; he's spot on about the surplus Bush began with. He's also correct about the deficit at the end of Bush's presidency, but there are two different ways to measure the 10-year projection when Bush left office. The CBO's estimate is $5 trillion lower than the White House numbers, though economists don't quibble with the White House methodology. So given that discussion, we'll take Obama down a notch to Mostly True.","['National', 'Economy', 'Federal Budget']",True,"A big part of President Barack Obama's first State of the Union speech on Jan. 27, 2010, focused on the economy.To set the stage, he said his predecessor was largely responsible for the country's fiscal shape.At the beginning of the last decade ... America had a budget surplus of over $200 billion, Obama said. By the time I took office, we had a one-year deficit of over $1 trillion and projected deficits of $8 trillion over the next decade. Most of this was the result of not paying for two wars, two tax cuts, and an expensive prescription drug program.We've checked several claims to this effect in the last year,most recently one by Obama adviser David Axelrod. Indeed, we found that the government was enjoying a surplus of about $236 billion circa 2001. Later, when Obama took office, the Congressional Budget Office reported the deficit was over $1.2 trillion. A good chunk of the deficits racked up by the Bush administration came from tax cuts, the war in Iraq and actions that Bush and a Democratic Congress took to prop up the economy right before he left office.In the same report, the CBO projected a 10-year deficit of about $3.1 trillion. But Obama said $8 trillion, based on budget numbers published by the White House Office of Management and Budget shortly after Obama took office.Why the discrepancy? When we checked the similar claim by Axelrod, we spoke with Josh Gordon, policy director for the Concord Coalition. He said it has to do with how the two offices estimate the future. The CBO bases its projections on the assumption that the Bush tax cuts would expire in 2010 and that a patch to fix the alternative minimum tax would expire, among other things. The White House does not; instead, it assumes that nothing changes in current law.So, Obama's overall point is correct that the government was enjoying a substantial surplus when Bush took office and had a big deficit when he departed; he's spot on about the surplus Bush began with. He's also correct about the deficit at the end of Bush's presidency, but there are two different ways to measure the 10-year projection when Bush left office. The CBO's estimate is $5 trillion lower than the White House numbers, though economists don't quibble with the White House methodology. So given that discussion, we'll take Obama down a notch to Mostly True."
Is This a Real Photograph of Bowie and Lemmy?,['The photo began circulating soon after both musicians passed away.'],"In January 2016, a photograph purportedly showing musicians David Bowie and Motörhead frontman Lemmy together at a party started circulating online. The photograph was originally posted to the image-sharing website Imgur on 11 January 2016, along with a caption that referenced the deaths of both musicians. Lemmy passed away on 28 December 2015, and Bowie passed a short time later on 10 January 2016. The caption read, ""Bowie and Lemmy are about to start the most rocking, stellar band ever. Rock in peace, you legends."" The photograph went viral as fans of Motörhead and David Bowie mourned the loss of the two rock legends. Unfortunately, the displayed image is fake. The fake image of David Bowie and Lemmy is a combination of two photographs: a 1972 photo of Lemmy with an unidentified girlfriend and another image of David Bowie with singer Claudia Lennear. It's possible that David Bowie and Lemmy Kilmister met at some point during their careers, but the displayed photo is not proof of such a meeting.",['loss'],False,"The photograph was originally posted to the image sharing web site Imgur on 11 January 2016, along with a caption that referenced the deaths of both musicians. Lemmy passed away on 28 December 2015, and Bowie passed a short time later on 10 January 2016:The fake imageof David Bowie and Lemmy isa combination of two photographs: A 1972photoof Lemmy and an unidentified girlfriend, and another image of David Bowie and singer Claudia Lennear:"
Does Olive Oil 'Fix' Sagging Breasts?,['No credible evidences suggests olive oil or any other topical treatment can prevent or reverse loss of firmness in breasts.'],"On 12 February 2017, the Facebook page ""GreenYatra"" published an image that claimed olive oil can be used to prevent or reverse ""sagging breasts."" The image-based claim did not link to any articles or other corroborating information, stating only: ""Massaging your breasts with olive oil is an excellent technique to firm sagging breasts. Olive oil is a rich source of antioxidants and fatty acids that can reverse the damage caused by free radicals and prevent sagging breasts. Plus, it will help improve the skin tone and texture."" According to the claim, the topical application of olive oil either circumvents or reverses the loss of elasticity in breasts. No specific reason was provided for the assertion that olive oil, as opposed to any other type of oil, could replicate the effect shown. The efficacy of topical treatments for sagging breasts or loss of skin elasticity is often discussed in cosmetic circles, partly due to the cost and invasiveness of surgical approaches. However, research demonstrating that any single topical ingredient can prevent (much less reverse) loss of skin elasticity is notably limited. Antioxidant ointments, creams, and lotions may help reduce the risk of wrinkles and protect against sun damage. Unlike sunscreens, they build up in the skin and are not washed away, so the protection may last longer. Selenium, coenzyme Q10 (CoQ10), and alpha-lipoic acid are antioxidants that can be applied to the skin, but evidence of their benefits is limited, and more studies in humans are needed. More commonly used antioxidants are described below. Your dermatologist can tell you which product is right for you. Research from 2012 indicates that antioxidants could potentially prevent damage to facial skin, but the evidence was ""limited,"" and reversal was not referenced. Only 1.5 percent of olive oil contains antioxidants (and that fraction is not composed entirely of antioxidants). Other foods are described as being higher in antioxidants, but no memes recommended rubbing a berry paste onto breasts for firmness. Research overwhelmingly examined the efficacy of topical treatments for facial skin, which lacks the weight and density of breast tissue. Although topicals designed for facial skin need only penetrate a few dermal layers, any product designed or intended for use on breasts would have to enter the breast tissue to ""lift"" or prevent elasticity loss, which is a far more challenging task. A blog post written by Miami-based cosmetic surgeon Dr. Ary Krau directly addresses the question of whether any specific topical substance (including olive oil) has ever shown promise in improving loss of elasticity for breast tissue in clinical research. Unfortunately, no cream or lotion has been clinically proven or FDA-approved to lift the breasts into a higher position. Don't waste your money on any product that claims to improve your breast position. While genetics play a significant role in breast sagging, there are a few things you can do to prevent it in the first place. Try not to fluctuate greatly in body weight; gaining and losing a lot of weight in a short period can take its toll on the breasts. Be diligent about wearing sunscreen on your chest and décolletage area to protect the skin from the sun's rays. Wear a supportive bra as much as possible, especially when performing high-intensity aerobic exercise. We contacted Dr. Krau's office, and a representative for the clinic told us that no effective topical treatment appears to exist. A thorough search of related studies turned up no strong evidence that facial skin or breast tissue could be firmed by topical treatments at all. A 5 percent concentration of Vitamin C (not olive oil) showed moderate success in the treatment of photo-aging in a small 2003 study, but those findings were not relevant to breast tissue or olive oil. There is research conducted by individuals who contracted with cosmetic medical firms that indicates some success in the ongoing development of a topical version of botulinum toxin type A (popularly known by the brand name Botox) intended solely for the face. However, that research only concerns a clinically prescribed substance (botulinum toxin, not a pantry product) and included no indications that it could be used on breast tissue.",['loss'],NEI,"On 12 February 2017, the Facebook page ""GreenYatra"" published an imagethat bore the claim thatolive oil canbe used to prevent or reverse ""sagging breasts"":The efficacy of topical treatments for sagging breasts or loss of skin elasticity is often discussed in cosmetic circles, thanksin part to the cost and invasiveness of surgical approaches. But research demonstrating any single topical ingredient can prevent (much less reverse) loss of skin elasticity is notably skimpy:Research from 2012 indicates that anxioxidants could potentially prevent damage to facial skin, but evidence was ""limited"" and reversal was not referenced. Only 1.5 percent of olive oil contains antioxidants (and that fraction is not composed entirely of antioxidants). Other foods are described as being higher in antioxidants, but no memes recommended rubbing a berry paste onto breasts for firmness. Research overwhelmingly examined efficacy of topical treatment for facial skin, which lacks the weight and density of breast tissue. And although topicals designed for facial skin need only penetrate a few dermal layers, any product designed or intended for useon breasts would have to enter the breast tissue to ""lift"" or prevent elasticity loss (a far taller order).A blog post written by Miami-based cosmetic surgeon Dr. Ary Krau directly addressesthe question of whether any specific topical substance (including olive oil) had ever shown promise to improve loss of elasticity for breast tissue in clinical research:We contacted Dr. Krau's office, and a representative for the clinic told usthat no effective topical treatment appears to exist. A thorough search of related studies turned up no strong evidence facial skin or breast tissue could be firmed by topical treatments at all. A 5percent concentration of Vitamin C (not olive oil) showedmoderate success in treatment of photo-aging in a small 2003 study, but those findings were not relevant to breast tissue or olive oil.There isresearch [PDF] (conducted by individuals who contracted with cosmetic medical firms) that indicates somesuccess in the ongoing development of a topical version of botulinum toxin type A (popularly known by the brand name Botox) and intended solely for the face. However, thatresearchonly concerns a clinically prescribed substance (botulinum toxin, not a pantry product) and includedno indications that it could beused on breast tissue."
Silicon Valley Bank donated $73M to 'BLM Movement',"['A conservative think tank reported that since 2020, Silicon Valley Bank donated or pledged to donate more than $70 million to causes related to the Black Lives Matter movement.', 'The think tank defined related causes as organizations and initiatives that advance one or more aspects of BLMs agenda., Black Lives Matter is not one entity with a set agenda.', 'It is a decentralized international activist movement with no formal hierarchy., Silicon Valley Banks charitable contributions that were counted in the think tanks total went primarily to groups and initiatives that had no clear association with the Black Lives Matter movement.']","After Silicon Valley Bank collapsed, some pundits and news organizations suggestedwithout evidencethat woke investments contributed to the collapse. Silicon Valley Bank donated $73M to BLM Movement, one March 15 Newsmaxheadlinecirculating on social media read. Fox News hosts Tucker Carlson andJesse Wattersalso made similar claims. Silicon Valley Bank  brace yourself  spent more than $73 million on donations to BLM and related organizations, CarlsonsaidMarch 14. The Newsmax article and similarpostswere flagged as part of Facebooks efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about ourpartnership with Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram.) The Newsmax article pointed to adatabasefrom the Claremont Institute, a conservative think tank. The database tracks pledges and contributions to the BLM movement and related causes, according to the institute. In the databases explanatory notes, the institute said its definition of the BLM movement includes organizations such as Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation; Movement for Black Lives; grassroots groups; independent BLM chapters; the fiscal sponsors of BLM organizations; and BLM partners such as the NAACP and the American Civil Liberties Union. The Claremont Institute defined Black Lives Matter related causes as organizations and initiatives that advance one or more aspects of BLMs agenda. However, Black Lives Matter is not one entity with a set agenda. It is a decentralized international activistmovementwith no formal hierarchy. The Claremont Institute and Silicon Valley Bank did not respond to PolitiFacts requests for comment. An institute spokespersontold MarketWatchthat most of Silicon Valley Banks roughly $70.5 million in contributions fell in the related causes category. He also said the bank donated to the NAACP and ACLU. The banks charitable contributions included in Claremonts $70 million-plus total went primarily to groups and initiatives with no clear tie to the Black Lives Matter movement: A 2021 pledge to invest more than $50 million over five years into the banksAccess to Innovation program, which works to connect people who are often underrepresented in the innovation economy  including women, Blacks and Latinos  with hiring, mentorship, educational and networking opportunities. A $20 million donation that the banksaidwould be used to support COVID-19 relief; a needs-based scholarship program; economic development; and diversity, equity and inclusion efforts. A 2-to-1 matchingcampaignthe bank created in 2020 for employees who donated their money or time to social justice organizations. A $250,000 allocation from the Silicon Valley Bank Foundation to support grants for social justice organizations where bank employees volunteer. A prominent Black Lives Matter organization, Black Lives Matter Global Foundation Network, told PolitiFact in a statement that the Black Lives Matter movement includes thousands of organizations, so there is no way for the group to say with certainty whether Silicon Valley Bank donated to any one of them. The group also said the banks possible contributions to Black causes are irrelevant to what caused the banks collapse. Flags fly in Black Lives Matter Plaza as President Joe Biden is sworn in during 59th Presidential Inauguration, Wednesday, Jan. 20, 2021, in Washington. (AP) A report in the newsletterPopular Informationfound an error in the databases calculations: Nearly $3 million in contributions that the database had initially counted occurred in 2019, not 2020. The Claremont Institute, which started tracking this data in 2020, updated the database to reflect that information, meaning the banks total contributions for 2020 were $70.65 million, rather than over $73 million, as the initial claims said. As of March 22, Newsmax had not corrected its headline to reflect that change. Facebook posts claimed Silicon Valley Bank donated $73M to 'BLM Movement.' The claim stemmed from a database kept by the Claremont Institute. It showed that since 2020, Silicon Valley Bank had donated or pledged to donate more than $70 million to causes related to the Black Lives Matter movement. The institute defined related causes as organizations and initiatives that advance one or more aspects of BLMs agenda. Black Lives Matter is not one entity with a set agenda; it is a decentralized international activist movement with no formal hierarchy. A close look at the Claremont list shows that Silicon Valley Banks charitable contributions went primarily to groups and initiatives with no clear association to the Black Lives Matter movement. We rate this claim False. RELATED:Was Silicon Valley Bank demise caused by Trump easing regulation, 'woke' efforts, or something else?","['Financial Regulation', 'Race and Ethnicity']",False,"After Silicon Valley Bank collapsed, some pundits and news organizations suggestedwithout evidencethat woke investments contributed to the collapse.Silicon Valley Bank donated $73M to BLM Movement, one March 15 Newsmaxheadlinecirculating on social media read.Fox News hosts Tucker Carlson andJesse Wattersalso made similar claims.Silicon Valley Bank  brace yourself  spent more than $73 million on donations to BLM and related organizations, CarlsonsaidMarch 14.The Newsmax article and similarpostswere flagged as part of Facebooks efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about ourpartnership with Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram.)The Newsmax article pointed to adatabasefrom the Claremont Institute, a conservative think tank. The database tracks pledges and contributions to the BLM movement and related causes, according to the institute.The Claremont Institute defined Black Lives Matter related causes as organizations and initiatives that advance one or more aspects of BLMs agenda. However, Black Lives Matter is not one entity with a set agenda. It is a decentralized international activistmovementwith no formal hierarchy.An institute spokespersontold MarketWatchthat most of Silicon Valley Banks roughly $70.5 million in contributions fell in the related causes category. He also said the bank donated to the NAACP and ACLU.A 2021 pledge to invest more than $50 million over five years into the banksAccess to Innovation program, which works to connect people who are often underrepresented in the innovation economy  including women, Blacks and Latinos  with hiring, mentorship, educational and networking opportunities.A $20 million donation that the banksaidwould be used to support COVID-19 relief; a needs-based scholarship program; economic development; and diversity, equity and inclusion efforts.A 2-to-1 matchingcampaignthe bank created in 2020 for employees who donated their money or time to social justice organizations.A report in the newsletterPopular Informationfound an error in the databases calculations: Nearly $3 million in contributions that the database had initially counted occurred in 2019, not 2020. The Claremont Institute, which started tracking this data in 2020, updated the database to reflect that information, meaning the banks total contributions for 2020 were $70.65 million, rather than over $73 million, as the initial claims said.RELATED:Was Silicon Valley Bank demise caused by Trump easing regulation, 'woke' efforts, or something else?"
Texas has exceeded the national poverty rate since at least 1959.,[],"Texas remains home to a greater share of people in poverty than the nation as a whole,Bee Moorheadwrote in a September 2015,oped articlein theAustin American-Statesman. Not news? Well, Moorhead, executive director of the Texas Interfaith Center for Public Policy/Texas Impact, also wrote that according to U.S. Census Bureau figures, Texas once again outstripped the national poverty rate in 2014, as we have done since at least 1959. Thats 56 years--a long time to be better at poverty. We wondered. To our inquiry, Moorhead emailed us a spreadsheet,drawing on bureau figures, indicating that in select years, or each decade from 1959 through 2009, more Texans lived below the federal poverty level, by percentage, than Americans as a whole. According to the figures, which we confirmed on the bureau website, the share of Texans in poverty was greatest in 1959  31.7 percent, 9 percentage points greater than the 22.1 percent of Americans nationally in poverty. In the selected years, the smallest gap occurred in 1979 when 14.7 percent of Texans lived in poverty compared with 13.1 percent of Americans overall, according to the figures. Moorhead said she separately drew the 2014 Texas poverty rate (16.4 percent) from a chartfetchablefrom a bureau web page last updated Sept. 16, 2015. Nationally in 2014, the bureauannounced,the poverty rate was 14.8 percent, meaning 46.7 million people lived in poverty. Moorhead also pointed out abureau websiteenabling comparisons of poverty in a state to the nation each decade from 1960 through 2010, leading us to develop this Texas-U.S. comparison: SOURCE:Web page,Poverty Rates by County, 1960-2010,U.S. Census Bureau (accessed Oct. 7, 2015) Measuring poverty Through the bureau, the federal government has estimated residents living in poverty for more than 50 years, initially from a U.S. Department of Agriculture estimate of how much income that families under economic stress needed in order to put food on the table. How the government defines poverty has changed a bit over the years, but generally,the bureau says, it uses a set of money income thresholds that vary by family size and composition to determine who is in poverty. If a family's total income is less than the family's threshold, then that family and every individual in it is considered in poverty. The thresholds dont vary by location, the bureau says, but are updated for inflation. The poverty definition rolls in income before taxes and does not include capital gains or noncash benefits (such as public housing, Medicaid, and food stamps), the bureau says. Each years national poverty estimates derive from the bureaus Annual Social and Economic Supplement to the Current Population Survey, which surveys about 100,000 households a year, asking about income from more than 50 sources,according tothe bureau. An experts look Moorhead did not delve into poverty rates for every year from 1959 on, so we asked Daniel Dillon of the University of Texas Child and Family Research Partnership for a look. Drawing from CPS data, heput together a chartsuggesting the Texas poverty rate exceeded the national rate each year from 1959 through 2014. But Dillon and bureau spokesman Robert Bernstein told us that comparative year-by-year figures start only in 1980. Since 1980, Dillon summed up, the Texas poverty rate has generally bounced between 15 percent and 17 percent with a few exceptions. The fact that is it so consistent means that the rate of growth in the general population is basically on par with the rate of growth in the poor population. Sometimes they dont change at the same rate though, like after the recession, where the number of poor shot up but population growth was stable. This caused the poverty rate to increase. So the poverty rate is reflecting the interplay between total population change and poor population change, the latter of which is generally more affected by fluctuations in the economy. Big picture: The 4.4 million Texans in poverty in 2014 was double the 2.2 million residents in poverty in 1980,Dillon noted. In the period, the states total population increased 87 percent, escalating from 14.3 million to 26.7 million, he noted. Dillon pointed out there were times the gap between poverty in Texas and the nation narrowed, including 2014. Broadly, he wrote, the gap grew through the 1980s until about 1988, at which point it peaked at a difference of 5 percentage points. Then the gap began to narrow, he wrote, expanding and contracting every few years until 2010 when it began to close. In 2014, Texas had a poverty rate 1.6 percentage points above the national rate, Dillon said. Thats the closest we have been to the national rate since 1984, when the gap was 1.3 percentage points. Several factors, Dillon said, explain why Texas has consistently had a bigger chunk of residents in poverty than the nation on average. The state is home to a larger foreign-born population than most states and is one of a few minority-majority states in that non-Hispanic whites make up a minority of the residents, he wrote. In comparison to their numbers, minority groups in Texas tend to be overrepresented among the poor. Education level is also strongly linked to poverty status, and Texas is the near the bottom when it comes to the percentage of the adult population with a high school degree, Dillon said. Finally, Texas has a higher percentage of children than most states and child poverty has been on the rise. Today, a quarter of Texas children live below the poverty line. Dillon said the narrowing gap between the Texas and national poverty rates might be explained by the state generally growing faster than most states due both to new births and migration from other places. As long as the mix of people moving to Texas are more likely to be above the poverty line than below it, this will drive the poverty rate down. Similarly, if births to non-poor families outpace those to poor families, this will also drive the rate down, Dillon wrote. Another indicator We also askedLori Taylor, a Texas A&M University economist, to evaluate Moorheads claim. By phone, Taylor said that while its likely the Texas poverty rate has consistently outpaced the national rate, on average, its worth mention that the rate has always been calculated by assuming the same income levels put residents in poverty regardless of location. She said this has tended to lead to overstatements of people in poverty in lower cost-of-living parts of the country and understatements of residents in poverty in high-cost areas. Taylor and a colleague pointed out in aDecember 2014 articlethat in 2013, per the government's poverty threshold, a family of four with two children and a household income of $23,624 was classified as poor regardless of whether the family lived in rural Arkansas, where a typical two-bedroom apartment rents for less than $600, or in New York, where a two-bedroom apartment rents for more than $1,400. In the past few years, the census bureau has been developing its Supplemental Poverty Measure, which reaches its rates by taking into account regional differences in housing costs. And, Taylor noted, the bureaufound in its 2013 surveysthat Texas and the U.S. had the same 15.9 percent SPM rate. In contrast, the general 2013 poverty rate for the country was 14.8 percent and the Texas rate was 16.9 percent. By phone, Moorhead agreed that using a standard measure of poverty across the country is insufficient to characterize the complexity of regional economies. But the SPM is a new measure too, she said, and rates havent been calculated retroactively to cover nearly all the years included in her Texas-U.S. comparison. Our ruling Moorhead said Texas has outstripped the national poverty rate since at least 1959. Available poverty rates for select years through 1979 and for 1980 through 2014 back up this statement. Yet poverty rates dont appear to be available for many earlier years. Also, a new supplemental poverty measure makes a case for the same share of Texans and Americans lately living in poverty provided regional differences in housing costs are factored in. We rate this claim Mostly True. MOSTLY TRUE The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information. Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check.","['Economy', 'Poverty', 'States', 'Texas']",True,"Texas remains home to a greater share of people in poverty than the nation as a whole,Bee Moorheadwrote in a September 2015,oped articlein theAustin American-Statesman.To our inquiry, Moorhead emailed us a spreadsheet,drawing on bureau figures, indicating that in select years, or each decade from 1959 through 2009, more Texans lived below the federal poverty level, by percentage, than Americans as a whole. According to the figures, which we confirmed on the bureau website, the share of Texans in poverty was greatest in 1959  31.7 percent, 9 percentage points greater than the 22.1 percent of Americans nationally in poverty. In the selected years, the smallest gap occurred in 1979 when 14.7 percent of Texans lived in poverty compared with 13.1 percent of Americans overall, according to the figures.Moorhead said she separately drew the 2014 Texas poverty rate (16.4 percent) from a chartfetchablefrom a bureau web page last updated Sept. 16, 2015. Nationally in 2014, the bureauannounced,the poverty rate was 14.8 percent, meaning 46.7 million people lived in poverty.Moorhead also pointed out abureau websiteenabling comparisons of poverty in a state to the nation each decade from 1960 through 2010, leading us to develop this Texas-U.S. comparison:SOURCE:Web page,Poverty Rates by County, 1960-2010,U.S. Census Bureau (accessed Oct. 7, 2015)Through the bureau, the federal government has estimated residents living in poverty for more than 50 years, initially from a U.S. Department of Agriculture estimate of how much income that families under economic stress needed in order to put food on the table. How the government defines poverty has changed a bit over the years, but generally,the bureau says, it uses a set of money income thresholds that vary by family size and composition to determine who is in poverty. If a family's total income is less than the family's threshold, then that family and every individual in it is considered in poverty. The thresholds dont vary by location, the bureau says, but are updated for inflation. The poverty definition rolls in income before taxes and does not include capital gains or noncash benefits (such as public housing, Medicaid, and food stamps), the bureau says.Each years national poverty estimates derive from the bureaus Annual Social and Economic Supplement to the Current Population Survey, which surveys about 100,000 households a year, asking about income from more than 50 sources,according tothe bureau.Moorhead did not delve into poverty rates for every year from 1959 on, so we asked Daniel Dillon of the University of Texas Child and Family Research Partnership for a look. Drawing from CPS data, heput together a chartsuggesting the Texas poverty rate exceeded the national rate each year from 1959 through 2014.Big picture: The 4.4 million Texans in poverty in 2014 was double the 2.2 million residents in poverty in 1980,Dillon noted. In the period, the states total population increased 87 percent, escalating from 14.3 million to 26.7 million, he noted.We also askedLori Taylor, a Texas A&M University economist, to evaluate Moorheads claim. By phone, Taylor said that while its likely the Texas poverty rate has consistently outpaced the national rate, on average, its worth mention that the rate has always been calculated by assuming the same income levels put residents in poverty regardless of location. She said this has tended to lead to overstatements of people in poverty in lower cost-of-living parts of the country and understatements of residents in poverty in high-cost areas. Taylor and a colleague pointed out in aDecember 2014 articlethat in 2013, per the government's poverty threshold, a family of four with two children and a household income of $23,624 was classified as poor regardless of whether the family lived in rural Arkansas, where a typical two-bedroom apartment rents for less than $600, or in New York, where a two-bedroom apartment rents for more than $1,400.In the past few years, the census bureau has been developing its Supplemental Poverty Measure, which reaches its rates by taking into account regional differences in housing costs. And, Taylor noted, the bureaufound in its 2013 surveysthat Texas and the U.S. had the same 15.9 percent SPM rate. In contrast, the general 2013 poverty rate for the country was 14.8 percent and the Texas rate was 16.9 percent.Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check."
Do These Photographs Show a Homeless Veteran Dying Under a Bush?,"['""We want to discard the parts of society we dont want, but like plastic, its never going to go away.""']","A pair of photographs reportedly showing a severely dehydrated homeless veteran named Kent near death on the streets of Los Angeles started making their way around social media in September 2018:   These images were apparently so shocking to some viewers that they suggested the photographs perhaps showed an artwork or a Halloween decoration as opposed to a real human being. Unfortunately, these  pictures are genuine. The photographs were first posted online by Facebook user Nick Spano on 22 September 2018. The original Facebook post contained a lengthy bit of text which was largely concerned with Spano's view on how the homeless (especially homeless veterans) are treated in the United States, along with a few details about the pictured individual, who was said to be a 68-year-old man named Kent. The man told Spano that he was a veteran and that he was ""looking for a place to die"" when Spano brought him some water before paramedics arrived to take him to the hospital: posted This is America: Kent, a 68 year old veteran dying under a bush outside million dollar properties in LA. The softball size tumor on the side of his face is now a gaping hole. Dried blood covers his hands and face. Flies swarm around his head, not bothering to wait for him to die before laying their eggs in the open wound that is crawling with hundreds of maggots. He tries to speak, but I can no longer understand him. This is fucking America! Im just looking for a place to die, he said. Those were his first words to me when I first discovered Kent about a month a go in shallow bed under the bushes outside my place. Like many people, my initial gut reaction was, not in my backyard! But I know better. Im aware that homelessness is a symptom of our broken and wasteful system, and the basic lack of decency, and compassion towards one another. We treat people like trash. We want to discard the parts of society we dont want, but like plastic, its never going to go away. All we do is make the problem worse, rather than realizing that our own habits are the problem. The way we treat people is the problem. We speak to one another through our own filters, and judgements before we even get to know them. So, instead I brought Kent water, and sat down to talk with him for awhile. He pulled his hoodie aside and showed me the tumor on the side of his face. I did it to myself, he said. Years of smoking was the likely cause. He went to the VA for medical care, but he said that he felt like they were just waiting for him to die so he left. I asked if I could get him some help, but he didnt want it. Im just looking for a place to die, he said. We are all full of shit, guys. Lets be honest with ourselves. Between the look-at-me-now Instagram selfies, the woke AF Facebook posts, and the heated political rants over which party is more American, we have lost our souls. Weve sold out. Weve forgotten that real wealth comes from investing in one another. This isnt the Me Too era, its just the Me era. We are the wealthiest, and most wasteful consumer culture in the history of humankind, and we buy everything they sell us, even their excuses. We cant fix every problem! Its too big! Its too expensive! Get a job! I had to work for it, why shouldnt they?! Bullshit!!! Each bomb we dropped on Syria costs us $100 million, and weve dropped dozens. The Iraq War cost American taxpayers over $2.5 trillion dollars and counting, and it was a lie! We have our own national emergency right here in the City of Dreams, but we dont have enough money to fix it. Could you imagine what would happen if we took funding for just one of those bombs, and dropped it into social services for American communities; into shelters for the homeless; medical care for our vets; clean water for Flint?!?! Dont say we cant fix the problem, because thats bullshit. We can!!! We are just so god damn brainwashed and complacent that we dont think we actually have any power to change it. But change starts when we stop ignoring the problem, and realize that we are the ones to fix it. Even the smallest act makes a big difference. There is no one else to call! Tag! Youre fucking it! The irony of the fact that I took a photo of Kent as he lie dying outside my house while waiting for paramedics to arrive, and posted it here for all to see, isnt lost on me. This might appear hypocritical to some, but that wont change my commitment to people like Kent in my community. I will continue to treat these people with dignity and respect, and be of service anyway I can, and if in the process, this post gets at least one of you, the next time you see someone camped out on the street, to stop and talk to them; to put your hand on their shoulder; to call them brother or sister; and to restore even the slightest sense of dignity in them through a simple act of compassion, then its worth it. Not everyone can help in the same way, and sometimes people dont want help, but we all can be human to one another. As they lifted Kent onto the stretcher, he raised his hand, and gave me a peace sign. I dont know his status at this time, but I will post an update as soon as I can. People over Profits -- Compassion over Comfort  Spano updated his post a few days later but he didn't have much additional information to report: Unfortunately, there isn't much to share at this time. I finally found the hospital where Kent was taken and being treated, but due to patient privacy laws (HIPPA), and the fact that I don't know Kent's full name, they wont not give me any information at this time. I dont know if he has passed, or if he is still in their care. I have made a request to a supervisor to share my information with Kent so that he can grant me access. I've also made it clear that there are many people who want to show their support, so I'm hoping they help us make that happen. Without Kent's last name, it's difficult to verify some of the details in this Facebook post, but it doesn't bear any of the hallmarks that have revealed similar posts to be hoaxes. For instance, we could not find any record of these photographs appearing online prior to Spano's post, which supports  that Spano truly was the person who took them. This post also doesn't include a call to action urging users to share it (which is a common tactic for disingenuous clickbait). We contacted Spano for more information about Kent, and he provided us with security camera footage to verify that his photographs were authentic and noted that Kent had told him during previous interactions he was a veteran. Spano never got Kent's last name, however, and Kent didn't have any ID on him when he was taken away by paramedics. While we can't officially verify whether or not Kent was a veteran, his story is, unfortunately, rather plausible. According to the National Coalition for Homeless Veterans, approximately 40,000 veterans in the United States are homeless on any given night. National Coalition for Homeless Veterans National Coalition for Homeless Veterans. &nbsp ""FAQ About Homeless Veterans.""
  Retrieved 25 September 2018.",['share'],True,"The photographs were first posted online by Facebook user Nick Spano on 22 September 2018. The original Facebook post contained a lengthy bit of text which was largely concerned with Spano's view on how the homeless (especially homeless veterans) are treated in the United States, along with a few details about the pictured individual, who was said to be a 68-year-old man named Kent. The man told Spano that he was a veteran and that he was ""looking for a place to die"" when Spano brought him some water before paramedics arrived to take him to the hospital:While we can't officially verify whether or not Kent was a veteran, his story is, unfortunately, rather plausible. According to the National Coalition for Homeless Veterans, approximately 40,000 veterans in the United States are homeless on any given night."
Is the Equifax Data Breach Settlement Email Genuine?,['Such emails claimed to offer a free membership in Experian IdentityWorks for four years.'],"In late January 2022, Google users looked to Reddit and elsewhere to find out if an email for the status of the Equifax data breach settlement was a ""scam or legit,"" as readers often do after receiving such notices. The email had the subject line, ""Equifax Data Breach Settlement (Credit Monitoring Instructions and Activation Code),"" and linked to the website, experianidworks.com/equifaxsettlement. It promised a free four-year membership for the credit monitoring service Experian IdentityWorks. Google Reddit experianidworks.com/equifaxsettlement This was a legitimate notice for a data breach settlement for Equifax. Readers might remember making a claim in the settlement back in July 2019. Users who opted to receive credit monitoring instead of a check were sent activation codes in the new email for Experian IdentityWorks. The official website for the settlement was equifaxbreachsettlement.com. back in July 2019 equifaxbreachsettlement.com The official settlement website documented the fact that in September 2017, Equifax was ""the victim of a criminal cyberattack,"" giving the attackers ""unauthorized access to the personal information of approximately 147 million U.S. consumers."" This included ""peoples names, Social Security numbers, birth dates, addresses, and in some instances drivers license numbers, credit card numbers, or other personal information."" documented Equifax Numerous lawsuits were brought on behalf of consumers whose personal information was impacted as a result of the Data Breach. Chief Judge Thomas W. Thrash Jr. of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia is overseeing these lawsuits. These lawsuits are known as In re: Equifax Inc. Customer Data Security Breach Litigation, Case No. 1:17-md-2800-TWT. The consumers who sued are called the Plaintiffs. Equifax, Inc., and two of its subsidiaries are the Defendants. Plaintiffs claimed that Equifax did not adequately protect consumers personal information and that Equifax delayed in providing notice of the data breach. The most recent version of the lawsuit, which describes the specific legal claims alleged by the Plaintiffs, is available here. Equifax denies any wrongdoing, and no court or other judicial entity has made any judgment or other determination of any wrongdoing. here In the end, both sides of the legal battle ""agreed to a settlement after a lengthy mediation process overseen by a retired federal judge."" That settlement allowed claimants to choose to receive a check or credit monitoring. Anyone who chose to receive a check might eventually receive an amount much smaller than expected, as the ""alternative compensation of up to $125"" would ""likely will be substantially lowered"" to a ""small percentage"" of what was expected.  In 2017, the Equifax website provided steps for consumers to take following a security breach at the company. (Photo by Smith Collection/Gado/Getty Images)  The email that began to be sent in late January 2022 provided a status update on the Equifax data breach settlement. According to a copy of the email that we reviewed, it read as follows: Equifax Data Breach Settlement (Credit Monitoring Instructions and Activation Code) Issue Date: January 31, 2022 Claim No. (removed)Dear (removed): You filed a claim in the Equifax Data Breach Settlement and chose to receive free, three-bureau (Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion) credit monitoring from Experian for four years. Implementation of the Settlement was delayed by appeals; however, the Settlement is now effective because appellate courts have affirmed it. This email provides additional information about the services provided by Experian as part of the Settlement and how you can enroll. You are receiving free membership in Experian IdentityWorks for four years. You must enroll by June 27, 2022. This service is free for you and provided as a Settlement benefit. You do not need to provide any payment information to enroll and you do not need to cancel the service when it ends. We encourage you to enroll today. HOW TO ENROLL:  Visit the Experian IdentityWorks Website: www.experianidworks.com/equifaxsettlement Enter Your Activation Code: (removed) www.experianidworks.com/equifaxsettlement You must use the above code to enroll by June 27, 2022 (your activation code will not work after this date). If you have questions, need help with Identity Restoration (either because you were a victim of fraud or identity theft) because of the Equifax data breach, or would like another way to sign up for Experian IdentityWorks, please call Experians customer care team toll-free at 1-877-251-5822. So that the team may better serve you, please be prepared to provide them with engagement number (removed) so that you may access the Settlements Identity Restoration services for assistance with fraud or identity theft. For more information on Identity Restoration services, visit www.experianidworks.com/equifaxsettlement. www.experianidworks.com/equifaxsettlement The email also broke down exactly what is included in the four-year membership to the credit monitoring service known as Experian IdentityWorks: Experian IdentityWorks - Daily Credit Monitoring* from each of the three nationwide Consumer Reporting Agencies showing key changes to your Consumer Reports;- Automated alerts when new accounts are opened; inquiries or requests for credit reports are made for the purpose of determining credit; changes to address; and negative information (including delinquencies or bankruptcies);- On-demand online access to a copy of your Experian Consumer Report, updated monthly;- Automated non-credit alerts, using public or proprietary data sources, for example: when certain information is found on a suspicious website or the dark web; when names, aliases, and addresses have been associated with your Social Security Number; when a payday loan or unsecured credit has been taken or opened using your Social Security Number; when your information matches information in arrest or criminal court records; when your information is used for identity authentication; when your mail has been redirected through the U.S. Postal Service; when banking activity is detected related to new deposit account applications, changes to personal information, and new signers are added to accounts; and when a balance is reported on your credit line that has been inactive for at least six months;- Up to One Million in Identity Theft Insurance** which provides coverage for certain costs and unauthorized electronic fund transfers;- A customer service center to assist with enrollment, monitoring alerts, disputes, fraud, and other Credit Monitoring Service questions;- Full Identity Restoration Service if you are the victim of fraud or identity theft (which includes a dedicated identity theft restoration specialist who will provide you with step-by-step assistance, and form letters to contact companies, government agencies, and Consumer Reporting Agencies), and- Child Monitoring Services (for Class Members under the age of eighteen). * Daily credit reports are only available online. If you do not register online, you can call for additional reports each quarter after you sign-up.** The Identity Theft Insurance is underwritten and administered by American Bankers Insurance Company of Florida, an Assurant company. Please refer to the actual policies for terms, conditions, and exclusions of coverage. Coverage may not be available in all jurisdictions.  Close-up of code on a computer screen for the Apache Struts framework, which was exploited by computer hackers using a Remote Code Execution exploit in order to allegedly steal the personal information of millions of people from credit bureau Equifax, Oct. 2, 2017. (Photo by Smith Collection/Gado/Getty Images)  To reach the administrator of the Equifax data breach settlement or to inquire about its status, the email said to call 1-833-759-2982. Meanwhile, any questions about Experian IdentityWorks can be directed to the phone number 1-877-251-5822. Equifax We previously reported on other legal matters involving settlements for National Grid and a Plaid Inc. National Grid Plaid Inc",['credit'],True,"In late January 2022, Google users looked to Reddit and elsewhere to find out if an email for the status of the Equifax data breach settlement was a ""scam or legit,"" as readers often do after receiving such notices. The email had the subject line, ""Equifax Data Breach Settlement (Credit Monitoring Instructions and Activation Code),"" and linked to the website, experianidworks.com/equifaxsettlement. It promised a free four-year membership for the credit monitoring service Experian IdentityWorks.This was a legitimate notice for a data breach settlement for Equifax. Readers might remember making a claim in the settlement back in July 2019. Users who opted to receive credit monitoring instead of a check were sent activation codes in the new email for Experian IdentityWorks. The official website for the settlement was equifaxbreachsettlement.com.The official settlement website documented the fact that in September 2017, Equifax was ""the victim of a criminal cyberattack,"" giving the attackers ""unauthorized access to the personal information of approximately 147 million U.S. consumers."" This included ""peoples names, Social Security numbers, birth dates, addresses, and in some instances drivers license numbers, credit card numbers, or other personal information.""Numerous lawsuits were brought on behalf of consumers whose personal information was impacted as a result of the Data Breach. Chief Judge Thomas W. Thrash Jr. of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia is overseeing these lawsuits. These lawsuits are known as In re: Equifax Inc. Customer Data Security Breach Litigation, Case No. 1:17-md-2800-TWT. The consumers who sued are called the Plaintiffs. Equifax, Inc., and two of its subsidiaries are the Defendants. Plaintiffs claimed that Equifax did not adequately protect consumers personal information and that Equifax delayed in providing notice of the data breach. The most recent version of the lawsuit, which describes the specific legal claims alleged by the Plaintiffs, is available here. Equifax denies any wrongdoing, and no court or other judicial entity has made any judgment or other determination of any wrongdoing. In 2017, the Equifax website provided steps for consumers to take following a security breach at the company. (Photo by Smith Collection/Gado/Getty Images) Visit the Experian IdentityWorks Website: www.experianidworks.com/equifaxsettlement Enter Your Activation Code: (removed)If you have questions, need help with Identity Restoration (either because you were a victim of fraud or identity theft) because of the Equifax data breach, or would like another way to sign up for Experian IdentityWorks, please call Experians customer care team toll-free at 1-877-251-5822. So that the team may better serve you, please be prepared to provide them with engagement number (removed) so that you may access the Settlements Identity Restoration services for assistance with fraud or identity theft. For more information on Identity Restoration services, visit www.experianidworks.com/equifaxsettlement.The email also broke down exactly what is included in the four-year membership to the credit monitoring service known as Experian IdentityWorks: Close-up of code on a computer screen for the Apache Struts framework, which was exploited by computer hackers using a Remote Code Execution exploit in order to allegedly steal the personal information of millions of people from credit bureau Equifax, Oct. 2, 2017. (Photo by Smith Collection/Gado/Getty Images)To reach the administrator of the Equifax data breach settlement or to inquire about its status, the email said to call 1-833-759-2982. Meanwhile, any questions about Experian IdentityWorks can be directed to the phone number 1-877-251-5822.We previously reported on other legal matters involving settlements for National Grid and a Plaid Inc."
Was David Hogg a student at a high school in California?,['The Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shooting survivor turned gun-control activist has been the target of relentless online hoaxes and attempted smears.'],"In the weeks after a gunman opened fire at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida on 14 February 2018, killing seventeen people, Internet trolls and ""hoaxers"" continued to share an already completely debunked rumor that David Hogg  a teenaged survivor of the mass shooting who has since become an outspoken advocate of gun control  is actually a professional actor who went to school in southern California:   As Hogg's classmates have pointed out and as we reported previously, the above meme is a very low-quality, low-effort Internet hoax  the photograph actually confirms that Hogg is legitimately an Marjory Stone Douglas High School student because the image was taken from MSD's yearbook, a fact that could be gleaned from another student in the very same image wearing an MSD ""Eagles"" mascot shirt two rows above him: reported previously Theres a photo going around claiming David Hogg did not attend Douglas, but a school in California. Heres a video to debunk that: pic.twitter.com/hJsMNSdAsF pic.twitter.com/hJsMNSdAsF  Joey (@_Joey_Wong) February 21, 2018 February 21, 2018  Hogg had visited California in 2017 and witnessed an altercation, about which he made a video blog  a simple fact that was blown out by conspiracy theorists to mean he already lived in Los Angeles and was part of the entertainment industry. (Hogg did live in California, but relocated with his family to Florida before starting high school; he returns to visit every year, as many people do.)  video blog Nikolas Cruz, 19, a former Marjory Stone Douglas student who used an AR-15 semi-automatic firearm he had reportedly purchased from a gun store to carry out the mass shooting, has since been charged with murder; Parkland students have galvanized a national movement calling for stricter gun legislation. Hogg has been one of the most vocal leaders in what has become known as the ""March For Our Lives."" known as The students' activism has made them the target of ""hoaxers""  deranged Internet users and grifters who spread false information that mass shooting incidents are manufactured by the government to seize guns and hand power to a secret global cabal working to install an authoritarian world government. hoaxers Such hoaxers have periodically been arrested and jailed for physically stalking and harassing survivors, but despite their outlandish beliefs and apparent moral debasement, they are not exactly the ""fringe."" Far-right web sites and Internet personalities like GatewayPundit.com writer Lucian Wintrich, undeterred by ongoing lawsuits related to previous conspiracy theory-related blunders, have claimed the Parkland students were reading from scripts, while the National Rifle Association said in an official statement in response to a nationwide march on 24 March 2018 that the events were staged by ""Hollywood elites."" arrested jailed stalking ongoing lawsuits blunders claimed statement DAngelo, Bob.  ""NRA: March Fueled By 'Gun-Hating Billionaires and Hollywood Elites.'""
Dayton Daily News.  25 March 2018. Herman, John. ""The Making of a No. 1 YouTube Conspiracy Video After the Parkland Tragedy.""
The New York Times.  21 February 2018. Chavez, Nicole.  ""School Shooting Survivor Knocks Down 'Crisis Actor' Claim.""
CNN.  21 February 2018.",['returns'],False,"As Hogg's classmates have pointed out and as we reported previously, the above meme is a very low-quality, low-effort Internet hoax  the photograph actually confirms that Hogg is legitimately an Marjory Stone Douglas High School student because the image was taken from MSD's yearbook, a fact that could be gleaned from another student in the very same image wearing an MSD ""Eagles"" mascot shirt two rows above him:Theres a photo going around claiming David Hogg did not attend Douglas, but a school in California. Heres a video to debunk that: pic.twitter.com/hJsMNSdAsF Joey (@_Joey_Wong) February 21, 2018Hogg had visited California in 2017 and witnessed an altercation, about which he made a video blog  a simple fact that was blown out by conspiracy theorists to mean he already lived in Los Angeles and was part of the entertainment industry. (Hogg did live in California, but relocated with his family to Florida before starting high school; he returns to visit every year, as many people do.) Nikolas Cruz, 19, a former Marjory Stone Douglas student who used an AR-15 semi-automatic firearm he had reportedly purchased from a gun store to carry out the mass shooting, has since been charged with murder; Parkland students have galvanized a national movement calling for stricter gun legislation. Hogg has been one of the most vocal leaders in what has become known as the ""March For Our Lives.""The students' activism has made them the target of ""hoaxers""  deranged Internet users and grifters who spread false information that mass shooting incidents are manufactured by the government to seize guns and hand power to a secret global cabal working to install an authoritarian world government.Such hoaxers have periodically been arrested and jailed for physically stalking and harassing survivors, but despite their outlandish beliefs and apparent moral debasement, they are not exactly the ""fringe."" Far-right web sites and Internet personalities like GatewayPundit.com writer Lucian Wintrich, undeterred by ongoing lawsuits related to previous conspiracy theory-related blunders, have claimed the Parkland students were reading from scripts, while the National Rifle Association said in an official statement in response to a nationwide march on 24 March 2018 that the events were staged by ""Hollywood elites."""
Did Al Gore Predict Earth's Ice Caps Would Melt by 2014?,"['In the late 2000s, the former U.S. Vice President sometimes inaccurately represented studies that predicted the timeline for an ice-free Arctic.']","In the years 2007, 2008, and 2009, Al Gore made statements about the possibility of a complete lack of summer sea ice in the Arctic by as early as 2013. While Gore attributed these predictions to scientists, they stemmed from a selective reading of aggressive estimates regarding future melting. The comments became a popular talking point for human-cause climate change deniers in 2014 and onward when the predictions, which in some cases were overstated, did not pan out:  On 10 December 2007, in his Nobel prize acceptance speech, Gore said: acceptance speech Last September 21, as the Northern Hemisphere tilted away from the sun, scientists reported with unprecedented distress that the North Polar ice cap is ""falling off a cliff."" One study estimated that it could be completely gone during summer in less than 22 years. Another new study, to be presented by U.S. Navy researchers later this week, warns it could happen in as little as 7 years. Here, Gore referred to a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association (NOAA) announcement and two different climate studies, one of which became the source for his most aggressive statements. On 21 September 2007, NOAA did announce that sea ice had hit its lowest recorded point in history. The second, more aggressive estimate for when summer sea ice would disappear in the Arctic came from a conference talk at the 2007 American Geophysical Fall Meeting, which was undertaken by researchers associated with the Naval Postgraduate School and was presented later that week. The BBC reported that the study did make the prediction that Gore claimed: conference talk BBC Scientists in the US have presented one of the most dramatic forecasts yet for the disappearance of Arctic sea ice. Their latest modelling studies indicate northern polar waters could be ice-free in summers within just 5-6 years. Professor Wieslaw Maslowski told an American Geophysical Union meeting that previous projections had underestimated the processes now driving ice loss. The BBC article also noted that Maslowskis group, frequently cited by Gore, often made predictions that were more aggressive than their peers': ""Professor Maslowski's group, which includes co-workers at NASA and the Institute of Oceanology, Polish Academy of Sciences (PAS), is well known for producing modelled dates that are in advance of other teams."" On 13 December 2008, Gore appeared to have made a similarly flawed statement while speaking at the opening of a German natural history museum. Although transcripts and clear audio are hard to find, one video of the event documented Gore's saying that ""The entire North polar ice cap may well be completely gone in 5 years. Given the dates presented, it is likely that Gore was once again referring to Maslowskis data, and unless he preceded his statement with some qualification not captured by the video, Gore's statement either intentionally or accidentally neglected to mention that this prediction, aggressive as it was, concerned only summer sea ice. opening video On 14 December 2009, during a speech at the Copenhagen Climate Conference, Gore cited newer research from the same group, saying: ""These figures are fresh. Some of the models suggest to Dr [Wieslav] Maslowski that there is a 75 per cent chance that the entire north polar ice cap, during the summer months, could be completely ice-free within five to seven years."" cited That statement put Gore in hot water when Maslowski told rhe Times of London that his data did not allow for such a prediction:   told Its unclear to me how this figure was arrived at, Dr Maslowski said. I would never try to estimate likelihood at anything as exact as this. Mr Gores office later admitted that the 75 per cent figure was one used by Dr Maslowksi as a ballpark figure several years ago in a conversation with Mr Gore. The claim that Gore predicted an ice-free Arctic in 2014 is a simplification of these events. However, Gore was definitely guilty in these cases of cherry-picking science or playing loose with the details of that science. Gores statements gained the most viral attention in 2014 and 2015, both because these were years in which Gores statements implied an ice-free summer in the Arctic and because those years had relatively more arctic sea ice than preceding years. relatively more From a broad perspective, however, summer sea ice in the Arctic has in fact been declining at faster rates relative to 20th century, and the year 2016 tied with the year 2007 (the year highlighted by Gore in his Nobel speech) for the second least Arctic summer sea ice on record (the lowest recorded sea ice extent occurred in 2012). declining tied While the disappearance of summer sea ice is difficult to predict, a 2013 review of different approaches (including Maslowskis) summarized the range of various predictions for the first ice-free summer in the Arctic: review We have investigated three approaches to predicting 21st century summer Arctic sea ice loss as represented by trendsetters, stochasters, and modelers [three quantitative approaches used to make predictions]. At present, it is not possible to completely choose one approach over another as all approaches have strengths and weaknesses ... Time horizons for summer sea ice loss of these three approaches turns out to be roughly 2020, 2030, and 2040 respectively for trendsetters, stochasters, and modelers ... It is reasonable to conclude that Arctic sea ice loss is very likely to occur in the rst rather than the second half of the 21st century, with a possibility of loss within a decade or two. Arctic sea ice is without question on a declining trend, but Gore definitely erred in his use of preliminary projections and misrepresentations of research. Because Gore himself did not claim to have made these predictions, however, and because his statements applied specifically to summer sea ice in the Arctic, we rate the claim that Gore ""predicted the ice caps will melt by 2014"" as a mixture. Gore, Al  ""Al Gore - Nobel Lecture""
  Nobeprize.org.  10 December 2007 Whelan, J. et al.  ""Understanding Recent Variability in the Arctic Sea Ice Thickness and Volume - Synthesis of Model Results and Observations.""
  AGU Fall Meeting, 2007.  December 2007. Amos, Jonathan.  ""Arctic Summers Ice-Free 'by 2013.'""
  BBC News.  December 2007. Rhein-Zeitung.  ""Al Gore hlt Rede zur Erffnung des Gondwana-Park.""
  13 December 2008. FORA TV.  ""COP15: Gore and Stre Report on Arctic's Melting Ice.""
  14 December 2009. Devlin, Hannah et al.  ""Inconvenient Truth for Al Gore as His North Pole Sums Don't Add Up.""
  The [London] Times.  15 December 2009. Starr, Cindy et al.  Annual Arctic Sea Ice Minimum 1979-2015 with Area Graph.""
  NASA Scientific Visualization Studio.  10 March 2016. National Snow and Ice Data Center.  ""2016 Ties With 2007 for Second Lowest Arctic Sea Ice Minimum.""
  15 September 2016. Overland, James E. and Muyin Wang.  When Will the Summer Arctic Be Nearly Sea Ice Free?""
  Geophysical Research Letters.  21 May 2013.",['loss'],NEI,"On 10 December 2007, in his Nobel prize acceptance speech, Gore said:The second, more aggressive estimate for when summer sea ice would disappear in the Arctic came from a conference talk at the 2007 American Geophysical Fall Meeting, which was undertaken by researchers associated with the Naval Postgraduate School and was presented later that week. The BBC reported that the study did make the prediction that Gore claimed:On 13 December 2008, Gore appeared to have made a similarly flawed statement while speaking at the opening of a German natural history museum. Although transcripts and clear audio are hard to find, one video of the event documented Gore's saying that ""The entire North polar ice cap may well be completely gone in 5 years. Given the dates presented, it is likely that Gore was once again referring to Maslowskis data, and unless he preceded his statement with some qualification not captured by the video, Gore's statement either intentionally or accidentally neglected to mention that this prediction, aggressive as it was, concerned only summer sea ice.On 14 December 2009, during a speech at the Copenhagen Climate Conference, Gore cited newer research from the same group, saying: ""These figures are fresh. Some of the models suggest to Dr [Wieslav] Maslowski that there is a 75 per cent chance that the entire north polar ice cap, during the summer months, could be completely ice-free within five to seven years.""That statement put Gore in hot water when Maslowski told rhe Times of London that his data did not allow for such a prediction:  Gores statements gained the most viral attention in 2014 and 2015, both because these were years in which Gores statements implied an ice-free summer in the Arctic and because those years had relatively more arctic sea ice than preceding years.From a broad perspective, however, summer sea ice in the Arctic has in fact been declining at faster rates relative to 20th century, and the year 2016 tied with the year 2007 (the year highlighted by Gore in his Nobel speech) for the second least Arctic summer sea ice on record (the lowest recorded sea ice extent occurred in 2012).While the disappearance of summer sea ice is difficult to predict, a 2013 review of different approaches (including Maslowskis) summarized the range of various predictions for the first ice-free summer in the Arctic:"
Barack Obama's Net Worth,"[""Barack Obama's net worth increased over $10 million from 2008 to 2012?""]","Claim: Barack Obama's net worth increased by over $10 million from 2008 to 2012. Example: [Collected via e-mail, October 2012] Seen on Facebook: a Tea Party photo of President Obama on a golf cart purporting his net worth as of 12/31/07 and 12/31/11. Origins: This graphic, claiming that Barack Obama's net worth had increased from $1.3 million at the end of 2007 to over $11.4 million by the end of 2011, was widely circulated in October 2012. It's fair to say that the Obamas' net worth has increased significantly during Barack Obama's presidency, but assigning a specific dollar amount to that increase is difficult. Net worth figures for politicians are typically derived from analyzing financial disclosure forms, a method that allows for considerable interpretation. Certainly, the dollar figures displayed in the graphic were not simply pulled out of thin air: CNN/Money did estimate Barack Obama's net worth at $1.3 million in 2007, and some sources, such as an Associated Press article, stated his net worth in mid-2012 to be around $11.8 million. However, other sources vary widely regarding the latter figure. In mid-2012, Forbes estimated the Obamas' net worth to be $5.7 million (down slightly from the previous year), while OpenSecrets.org placed the figure in the broad range of ""$1,566,014 to $7,764,999,"" and other sources provided similarly broad estimates, such as ""somewhere between $2.6 million and nearly $8.3 million."" The Forbes report noted why the online version of its article included a considerably lower estimation of the Obamas' net worth than the print version: the current issue of Forbes magazine values the Obamas at a shared net worth of nearly $9 million, based on the May 16, 2011 financial disclosure, the most up-to-date as of press time. The day after our issue went to press, Obama released his new financial disclosure form, which showed that: 1) the Obamas have taken money out of treasuries; 2) book income is decreasing; and 3) the family still owes on its mortgage, which was disclosed for the first time. The latest disclosure also provided new information on the family's college savings plans, allowing us to refine our valuation and bring the sum down. The above valuation takes all this into account. Last updated: 16 October 2012.",['mortgage'],NEI,"dollar amount to that increase is difficult: net worth figures for politicians are typically derived from analyzing financial disclosure forms, a method which leaves room for a good deal of interpretation.Certainly the dollar figures displayed in the above graphic were not just pulled out of thin air: CNN/Money did peg Barack Obama's net worth at $1.3 million in 2007, and some sources (such as this Associated Press article) stated his net worth in mid-2012 to be around $11.8 million. Other sources vary widely regarding the latter figure, however.  In mid-2012 Forbes estimated the Obamas' net worth to be $5.7 million (down slightly from the previous year), OpenSecrets.org put the figure somewhere in the broad range of ""$1,566,014 to $7,764,999,"" and other sources listed similarly broad range estimates such as ""somewhere between $2.6 million and nearly $8.3 million."""
Did George Orwell Say This About Societies That 'Drift From the Truth'?,"['Not everything ""Orwellian"" in its tone is Orwellian in its origins. ']","In August and September 2021, an old quotation attributed to the English novelist George Orwell re-emerged on social media. For example, on September 5, the Scottish historian William Dalrymple posted a widely shared tweet: ""The further a society drifts from the truth, the more they will hate those that speak it."" In reality, Orwell never wrote or uttered those words, even though they have a broadly Orwellian ring to them. Rather, that maxim was first written by a conservative writer in 2009 but has been almost universally misattributed to Orwell in the intervening 12 years. The bogus Orwell quotation has appeared in countless social media posts and opinion columns in recent years, with various small tweaks. Former U.S. Senator Jeff Flake, an Arizona Republican who railed against former President Donald Trump before leaving the Senate in 2019, included it in a Washington Post column in May and in a Senate speech back in January 2018. In February 2019, former FBI Director James Comey also used it to criticize Trump, but the quote has also been favored by conservatives and by supporters of whistleblowers Edward Snowden and Chelsea Manning. In 2012, rapper Soulja Boy posted a version of the same quote on Twitter. However, the earliest version we could find, and apparently the original, came in a May 6, 2009, column by the conservative writer Selwyn Duke on the right-leaning website RenewAmerica.com. Duke's column railed against what he presented as political correctness and left-wing censorship and contained several Orwellian references, including his use of the phrase ""today's 1984 Britain"" and the line ""telling the truth is a revolutionary act."" (To add irony upon irony, the true provenance of that quotation is unclear.) In conclusion, Duke wrote, ""The further a society drifts from Truth, the more it will hate those who speak it."" Several years later, Duke himself firmly asserted authorship of the line, writing, ""You can imagine my surprise when I learned people were quoting it and that Orwell was taking credit for it."" Snopes was unable to find any earlier version of the quotation than Duke's, despite consulting a newspaper archive that stretches back far beyond Orwell's lifetime. As a result, we are satisfied not only that the quote did not originate with Orwell but also that its original author was indeed most likely Duke.",['credit'],False,"The bogus Orwell quotation has appeared in countless social media posts and opinion columns in recent years, with various small tweaks. Former U.S. Sen. Jeff Flake, an Arizona Republican who railed against former President Donald Trump before leaving the Senate in 2019, included it in a Washington Post column in May, and in a Senate speech back in January 2018.In February 2019, former FBI Director James Comey also used it to criticize Trump, but the quote has also been favored by conservatives, and by supporters of whistleblowers Edward Snowden and Chelsea Manning. In 2012, rapper Soulja Boy posted a version of the same quote on Twitter.However, the earliest version we could find, and apparently the original, came in a May 6, 2009, column by the conservative writer Selwyn Duke, on the right-leaning website RenewAmerica.com. Duke's column railed against what he presented as political correctness and left-wing censorship and contained several Orwellian references, including his use of the phrase ""today's 1984 Britain,"" and his use of the line ""telling the truth is a revolutionary act."" (To add irony upon irony, the true provenance of that quotation is unclear, and Orwell almost certainly did not come up with it). Several years later, Duke himself firmly asserted authorship of the line, writing, ""You can imagine my surprise when I learned people were quoting it and that Orwell was taking credit for it."""
Did the Trump Campaign Have To Issue Refunds for Recurring Donations?,['A report by The New York Times outlines Trump donors who were surprised to find their bank accounts drained.'],"In early April 2021, Snopes readers asked about social media posts and memes that claimed that former U.S. President Donald Trump ""tricked"" them into making recurring campaign donations. For instance, one such meme said contributors to the campaign who though they were making a one-time donation ""were unaware the fine print stated they would be billed the same amount every single week until election day."" Donald Trump   In many cases, these claims are rather exaggerated, mean-spirited takes on a New York Times story, as we will explain below. As we previously reported, it's true that the Trump campaign was soliciting recurring donations with a pre-checked box, even after the Nov. 3, 2020, presidential election. It's also true that many Trump supporters demanded refunds from the Trump campaign, although it seems mathematically impossible that the number of people who requested refunds was in the millions (as was claimed in social media posts). New York Times story previously reported The April 3 Times report details the experience of Trump donor Stacy Blatt, a retiree who was in hospice care, suffering from cancer, when he discovered his bank account depleted from those recurring donations. Stacy Blatt was in hospice care last September listening to Rush Limbaughs dire warnings about how badly Donald J. Trumps campaign needed money when he went online and chipped in everything he could: $500. It was a big sum for a 63-year-old battling cancer and living in Kansas City on less than $1,000 per month. But that single contribution  federal records show it was his first ever  quickly multiplied. Another $500 was withdrawn the next day, then $500 the next week and every week through mid-October, without his knowledge  until Mr. Blatts bank account had been depleted and frozen. When his utility and rent payments bounced, he called his brother, Russell, for help. What the Blatts soon discovered was $3,000 in withdrawals by the Trump campaign in less than 30 days. They called their bank and said they thought they were victims of fraud. Contrary to the takes offered in partisan memes and posts, Blatt and others like him were not ""low IQ,"" but instead, fell victim to the complicated and evolving wording in a pre-checked box on Trump's online donation portal, according to the Times. As a result, the Times reported, the Trump campaign and WinRed, a for-profit company that processed the online donations, were forced to issue $122 million in campaign contribution refunds to people like Blatt. pre-checked box As Election Day neared in November 2020, the Times report described what amounted to a sense of panic that cropped up inside the Trump campaign, as Democrats out-raised and spent them. During that time, the text on the online donation portal for Trump's donation website changed from simply asking donors to make donations a monthly gift, to including a pre-checked box with more complicated text that made donations weekly. asking donors As the election drew closer, text in that bright yellow box went from containing a pre-checked field that in March 2020 simply said, ""Make this a monthly recurring donation,"" to more complicated and emphatic demands by late 2020 that contained fake ultimatums. As of Sept. 30, 2020, the box looked like this: looked like this   As the pre-checked box evolved, the result was an increase in refunds issued to donors who had missed the finer print in the box that allowed the refunds to be weekly recurring. The refunds issued by the Trump campaign outpaced and dwarfed the $21 million in refunds issued by his political rival, now-U.S. President Joe Biden. The effect can be seen in a graph posted by Shane Goldmacher, the Times report's author:  The evolution of the text in the box on Trump's online donation portal can be viewed by clicking on various dates via the Internet Archive. Internet Archive A search for Blatt's name can be found on OpenSecrets.org, a campaign finance transparency tool run by the nonpartisan organization Center for Responsive Politics, which tracks money in politics. It confirms the Times reporting that Blatt, who listed himself as retired, was billed $500 multiple times by the Trump campaign between mid-September and October 11, 2020. Sadly, Blatt died of cancer in February 2021, according to the Times. found on OpenSecrets.org We sent emails to WinRed and the Trump campaign seeking comment, but didn't get an answer in time for publication. We will update if we do. But we note that in their public statements responding to the Times story that neither Trump nor WinRed refute the financial figures or facts laid out by the Times. Instead, the stance taken by both WinRed and Trump is that the Times' report was unfairly negative about their approach to fundraising. In a series of tweets, WinRed called the Times report a ""hit piece"" and said WinRed's practices were comparable to that of ActBlue, the fundraising portal that serves Democratic candidates. ""So when Republicans do it to stay competitive, its nefarious, and when Dems - who created the technology - do it, its a 'platform for little experiments that gently squeeze even more money out of donors,'"" WinRed tweeted. called tweeted In a statement responding to the report, Trump referenced his pre- and post-election disinformation campaign, namely false claims that the 2020 election was beset by a massive-scale voter fraud conspiracy. Like WinRed, Trump said his own fundraising efforts were based on those of ActBlue, and also like WinRed, he claimed that the percentage of donors who formally disputed the charges with their financial institutions was low: statement We learned from liberal ActBlue  and now were better than they are! In fact, many people were so enthusiastic that they gave over and over, and in certain cases where they would give too much, we would promptly refund their contributions. Our overall dispute rate was less than 1% of total online donations, a very low number. This is done by Dems also The Times story reported that WinRed ""typically granted [refunds] to avoid more costly formal disputes."" It also pointed out that while WinRed is a for-profit company, ActBlue is a non-profit organization. As such, WinRed ""makes its money by taking 30 cents of every donation, plus 3.8 percent of the amount given. WinRed was paid more than $118 million from federal committees the last election cycle; even after paying credit card fees and expenses like payroll and rent, the profits are believed to be significant."" We reached out to ActBlue for a response to WinRed and Trump's comments. A spokesperson told us by email that the average contribution amount across the platform in 2019-2020 was $38.08. The spokesperson also referred to this portion of the Times report that included a statement by ActBlue: was $38.08 ActBlue said in a statement that it had begun to phase out prechecked recurring boxes unless groups were explicitly asking for recurring contributions. Some prominent Democratic groups, including both congressional campaign committees, continue to precheck recurring boxes regardless of that guidance. Still, Democratic refund rates were only a small fraction of the Trump campaigns last year. On April 7, 2021, Timothy Miller, a writer for the political news site The Bulwark, tweeted that he received a fundraising text from the National Republican Congressional Committee with a similar, pre-checked fundraising box:  Despite aggressive efforts to pursue claims of widespread voter fraud, no evidence was ever presented by the Trump camp that widespread fraud occurred in the 2020 election. Biden won by 7 million votes and 74 electoral college points. widespread voter fraud won",['profit'],True,"In early April 2021, Snopes readers asked about social media posts and memes that claimed that former U.S. President Donald Trump ""tricked"" them into making recurring campaign donations. For instance, one such meme said contributors to the campaign who though they were making a one-time donation ""were unaware the fine print stated they would be billed the same amount every single week until election day.""In many cases, these claims are rather exaggerated, mean-spirited takes on a New York Times story, as we will explain below. As we previously reported, it's true that the Trump campaign was soliciting recurring donations with a pre-checked box, even after the Nov. 3, 2020, presidential election. It's also true that many Trump supporters demanded refunds from the Trump campaign, although it seems mathematically impossible that the number of people who requested refunds was in the millions (as was claimed in social media posts).Contrary to the takes offered in partisan memes and posts, Blatt and others like him were not ""low IQ,"" but instead, fell victim to the complicated and evolving wording in a pre-checked box on Trump's online donation portal, according to the Times. As a result, the Times reported, the Trump campaign and WinRed, a for-profit company that processed the online donations, were forced to issue $122 million in campaign contribution refunds to people like Blatt.As Election Day neared in November 2020, the Times report described what amounted to a sense of panic that cropped up inside the Trump campaign, as Democrats out-raised and spent them. During that time, the text on the online donation portal for Trump's donation website changed from simply asking donors to make donations a monthly gift, to including a pre-checked box with more complicated text that made donations weekly.As the election drew closer, text in that bright yellow box went from containing a pre-checked field that in March 2020 simply said, ""Make this a monthly recurring donation,"" to more complicated and emphatic demands by late 2020 that contained fake ultimatums. As of Sept. 30, 2020, the box looked like this:The evolution of the text in the box on Trump's online donation portal can be viewed by clicking on various dates via the Internet Archive.A search for Blatt's name can be found on OpenSecrets.org, a campaign finance transparency tool run by the nonpartisan organization Center for Responsive Politics, which tracks money in politics. It confirms the Times reporting that Blatt, who listed himself as retired, was billed $500 multiple times by the Trump campaign between mid-September and October 11, 2020. Sadly, Blatt died of cancer in February 2021, according to the Times.In a series of tweets, WinRed called the Times report a ""hit piece"" and said WinRed's practices were comparable to that of ActBlue, the fundraising portal that serves Democratic candidates. ""So when Republicans do it to stay competitive, its nefarious, and when Dems - who created the technology - do it, its a 'platform for little experiments that gently squeeze even more money out of donors,'"" WinRed tweeted.In a statement responding to the report, Trump referenced his pre- and post-election disinformation campaign, namely false claims that the 2020 election was beset by a massive-scale voter fraud conspiracy. Like WinRed, Trump said his own fundraising efforts were based on those of ActBlue, and also like WinRed, he claimed that the percentage of donors who formally disputed the charges with their financial institutions was low:We reached out to ActBlue for a response to WinRed and Trump's comments. A spokesperson told us by email that the average contribution amount across the platform in 2019-2020 was $38.08. The spokesperson also referred to this portion of the Times report that included a statement by ActBlue:Despite aggressive efforts to pursue claims of widespread voter fraud, no evidence was ever presented by the Trump camp that widespread fraud occurred in the 2020 election. Biden won by 7 million votes and 74 electoral college points."
Could This Internet Joke Show Racial Prejudice in Cases of Tax Evasion Prosecution?,"['What do these four examples have in common?  Nothing of significance, as far as we can tell.']","One of the more unusual political memes we've come across presented four different cases of tax-related financial improprieties to suggest that tax-evasion prosecutions were somehow influenced by racial bias against non-blacks. However, the ""Tax Racism"" meme offered examples, not all of which were actual cases of tax evasion, so widely spaced in time and differing in circumstances as to be unhelpful in making any point at all about either tax fraud or race. Martha Stewart, the entrepreneur who rose to prominence as the author of books on cooking, entertaining, and decorating, was not charged with or imprisoned for non-payment of income taxes. Stewart was found guilty in March 2004 of felony charges of conspiracy, obstruction of an agency proceeding, and making false statements to federal investigators in a case related to a U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) investigation into insider trading activity. On June 4, 2003, the Securities and Exchange Commission filed securities fraud charges against Martha Stewart and her former stockbroker, Peter Bacanovic. The complaint, filed in federal court in Manhattan, alleges that Stewart committed illegal insider trading when she sold stock in a biopharmaceutical company, ImClone Systems, Inc., on December 27, 2001, after receiving an unlawful tip from Bacanovic, who was then a broker with Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated. The Commission further alleges that Stewart and Bacanovic subsequently created an alibi for Stewart's ImClone sales and concealed important facts during SEC and criminal investigations into her trades. In a separate action, the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York obtained an indictment charging Stewart and Bacanovic criminally for their false statements concerning Stewart's ImClone trades. Stewart was sentenced to five months in prison and also settled a civil suit with the SEC by paying a $195,000 fine, a penalty that reflected four times the amount of stock value loss she avoided by taking advantage of inside information, plus interest. Stewart did engage in a dispute with the state of New York in 2002 over unpaid property taxes that she contended she didn't owe because she hardly spent any time in that state, and she was eventually ordered by a judge to pay $220,000 in back taxes plus penalties. But contrary to the false impression created by this meme, she was not prosecuted or jailed over that issue; the time she spent in prison was solely related to a later insider-trading case, not to tax evasion. By the mid-1920s, notorious Chicago mobster Alphonse Gabriel Capone was reportedly taking in nearly $60 million annually ($878 million in 2018 dollars) from a variety of illegal activities, primarily Prohibition-era bootlegging. Capone was dubbed ""Public Enemy No. 1"" after the 1929 Saint Valentine's Day Massacre, in which gunmen allegedly hired by him posed as police officers to murder seven members of a rival gang, leading to increased public pressure on the government to rein Capone in. Federal authorities had difficulty gathering sufficient hard evidence to convict Capone on any substantial criminal charges, so they took what was then a novel approach: Even if they couldn't prove Capone was making his millions illegally, they could prove he wasn't paying income tax on his ill-gotten gains. Despite his obviously lavish lifestyle, Capone never filed a federal income tax return and claimed he had no taxable income, reportedly boasting at one point that, ""They can't collect legal taxes from illegal money."" He was proved wrong. IRS and Treasury agents gathered evidence that Capone had made millions of dollars in untaxed income, and the mobster was eventually indicted on 22 counts of federal income tax evasion. After conviction, he was sentenced in 1931 to 11 years in prison, fined $50,000, and ordered to pay back taxes in the amount of $215,000. Capone was released from prison in 1939 with time off for good behavior and retired to Florida, where he died in 1947 at the relatively young age of 48. In a literal sense, Capone was indeed jailed for non-payment of income taxes, but the tax evasion charges were essentially a proxy for prosecuting the mobster over the multitude of vastly worse and violent crimes with which he was connected, as well as the immense profits he derived from those criminal activities. Capone was by no means an otherwise upright and law-abiding citizen who was thrown in prison simply because he didn't pay his income taxes. At this point in our narrative, we need to distinguish between different forms of tax evasion. At one end of the spectrum are those who haven't engaged in any fraudulent behavior but simply didn't or can't pay their taxes for any number of reasons—maybe they didn't plan or withhold prudently, they received poor financial advice, they had legitimate confusion or dispute over what constituted taxable income, or they simply overspent and ended up in debt. Although non-payment of taxes is a crime, the IRS will not usually seek prosecution in these types of cases and will instead work with offenders to facilitate payment of their back debts, rather than making repayment difficult or impossible by incarcerating them. At the other end of the spectrum are those who actively engage in fraud to evade the full payment of taxes: They fail to disclose their full income, hide financial transactions, claim deductions to which they are not entitled, disguise monies earned as something other than income, or otherwise file falsified tax returns. The IRS will, at their discretion, seek prosecution in egregious cases of these forms of tax evasion. Leona Helmsley, derisively known as the ""Queen of Mean,"" was a billionaire who, along with her husband, real estate investor and broker Harry Helmsley, owned a vast portfolio of real estate and other assets, including a chain of hotels and the iconic Empire State Building. Leona Helmsley, who once reportedly asserted that ""We don't pay taxes. Only the little people pay taxes,"" fell into the latter class of tax evader, falsely manipulating her personal finances, business expenses, and dealings with third parties to avoid paying immense sums of taxes. Some of Helmsley's luster was tarnished in 1986 when court documents and law enforcement officials said she had failed to pay sales taxes in New York on hundreds of thousands of dollars of jewelry she purchased at Van Cleef & Arpels, the exclusive Manhattan store. Two senior store officers were indicted on charges that they operated a scheme by which customers with out-of-state addresses could have their purchases recorded as being mailed to them, thus avoiding city and state taxes. In 1987, a series of adverse articles in The New York Post about the Helmsleys, set off by one of their disgruntled employees, led to a broad investigation. The following year, Harry and Leona Helmsley were indicted by federal and state authorities on charges that they had evaded more than $4 million in income taxes by fraudulently claiming as business expenses luxuries they purchased for Dunnellen Hall in Greenwich, Conn., a 28-room Jacobean mansion on 26 acres with a sweeping view of Long Island Sound that they bought in 1983. In 235 counts in state and federal indictments brought by Robert Abrams, then the New York State attorney general, and Rudolph W. Giuliani, then the United States attorney and later mayor of New York, the Helmsleys were accused of draining their hotel and real estate empire to provide themselves with such extravagances at Dunnellen Hall as a $1 million marble dance floor above a swimming pool, a $45,000 silver clock, a $210,000 mahogany card table, a $130,000 stereo system, and $500,000 worth of jade art objects. Nothing was too small or personal to be billed to their businesses, from Mrs. Helmsley's bras to a white lace and pink satin dress and jacket and a white chiffon skirt—the dress and skirt were entered in the Park Lane Hotel records as uniforms for the staff. Mrs. Helmsley was also charged with defrauding Helmsley stockholders by receiving $83,333 a month in secret consulting fees. She was convicted of 33 felony counts related to her evasion of $1.2 million in federal income taxes. She was sentenced to 16 years in prison (reduced to four years on appeal), fined $7.1 million for tax fraud, and ordered to pay some $1.7 million in back federal and state taxes. She began serving her sentence in 1992 and was released from federal prison in Connecticut in 1994 after having served less than half her sentence. Where along the tax-evader spectrum between ""legitimate dispute"" and ""willful tax fraud"" civil rights activist Al Sharpton might fall is difficult to determine. Claims were made in the press in 2014 that Sharpton owed some $4.5 million in unpaid taxes, but the accuracy of that number and how much of the money owed might already have been repaid by Sharpton were unclear, and his tax-troubles narrative involved a muddied mixture of personal, business, and non-profit finances, as well as liabilities for federal taxes, state taxes, payroll taxes, and personal income taxes. Much of the dispute over the ""why"" and ""how much"" of Sharpton's unpaid tax bill stemmed from the operations of the National Action Network, a not-for-profit civil rights organization founded by Sharpton in 1991. Sharpton contended in a 2014 New York Times account that he incurred an unexpected tax liability because he was taxed personally for income he had given to the non-profit organization, and that he was up to date on repayment plans. Officials contested that the amount he was in arrears for unpaid taxes had actually grown larger, though. Today, Mr. Sharpton still faces personal federal tax liens of more than $3 million and state tax liens of $777,657, according to records. Mr. Sharpton said the federal liens resulted from a demand by the IRS that he pay taxes on earnings from speaking engagements that he had turned over to the National Action Network. He said he was up to date on payment plans for both the federal and state liens, so, he said, the outstanding balance was much lower than records showed. But according to state officials, his balance on the state liens is actually $220,000 greater now than when they were first filed during the years 2008 through 2010. A spokesman for the State Department of Taxation and Finance said state law did not allow him to provide any further details. Sharpton then contested that news account, asserting that it referenced ""old taxes"" and insisting again that his tax liens had been paid down below the $4.5 million debt claimed in the New York Times report. During a news conference at the headquarters of his National Action Network in Harlem, Mr. Sharpton sought to refute the assertion that there were $4.5 million in state and federal tax liens outstanding against him and the for-profit businesses he controls. He said that the liens had been paid down, although he declined to say by how much, and that he was current on all taxes he was obligated to pay under settlement agreements with tax authorities. ""We're talking about old taxes,"" he said, adding, ""We're not talking about anything new. So all of this, as if I'm not paying taxes while I'm doing whatever I'm doing, it reads all right, but it just is not true."" The accuracy of Mr. Sharpton's assertion that the amount he owes the federal government is much lower than the $3.6 million shown in records could not be verified. A spokesman for the Internal Revenue Service said federal law prohibited the agency from divulging any details about individual taxpayers. As for the state tax liens, Mr. Sharpton's assertion that he had paid them down conflicts with information provided by state officials. State authorities filed tax liens against Mr. Sharpton in 2008 and 2009, and again in 2010 against a for-profit business he controls, Revals Communications, all totaling $695,000. But a spokesman for the State Department of Taxation and Finance said the amount due had actually increased to $916,000. Regardless of the numbers, Sharpton wasn't put in prison because tax officials did not deem his case to be an exceptional one of scofflaw tax fraud or evasion that merited prosecution, instead working with him to facilitate his paying down the debt. The conclusion here is a simple one: Cherry-picking four very disparate cases of financial wrongdoing spanning several decades, while ignoring the many other instances of tax evasion successfully prosecuted by the U.S. government, documents nothing about any purported racial bias in such prosecutions.",['returns'],False,"Martha Stewart, the entrepreneur who rose to prominence as the author of books on cooking, entertaining, and decorating, was not charged with, or imprisoned for, non-payment of income taxes. Stewart was found guilty in March 2004 of felony charges of conspiracy, obstruction of an agency proceeding, and making false statements to federal investigators in a case related to a U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) investigation into insider trading activity:Stewart was sentenced to 5 months in prison and also settled a civil suit with the SEC by paying a $195,000 fine (a penalty that reflected four times the amount of stock value loss she avoided by taking advantage of inside information, plus interest).Stewart did engage in a dispute with the state of New York in 2002 over unpaid property taxes that she contended she didn't owe because she hardly spent any time in that state, and she was eventually ordered by a judge to pay $220,000 in back taxes plus penalties. But contrary to the false impression created by this meme, she was not prosecuted or jailed over that issue  the time she spent in prison was solely related to a later insider-trading case, not to tax evasion.IRS and Treasury agents gathered evidence that Capone had made millions of dollars in untaxed income, and the mobster was eventually indicted on 22 counts of federal income tax evasion. After conviction he was sentenced in 1931 to 11 years in prison, fined $50,000, and ordered to pay back taxes in the amount of $215,000. Capone was released from prison in 1939 with time off for good behavior and retired to Florida, where he died in 1947 at the relatively young age of 48.At this point in our narrative we need to distinguish between different forms of tax evasion. At one end of the spectrum are those who haven't engaged in any fraudulent behavior but simply didn't or can't pay their taxes for any number of reasons  maybe they didn't plan or withhold prudently, they received poor financial advisement, they had legitimate confusion or dispute over what constituted taxable income, or they simply overspent and ended up in debt. Although non-payment of taxes is a crime, the IRS will not usually seek prosecution in these types of case and will instead work with offenders in order to facilitate payment of their back debts (rather than making repayment difficult or impossible by incarcerating them).Leona Helmsley, derisively known by the nickname as the ""Queen of Mean,"" was a billionaire who  along with her husband, real estate investor and broker Harry Helmsley  owned a vast portfolio of real estate and other assets, including a chain of hotels and the iconic Empire State Building.Leona Helmsley, who once reportedly asserted that We dont pay taxes. Only the little people pay taxes, fell into the latter class of tax evader, falsely manipulating her personal finances, business expenses, and dealings with third parties in order to avoid paying immense sums of taxes:Much of the dispute over the ""why"" and ""how much"" of Sharpton's unpaid tax bill stemmed from the operations of the National Action Network, a not-for-profit, civil rights organization founded by Sharpton in 1991. Sharpton contended in a 2014 New York Times account that he incurred an unexpected tax liability because he was taxed personally for income he had given to the non-profit organization, and that he was up to date on repayment plans. Officials contested that the amount he was in arrears for in unpaid taxes had actually grown larger, though:Sharpton then contested that news account, asserting that it referenced ""old taxes"" and insisting again his tax liens had been paid down below the $4.5 million debt claimed in the New York Times report that stated Sharpton's unpaid tax debt had nonetheless grown larger, not smaller:The conclusion here is a simple one: Cherry-picking four very disparate cases of financial wrongdoings spanning several decades, while ignoring the many other instances of tax evasion successfully prosecuted by the U.S. government, documents nothing about any purported racial bias in such prosecutions."
Company Anniversary Free Product Scam,['Businesses are not celebrating their anniversaries by giving away free product to Facebook users who share and like a page.  Those offers are a form of online scam.'],"Scammers and malware purveyors are always looking for ways to entice online users into following web links that will lead those victims into the traps set for them, and offers of free products are prime bait in that pursuit of prey. One common method such predators use is establishing fake Facebook accounts mimicking those of well-known vendors of consumer products (typically of the edible variety, such as Starbucks, Taco Bell, McDonald's, KFC, Wendy's, Burger King, Whole Foods, Safeway, Food Lion, and Little Caesars) and posting bogus offers for ""lifetime passes"" or other dispensations of free product as part of a supposed company anniversary or birthday celebration (e.g., ""Starbucks is giving away free lifetimes in celebration of the brand's 44th anniversary""). The primary type of free product fraud is the ""sweepstakes scam,"" which is intended to lure victims into completing numerous surveys, disclosing a good deal of personal information, and then agreeing to sign up for costly, difficult-to-cancel ""Reward Offers"" hidden in the fine print. The scammers spread links via e-mail and Facebook that purport to offer free product to those who follow those links. These web pages (which are not operated or sponsored by the companies they reference) typically ask the unwary to click what appear to be Facebook ""share"" buttons and post comments to the scammer's site (which is really a ruse to dupe users into spreading the scam by sharing it with all of their Facebook friends). Those who follow such instructions are then led into a set of pages prompting them to input a fair amount of personal information (including name, age, address, and phone numbers), complete a lengthy series of surveys, and finally sign up (and commit to paying) for at least two ""Reward Offers"" (e.g., Netflix subscriptions, credit report monitoring services, prepaid credit cards): Pursuant to the Terms & Conditions, you are required to complete 2 of the Reward Offers from the above. You will need to meet all of the terms and conditions to qualify for the shipment of the reward. For credit card offers, you must activate your card by making a purchase, transferring a balance, or making a cash advance. For loan offers you must close and fund the loan. For home security and satellite tv offers you must have the product installed. You may not cancel your participation in more than a total of 2 Reward Offers within 30 days of any Reward Offer Sign-Up Date as outlined in the Terms & Conditions (the Cancellation Limit). Not only that, but the fine print on the ""free"" product offers typically states that by accepting its terms, the user agrees to receive telemarketing phone calls and text messages from a variety of different companies:   Similar phony free product lures are used to spread malware. In those versions of the scam, those who attempt to reach the URL provided for the purpose of claiming the free products are instead victimized by a Facebook ""lifejacking"" attack, a malicious script that takes over a user's Facebook profile without their knowledge and propagates itself to their friends' accounts as well. lifejacking In short, those who seek ""free"" merchandise generally end up paying a dear cost for it.",['share'],False,"Similar phony free product lures are used to spread malware. In those versions of the scam, those who attempt to reach the URL provided for the purpose of claiming the free products are instead victimized by a Facebook ""lifejacking"" attack, a malicious script that takes over a user's Facebook profile without their knowledge and propagates itself to their friends' accounts as well."
'Sawing New York in Half' Hoax,"[""If you can't move the people off the land, just move the land ...""]","In the spring of 1823, two men by the names of De Voe and Lozier (a retired butcher and a wealthy contractor, respectively) whiled away an idle day with an excursion to their familiar stomping grounds at New York City's Centre Market.  There, at a table in the back of the market, they regaled an enthralled audience of butchers, farmers, and fishmongers with an astounding tale: Manhattan Island was sinking.   By the 1820s, burgeoning New York City had become America's most populous city with 150,000 inhabitants, and the combined weight of all the additional people and the buildings and other infrastructure necessary to support them, the two men claimed, had made Manhattan too bottom-heavy, and the island was beginning to sink into the harbor.  Not to worry, De Voe and Lozier averred to the credulous crowd  they had been hired by New York mayor Stephen Allen to deal with the problem and had come up with a masterful plan to stave off  impending disaster: They were to oversee a massive, coordinated effort to saw Manhattan in half, then tow the lower half out in the harbor, turn it around, and reattach it.  The most heavily populated section of Manhattan would then be situated in the middle of a more balanced island, and the danger of its tipping and spilling into New York harbor would be ameliorated.   Maybe it sounded a bit incredible, but to an audience of uneducated New Yorkers who had witnessed the ongoing successful development of the Erie Canal, no engineering feat seemed beyond the abilities of dedicated, hard-working men. Erie Canal Such a mammoth undertaking would require a huge investment in labor and material, both of which the vendors and laborers found in the Centre Market were only too happy to volunteer to provide.  With New York ravaged by an economic depression and a yellow fever epidemic, work was hard to find.  The prospect of steady employment at good wages, even of a temporary nature, was a godsend. Over the ensuing weeks, De Voe and Lozier signed up the hundreds of eager workmen, craftsmen, and suppliers required for their project: the manual laborers needed to do the work of sawing the island in half (twenty men per saw, provided they could demonstrate a suitable ability to hold their breath while sawing underwater), rowing it out past Governor's and Ellis Islands into the harbor (one hundred men per oar), pivoting it, bringing it back in, and re-attaching it; the carpenters and joiners needed to fashion twenty 100-foot-long saws with three-foot teeth and two dozen 250-foot-long oars; the blacksmiths and ironworkers needed to create twenty-four towering cast iron oarlocks as well as huge anchors with long chains (to prevent the island's being swept out to sea by an unexpected storm); the contractors needed to construct housing for all the workmen; and the farmers and butchers needed to supply hundreds and thousands head of cattle, pigs, and chickens to keep everyone fed. As the day for the commencement of the project drew near, De Voe and Lozier announced their intention to have their army of laborers proceed to the work site in two groups.  Author Joel Rose imagined the scene that day: The men began to arrive early, as they had been instructed. Some were carrying tools. Shovels, axes, picks. Some pushed wheelbarrows. Some came with their wives and children. Contractors and carpenters drove up in wagons loaded with lumber and hammers and saws. Butchers drove herds of cattle and hogs, carts loaded with crated chickens. At each site they were met by a fife-and-drum corps that had been engaged by Lozier to lead the army of workers in their triumphant trek north. The atmosphere was jovial and full of hope. Estimates were that between five hundred and a thousand workers had shown up at each locale. They stood around for some time to no avail. Finally after several hours, a contingent was sent back to Centre Market to see if either or both Lozier and De Voe could be located or to learn what had caused their delay. At the market a message had been left. The message said that the pair had had to leave town, owing to matters of their health. For an hour the workers hung around wondering what to do, while the fife-and-drum bands continued on with their music. The mood grew increasingly angry. Gradually it dawned on more and more of them that they had been 'handsomely sold.' Several hundred men had been foolishly humbugged in one of the most improbable, celebrated hoaxes in American history.  Or had they? Although numerous accounts of this elaborate jape have been penned throughout the years, they all trace to a single source: an account given over thirty years after the fact by John De Voe to his nephew Thomas, a member of the New York Historical Society.  Thomas De Voe eventually published his uncle's reminiscences in The Market Book, his historical account of public markets in several eastern cities, and it is from this one work that all information about the great ""Manhattan Sawed in Half"" hoax springs.  Single-source tales are often problematic, and indeed problems abound with this particular source.  John De Voe couldn't recall important details, such as the year the prank occurred (it was either 1823 or 1824; he didn't remember which) or the first name used by his partner Lozier.  And although he admitted that ""Lozier"" was a pseudonym, he couldn't recall his partner's real name, even though the two men were supposedly friends. More suspect, though, nobody other than John De Voe seems to have left any record whatsoever of his participation in this gargantuan put-on, or of the put-on itself.  No newspaper of the day made any mention of this mammoth undertaking, or its failure to come off.  No published journals, diaries, or letters by New Yorkers of the era include any reference to a plan that supposedly enlisted hundreds of local workers and supporters.   No writer found this story sufficiently interesting to chronicle while anyone involved with (or fooled by) it was still alive.  No arrests, prosecutions, or civil lawsuits followed in the wake of this cruel exploitation of public gullibility. Plenty of excuses are offered for this suspicious lack of documentation  that De Voe and Lozier had committed no crime, that no one involved wanted to embarrass himself by admitting he'd been taken in, that most of those duped were immigrants circumspect about speaking to outsiders  but the improbability of a such an absurd prank's very visibly ensnaring several hundred victims in the country's largest city yet remaining completely unremarked upon cannot be dismissed.  The hoax here isn't that two men once led hundreds of foolish New Yorkers into falling for an incredibly silly scheme -- the real hoax is that so many people since then have believed they did. It's possible that De Voe did have a partner, and that they did once briefly lead a few nave Centre Market denizens into falling for a tall tale about sawing Manhattan in half to keep it from sinking, but no credible evidence exists to verify that they pulled off anything on the scale attributed to them by latter-day chroniclers.  In the end, though, as writer Joel Rose concluded an account of his efforts to trace the origins of the hoax: The hoax may never have occurred, and therefore deserved no further notice. But ... it became evident that the hoax's authenticity no longer mattered.  The story was part of the fabric of the city's history, as much as Washington Irving's Diedrich Knickerbocker, and Asbury's own gangs of New York, and against a context of nineteenth century ruse, hoax, and humbug, it was important. Or, as Margo Jefferson put it more succinctly: ""The public enjoyed both tales ... People wanted to believe and know they'd be conned, as long as they didn't know when or how."" Jefferson, Margo.  On Michael Jackson On Michael Jackson Rose, Joel.  New York Sawed in Half: An Urban Historical New York Sawed in Half: An Urban Historical Sifakis, Carl.  The Big Book of Hoaxes The Big Book of Hoaxes",['investment'],False,"Maybe it sounded a bit incredible, but to an audience of uneducated New Yorkers who had witnessed the ongoing successful development of the Erie Canal, no engineering feat seemed beyond the abilities of dedicated, hard-working men.Jefferson, Margo.  On Michael JacksonRose, Joel.  New York Sawed in Half: An Urban HistoricalSifakis, Carl.  The Big Book of Hoaxes"
Was Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez unsuccessful in voting for her own bill?,['Some people might benefit from acquiring an understanding of how the U.S. Congress actually works.'],"On 7 February 2019, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York and Rep. Edward Markey of Massachusetts, both Democrats, introduced a five-page nonbinding resolution to the U.S. House of Representatives for the federal government to recognize its duty to establish a ""Green New Deal."" The controversial proposal incorporated seven goals previously articulated by Ocasio-Cortez for the U.S. to realize within ten years: dramatically expanding existing renewable power sources and deploying new production capacity with the goal of meeting 100% of national power demand through renewable sources; building a national, energy-efficient smart grid; upgrading every residential and industrial building for state-of-the-art energy efficiency, comfort, and safety; eliminating greenhouse gas emissions from manufacturing, agriculture, and other industries, including by investing in local-scale agriculture in communities across the country; repairing and improving transportation and other infrastructure, and upgrading water infrastructure to ensure universal access to clean water; funding massive investments in the drawdown of greenhouse gases; and making green technology, industry, expertise, products, and services a major export of the United States, with the aim of becoming the undisputed international leader in helping other countries transition to completely greenhouse gas-neutral economies and bringing about a global Green New Deal. The broader proposal also called for sweeping social measures such as ""a job guarantee program to assure a living wage job to every person who wants one,"" ""basic income programs,"" and ""universal health care programs."" On 26 March 2019, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell forced a preemptive vote in the U.S. Senate on a procedural motion to take up a binding form of the resolution, deriding the Green New Deal as a plan for ""basically outlawing the only sources of energy that working-class and middle-class families can actually afford,"" which would kill off entire domestic industries and eliminate millions of jobs. Democrats criticized McConnell's move as a ""sham"" intended to ""quash debate by blocking public hearings and expert testimony about the consequences of inaction on climate change"" and to hasten a vote in order to force Senate Democrats to commit to either supporting or rejecting the proposal at a very early stage. The criticism suggested that Republicans set up this vote to highlight potential splits in the Democratic caucus and force lawmakers to splinter from a high-profile, progressive idea. As the thinking goes, if only part of the Democratic caucus wound up backing the idea, Republicans could argue that it didn't actually have enough support from the party. Additionally, the move aimed to put Democrats from more moderate states in a tough position, forcing them to choose between backing a popular liberal idea and potentially turning off some of their constituents. ""The Senate vote is a perfect example of that kind of superficial approach to government,"" Ocasio-Cortez said. ""What McConnell's doing is trying to rush this bill to the floor without a hearing, without any markups, without working through committee because he doesn't want to save our planet. He thinks we can drink oil in 30 years when all our water is poisoned."" In the end, most Democrats didn't bite. All 53 Republicans in the Senate voted against the plan, but they were joined by just three Democrats and independent Sen. Angus King of Maine (who caucuses with Democrats). The remaining 43 Democratic senators all declined to commit and merely voted present in protest of the GOP's action. The procedural motion was thus voted down by a 57-0 margin. A meme circulated online afterward, offensively portraying Rep. Ocasio-Cortez as a ""100% retard"" for failing to ""even vote for [her] own bill."" The implications of that meme were wrong on two counts: 1) The Senate was not voting on whether to accept or reject Ocasio-Cortez's ""Green New Deal"" resolution. What the Senate voted on was a different form of the resolution, and what they voted against was not the resolution itself but a motion for cloture, the step of agreeing to end debate on a bill so that Senate consideration of it can move forward. This was not the non-binding Green New Deal resolution introduced by Sen. Edward Markey and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Feb. 7. Instead, this was a version that McConnell himself introduced, and it was a binding resolution. Instead of voting on whether ""it is the sense of the Senate"" that the government has a duty to create a Green New Deal, senators would have been skipping ahead to vote on whether the Green New Deal should become ""the policy of the United States,"" without so much as a hearing. Under Senate rules, making it binding was the only way McConnell could hold a show vote without the usual process of assigning the legislation to the appropriate committees for discussion and debate. That would put a public spotlight on experts testifying and debate over climate solutions, something McConnell sought to avoid. Technically, the Senate voted on whether to end debate on McConnell's motion to proceed to consideration of his version of a Green New Deal resolution. This ""cloture"" vote wasn't on the substance of the Green New Deal. McConnell's aim was not to actually consider the Green New Deal, which he describes as a ""socialist"" plan that would ""uproot life as we know it."" He was hoping the vote would kill talk of a Green New Deal in its infancy while putting Democrats on the spot. 2) Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is a member of the U.S. House of Representatives, not a member of the U.S. Senate, and thus she had no opportunity to vote on the cloture motion at all. In short, Rep. Ocasio-Cortez didn't ""neglect"" or ""forget"" to participate in the referenced Green New Deal vote; she wasn't eligible to take part in it because she isn't a member of the Senate. Nor was the vote that took place in the Senate one that directly addressed the merits or deficiencies of her Green New Deal resolution.",['income'],False,"On 7 February 2019, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York and Rep. Edward Markey of Massachusetts, both Democrats, introduced a five-page nonbinding resolution to the U.S. House of Representatives for federal government to recognize its duty to establish a ""Green New Deal.""The broader proposal also called for sweeping social measures such as ""a job guarantee program to assure a living wage job to every person who wants one,"" ""basic income programs"" and ""universal health care programs.""Democrats criticized McConnell's move as a ""sham"" intended to ""quash debate by blocking public hearings and expert testimony about the consequences of inaction on climate change"" and to hasten a vote in order to force Senate Democrats to commit to either supporting or rejecting the proposal at a very early stage:In the event, most Democrats didn't bite. All 53 Republicans in the Senate voted against the plan, but they were joined by just three Democrats and independent Sen. Angus King of Maine (who caucuses with Democrats). The remaining 43 Democratic senators all declined to commit and merely voted present in protest of the GOPs action. The procedural motion was thus voted down by a 57-0 margin.1) The Senate was not voting on whether to accept or reject Ocasio-Cortez's ""Green New Deal"" resolution. What the Senate voted on was a different form of the resolution, and what they voted against was not the resolution itself but a motion for cloture, the step of agreeing to end debate on a bill so that Senate consideration of it can move forward:Instead, this was a version that McConnell himself introduced, and it was a binding resolution. Instead of voting on whether ""it is the sense of the Senate"" that the government has a duty to create a Green New Deal, senators would have been skipping ahead to vote on whether the Green New Deal should become ""the policy of the United States,"" without so much as a hearing."
Betty White on 'Grow Some Balls',"[""A popular joke about the wisdom of the saying 'Grow some balls' is falsely attributed to actress Betty White.""]","A popular meme circulating since 2011 via the Internet quotes nonagenarian comic actress Betty White thusly:  But while the observation has much of the cadence, attitude and wit that have made White so beloved by American audiences over the years, she never uttered those words and made no bones about it when they were recited to her by a writer for The Guardian: ""That's what I hate about Facebook and the internet. They can say you said anything. I never would have said that. I'd never say that in a million years."" The Guardian So, who did say it? Partial credit goes to New York standup comedian Sheng Wang, who delivered a lengthier version of the joke on the 28 January 2011 episode of Comedy Central Presents: Sheng Wang Comedy Central Presents A friend said to me, ""Hey you need to grow a pair. Grow a pair, Bro."" It's when someone calls you weak, but they associate it with a lack of testicles. Which is weird, because testicles are the most sensitive things in the world. If you suddenly just grew a pair, you'd be a lot more vulnerable. If you want to be tough, you should lose a pair. If you want to be real tough, you should grow a vagina. Those things can take a pounding. And it appears that Wang's routine borrowed heavily from a bit by comedian Hal Sparks, ""Pussy Is Tougher,"" which aired on Showtime in 2010. Pussy Is Tougher Cragg, Michael.""Betty White: TV's Golden Girl on 63 Years in Show Business.""
The Guardian.9 November 2012.",['credit'],False,"But while the observation has much of the cadence, attitude and wit that have made White so beloved by American audiences over the years, she never uttered those words and made no bones about it when they were recited to her by a writer for The Guardian: ""That's what I hate about Facebook and the internet. They can say you said anything. I never would have said that. I'd never say that in a million years.""So, who did say it? Partial credit goes to New York standup comedian Sheng Wang, who delivered a lengthier version of the joke on the 28 January 2011 episode of Comedy Central Presents:And it appears that Wang's routine borrowed heavily from a bit by comedian Hal Sparks, ""Pussy Is Tougher,"" which aired on Showtime in 2010."
Did Donald Trump claim that the Earth is flat?,['Rumors that the President-elect believes the world is flat originated from a hoax and satire web site.'],"In December 2016, rumors flew about Donald Trump's personal beliefs and connections as he continued to announce picks for his incoming administration. One such rumor was a meme with a quote that purported to be from the President-elect, painting him as a flat-earther: flat-earther   mocked up Speaking to reporters in Baltimore on Monday, following the 138th conference for the National Guard Association of the United States, the Republican Partys presidential nominee revealed that he is a member of a growing population known generally as flat earth truthers. I fly a lot, and I mean a lot. No one flies more than me. Listen, I own a jet. I own a 757, beautiful plane, its the best plane! If the world were round, believe me, I would know! The comments came in response to a question from AP reporter, Charles Darr, regarding the future role of the National Guard, as private companies proliferate space travel. Mr. Trump, if elected, are you willing to increase taxes in order to meet the growing budget demands of the National Guard, as existential threats from our enemies grow along with the advancement of space travel technology? Darr asked. The presidential hopeful replied that such a future is nonsense, adding that the round earth people, and you know who they are, these people have an agenda. CNN.com.de (like many pages of its ilk) is not affiliated with the legitimate news organization CNN. The site uses a web address similar to CNN.com's in order to trick readers into believe that they are reading genuine news items. However, this web site does not publish factual stories. publish While there is no disclaimer on the web site that specifically states its content is fictional, it does provide several hints that its stories are hoaxes. For instance, the provided contact number of (785) 273-0325 does not lead to CNN's, but that of the Westboro Baptist Church.  (785) 273-0325 ",['taxes'],False,"In December 2016, rumors flew about Donald Trump's personal beliefs and connections as he continued to announce picks for his incoming administration. One such rumor was a meme with a quote that purported to be from the President-elect, painting him as a flat-earther:CNN.com.de (like many pages of its ilk) is not affiliated with the legitimate news organization CNN. The site uses a web address similar to CNN.com's in order to trick readers into believe that they are reading genuine news items. However, this web site does not publish factual stories.While there is no disclaimer on the web site that specifically states its content is fictional, it does provide several hints that its stories are hoaxes. For instance, the provided contact number of (785) 273-0325 does not lead to CNN's, but that of the Westboro Baptist Church. "
Did Nick Saban Endorse Joe Biden?,"['As far as we can tell, the University of Alabama football coach has not officially endorsed either candidate for U.S. president. ']","An image supposedly showing a meme that was posted to 2020 Democratic U.S. presidential nominee Joe Biden's Facebook page featuring an endorsement from University of Alabama's football coach Nick Saban was circulated on social media in September 2020: This image was not shared to Biden's Facebook page, and it does not show a genuine endorsement from Saban.   This image first started circulating in April 2020, when it was posted to College Football Trash Talk Nation, a Facebook page that describes its content as a mix of ""memes, satirical quotes, trash talk and more."" While this image was originally shared as a joke, it was recirculated on social media as if it were genuine after Saban showed support for the Black Lives Matter movement in August 2020. College Football Trash Talk Nation Alabama.com reported: reported Alabama coach Nick Saban led a march Monday afternoon of hundreds of the universitys athletes, coaches and staff that was organized to protest racial injustice in the country. Saban was at the front of a large crowd of players who walked from the Mal Moore athletic facility to Foster Auditoriums schoolhouse door. Senior running back Najee Harris walked next to Saban wearing a T-shirt reading, Defend Black Lives; racial solidarity against this corrupt system. Other players walked behind Saban holding a banner reading, Black Lives Matter. The march was also advertised on social media over the weekend by players with the hashtag #BLM. As the Black Lives Matter movement has received support from Biden and various other liberal politicians, and condemnation from U.S. President Donald Trump and conservative politicians, Saban's involvement in this march was interpreted by some on social media as a tacit endorsement of Biden. When purveyors of misinformation started to recirculate this meme, some were ready to believe that it was real.  But this image does not feature a genuine quote from Saban, nor does it show a genuine image that was shared by the Biden campaign. This meme was created using a still from an advertisement Saban did for Aflac insurance:  It should also be noted that while Saban did march against racial injustice, he has not officially endorsed Biden for president. As far as we can tell, Saban has not endorsed anyone for president in 2020, and judging by his previous comments, he likely won't be endorsing anyone soon.  In 2016, Saban explained why he didn't endorse a candidate for president: explained If I say I like one person, that means everybody that voted for the other person doesn't like me. So, why would I do that? I want what's best for our country. I'm not sure I can figure that out. I want what's best for people who want to improve the quality of their life. I hope whoever our leader is will do all that he can do to make our country safe and improve the quality of life for a lot of the people we have in our country and I don't think I am qualified to determine who that should be. Alabama.com.  ""Nick Saban Leads Black Lives Matter March in Tuscaloosa.""
  31 August 2020. Sports Illustrated.  ""Alabama Coach Nick Saban Says He Was Unaware of Election."" 
 10 November 2016.",['insurance'],False,"This image was not shared to Biden's Facebook page, and it does not show a genuine endorsement from Saban. This image first started circulating in April 2020, when it was posted to College Football Trash Talk Nation, a Facebook page that describes its content as a mix of ""memes, satirical quotes, trash talk and more."" While this image was originally shared as a joke, it was recirculated on social media as if it were genuine after Saban showed support for the Black Lives Matter movement in August 2020.Alabama.com reported:In 2016, Saban explained why he didn't endorse a candidate for president:"
Volkswagen Passat,['High mileage Volkswagen Passat automobiles cannot be purchased in the United States?'],"Claim:  The U.S. government prohibits high mileage Volkswagen Passat automobiles from being purchased by U.S. customers.  Examples:  [Collected via e-mail, May 2012] VW Passat 78.5 MPG in the UK  Below is an email about the VW Passat that is made in the USA which gets over 70MPG but is not allow to be sold in the USA.  Just one more Washington Red Flag.I have included a short youtube video and a link to VW UK web site which confirms video is correct. Checked out VW web site and you can order any car they have for sale unless you are a US Citizen. As a US Citizen VW will not deliver the higher mileage cars they manufacture in the US to US Citizens. This is true and can be verified by just trying to buy one of these cars with the blue motion engine for shipment from the US to any destination in the US. I didnt go to the Ford UK web site to check out Ford but Rick has and he says Ford has several models for sale manufactured in the US with mileage of better than 71 miles per gallon on the highway that also are available for sale in Europe but not the US.  VW Web Site: https://www.volkswagen.co.uk/#/new/passat-estate-vii/which-model/engines/fuel-consumption/ https://www.volkswagen.co.uk/#/new/passat-estate-vii/which-model/engines/fuel-consumption/  Origins:  May 2012 saw the circulation of the message cited above, one which claimed that Volkswagen Passat vehicles with 70+ miles per gallon (MPG) figures manufactured in the U.S. were readily available in the UK, but U.S. government regulations prohibited their being sold to U.S. customers.  These claims appear to be misleading, however. First of all, a UK gallon is not the equivalent of a U.S. gallon: 1 UK gallon = 1.2 U.S. gallons, so MPG figures for automobiles in the UK are inflated by 20% relative to U.S. figures.  Additionally, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) process for determining average mileage ratings is generally more stringent than the process used  in other countries, so EPA ratings tend to be on the conservative side.  Therefore, taking both factors into consideration, a car rated at 70 MPG in the UK would likely be EPA rated somewhere around the mid- to high-40 MPG range.  Second, we found no evidence of U.S. government regulations that would prohibit the sale of automobiles such as the referenced Volkswagen Passat in the United states solely because of their mileage ratings.  In general, when an automobile manufacturer offers a particular model of vehicle in other parts of the world but not the U.S., it's because that model has features that don't appeal to U.S. buyers or because the model does not meet U.S. safety or environmental standards.  In the case of the Volkswagen Passat models mentioned here, their lack of availability in the U.S. is likely due to a combination of those factors. Others have noted that U.S. consumers tend to focus less on mileage and prefer gasoline-powered cars with automatic transmissions and larger, higher-performance engines, but the UK version of the Passat cited here is a diesel-powered car with a manual transmission and a smaller, lower-performing engine: The UK Passat engine is very small (the 0-60 time is 12.5 seconds with a manual transmission) and most Americans won't accept such poor performance. Diesel fuel doesn't have a tax-preferred status here in the U.S. either, and the engine is probably at a premium cost due to new technology. What's more is that vehicles in the UK (but not the U.S.) are taxed by carbon emission, so vehicles in the UK are sold with a much wider choice of engines, usually including diesels and far smaller engines than are available for these vehicles in the U.S., because there is a high cost of operating the vehicle already (i.e., higher fuel prices) and these engines minimize the carbon tax portion. The dynamics of car ownership and manufacturing cars in the US versus the UK is vastly different: it's not really the regulations that are to blame.  Manufacturers don't bother to get U.S. EPA certifications because they know that the demand isn't there, especially right now when the demand is for hybrid (or at the really high end, electric). I doubt that such a car would be viable to sell: people in the U.S. don't put much stock in to gas mileage in comparison to power demands. If you are going to charge a premium, you have to offer something noticeably different, and diesel probably isn't going to pass muster for most folks.  Diesel vehicles in the U.S. have a bad reputation. Also, as reported in a Pure Energy Systems News (PESN) article on this topic, a Manager of Product and Technology Communications for Volkswagen of America Inc. stated that: article VW used to sell the same (or similar?) Passat as is sold in Europe here in the US. But it didn't sell very well. It was too expensive and too small in the mid-size sedan segment. So they came up with a larger version with a better price point; and of course the size effects the mileage. Volkswagen's response to our query was non-committal, stating only that they could not say when Bluemotion technology vehicles like the UK version of the Passat would be available in the U.S. We recognize that in this current economic climate, the desires of the driving public have changed.  Many consumers have realized that efficiency and economy are the true values of an automobile. Emissions standards have increased, and we are working to be both ecologically responsible and provide fuel efficient vehicles people want. VW continues to research all options for fuel efficiency. We have no further information at this time if, or when the Bluemotion technology will be available in the US. Last updated:  14 May 2012 ",['economy'],False,"https://www.volkswagen.co.uk/#/new/passat-estate-vii/which-model/engines/fuel-consumption/Also, as reported in a Pure Energy Systems News (PESN) article on this topic, a Manager of Product and Technology Communications for Volkswagen of America Inc. stated that:"
Are US Citizens Married to Immigrants Excluded from COVID-19 Stimulus Checks?,"['The answer, in part, depends on how couples filed their taxes.']","Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease. 

In the weeks that followed the U.S. federal government's March 2020 approval of a $2.2 trillion stimulus package, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, to jumpstart a pandemic-broken economy, journalists and economists combed through the legislation's 247-page PDF document outlining who would receive financial help. Early news reports on the bill highlighted its funding boosts to help newly unemployed Americans, small businesses facing diminished profits, health care facilities on the frontlines of fighting the COVID-19 coronavirus disease, and qualifying taxpayers by giving them one-time checks of about $1,200 (or more depending on how they filed taxes and their number of children). Then, in mid-April, more headlines focused on the intricacies of the multi-faceted policy package, including the claim that U.S. citizens married to immigrants wouldn't qualify for the one-time payments like other taxpayers. 

Numerous readers contacted Snopes to investigate the truth behind the claim. For our examination, we first looked at where the claim originated. On April 20, the Los Angeles Times published a news story headlined, ""These U.S. citizens won't get coronavirus stimulus checks because their spouses are immigrants,"" featuring stories of four couples, each of which includes an immigrant and will not be receiving the payments, as well as commentary from immigrant-rights advocates. The following day, CBS News published a story that cited the LA Times' reporting. Then, on April 22, Yahoo!'s lifestyle section republished an article from the so-called ScaryMommy website, a self-proclaimed source of ""entertainment and information for millennial moms online."" The post included editorialized phrasing, such as: ""They just hate immigrants, and now, by default, American citizens who associate with them,"" the Scary Mommy post read, referring to the federal administration under U.S. President Donald Trump. ""The government is leaving those people (and their families) out of help, and it's heartbreaking."" A rush of tweets, some lacking important context, followed. Among the sharers of the LA Times story was U.S. Sen. Claire Celsi, a Democrat from Iowa, who said on Twitter: Responding to her tweet, however, one user wrote: ""I'm an immigrant. My wife is a U.S. citizen. We got $2,400 as a direct deposit on April 15th. This is no less misleading than posting 'immigrants commit crimes.' It's technically true, but there is no causal link."" 

Cue this fact check on who is and isn't eligible for the stimulus checks, called Economic Impact Payments, based on 2019 or 2018 tax returns. For those who are eligible, the CARES Act authorized the federal government to send: Additionally, for single tax filers with higher annual salaries but less than $99,000, the federal government is reducing the payments by $5 for each $100 above the $75,000 threshold (similar math goes for payments to families). But to qualify, a recipient must be a ""U.S. citizen, permanent resident, or qualifying resident alien"" under guidelines established by the Internal Revenue Service. The latter two categorizations cover foreign-born residents who have obtained green cards to prove their legal status to work and live in the country and Social Security Numbers (SSN). The provision in the CARES Act outlining the payments states: That means immigrants who do not have legal status are excluded from the stimulus payments, even if they have work visas or use an Individual Taxpayer Identification Number (which the IRS issues to workers without SSNs) to pay annual taxes. Additionally, if they file joint tax returns with their spouses, both parties are ineligible for the checks; the CARES Act's provisions require both parties on a couple's return to have SSNs and will not accept joint returns with one or more Individual Taxpayer ID numbers. (Different standards apply to military couples, however: ""If either spouse is a member of the U.S. Armed Forces at any time during the taxable year, then only one spouse needs to have a valid SSN,"" according to the IRS.) 

According to the Migration Policy Institute, a nonpartisan research center, roughly 1.2 million immigrants without green cards are married to a U.S. citizen. Of that amount, the spouses who are U.S. citizens and filed single tax returns, regardless of their partner's immigration status, qualify to receive an individualized payment amount based on their income. Given that significant caveat, as well as the fact that immigrants with green cards are eligible for the checks, we rate this claim a ""Mixture"" of true and false: U.S. citizens who filed joint tax returns with spouses who are immigrants without Social Security Numbers won't receive the payments, but spouses of immigrants with legal status will.",['economy'],NEI,"Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And, please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease. In the weeks that followed the U.S. federal government's March 2020 approval of a $2.2 trillion stimulus package  the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act  to jumpstart a pandemic-broken economy, journalists and economists combed through the legislation's 247-page PDF document outlining who would receive the financial help.Early news reports on the bill had highlighted its funding boosts to help newly unemployed Americans, small businesses facing diminished profits, health care facilities on the frontlines of fighting the COVID-19 coronavirus disease, and qualifying taxpayers by giving them one-time checks of about $1,200 (or more depending on how they filed taxes and their number of children). Then, in mid-April, more headlines focused on the intricacies of the multi-faceted policy package  including the claim that U.S. citizens married to immigrants wouldn't qualify for the one-time payments like other taxpayers.For our examination, we first looked at where the claim originated. On April 20, the Los Angeles Times published a news story headlined, ""These U.S. citizens won't get coronavirus stimulus checks  because their spouses are immigrants,"" featuring stories of four couples, each of which includes an immigrant and will not be receiving the payments, as well as commentary from immigrant-rights advocates. The following day, CBS News published a story that cited the LA Times' reporting. Then, on April 22, Yahoo!'s lifestyle section republished an article from the so-called ScaryMommy website, a self-proclaimed source of ""entertainment and information for millennial moms online."" The post included editorialized phrasing, such as:Responding to her tweet, however, one user wrote: ""I'm an immigrant. My wife is a US citizen. We got $2,400 as a direct deposit on April 15th. This is no less misleading than posting 'immigrants commit crimes.' It's technically true, but there is no causal link.""But to qualify, a recipient must be a ""U.S. citizen, permanent resident or qualifying resident alien"" under guidelines established by the Internal Revenue Service. The latter two categorizations cover foreign-born residents who have obtained green cards to prove their legal status to work and live in the country and Social Security Numbers (SSN). The provision in the CARES Act outlining the payments states:According to the Migration Policy Institute, a nonpartisan research center, roughly 1.2 million immigrants without green cards are married to a U.S. citizen. Of that amount, the spouses who are U.S. citizens and filed single tax returns  regardless of their partner's immigration status  qualify to receive an individualized payment amount based on their income."