Datasets:

1-800-SHARED-TASKS

/

COLING-2025-FINNLP-FMD

like 2

Follow

1-800-Shared-Tasks 33

Did Carter Sell His Peanut Farm When He Became President?

['Social media users were back in the business of comparing presidential business practices in spring 2020. ']

As U.S. President-elect Donald Trump prepared to take office in December 2016, multiple news reports addressed the potential conflicts of interest he would face as he transitioned from a businessman to chief executive. Many critics urged Trump to divest himself of his businesses and cited former U.S. President Jimmy Carter's sale of his peanut farm as an exemplary model of how to head off such potential conflicts of interest. In May 2020, after an appeals court ruled that a lawsuit could proceed alleging that Trump had violated the constitution by receiving foreign money through his hotels, comparisons between Carter and Trump once again gained traction on social media. While Carter did place his businesses into a blind trust before he was elected president in 1977, he didn't actually sell his peanut farm until he left office in 1981. On Jan. 5, 1977, Carter released a plan detailing how his assets would be handled when he assumed office. Carter listed eight actions that he would take to avoid conflicts of interest, including transferring Carter's Warehouse, Carter Farms, and all funds related to those business ventures into a trust. The transition group studied existing laws and regulations regarding conflicts of interest and the regulation of ethics for officials in the executive branch of government. The existing law is extremely strong in prohibiting outside earned income. Governor Carter heavily approves of that law and its policy. In order to prevent possible financial conflicts of interest while President, Governor Jimmy Carter is taking the following actions: 1. All common stock is being sold, consisting of 100 shares of Rich's, Inc. and 956 shares of Advanced Investors. A small net loss on this stock is likely. 2. Jimmy Carter's interest in (a) Carter's Warehouse and Carter Farms, Inc., and any funds related to them (b) all property except the private home and personal items, and (c) his father's estate will be transferred to a trust. Income or principal from the trust will be available to Jimmy Carter but only as distributions of cash. Carter's business suffered significantly while he served as president, but it wasn't until he left office in 1981 that the decision was made to sell the family farm. While he served as president, Jimmy Carter placed the family farm supply business into the protection of a blind trust before he left for Washington, D.C. in 1977. This trust allowed a law firm in Atlanta to take full administration of the farm supply business during his years in the White House. The Carters felt that relinquishing the business to someone else's care would separate them from these affairs and avoid the possibility of their financial holdings resembling any conflict of interest while President Carter was in office. Their personal counsel, Charles Kirbo of the Atlanta law firm, was their financial trustee. Following the election loss in 1981, the Carters were informed by Charles Kirbo that because of three years of drought and several changes in warehouse management, they were over $1 million in debt. As they struggled to recover from the unexpected financial blow, the solution to their problem became evident. The Carters sold the family business and also began writing books, which helped them recover financially. Regarding a meme's claim that Carter was still building houses at the age of 92, that is, for the most part, true. Carter has been building houses with Habitat for Humanity since 1984. At the age of 92, he was still actively participating in the construction of new homes. The above-displayed meme is a few years old, however, as Carter is 95 years old at the time of this writing in May 2020. If the text of this meme was altered to give Carter's current age, it would still be true. In October 2019, shortly after suffering a fall at his home that required stitches, Carter was back on the construction site. A Habitat for Humanity's Jimmy & Rosalynn Carter Work Project has also been announced in the Dominican Republic for November 2020, but it's unclear if Carter will travel to the country to take part in the construction. Since beginning their work with Habitat for Humanity in 1984, President and Mrs. Carter have helped to build, renovate, and repair 4,390 homes in 14 countries alongside more than 104,000 volunteers through their annual work project. Since its founding in 1976, Habitat has served more than 22 million people around the world. "We are honored to host the 2020 Jimmy & Rosalynn Carter Work Project in the Dominican Republic," said Cesarina Fabin, national director of Habitat for Humanity Dominican Republic. "President and Mrs. Carter are shining examples of service. We are so grateful for their commitment to building a world where everyone has a safe and decent place to live." In summary, Carter placed his peanut farm into a blind trust when he took office in 1977. It wasn't until he left office four years later that the farm was sold. With that in mind, we rate this claim "Mixture."

['income']

NEI

As U.S. President-elect Donald Trump prepared to take office in December 2016, multiple news reports addressed the potential conflicts of interest he would face as he transitioned from a businessman to chief executive. Many critics urged Trump to divest himself of his businesses and cited former U.S. President Jimmy Carter's sale of his peanut farm as an exemplary model of how to head off such potential conflicts:In May 2020, after an appeals court ruled that a lawsuit could proceed alleging that Trump had violated the constitution by receiving foreign money through his hotels, comparisons between Carter and Trump once again gained traction on social media:On Jan. 5, 1977, Carter released a plan detailing how his assets would be handled when he assumed office. Carter listed eight actions that he would take to avoid conflicts of interest, including transferring Carter's Warehouse, Carter Farms, and all funds related to those business ventures into a trust:Carter's business suffered significantly while he served as president, but it wasn't until he left office in 1981 that the decision was made to sell the family farm:If the text of this meme was altered to give Carter's current age, it would still be true. In October 2019, shortly after suffering a fall at his home that required stitches, Carter was back on the construction site. A Habitat for Humanitys Jimmy & Rosalynn Carter Work Project has also been announced in the Dominican Republic for November 2020, but it's unclear if Carter will travel to the country to take part in the construction:

Does Johns Hopkins University's Coronavirus Map Contain Malware?

['Malicious actors often attempt to spread malware by disguising it as information from credible sources.']

In March 2020, as the outbreak of the novel coronavirus escalated into a global pandemic, concerned citizens around the world turned to the internet in search of information about the disease caused by the virus, COVID-19. They sought guidance from organizations such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the World Health Organization (WHO) to gain an accurate understanding of how rapidly the disease was spreading, where cases were being reported, and what actions they should take to keep themselves and their communities safe. The CDC, WHO, and Johns Hopkins University also provided valuable resources, including a real-time map that illustrated the global spread of the disease. At the time of this writing, the map from Johns Hopkins' Coronavirus Research Center shows 137,445 total confirmed cases, resulting in just over 5,000 deaths. Unfortunately, malicious actors viewed the heightened concerns about COVID-19 as an opportunity to spread misinformation and malware. On March 9, 2020, Reason Security released a report stating that maps similar to the one mentioned above were being used to deceive people into downloading malware. As global awareness of the coronavirus pandemic gradually shifted to widespread panic, and as governments began intensifying their efforts to combat the virus and protect their citizens, global news agencies found themselves racing to meet the public's demand for accurate information about new coronavirus-related infections, deaths, and transmissions. This demand created a vulnerability that malicious actors quickly exploited by disseminating malware disguised as a coronavirus map. Reason Labs cybersecurity researcher Shai Alfasi discovered and analyzed this malware, which weaponized coronavirus map applications to steal credentials such as usernames, passwords, credit card numbers, and other sensitive information stored in users' browsers. Attackers can use this information for various purposes, including selling it on the deep web or gaining access to bank accounts or social media. Hacker News explained that this malware attack targets individuals searching for any maps related to COVID-19, tricking them into downloading a map that runs a malicious application on the user's computer. Once downloaded, the map appears similar to the legitimate one from Johns Hopkins, but the software compromises the computer and attempts to steal personal information, such as passwords and credit card details. The malware specifically aims to target those seeking cartographic representations of the spread of COVID-19 on the internet, deceiving them into downloading and running a malicious application that displays a map loaded from a legitimate online source while compromising the computer in the background. The real map from Johns Hopkins is accessible online and does not require any software downloads. You can view the real-time tracking map by visiting the official Johns Hopkins website, which is safe and free from malware. ESRI, the company that provided the geographic information system (GIS) software to create Johns Hopkins' real-time coronavirus tracking map, attempted to clarify some of the confusion in a blog post. The company stated that the legitimate online map found on Johns Hopkins' site "does NOT contain any malware (and NEVER contained malware)." Reports from Hacker News and similar sources refer to a scam that uses an impostor version of the Hopkins map to trick users into downloading malware. ESRI emphasized that an increasing number of articles have been published online with unclear and sometimes misleading information regarding one of the primary dashboards for tracking the spread of the coronavirus. To clarify, the online map posted by Johns Hopkins University at https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/map.html does NOT contain any malware (and NEVER contained malware). This popular dashboard web application is hosted by Esri as part of their ArcGIS Online offering. The confusion arises from a situation where a malicious individual created a downloadable Windows-based application containing malware that closely resembles the Johns Hopkins Coronavirus browser-based dashboard. The person who posted the malicious downloadable app is attempting to exploit the hype surrounding the coronavirus, requiring users to either download the app executable or distribute it via email for users to install on their local Windows systems. Once downloaded and installed, the malicious app deploys malware called AZORult, designed to steal credentials in the background, among other activities. To mislead users into thinking they are accessing a coronavirus map viewer, the app calls the URL of the Johns Hopkins dashboard and displays the results within the application window. In summary, you can safely browse the coronavirus dashboard on the web without needing to download any software. If you encounter someone offering a coronavirus dashboard that requires software to be downloaded, do not use it! A real-time map tracking the spread of COVID-19 around the globe is available for viewing on the Johns Hopkins University website. This map is safe to use and does not require any software downloads. If you come across an email or social media post asking you to download a similar map, exercise caution, as it is likely an attempt to trick you into downloading malware.

['credit']

NEI

In March 2020, as the outbreak of the novel coronavirus grew into a global pandemic, worried citizens of the world took to the internet in search of information about the disease caused by the virus, COVID-19. They turned to organizations such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the World Health Organization (WHO) to get an accurate picture of how fast the disease was spreading, where cases were being reported, and what they should do to keep themselves (and their communities) safe.This is a genuine map from Johns Hopkins that is safe to access here.Unfortunately, malicious actors saw the heightened concerns about COVID-19 as an opportunity to start spreading misinformation and malware. On March 9, 2020, Reason Security released a report stating that maps similar to the one above were being used to trick people into downloading malware: Hacker News explained that this malware attack targets people who are searching for any maps about COVID-19 and tricks them into downloading a map with a file that runs a malicious application on the user's computer. Once downloaded, the map appears similar to the legitimate map from Johns Hopkins shown above, but the software will actually compromise the computer and attempt to steal personal information, such as passwords and credit card information. The real map from Johns Hopkins is viewable online and does not require you to download any software to use it. You can access the real-time tracking map by visiting this website. This is the official URL from Johns Hopkins, and no indication exists that this site is unsafe or infected with malware. ESRI writes (emphasis ours):In summary, a real-time map that tracks the spread of COVID-19 around the globe is available to view on the Johns Hopkins University website. This map is safe to use and does not require you to download any software. If you encounter an email or social media post that asks you to download a similar map, be cautious. It's likely someone is attempting to trick you into downloading a piece of malware.

Russian forces will be responsible for ensuring the safety at events held in the United States.

['Will Russian forces be providing security at large events in the U.S.?']

Claim: Russian forces will be providing security at large events in the U.S. Examples: [Collected via e-mail, July 2013] I have been told that some sort of deal between the Obama administration and the Russian govt. would allow Russian military forces to act as security, on American soil, during large, special events (such as Super Bowl) or in the case of national emergencies. Any truth here? I already know how the Constitution treats such things. Now days, it doesn't seem to matter tho. Has FEMA struck an agreement with Russia that will provide for the Russian Military to provide crowd control at U.S. events on American Soil? This was reported as true in a post I saw on FB and reported that these soldiers would be able to fire on and kill Americans on U.S. soil. Origins: On 26 June 2013, Russia announced an agreement between the United States Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the Russian Emergency Situations Ministry to share information and observation opportunities with first responders and emergency managers from each other's countries during joint rescue operations: announced The Russian Emergency Situations Ministry and the USA Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) are going to exchange experts during joint rescue operations in major disasters. This is provided by a protocol of the fourth meeting of the U.S.-Russia Bilateral Presidential Commission Working Group on Emergency Situations and seventeenth meeting of Joint U.S.-Russia Cooperation Committee on Emergency Situations, which took place in Washington on 25 June. The document provides for expert cooperation in disaster response operations and to study the latest practices. In addition, the parties approved of U.S.-Russian cooperation in this field in 2013-2014, which envisages exchange of experience including in monitoring and forecasting emergency situations, training of rescuers, development of mine-rescuing and provision of security at mass events. At the end of the meeting the parties expressed their satisfaction with the level of cooperation between the Russian Federation and the United States in the area of emergency prevention and response and agreed to develop it in order to respond efficiently to all kinds of disasters. The conspiracy site Infowars then spun this announcement into a claim that Russian military forces would be providing security for large events in the United States such as the Super Bowl and presidential inaugurations: Infowars As part of a deal signed last week in Washington DC between the Russian Emergency Situations Ministry and FEMA, Russian officials will provide "security at mass events" in the United States, a scenario that wont sit well with Americans wary of foreign assets operating on US soil. According to a press release by the Ministry of the Russian Federation for Civil Defense and Emergencies, US and Russian officials met on June 25 at the 17th Joint U.S.-Russia Cooperation Committee on Emergency Situations. In addition to agreeing with FEMA to "exchange experts during joint rescue operations in major disasters," the Russian Emergency Situations Ministry will also be providing "security at mass events" in the United States. This suggests that events designated as "National Special Security Events" by the Department of Homeland Security, which include the Super Bowl, international summits such as the G8 and presidential inaugurations, will now rely partly on Russian authorities to provide security. However, the Infowars article was an alarmist, far-fetched interpretation of the original announcement, which said nothing about Russia's providing security for events taking place within the U.S. The Russian Emergency Situations Ministry announcement merely noted that "provision of security at mass events" was one of the areas of interest which the two countries hoped to study and learn about from each other as part of their joint agreement. FEMA and the Russian news agency RIA Novosti quickly debunked Infowars' unsupported assumption, stating plainly that the U.S. and Russia would not be deploying security guards or military forces in each other's countries: The top US emergency response agency moved to quell a flurry of Internet-driven speculation that Russian security teams could be deployed at large public events in the United States, saying the two countries will not swap security guards or soldiers under a long-running partnership agreement. There will be "no exchange of security or military personnel" under a recently renewed partnership between the US Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and Russias Emergency Situations Ministry, a FEMA spokesman told RIA Novosti. "The agreement continues information-sharing meetings and observation opportunities with first responders and emergency managers," the spokesman said. Picking up on an Emergency Situations Ministry statement declaring that partnership agreement "envisages the exchange of experience" in "the provision of security at mass events," numerous websites suspicious of the US governments encroachment on its citizens' rights suggested the deal means Russian security guards could be deployed at major public gatherings. The libertarian website Infowars.com, run by radio host and conspiracy theorist Alex Jones, proposed these events could include US presidential inaugurations and the Super Bowl. The FEMA spokesman said that while the US agency will not exchange security or military personnel with its Russian counterpart, the two sides "agreed to an exchange of emergency management experts to share best practices a continuation of a 17 year partnership." Last updated: 2 July 2013

['share']

False

Origins: On 26 June 2013, Russia announced an agreement between the United States Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the Russian Emergency Situations Ministry to share information and observation opportunities with first responders and emergency managers from each other's countries during joint rescue operations:The conspiracy site Infowars then spun this announcement into a claim that Russian military forces would be providing security for large events in the United States such as the Super Bowl and presidential inaugurations:

Is There a 'BTS Meal' at McDonald's?

['The Korean pop boy band BTS bagged seven Guinness World Records in 2020. ']

In mid-April 2021, the fast-food empire McDonald's announced a meal collaboration with the Korean pop boy band BTS. The announcement rocked Twitter, inciting tweets from the millions-strong fanbase of the musical group. The collaboration was revealed on TikTok and Twitter by the fast-food company and BIGHIT MUSIC, the record label of BTS. In an email to Snopes, McDonald's stated that the signature meal is set to include a 10-piece Chicken McNuggets, medium World Famous Fries, a medium Coke, and, for the first time ever in the U.S., sweet chili and cajun dipping sauces inspired by popular recipes from McDonald's South Korea. "BTS truly lights up the world stage, uniting people across the globe through their music," said Morgan Flatley, Chief Marketing Officer of McDonald's USA. "We're excited to bring customers even closer to their beloved band in a way only McDonald's can—through our delicious food—when we introduce the BTS signature order on our menu next month." McDonald's mentioned that the BTS collaboration builds on its partnerships with rapper Travis Scott and reggaeton musician J Balvin last year under the celebrity signature orders program launched in U.S. restaurants in 2020. However, this time around, BTS will be the first member of the program to eventually launch in 50 countries across six continents. The band has great memories with McDonald's. "We're excited about this collaboration and can't wait to share the BTS Meal with the world," said BIGHIT MUSIC. Also known as the Bangtan Boys, the seven-member boy band was formed in 2010 and debuted in 2013. BTS fans are so die-hard that they've given themselves the nickname "The Army," which stands for Adorable Representative M.C. for Youth. McDonald's told Snopes that customers will have the option of ordering BTS meals in participating restaurants or through contactless mobile orders, the app, drive-through, or via McDelivery. The BTS meal will be available at select U.S. restaurants beginning May 26 and will be rolled out to others across the globe through June 25. On May 26, the band's signature order was made available at participating U.S. restaurants nationwide. "Seeing the passion and anticipation from our fans worldwide since we announced the BTS Meal has been incredible," said Morgan Flatley, McDonald's chief marketing and digital customer experience officer, regarding the launch. "And the best part is, we are just getting started. We are preparing to give customers even more ways to experience this collaboration in the coming weeks—through a merch drop and exclusive digital content that will provide a behind-the-scenes look at BTS." UPDATE [May 26, 2021]: This article was updated to announce the launch and include newly released images.

['share']

True

In mid-April 2021, the fast-food empire McDonalds announced a meal collaboration with Korean pop boy band BTS. The announcement rocked Twitter, inciting Tweets from the millions-strong musical groups fanbase.The collaboration was announced on TikTok and Twitter by the fast-food company and BIGHIT MUSIC, the record label of BTS. In an email to Snopes, McDonalds said that the signature meal is set to include a 10-piece Chicken McNuggets, medium World Famous Fries, medium Coke and, for the first time ever in the U.S., sweet chili and cajun dipping sauces inspired by popular recipes from McDonalds South Korea. Image courtesy of McDonald'sMcDonalds said that the BTS collaboration builds on McDonalds partnerships with rapper Travis Scott and reggaeton musician J Balvin last year under the celebrity signature orders program launched in U.S. restaurants in 2020. But this time around, BTS will be the first member of the program to eventually launch in 50 countries across six continents.Seeing the passion and anticipation from our fans worldwide since we announced the BTS Meal has been incredible, said Morgan Flatley, McDonald's chief marketing and digital customer experience officer, of the launch. And the best part is, we are just getting started. We are preparing to give customers even more ways to experience this collaboration in the coming weeks through a merch drop and exclusive digital content that will provide a behind-the-scenes look at BTS. Image courtesy of McDonald's

No, Biden Didn't Give China Control Over the US Power Grid

['Biden signed an executive order. Wild conspiracy theories ensued.']

In mid-to-late February 2021, readers emailed Snopes asking about memes and stories posted online that claimed U.S. President Joe Biden had signed an executive order granting the Chinese government access to or control over the U.S. power grid. stories For example, the headline on an opinion piece published in the Washington Examiner on Jan. 27, 2021, read, "Bidens order could let China control US electric grid." headline Others took it a step further to falsely claim that Biden gave China access to the U.S. power grid, and it was China that caused millions of Texans to lose power during a brutal cold snap in February 2021. Here is one example, with the Twitter user's name cropped out for privacy reasons: millions First off, Biden didn't sign an executive order granting China access to or control over the U.S. power grid system. Biden signed an executive order suspending for 90 days an order by his predecessor, Donald Trump, that bars installation of equipment purchased from foreign adversaries into electrical infrastructure, so Biden's administration officials could evaluate Trump's order. But that doesn't mean Biden gave China access to U.S. power grids. We will explain below. The U.S. is served by three electrical grids one that interconnects the western half of the U.S. and western Canada, another that interconnects the eastern half of the U.S. and eastern Canada, and a third grid that is the independent system serving most of Texas. These, along with a fourth grid serving Quebec, are usually referred to as the bulk-power system (BPS). three electrical grids On May 1, 2020, Trump signed an executive order entitled "Securing the United States Bulk-Power System." Trump's order prohibited the purchase and use of bulk-power system electrical equipment "designed, developed, manufactured, or supplied, by persons owned by, controlled by, or subject to the jurisdiction or direction of a foreign adversary" to mitigate what it said was the potential threat of a cyberattack by foreign adversaries hacking into U.S. electrical systems. entitled On Dec. 17, 2020, Dan Brouillette, Trump's secretary of energy, issued a prohibition order stemming from Trump's May 1, 2020, executive order. Brouillette's order "prohibits utilities that supply critical defense facilities (CDF) from procuring from the Peoples Republic of China, specific BPS electric equipment that poses an undue risk to the BPS, the security or resilience of critical infrastructure, the economy, national security, or safety and security of Americans." prohibition order In other words, Brouillette's order barred equipment purchased from China from being used in critical electrical infrastructure in the U.S. On Jan. 20, 2021, Biden signed an executive order entitled, "Executive Order on Protecting Public Health and the Environment and Restoring Science to Tackle the Climate Crisis." The order suspended Trump's May 1 order for 90 days. entitled During those 90 days, Biden's order directs the U.S. secretary of energy and director of the Office of Management and Budget to "jointly consider whether to recommend that a replacement order be issued." That does not mean that, while the order is suspended, China has 90 days of free access to electrical grids serving the United States. The U.S. Department of Energy said that during the suspension, utility providers must still refrain from installing equipment specified in Brouillette's prohibition order: said prohibition order [During] this 90-day review period, Responsible Utilities will refrain from installation of bulk-power system electric equipment or programmable components specified in Attachment 1 of the Prohibition Order that is subject to foreign adversaries ownership, control, or influence, and that Responsible Utilities will continue to work with the Department on identifying and mitigating supply chain vulnerabilities. To ensure that security of the Nations bulk-power system is strengthened during this suspension, the Department requests that Responsible Utilities designate critical defense facilities as a priority load in the applicable system load shedding and restoration plans. The Texas power grid is independently operated by the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT), taking its policy direction primarily from state officials, not the federal government. primarily The Texas power grid didn't fail because of interference by China or any other external entity. It failed because when the state experienced Arctic temperatures that it isn't used to experiencing, demand for electricity spiked beyond what the grid was prepared to handle. State officials also failed to weatherize power-generating infrastructure from cold temperatures, which resulted in problems like natural gas supply lines and wind turbines freezing. spiked beyond We reached out to the White House seeking further clarification on this subject but didn't get a response in time for publication. We will update this story when and if we hear back.

['economy']

False

In mid-to-late February 2021, readers emailed Snopes asking about memes and stories posted online that claimed U.S. President Joe Biden had signed an executive order granting the Chinese government access to or control over the U.S. power grid.For example, the headline on an opinion piece published in the Washington Examiner on Jan. 27, 2021, read, "Bidens order could let China control US electric grid."Others took it a step further to falsely claim that Biden gave China access to the U.S. power grid, and it was China that caused millions of Texans to lose power during a brutal cold snap in February 2021. Here is one example, with the Twitter user's name cropped out for privacy reasons:The U.S. is served by three electrical grids one that interconnects the western half of the U.S. and western Canada, another that interconnects the eastern half of the U.S. and eastern Canada, and a third grid that is the independent system serving most of Texas. These, along with a fourth grid serving Quebec, are usually referred to as the bulk-power system (BPS).On May 1, 2020, Trump signed an executive order entitled "Securing the United States Bulk-Power System." Trump's order prohibited the purchase and use of bulk-power system electrical equipment "designed, developed, manufactured, or supplied, by persons owned by, controlled by, or subject to the jurisdiction or direction of a foreign adversary" to mitigate what it said was the potential threat of a cyberattack by foreign adversaries hacking into U.S. electrical systems.On Dec. 17, 2020, Dan Brouillette, Trump's secretary of energy, issued a prohibition order stemming from Trump's May 1, 2020, executive order. Brouillette's order "prohibits utilities that supply critical defense facilities (CDF) from procuring from the Peoples Republic of China, specific BPS electric equipment that poses an undue risk to the BPS, the security or resilience of critical infrastructure, the economy, national security, or safety and security of Americans."On Jan. 20, 2021, Biden signed an executive order entitled, "Executive Order on Protecting Public Health and the Environment and Restoring Science to Tackle the Climate Crisis." The order suspended Trump's May 1 order for 90 days.That does not mean that, while the order is suspended, China has 90 days of free access to electrical grids serving the United States. The U.S. Department of Energy said that during the suspension, utility providers must still refrain from installing equipment specified in Brouillette's prohibition order:The Texas power grid is independently operated by the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT), taking its policy direction primarily from state officials, not the federal government.The Texas power grid didn't fail because of interference by China or any other external entity. It failed because when the state experienced Arctic temperatures that it isn't used to experiencing, demand for electricity spiked beyond what the grid was prepared to handle. State officials also failed to weatherize power-generating infrastructure from cold temperatures, which resulted in problems like natural gas supply lines and wind turbines freezing.

Washington Post Hits Obama

["Matt Patterson wrote 'The Affirmative Action President,' an opinion piece critical of Barack Obama?"]

Matt Patterson wrote "The Affirmative Action President," an opinion piece critical of Barack Obama, for the Washington Post. Amazing that the Washington Post would actually print this. Amazing! The Washington Post, August 18, 2011: Obama: The Affirmative Action President by Matt Patterson (columnist for the Washington Post, New York Post, San Francisco Examiner). Years from now, historians may regard the 2008 election of Barack Obama as an inscrutable and disturbing phenomenon, a baffling breed of mass hysteria akin perhaps to the witch craze of the Middle Ages. How, they will wonder, did a man so devoid of professional accomplishment beguile so many into thinking he could manage the world's largest economy, direct the world's most powerful military, and execute the world's most consequential job? Origins: The opinion piece referenced above was penned by Matt Patterson and was published (under the title "Obama: The Affirmative Action President") on the American Thinker website on August 18, 2011. Although the important "who" of the attribution is correct, the "where" is incorrect: despite the mention of the Washington Post in the example cited above, this item was never published in either the print or online version of that newspaper (nor, as claimed in later versions, was it published in Newsweek magazine). A possible explanation for the confusion is that someone viewed the list of publications in which Matt Patterson's work has appeared and mistakenly assumed this piece was syndicated to all of them. (Mr. Patterson isn't a "columnist" for any of the newspapers mentioned, but rather an occasional contributor of opinion pieces.) Matt Patterson published list Last updated: December 20, 2011.

['economy']

True

[Rest of article here.]Origins: The opinion piece referenced above was penned by Matt Patterson and was published (under the title "Obama: The Affirmative Action President") on the American Thinker web site on 18 August 2011. Although the important "who" of the attribution is correct, however, the "where" is incorrect: despite the mention of the Washington Post in the example cited above, this item was never published in either the print or online version of that newspaper (nor, as claimed in later versions, was it published in Newsweek magazine). A possible explanation for the confusion is that someone viewed the list of publications in which Matt Patterson's work has appeared and mistakenly assumed this piece was syndicated to all of them. (Mr. Patterson isn't a "columnist" for any of the newspapers mentioned, but rather an occasional contributor of opinion pieces.)

Did Derek Chauvin 'Under-Report Half a Million Dollars in Income'?

['The former Minneapolis police officer, already sentenced for the murder of George Floyd, has been charged with nine counts of felony tax evasion.']

In June 2021, as former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin faced sentencing for the murder of George Floyd, one widely-shared social media post accused Chauvin of other crimes, namely tax evasion. On June 25, @davenewworld_2 wrote on Twitter: "Derek Chauvin underreported half a million dollars in income while owing $20,000+ in taxes, and then fucking murdered George Floyd over an alleged $20 counterfeit bill..." wrote That tweet, and the claims it contained, were further promoted in a popular Reddit post, on the following day. popular Reddit post On June 25, Hennepin County Judge Peter Cahill sentenced Chauvin to 22 and a half years in prison for the murder of Floyd, a Black man who died after Chauvin kneeled on his neck for more than nine minutes, in May 2020. sentenced The claim that Chauvin "underreported half a million dollars in income" stems from an ongoing criminal case against him, and his former wife Kellie May Chauvin. However, Chauvin has not yet entered a plea in that case, and has not been tried or convicted, as of June 28, 2021. As a result, we are issuing a rating of "Unproven," for now. When the case is resolved, we will update this fact check accordingly. A brief note: Kellie May and Derek Chauvin divorced in February 2021, and during those proceedings she expressed an intention to change her last name. However, we have not been able to find any record of that name change, so this article refers to her using her last-known last name, Chauvin. expressed an intention On July 22, 2020, the office of Washington County Attorney Pete Orput charged the Chauvins with nine counts each of felony tax evasion, claiming that they "failed to file income tax returns and pay state income taxes, underreported and underpaid taxes on income generated from various employments each year, and failed to pay proper sales tax on a vehicle purchased in Minnesota." charged The complaint against Derek Chauvin summarized the details of their alleged offenses, as follows: complaint The Chauvins did not file tax returns in 2016, 2017, and 2018. The filed tax returns for years 2014 and 2015 did not report income received from D. Chauvin's off-duty security work and K. Chauvin's photography income. Tax returns for years 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019 filed on June 26, 2020, did not report D. Chauvin's off-duty security work and K. Chauvin's photography income. According to prosecutors, the Chauvins under-reported a total of $464,433 in income between 2014 and 2019, just short of the "half a million dollars" included in the widely-shared tweet from June 2021: Source: Washington County Attorney's Office However, the Chauvins have not yet entered pleas in this case, as of June 28, 2021. An omnibus hearing, at which the two defendants could potentially enter pleas, was scheduled for June 30, the Washington County Attorney's office told Snopes. could potentially enter pleas Since Derek Chauvin has not yet pleaded guilty or been convicted of the charges against him, and neither might ever occur, the claim that he "under-reported half a million dollars in income" was unproven, as of June 28. When the case is resolved, we will update this fact check accordingly.

['returns']

NEI

In June 2021, as former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin faced sentencing for the murder of George Floyd, one widely-shared social media post accused Chauvin of other crimes, namely tax evasion. On June 25, @davenewworld_2 wrote on Twitter: "Derek Chauvin underreported half a million dollars in income while owing $20,000+ in taxes, and then fucking murdered George Floyd over an alleged $20 counterfeit bill..."That tweet, and the claims it contained, were further promoted in a popular Reddit post, on the following day.On June 25, Hennepin County Judge Peter Cahill sentenced Chauvin to 22 and a half years in prison for the murder of Floyd, a Black man who died after Chauvin kneeled on his neck for more than nine minutes, in May 2020.A brief note: Kellie May and Derek Chauvin divorced in February 2021, and during those proceedings she expressed an intention to change her last name. However, we have not been able to find any record of that name change, so this article refers to her using her last-known last name, Chauvin. On July 22, 2020, the office of Washington County Attorney Pete Orput charged the Chauvins with nine counts each of felony tax evasion, claiming that they "failed to file income tax returns and pay state income taxes, underreported and underpaid taxes on income generated from various employments each year, and failed to pay proper sales tax on a vehicle purchased in Minnesota."The complaint against Derek Chauvin summarized the details of their alleged offenses, as follows: Source: Washington County Attorney's OfficeHowever, the Chauvins have not yet entered pleas in this case, as of June 28, 2021. An omnibus hearing, at which the two defendants could potentially enter pleas, was scheduled for June 30, the Washington County Attorney's office told Snopes.

Do U.S. Gun Deaths Since 1968 Outnumber Deaths in All American Wars?

['A popular claim about gun-related fatalities revitalized after the 2017 Las Vegas mass shooting is fundamentally accurate, with some allowance for imprecision.']

In the aftermath of the October 1, 2017, mass shooting in Las Vegas, the American public attempted to come to grips with the scale of gun violence in the United States. One oft-cited statistic posted on social media by "The Other 98%" maintained that 1.3 million Americans had been killed in all the wars in U.S. history, while 1.5 million Americans had been killed by firearms (in non-military use) since 1968 alone. NBC News reported similar figures, stating that more Americans have died from gunshots in the last 50 years than in all the wars in American history. Since 1968, more than 1.5 million Americans have died in gun-related incidents, according to data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. By comparison, approximately 1.2 million service members have been killed in every war in U.S. history, according to estimates from the Department of Veterans Affairs and iCasualties.org, a website that maintains an ongoing database of casualties from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Different versions of this claim have been prominently offered in recent years by sources such as New York Times columnist Nicolas Kristof in 2015 and PBS Newshour contributor and commentator Mark Shields in 2012. All these claims contain casual uses of the qualifier "Americans" in reference to gun deaths, which is somewhat confusing because not everyone who has been killed by firearms in the United States was an American citizen, and official sources for gun death statistics do not offer breakdowns by nationality. Therefore, we assume that "Americans" is used here for rhetorical effect rather than as a functional statistical category, and we will deal with the total number of gun deaths occurring in the United States since 1968. Similarly, according to historian Don H. Doyle, the U.S. Civil War saw around 543,000 foreign-born (i.e., immigrant) soldiers fighting on the Union side alone, so a significant number of Civil War deaths might have involved non-American citizen combatants, but we will count them all as "Americans." (Indeed, non-U.S. citizens have likely served and died fighting for the U.S. side in every American military conflict since the Revolutionary War, but probably in much greater numbers during the Civil War than in any other.) Support for this claim often uses sources that relate only to combatant deaths in wars and do not include civilian or other non-combatant deaths (the latter being figures that might also include non-U.S. citizens). One could argue that civilian deaths in wars should be included (although estimates of these deaths are much less reliable than for fatalities among military personnel), but we are limiting our analysis to include only combatant deaths in military conflicts. We will break this analysis into two parts: the total number of deaths in the United States involving firearms since 1968 and the number of deaths in the U.S. and among American combatants across all wars in American history. The estimated total number of firearms-related deaths from 1968 to 2016 is 1.58 million. The official number for 1968 to 2015 is 1.55 million, and we have assumed the number of deaths in 2016 as being the midpoint between the two previous years (2014 and 2015). In most cases, the source of these figures is the Centers for Disease Control's (CDC) Web-based Injury Statistics Query and Reporting System (WISQARS). For figures from 1968 to 1991, we consulted the CDC directly. For combatant fatalities, our main source is an April 2017 summary published by the Department of Veterans Affairs, which lists the following figures: The Civil War Trust, a non-profit organization primarily dedicated to preserving American battlefields, estimates that around 6,800 people died in battle during the Revolutionary War, with an additional 17,000 deaths caused by disease, and between 8,000 and 12,000 more deaths occurring among those held as prisoners of war. The upper end of this estimate range would put the total number of deaths associated with the American Revolutionary War at 26,800. Similarly, the Civil War Trust estimates that around 15,000 Americans died during the War of 1812, a significantly higher number than the 2,260 battle deaths estimated by the Department of Veterans Affairs. The Civil War is an interesting case. Based on the work of two late 19th and early 20th-century historians, the widely accepted figure for deaths in this conflict was reckoned as 618,222 for about a century. In 2011, however, J. David Hacker (then of Binghamton University) published a significant upward revision of that total, estimating that the likely death toll was between 650,000 and 851,000. Taking the midpoint in this estimate range assumes about 750,000 combatant deaths for the Civil War. Because of the enhanced statistical sophistication involved in Hacker's research and what appears to be acceptance and support of his estimate among historians, we are going to use 750,000 as the estimated death toll among combatants in the Civil War. Figures for the Global War on Terror are taken from the Department of Defense's Defense Casualty Analysis System and are valid as of October 2017. If we rely on the Department of Veterans Affairs summary while accepting J. David Hacker's 750,000 estimate for the Civil War, the total number of deaths among American combatants in all U.S. military conflicts, using high estimates for each, is thus 1,481,862—about 100,000 less than the total number of firearms-related fatalities in the U.S. between 1968 and 2016. So even using the higher end of available estimates for war deaths throughout American history, the grand total of those deaths is still lower than the total of firearms-related fatalities since 1968, a period of just 49 years. Although this disparity between war deaths and gun deaths is smaller than the gap claimed by The Other 98% (200,000) or NBC News (300,000), the imprecision of casualty estimates (especially for the Civil War era) allows for a considerable margin of error.

['profit']

True

In the aftermath of the 1 October 2017 mass shooting in Las Vegas, the American public attempted to come to grips with the scale of gun violence in the United States. One oft-cited statistic posted in social media by "The Other 98%" maintained that 1.3 million Americans had been killed in all the wars in U.S. history, while 1.5 million Americans had been killed by firearms (in non-military use) since 1968 alone:NBC News reported similar figures:More Americans have died from gunshots in the last 50 years than in all of the wars in American history. Since 1968, more than 1.5 million Americans have died in gun-related incidents, according to data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. By comparison, approximately 1.2 million service members have been killed in every war in U.S. history, according to estimates from the Department of Veterans Affairs and iCasualties.org, a website that maintains an ongoing database of casualties from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.All these claims contain casual uses of the qualifier "Americans" in reference to gun deaths, which is somewhat confusing because not everyone who has been killed by firearms in the United States was an American citizen, and official sources for gun death statistics do not offer breakdowns by nationality. Therefore, we assume that "Americans" is used here for rhetorical effect, rather than as a functional statistical category, and deal with the total number of gun deaths occurring in the United States since 1968. Similarly, according to the historian Don H. Doyle, the U.S. Civil War saw around 543,000 foreign-born (i.e., immigrant) soldiers fighting on the Union side alone, so a significant number of Civil War deaths might have involved non-American citizen combatants, but we'll count them all as "Americans." (Indeed, non-U.S. citizens have likely served and died fighting for the U.S. side in every American military conflict since the Revolutionary War, but probably in much greater numbers during the Civil War than any other.)In most cases, the source of these figures is the Centers for Disease Control's (CDC) Web-based Injury Statistics Query and Reporting System (WISQARS). For figures from 1968 to 1991, we consulted the CDC directlyFor combatant fatalities, our main source is an April 2017 summary published by the Department of Veterans Affairs, which lists the following figures:The Civil War Trust, a non-profit organisation primarily dedicated to preserving American battlefields, estimates that around 6,800 people died in battle during the Revolutionary War, with an additional 17,000 deaths caused by disease, and between 8,000 and 12,000 more deaths occurring among those held as prisoners of war. The upper end of this estimate range, then, would put the total number of deaths associated with the American Revolutionary War at 26,800.Similarly, the Civil War Trust estimates that around 15,000 Americans died during the War of 1812, a significantly higher number than the 2,260 battle deaths estimated by the Department of Veterans Affairs.The Civil War is an interesting case. Based on from the work of two late 19th and early 20th century historians, the widely accepted figure for deaths in this conflict was reckoned as 618,222 for about a century. In 2011, however, J. David Hacker ( then of Binghamton University) published a significant upwards revision of that total, estimating that the likely death toll was between 650,000 and 851,000. Taking the mid-point in this estimate range assumes about 750,000 combatant deaths for the Civil War. Because of the enhanced statistical sophistication involved in Hacker's research, and what appears to be acceptance and support of his estimate among historians, we are going to use 750,000 as the estimated death toll among combatants in the Civil War.Figures for the Global War on Terror are taken from the Department of Defense's Defense Casualty Analysis System and are valid as of October 2017.

College tuition rates in Texas jumped by 55% since 2003.

[]

Democrats criticized Rick Perry for college costs on the day the Republican governor delivered his valedictory speech to Texas lawmakers. Among the complaints in a Jan. 15, 2015, email blast from the Democratic National Committee was the assertion that college tuition rates in Texas had jumped by 55% since 2003, putting the dream of earning a college degree further out of reach for many Texans. That year should ring a bell; it was when Perry and the Republican-controlled Legislature agreed to deregulate public college tuition, handing control to appointed college and university governing boards. We wondered how much tuition ultimately escalated. By email, Miryam Lipper, a committee spokeswoman, pointed out a September 2012 news story in the Dallas Morning News that stated, according to the paper's analysis, Texas students were paying 55 percent more for tuition and fees at state universities a decade after lawmakers lifted restrictions on costs. The story also noted that state officials used to brag about the affordability of college, but costs had ballooned since 2003, even when inflation was factored in. Seeking up-to-date information, we reached out to the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board, where a staff spokeswoman, Kelly Carper Polden, referred us to a February 2014 board document she described as the most recent publicly available report on Texas tuition and fees. The document stated, in part, that from fall 2003 through fall 2013, the statewide average total academic charges for a student taking 15 semester credit hours at a public university increased by 104 percent. According to the document, the board's calculations were based on tuition and fees charged to students. However, the board also noted that a student's actual charges might vary based on their classification and level of enrollment, the college they attend within the university, their specific personal circumstances, or other reasons deemed appropriate by the institution. Charts in the board analysis indicated the tuition and fees each year from fall 2003 through fall 2013 for nearly 40 institutions, most of them in the University of Texas or Texas A&M University systems. On average, in fall 2003, tuition and fees were $1,934 for 15 semester credit hours, according to the report. The average in fall 2013 was $3,951, the board stated. By phone, Polden confirmed that the board's results did not take inflation into account. Therefore, we employed a U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics inflation calculator to estimate that tuition and fees at the state's public colleges and universities escalated by 61 percent in real terms from fall 2003 through fall 2013. However, this did not cover the 2014-15 school year. So we asked for comparable charges on average for a student as of fall 2014. By email, Polden stated that the fall 2014 statewide average for someone taking 15 semester credit hours was $4,091, raising the raw average tuition increase since fall 2003 to 112 percent. Adjusted for inflation, we calculated that the increase was 64 percent. Separately, we asked the University of Texas at Austin for its fall 2014 charge for that many credit hours. Spokesman Gary Susswein emailed the amount, $4,905, which we compared with the fall 2003 charge for that university of $2,721. Adjusted for inflation, the hike over the years amounted to 40 percent. Worth mentioning: After signing tuition deregulation into law, Perry subsequently had no sway over tuition hikes except to appoint higher education governing boards. In recent years, Perry also called for $10,000 four-year degree programs and for institutions to freeze tuition so that an entering student would pay the same amount each year while earning a degree. The Democratic group, focusing on Perry, stated that Texas college tuition rates increased by 55 percent since 2003. That figure is outdated—the increase through fall 2014 was 64 percent—and it's also important to clarify that the governor did not directly control tuition, though he approved the 2003 law deregulating rates and appointed the governing boards of public colleges and universities. We rate the statement Mostly True.

['Education', 'State Budget', 'Texas']

True

That year should ring a bell; its when Perry and the Republican-controlled Legislatureagreed to deregulate public college tuition, handing control to appointed college and university governing boards.By email, Miryam Lipper, a committee spokeswoman, pointed out a September 2012news storyin theDallas Morning Newsthat said by the papers analysis, Texas students are paying 55 percent more for tuition and fees at state universities a decade after lawmakers lifted restrictions on costs. The story also said: State officials used to brag about the affordability of college, but the costs have ballooned since 2003, even when inflation is factored in.Seeking up-to-date information, we reached out to the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board, where a staff spokeswoman, Kelly Carper Polden, pointed out aFebruary 2014 board documentshe described as the most recent publicly available report on Texas tuition and fees. The document said, in part: From fall 2003 through fall 2013, the statewide average total academic charges for a student taking 15 SCHs at a public university has increased by 104 percent. An SCH is a semester credit-hour.By phone, Polden confirmed the boards results didnt take inflation into account. So we employed a U.S. Bureau of Labor Statisticsinflation calculatorto estimate that tuition and fees at the states public colleges and universities escalated 61 percent, in real terms, from fall 2003 through fall 2013.Worth mention: After signing tuition deregulation into law, Perry subsequently had no sway over tuition hikes except to appoint higher education governing boards. In recent years too, Perrycalled for $10,000, four-year degree programs and for institutions to freeze tuitionso an entering student would pay the same tab each year while earning a degree.Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check.

Was it the Grateful Dead who sponsored the Olympic basketball team of Lithuania?

["Just keep dribblin' on."]

In July 2021, as the pandemic-delayed 2020 Olympic Games approached, an interesting tidbit about basketball, Lithuania, and the 1960s psychedelic rock band the Grateful Dead began to circulate on social media. A viral Reddit post claimed that "after the breakup of the USSR, the Lithuanian basketball team couldn't afford to participate in the 1992 Olympics, so the Grateful Dead funded the team's expenses and sent a box of tie-dyed outfits in Lithuania's national colors. They went on to win bronze." This post is generally accurate. The Grateful Dead really did sponsor Lithuania's men's basketball team, and they provided the team with tie-dyed shirts bearing the country's national colors (yellow, green, and red) and a "Skullman" logo designed by Greg Speirs. Our one quibble with this claim is that the band was not the team's sole source of funding. While the Grateful Dead did provide some financial support (one report states that the band wrote a $5,000 check), the band's main contribution was allowing the team to sell special Grateful Dead merchandise, which proved massively popular with fans at the 1992 Olympic Games. Here's a newspaper clipping from 1992 about the popularity of these shirts. According to Grateful Dead spokesman Dennis McNally, around 20,000 shirts sold in the first week. A third of the money raised went to the Lithuanian Olympic Committee, and the band received "nothing more than a good time." The Grateful Dead's connection with the Lithuanian basketball team began in 1992 when Sarunas Marciulionis, the team's star guard, and scout Donnie Nelson showed up at a garage in San Francisco to hear the band play. The team, which would be competing in its first Olympic Games since the country declared independence from the Soviet Union a few years earlier, was seeking sponsors to fund their trip to Barcelona. Here's an excerpt from an article published on NBCOlympics.com in 2012: On a cold and windy Bay Area winter day 20 years ago, Sarunas Marciulionis and Donnie Nelson, a starting guard and a scout, respectively, for the Golden State Warriors, knocked uncertainly on the door of a nondescript garage in San Francisco. The Grateful Dead is in here? Nelson thought to himself. Somebody said to enter, and so they did, metaphorical hats in hand, taking in the sights and, more vividly, the smells. "Well, there was a little pot going on," Nelson recalls today. "The Dead were trying out Beatles covers, doing stuff like 'Here Comes the Sun' and 'Hey Jude,' but they were just kind of working through things and sounding kind of nasally. Sarunas pulls me aside and says, 'Donnie, no way these guys are famous. They're terrible.'" Nelson shakes his head and smiles. "I always think back and wonder what it would be like if someone caught that scene today -- Sarunas in the Dead pot garage." The Dead had heard about the Marciulionis-Nelson crusade to raise money to enable Lithuania, Marciulionis's native land, to try to qualify for the 1992 Olympics in Barcelona. "You're all about liberty and freedom and, man, we're all about that, too, so we dig what you guys are doing," said Jerry Garcia, the Dead's leader. That's a paraphrase, but if you've ever heard Jerry (who died in 1995), it's pretty close. NBC reported that the band ended up writing the team a check for $5,000. More importantly, the band gave the team a license to use and sell special Olympics-Grateful Dead merchandise. These items were a major hit and helped the team raise funds that were then used to support their participation in the 1996 Olympics. Strong anti-Soviet reactions from the West helped force a treaty, but by the time Marciulionis decided that he wanted to field a team, the nation was nearly bankrupt. He donated some of the money from his $1.28 million Golden State contract, and, with the help of Nelson, whom he had tapped to be Lithuania's assistant coach, set out to raise the rest. Getting the Dead was a major coup. The band wrote a check for $5,000 but, more importantly, granted Lithuania the rights to sell a Dead t-shirt, a stoned-out psychedelic masterpiece splashed with Lithuania's national colors of green, red, and yellow and anchored by the Dead's skeleton symbol. Purely from a fundraising perspective, sales of the t-shirt had more to do with the 1996 Olympics; it financed most of Lithuania's participation in the Atlanta Games. But the t-shirt became the hit of the '92 Games, more treasured than any of the merchandise bearing the likeness of Michael Jordan, Magic Johnson, and Larry Bird, the stalwarts of the United States Dream Team. The shirt kept Lithuania in the news, told the story of its heroic struggle for freedom, its battle to get to Barcelona (it earned a spot through the European Olympic qualifier), and its quest for a medal. For many American basketball fans, the 1992 Olympics are probably remembered for the dominant play of the "Dream Team," the American Olympic team that featured superstars such as Michael Jordan, Magic Johnson, and Larry Bird. But the Lithuanian team made its mark as well. In 2012, a documentary was released entitled "The Other Dream Team," which followed Arvydas Sabonis and Sarunas Marciulionis on their somewhat psychedelic journey to a bronze medal. Updated [1 September 2021]: Updated to credit the designer of the Skullman logo.

['funds']

True

In July 2021, as the pandemic-delayed 2020 Olympic games approached, an interesting tidbit about basketball, Lithuania, and the 1960s psychedelic rock band the Grateful Dead started to circulate on social media. A viral Reddit post claimed that "after the breakup of the USSR, the Lithuanian basketball team couldn't afford to participate in the 1992 Olympics, so the Grateful Dead funded the team's expenses and sent a box of tie-dyed outfits in Lithuania's national colours. They went on to win bronze." This post is generally accurate. The Grateful Dead really did sponsor Lithuania's men's basketball team, and they did provide the team with tie-dyed shirts bearing the country's national colors (yellow, green, and red), and a "Skullman" logo designed by Greg Speirs, which can be seen above. Our one quibble with this claim is that the band was not the team's sole source of funding. While the Grateful Dead did provide the team some financial support (one report states that the band wrote a $5,000 check), the band's main contribution was that it allowed the team to sell special Grateful Dead merchandise, which proved massively popular with fans at the 1992 Olympic Games. 28 Aug 1992, Fri The Times Recorder (Zanesville, Ohio) Newspapers.comHere's an excerpt from an article published on NBCOlympics.com in 2012 (archived here):

Is This a Real Photo of Obama Shaking Hands with Iranian President Rouhani?

['Arizona U.S. Rep. Paul Gosar tweeted a fake image of a meeting between former President Barack Obama and Iran President Hassan Rouhani.']

On Jan. 6, 2020, amidst escalating tensions between the U.S. and Iran over the U.S. airstrike that killed Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani in Baghdad, U.S. Rep. Paul A. Gosar, R-Az., tweeted a picture of former President Barack Obama shaking hands with Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, along with the caption "The world is a better place without these guys in power": airstrike However, Obama and Rouhani never met face-to-face during the former's term of office, and the image of the two men tweeted by Gosar was a fake created by altering a 2011 photograph of Obama's meeting with former Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to discuss nuclear-liability laws: Manmohan Singh Moreover, Gosar's critical caption for the fake photo ("The world is a better place without these guys in power") was inaccurate, as Rouhani is still very much in power as Iran's president. Rouhani After the picture of Obama and Rouhani was identified as a fake, Gosar then criticized the "dim witted reporters" who pointed it out and attempted to claim that the false and misleading aspects of his tweet were irrelevant: Reuters. "'Never Threaten the Iranian Nation,' Rouhani Tells Trump." The New York Times. 6 January 2020. Wright, Tom. "Indian, U.S. Leaders Meet on Nuclear Law." The Wall Street Journal. 18 November 2011.

['liability']

False

On Jan. 6, 2020, amidst escalating tensions between the U.S. and Iran over the U.S. airstrike that killed Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani in Baghdad, U.S. Rep. Paul A. Gosar, R-Az., tweeted a picture of former President Barack Obama shaking hands with Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, along with the caption "The world is a better place without these guys in power":However, Obama and Rouhani never met face-to-face during the former's term of office, and the image of the two men tweeted by Gosar was a fake created by altering a 2011 photograph of Obama's meeting with former Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to discuss nuclear-liability laws:Moreover, Gosar's critical caption for the fake photo ("The world is a better place without these guys in power") was inaccurate, as Rouhani is still very much in power as Iran's president.

Was a Keto Diet Pill Endorsed on 'Shark Tank'?

['Nobody would ever lie in an ad for a diet product, right?']

In November 2019, several readers began inquiring about the existence of a keto pill that had allegedly been funded through the popular NBC TV show "Shark Tank" a program in which affluent judges decide for or against investing their personal funds in various entrepreneurial ventures pitched to them in front of the camera. Keto, in this context, is a form of dieting that proponents claim forces your body to metabolize body fat in the absence of other carbs like glucose. This post is not about the science behind such claims, but instead about the business of selling supplements with fake celebrity endorsements. For the record, no keto-based product has ever been pitched or funded on "Shark Tank." form of dieting In at least one notable instance, a product named PureFit KETO was marketed as if it had been successfully pitched on "Shark Tank." However, on June 22, 2019, the Better Business Bureau investigated the company, finding that the images appearing on PureFit KETO's website were taken from a separate 'Shark Tank' episode that does not mention PureFit KETO. Despite this, Amazon, among others, includes the "Shark Tank" claim in its product listing at the time of this reporting in late 2019. marketed finding Shark Tank" claim Claims of a "Shark Tank" approved keto pill are just one of a series of iterations of a broader scam. Among the many ways some people seek passive income from online marketing is to sell supplements via dropshipping a practice in which the person advertising and selling a given product never actually has physical possession of the product in question. The role of the dropshipper is to move the product by directing potential customers to order directly from a supplier and thereby earning a fraction of the profits from a sale in the process. Myriad individuals in this space evidently use a variety of dubious practices to juice those sales. dropshipping One such method is to lie about who has endorsed the product, as evidenced in claims that PureFit Keto had been funded on "Shark Tank." Similar products have also been advertised as if famous celebrities use them. For example, marketers of a product named Keto Fit claimed the supplement was endorsed by model Chrissy Teigen, providing made-up quotes from her to sell the product. Teigen publicly repudiated the practice when it was brought to her attention in January 2019: Claims of Keto Fits celebrity endorsements dont end with Teigen. False claims about Keto Fits endorsements include alleged support from celebrities such as Demi Lovato and Jameela Jamil. In some cases, claims of support come from websites designed to look like existing media properties the Teigen claims were made on a website pretending to be the popular site Bored Panda. In other cases, a common marketing method is the creation of fake diet pill reviews on blogs that exist solely to review that one keto product while highlighting impossible-to-miss links to order the product. Demi Lovato reviews on blogs Though these various keto products often change names the products are frequently rebranded into similar-sounding names over time the product generally remains the same. These products, with names like KetoFit, KetoBurn, KetoPlus, or KetoMelt, are all if you trust these companies to accurately report their contents made up of the same chemical: Beta-hydroxybutyrate (BHB). rebranded BHB is a ketone that the body is able under certain circumstances to burn for energy instead of glucose. Suggesting this widely available nutritional supplement is uniquely worthy to be an invention worthy of "Shark Tank," or a secret product used by the Hollywood elite is, on its face, absurd. More to the point, however, no keto diet pill has ever been discussed on the show "Shark Tank." a ketone Masood, Wajeed and Kalyan R. Uppaluri. Ketogenic Diet. StatPearls. As updated on 21 March 2019. BBB.com. PureFit KETO. Accessed 19 November 2019. Amazon.com. Purefit Keto Weight Loss Pills for Men and Women - Ketogenic Diet Supplement - Burn Fat for Energy - BHB Formula (1 Month). Accessed 19 November 2019. Shopify. The Ultimate Guide to Dropshipping. Accessed 19 November 2019. Brar, Faith. BHB: The Miracle Molecule of the Keto Diet? StatPearls. 28 September 2017.

['income']

False

Keto, in this context, is a form of dieting that proponents claim forces your body to metabolize body fat in the absence of other carbs like glucose. This post is not about the science behind such claims, but instead about the business of selling supplements with fake celebrity endorsements. For the record, no keto-based product has ever been pitched or funded on "Shark Tank."In at least one notable instance, a product named PureFit KETO was marketed as if it had been successfully pitched on "Shark Tank." However, on June 22, 2019, the Better Business Bureau investigated the company, finding that the images appearing on PureFit KETO's website were taken from a separate 'Shark Tank' episode that does not mention PureFit KETO. Despite this, Amazon, among others, includes the "Shark Tank" claim in its product listing at the time of this reporting in late 2019.Claims of a "Shark Tank" approved keto pill are just one of a series of iterations of a broader scam. Among the many ways some people seek passive income from online marketing is to sell supplements via dropshipping a practice in which the person advertising and selling a given product never actually has physical possession of the product in question. The role of the dropshipper is to move the product by directing potential customers to order directly from a supplier and thereby earning a fraction of the profits from a sale in the process. Myriad individuals in this space evidently use a variety of dubious practices to juice those sales. Claims of Keto Fits celebrity endorsements dont end with Teigen. False claims about Keto Fits endorsements include alleged support from celebrities such as Demi Lovato and Jameela Jamil. In some cases, claims of support come from websites designed to look like existing media properties the Teigen claims were made on a website pretending to be the popular site Bored Panda. In other cases, a common marketing method is the creation of fake diet pill reviews on blogs that exist solely to review that one keto product while highlighting impossible-to-miss links to order the product.Though these various keto products often change names the products are frequently rebranded into similar-sounding names over time the product generally remains the same. These products, with names like KetoFit, KetoBurn, KetoPlus, or KetoMelt, are all if you trust these companies to accurately report their contents made up of the same chemical: Beta-hydroxybutyrate (BHB).BHB is a ketone that the body is able under certain circumstances to burn for energy instead of glucose. Suggesting this widely available nutritional supplement is uniquely worthy to be an invention worthy of "Shark Tank," or a secret product used by the Hollywood elite is, on its face, absurd. More to the point, however, no keto diet pill has ever been discussed on the show "Shark Tank."

Is the USPS Intentionally Delaying Mail to Aid in Trump's Reelection?

['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."

['finance']

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:

Were Pearl Harbor Photographs Recently Found in an Old Camera?

['Photographs of the Pearl Harbor attack that were supposedly recently found in an old camera stored in a foot locker actually come from a variety of sources.']

PHOTOS STORED IN AN OLD BROWNIE CAMERA Thought you might find these photos very interesting, considering their quality from 1941. Pearl Harbor photos were found in an old Brownie stored in a foot locker. THESE PHOTOS ARE FROM A SAILOR WHO WAS ON THE USS QUAPAW ATF-110. INTERESTING, I THINK THEY'RE SPECTACULAR. On Sunday, December 7th, 1941, the Japanese Empire launched a surprise attack against the U.S. forces stationed at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. By planning his attack on a Sunday, the Japanese commander Admiral Nagumo hoped to catch the entire fleet in port. As luck would have it, the aircraft carriers and one of the battleships were not in port. (The USS Enterprise was returning from Wake Island, where it had just delivered some aircraft. The USS Lexington was ferrying aircraft to Midway, and the USS Saratoga and USS Colorado were undergoing repairs in the United States.) In spite of the latest intelligence reports about the missing aircraft carriers (his most important targets), Admiral Nagumo decided to continue the attack with his force of six carriers and 423 aircraft. At a range of 230 miles north of Oahu, he launched the first wave of a two-wave attack. Beginning at 0600 hours, his first wave consisted of 183 fighters and torpedo bombers, which struck at the fleet in Pearl Harbor and the airfields in Hickam, Kaneohe, and Ewa. The second strike, launched at 0715 hours, consisted of 167 aircraft, which again struck at the same targets. At 0753 hours, the first wave, consisting of 40 Nakajima B5N2 "Kate" torpedo bombers, 51 Aichi D3A1 "Val" dive bombers, 50 high-altitude bombers, and 43 Zeros, struck the airfields and Pearl Harbor. Within the next hour, the second wave arrived and continued the attack. When it was over, the U.S. losses were: Casualties USA: 218 KIA, 364 WIA. USN: 2,008 KIA, 710 WIA. USMC: 109 KIA, 69 WIA. Civilians: 68 KIA, 35 WIA. TOTAL: 2,403 KIA, 1,178 WIA. ------------------------------------------------- Battleships USS Arizona (BB-39) - total loss when a bomb hit her magazine. USS Oklahoma (BB-37) - total loss when she capsized and sank in the harbor. USS California (BB-44) - sunk at her berth. Later raised and repaired. USS West Virginia (BB-48) - sunk at her berth. Later raised and repaired. USS Nevada (BB-36) - beached to prevent sinking. Later repaired. USS Pennsylvania (BB-38) - light damage. USS Maryland (BB-46) - light damage. USS Tennessee (BB-43) - light damage. USS Utah (AG-16) - (former battleship used as a target) - sunk. ------------------------------------------------- Cruisers USS New Orleans (CA-32) - light damage. USS San Francisco (CA-38) - light damage. USS Detroit (CL-8) - light damage. USS Raleigh (CL-7) - heavily damaged but repaired. USS Helena (CL-50) - light damage. USS Honolulu (CL-48) - light damage. ------------------------------------------------- Destroyers USS Downes (DD-375) - destroyed. Parts salvaged. USS Cassin (DD-372) - destroyed. Parts salvaged. USS Shaw (DD-373) - very heavy damage. USS Helm (DD-388) - light damage. ------------------------------------------------- Minelayer USS Ogala (CM-4) - sunk but later raised and repaired. ------------------------------------------------- Seaplane Tender USS Curtiss (AV-4) - severely damaged but later repaired. ------------------------------------------------- Repair Ship USS Vestal (AR-4) - severely damaged but later repaired. ------------------------------------------------- Harbor Tug USS Sotoyomo (YT-9) - sunk but later raised and repaired. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Aircraft 188 aircraft destroyed (92 USN and 92 U.S. Army Air Corps). The images seen above are genuine photographs of the Japanese attack on American military forces at Pearl Harbor in Hawaii on December 7, 1941, but not as claimed in the accompanying text; not all of them were taken by a sailor with a Brownie camera that remained undiscovered in a footlocker for many decades. For a "sailor" to have snapped pictures from all the perspectives shown above, he would have had to be in the harbor aboard his ship, on the ground, and aloft in an airplane, all while the attack was in progress. Moreover, the ship on which this wide-ranging sailor supposedly served, the first USS Quapaw, wasn't even built until well after the attack on Pearl Harbor. Most (if not all) of these images are readily identifiable as archival U.S. Navy photos that have been available since the early 1940s and have appeared in countless articles and books about the Pearl Harbor attack.

['loss']

False

The images seen above are genuine photographs of the Japanese attack on American military forces at Pearl Harbor in Hawaii on 7 December 1941, but not as claimed in the accompanying text all of them pictures taken by a sailor with a Brownie camera that remained undiscovered in a footlocker for many decades. For a "sailor" to have snapped pictures from all the perspectives shown above, he would had to have been in the harbor aboard his ship, on the ground, and aloft in an airplane all while the attack was in progress. Moreover, the ship on which this wide-ranging sailor supposedly served, the first USS Quapaw, wasn't even built until well after the attack on Pearl Harbor.Most (if not all) of these images are readily identifiable as archival U.S. Navy photos that have been available since the early 1940s and have appeared in countless articles and books about the Pearl Harbor attack.

Did Leonardo DiCaprio Donate $10M to Ukraine via International Visegrad Fund?

["This rumor just doesn't add up. "]

In March 2022, a rumor started circulating online that actor Leonardo DiCaprio had donated $10 million to Ukraine after the country was invaded by Russia. While this claim was repeated ad nauseam across social media, there's little evidence to suggest that it's true. In an article that has since been deleted, the Daily Mail reported: Daily Mail reported Hollywood megastar Leonardo DiCaprio has donated $10million (7.6million) to a fund for Ukraine, where his grandmother was born in 1915. The actor was reportedly very close with his grandmother - Helene Indenbirken - and would take her to premiers of many of his films. DiCaprio would call her 'Oma'. The donation from the 47-year-old was announced by the International Visegrad Fund, according to Polish News. For starters, neither Leonardo DiCaprio nor the International Visegrad Fund (IVF) have made any announcements about this alleged donation. We searched the social media profiles and websites for both the actor and the IVF, an international donor organization that finances grants and scholarships to encourage the "advancement of innovative ideas in Central and Eastern Europe," and found no mention of this alleged donation. Leonardo DiCaprio International Visegrad Fund Furthermore, this rumor can't be traced back to a reputable news source. While most articles about this alleged donation quoted a report from a website called "Polish News," that March 7 article is not the primary source for this rumor. The earliest iteration of this claim that we could find was published on guyanasouthamerica.gy on March 5, 2022. That article cited anonymous "sources" inside Ukraine: guyanasouthamerica.gy on March 5, 2022 Sources inside Ukraine today, 5th of May, 2022, disclosed that Hollywood superstar, famed for his role in the hit movie Titanic, Leonardo DiCaprio, has transferred ten million US dollars to the Ukrainian government as the war rages on between Russia and Ukraine. Presumably, the huge donation is meant to support the war efforts as well as humanitarian efforts within the country. This original report states that DiCaprio donated money directly to the Ukrainian government. This simply doesn't seem feasible, especially without any statements from the Ukrainian government. (We checked. Ukrainian President Zelenskyy has not mentioned any multi-million dollar donations from DiCaprio.) The claim that this money was donated to the International Visegrad Fund appears to come from people making big assumptions based on little information. On March 6, a day after the anonymously sourced guyanasouthamerica.gy article was published, the Twitter account Visegrad 24 picked up on the story and published the following tweet. (Visegrad 24 previously shared a false rumor that Pornhub was blocking Russian users from accessing its site). Visegrad 24 picked up on the story and published the following tweet. previously shared a false rumor Pornhub was blocking Russian users from accessing its site This tweet does not claim that DiCaprio donated money to the International Visegrad Fund. Rather, it says that the money was "donated to Ukraine." It seems likely that people saw this tweet, connected Visegrad 24 to the International Visegrad Fund, and assumed that this is where DiCaprio's alleged donation went. A spokesperson for the International Visegrad Fund told us that they were unaware of any such donation from DiCaprio: "We are not aware, neither do we have any information about Leonardo DiCaprio donating USD 10 million/7.6 million to Ukraine. International Visegrad Fund has not announced this information." While DiCaprio did not donate $10 million to this fund, the spokesperson did say that prime ministers from V4 countries (Poland, Hungary, Slovakia and the Czech Republic) agreed on a "support package of 1 million euros to help Ukraine via the International Visegrad Fund." The spokesperson said: I can, however, inform you that the V4 Prime Ministers met in London on 8 March 2022 where they agreed on a support package of 1 million euros to help Ukraine via the International Visegrad Fund. An extraordinary call for applications will be shortly available to NGOs, organisations, and municipalities from the V4 countries and Ukraine with a focus on improving the situation of refugees from Ukraine. While the rumors that DiCaprio donated $10 million to the Ukraine military or the International Visegrad Fund are untrue, the actor really has made a few private donations of unknown amounts to various humanitarian organizations working in Ukraine. People Magazine reported: People Magazine reported Previous reports claiming the actor had donated $10 million for Ukrainian military use and that DiCaprio has family ties to Ukraine are not true. "Leo had privately made several donations to humanitarian groups CARE, IRC, UNHCR and Save the Children. All directed at Ukraine," a source close to the Don't Look Up actor tells PEOPLE. "He had been watching things unfold and wanted to support Ukraine the best he could. He will continue to support the humanitarian groups on the ground which are helping the people of Ukraine." Dickler, Jessica. Heres a List of the Top-Rated Charities to Help the Ukraine Relief Effort. CNBC, 9 Mar. 2022, https://www.cnbc.com/2022/03/09/heres-a-list-of-top-rated-charities-to-help-the-ukraine-relief-effort.html. Examiner, Luke Gentile, Washington. Leonardo DiCaprio Donates $10 Million to Ukraine. Colorado Springs Gazette, https://gazette.com/news/leonardo-dicaprio-donates-10-million-to-ukraine/article_b1faacaa-b309-587c-8905-19f046619474.html. Accessed 9 Mar. 2022. Leonardo DiCaprio Donates $10 Million to Ukraine. Washington Examiner, 9 Mar. 2022, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/leonardo-dicaprio-donates-10-million-to-ukraine. Leonardo DiCaprio Donates $10MILLION to Fund for Ukraine - His Grandmothers Homeland | Daily Mail Online. https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10593687/Leonardo-DiCaprio-donates-10MILLION-fund-Ukraine-grandmothers-homeland.html. Accessed 9 Mar. 2022. REPORT: Leonardo DiCaprio Donates $10 Million To Help Ukraine. https://dailycaller.com/2022/03/09/report-leonardo-dicaprio-donation-10-million-ukraine-russia/. Accessed 9 Mar. 2022. Updated [9 March 2022]: Article updated with statement from DiCaprio's spokesperson about the actor's genuine donations to Ukraine.

['finance']

False

In March 2022, a rumor started circulating online that actor Leonardo DiCaprio had donated $10 million to Ukraine after the country was invaded by Russia. While this claim was repeated ad nauseam across social media, there's little evidence to suggest that it's true. In an article that has since been deleted, the Daily Mail reported:For starters, neither Leonardo DiCaprio nor the International Visegrad Fund (IVF) have made any announcements about this alleged donation. We searched the social media profiles and websites for both the actor and the IVF, an international donor organization that finances grants and scholarships to encourage the "advancement of innovative ideas in Central and Eastern Europe," and found no mention of this alleged donation. Furthermore, this rumor can't be traced back to a reputable news source. While most articles about this alleged donation quoted a report from a website called "Polish News," that March 7 article is not the primary source for this rumor. The earliest iteration of this claim that we could find was published on guyanasouthamerica.gy on March 5, 2022. That article cited anonymous "sources" inside Ukraine:The claim that this money was donated to the International Visegrad Fund appears to come from people making big assumptions based on little information. On March 6, a day after the anonymously sourced guyanasouthamerica.gy article was published, the Twitter account Visegrad 24 picked up on the story and published the following tweet. (Visegrad 24 previously shared a false rumor that Pornhub was blocking Russian users from accessing its site).People Magazine reported:

Did Fauci Spend Taxpayer Dollars on 'Cruel and Unnecessary' Tests on Beagles?

['Allocated government funds for the experiments reportedly totaled more than $1.8 million. ']

Throughout the latter half of 2021, the taxpayer watchdog group White Coat Waste Project (WCW) released announcements that it had exposed several government-funded, cruel and unusual research projects that tested potential vaccines and drug therapeutics on beagles, which collectively cost taxpayers millions of dollars. In all cases, WCW pointed blame at Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) at the National Institutes of Health (NIH), whom the group posited as having given the final approval to fund the projects. Snopes readers asked our team to focus our investigation on three of the studies in question, which included research conducted at the University of Georgia Research Foundation (UGR), the nonprofit research institute SRI International, and by scientists in Tunisia. The allegations began in July 2021, when the Republican-led animal rights advocacy group published a report that claimed Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of NIAID, approved funding from taxpayer dollars to conduct painful experiments on beagles. WCW claimed in its July 30 report that Fauci, in an attempt to advance a human vaccine for a parasitic disease called lymphatic filariasis, spent $424,000 to commission a study in which healthy beagles were given an experimental drug and then intentionally infested with flies that carry a disease-causing parasite that affects humans. The findings of the WCW investigation were subsequently reported in publications like Fox News and conservative-leaning outlets such as RT, The Federalist, The Daily Caller, and The Patriot Project. In October 2021, Republican U.S. House Representative Nancy Mace of South Carolina tweeted a letter she sent to Dr. Anthony Fauci, referencing documents obtained via a Freedom of Information Act request from WCW. WCW claimed that from October 2018 to February 2019, Fauci ordered cruel and unusual drug toxicity tests on dogs that cost taxpayers $1.68 million. In a third report, WCW claimed that NIAID funded more than $375,000 to conduct a study that again used beagles as test subjects in experiments involving sand flies that the organization described as "torture." Snopes contacted WCW and obtained copies of documents reportedly obtained via separate Freedom of Information Act requests submitted by the organization. Claims of Fauci funding the torture of dogs circulated and recirculated in Fall 2021 and are largely based on two studies funded by the NIAID that did, indeed, involve using beagles as test subjects. We break those claims down below, but first, a closer look at the organization behind the reports. Founded in 2013, WCW is a watchdog group that self-describes as representing more than 2 million liberty lovers and animal lovers who oppose using taxpayer dollars to support experiments on animals. It is not a traditional animal advocacy group but instead devotes its efforts to denouncing what it characterizes as wasted government funds spent on testing. In 2016, the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) reported that the Washington, D.C.-based organization is the brainchild of former Republican strategist Anthony Bellotti. His opposition to animal research began in 1995, when, in the summer between high school and college, he worked in a hospital laboratory that was conducting heart studies on pigs and witnessed experiments he saw as cruel. After he became a political consultant, he hit upon the idea of framing such research as a waste of taxpayer money, wrote AAAS. Following the UGR investigation into the lymphatic filariasis studies, a spokesperson for WCW told Snopes that in August 2021, the watchdog group also requested documents related to toxicity testing on beagles commissioned by NIAID. Snopes read through the file to verify the claims made in the WCW report specific to NIH contract number HHSN272201400006I, which was described in a government database as preclinical development services for AIDS therapeutics with SRI International, a California-based nonprofit scientific research institute. According to the government fiduciary site USA Spending, a $1.1 million grant was awarded to the organization by DHHS on behalf of the NIAID. The study was listed to begin on July 15, 2020, and wrap up by December 24, 2021, and included testing on small animals for therapeutics to treat HIV as well as Hepatitis B and C viruses. The request returned 1,438 pages of documents describing wasteful and unnecessary drug toxicity tests on beagle puppies, a WCW spokesperson told Snopes. The documents are hosted on our site at the link below. The records outlined several studies involving both rats and beagles. The documents outline both the proposed study design as well as the actual results of the study, the latter of which resulted in 40 beagles between the ages of 8 and 9 months being administered oral and subcutaneous (under the skin) doses of an unnamed HIV therapeutic between September 2018 and October 2019. It is true that all dogs were euthanized following the study and their organs were analyzed for potential toxicity from the drugs. It is also true that the dogs' vocal cords were cut out. In a statement emailed to MedPage Today, NIAID told the publication that the contract for "preclinical pharmacology and toxicology services" was conducted "as required in animal models by the FDA, in compliance with Good Laboratory Practice (GLP) guidelines and in a facility accredited by the Association for Assessment and Accreditation of Laboratory Animal Care (AAALAC) or its equivalent." "Vocal cordectomies, conducted humanely under anesthesia, may be used in research facilities where numerous dogs are present," the statement said. "This is to reduce noise, which is not only stressful to the animals but can also reach decibel levels that exceed OSHA allowable limits for people and can lead to hearing loss." The housing and care of the beagles at the time of the study was in accordance with the Association for Assessment and Accreditation of Laboratory Animal Care, while welfare requirements were met in accordance with regulations established by the U.S. Department of Agriculture through the Animal Welfare Act. Every effort will be made to minimize, if not eliminate, pain and suffering in all animals in this study. Moribund animals and animals experiencing undue pain and suffering will be euthanized at the discretion of the Study Director, attending veterinarian, or other qualified person. The Study Director will make every effort to protect the scientific validity of the study, read the document. While at least some of the funding was provided by NIAID, it is still unclear whether Fauci personally signed off on approving the research. Claims of Fauci ordering the funding of therapeutic testing on beagles originated with a 38-page FOIA request submitted by WCW and shared publicly in July. Those are hosted in this Dropbox folder and have been archived on our site: Snopes read through the document, and our analysis confirmed that obligated funds were issued to the UGR by the NIH in the amount of $424,555 to determine the efficacy of a potential vaccine for lymphatic filariasis on beagle test subjects. A contract shared online by the U.S. government defined the research as: "PRE-CLINICAL MODELS OF INFECTIOUS DISEASES; TASK C12 LYMPHATIC FILARIASIS VACCINE (LFGUARD) EFFICACY TRIAL IN DOGS." Research conducted on behalf of NIAID is funded in large part through annual funds allocated by Congress and the president, though direct projects may be signed off on by various leaders within NIH. However, there is no evidence that the grant was personally approved by Fauci, and there is no mention of him in the FOIA documentation. All that we can definitively say is that at least some of the money came from NIH. Neither the NIH nor UGR responded to Snopes requests to verify the documents published by WCW, but a spokesperson for WCW sent our team a letter, written by NIAID Government Information Specialist Lauren Bartok in response to the FOIA request under case number 55876. The letter referenced the experimental documents obtained by WCW, confirming that the experiments took place. As with the first study, personal and proprietary information had been removed from the document, including the name of the vaccine and experiment objectives. The files did note that the contractor (UGR) was to acquire healthy, adult beagle dogs to administer different formulations [presumably of vaccine] to dogs via the intramuscular route. Each set of experiments will use 14 dogs, which total 28 dogs at the completion of the study (7 dogs in each group), read the statement of work. Studies began in mid-November 2020, at which point the pathogen-free adult beagle dogs were scheduled to receive a total of three doses on days 0, 28, and 56. Throughout the study, researchers were instructed to monitor the dogs' health twice daily and collect blood and urine samples. A first dose of the vaccine was administered on November 12, with a second round given on December 17 without incident, with one important exception. That exception was four dogs in the so-named blue group reported as having vocalized in pain upon administration. After a physical examination five days later, the four dogs were observed as being bright, alert, and responsive. A third and final round was administered on January 14, 2021, also without incident but with one important exception. Half of the animals in the blue group again vocalized in pain upon administration. A week later, they were once again deemed bright, alert, and responsive. Emails sent between the researchers were included in the FOIA documents and confirmed that only the blue group showed a consistent pain response. The research is scheduled to be completed by January 15, 2022, and all animals will be euthanized after day 196, read the FOIA document. The UGR contract noted the vaccine was for lymphatic filariasis, a mosquito-borne parasitic infection caused by microscopic, thread-like worms. When inside their human hosts, these filarial worms live in the human lymph system and can cause elephantiasis and, in men, a condition called hydrocele that causes the swelling of the scrotum, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Lymphatic filariasis affects an estimated 120 million people worldwide, with another 1.2 billion at risk of infection, wrote researchers in 2014. Currently, there is no vaccine available for human cases, though treatment typically consists of chemotherapy and multiple drug therapies. But as the White Coat Project reported, vaccines for the disease have been tested in mice and were shown to be 90% effective and macaques (70% effective). In fact, at least 27 related animal experiments have been conducted since the 1940s on filarial worms. While WCW deemed the experiments "cruel and unnecessary" and claimed that some of the dogs were "bitten to death," the NIH contends that all research involving animals is overseen by the agency's Office of Laboratory Welfare to ensure it is conducted ethically. All animals used in NIH-funded research are protected by laws, regulations, and policies that ensure the smallest number of subjects and the greatest commitment to their welfare, notes the agency on its website. Furthermore, no evidence was put forward showing that the dogs were subject to biting, let alone "bitten to death." If any such information was included in the FOIA document, it has since been redacted. In an interview with Newsweek, Greg Trevor, associate vice president for marketing and communications at UGR, confirmed that the research was for a potential vaccine that was developed at another institution. In an emailed statement, Trevor reportedly told the publication that under federal rules, a vaccine must be tested in two animal species before it can be cleared for human clinical trials. NIAID decided to fund this research and that it needed to be conducted on a dog model, of which beagles are the standard. "Because this disease currently has no cure, unfortunately, the animals that are part of this trial must be euthanized. We do not take lightly the decision to use such animals in some of our research," Trevor reportedly told the publication. The third study took place in Tunisia and analyzed whether a species of sand fly (Phlebotomus perniciosus) was noticeably attracted to beagles who were infected with Leishmania infantum, the parasite that causes the skin disease leishmaniasis. Sand flies are the main vector of L. infantum, and dogs are the main host and reservoir of the disease. Though the research took place, NIAID did not fund the study, and the journal that published the study, PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases, issued a correction after reporting that the federal agency did support the study. The manuscript mistakenly cited support from NIAID, when in fact NIAID did not support this specific research shown in the images of the beagles being circulated, NIAID told Politifact. PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases confirmed to MedPage Today that the mistake was made and posted a correction online, adding that NIAID did not provide any funding for this research and any such claim was made in error. Research conducted on behalf of NIAID is funded in large part through congressional and executive actions deciding how to allocate taxpayer dollars. These annual allocations are then signed off on by the sitting president. NIAID funding for the fiscal year 2021 was awarded $5.4 billion by then-U.S. President Donald Trump in 2020. The following year, President Joe Biden requested an increase of $178.9 million, or 2.9% compared with the fiscal year 2021 enacted level, for a total of $6.2 billion to be awarded in the fiscal year 2022. It is true that research conducted at UGR and SRI International was at least in part funded by NIAID with taxpayer dollars, though it is unclear whether such allocations were personally approved by Fauci.

['funds']

NEI

The allegations began in July 2021, when the Republican-led animal rights advocacy group published a report that claimed Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of NIAID, approved funding from taxpayer dollars to conduct painful experiments on beagles. WCW claimed in its July 30 report that Fauci, in an attempt to advance a human vaccine for a parasitic disease called lymphatic filariasis, spent $424,000 to commission a study in which healthy beagles are given an experimental drug and then intentionally infested with flies that carry a disease-causing parasite that affects humans. The findings of the WCW investigation were subsequently reported in publications like Fox News and conservative-leaning outlets such as RT, The Federalist, The Daily Caller, and The Patriot Project.In October 2021, Republican U.S. House Representative Nancy Mace of South Carolina tweeted a letter she sent to Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease, referencing documents obtained via a Freedom of Information Act request from WCW. WCW claimed that from October 2018 to February 2019, Fauci ordered cruel and unusual drug toxicity tests on dogs that cost taxpayers $1.68 million. In a third report, WCW claimed that NIAID funded more than $375,000 to conduct a study that again used beagles as test subjects in experiments involving sand flies that the organization described as "torture."Founded in 2013, WCW is a watchdog group that is self-described as representing more than 2 million liberty lovers and animal-lovers who oppose using taxpayer dollars to support experiments on animals. It is not a traditional animal advocacy group but instead devotes its efforts to denouncing what it characterizes as wasted government funds spent on testing.In 2016, the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) reported that the Washington, D.C.-based organization is the brainchild of former Republican strategist Anthony Bellotti.Snopes read through the file to verify the claims made in the WCW report specific to NIH contract number HHSN272201400006I, which was described in a government database as preclinical development services for AIDS therapeutics with SRI International, a California-based nonprofit scientific research institute. According to the government fiduciary site USA Spending, a $1.1 million grant was awarded to the organization by DHHS on behalf of the NIAID. The study was listed to begin July 15, 2020, and wrap up by Dec. 24, 2021, and included testing on small animals for therapeutics to treat HIV as well as Hepatitis B and C viruses. The request returned 1,438 pages of documents describing wasteful and unnecessary drug toxicity tests on beagle puppies, a WCW spokesperson told Snopes. The documents are hosted on our site at the link below. It is also true that the dogs vocal cords were cut out. In an statement emailed to MedPage Today, NIAID told the publication that the contract for "preclinical pharmacology and toxicology services" was conducted "as required in animal models by the FDA, in compliance with Good Laboratory Practice (GLP) guidelines and in a facility accredited by the Association for Assessment and Accreditation of Laboratory Animal Care (AAALAC) or its equivalent. WCWClaims of Fauci ordering the funding of therapeutic testing on beagles originated with a 38-page FOIA request submitted by WCW and shared publicly in July. Those are hosted in this Dropbox folder and have been archived on our site:Research conducted on behalf of NIAID is funded in large part through annual funds allocated by Congress and the president, though direct projects may be signed off on by various leaders within NIH. However, there is no evidence that the grant was personally approved by Fauci and there is no mention of him in the FOIA documentation. All that we can definitively say is that at least some of the money came from NIH. Neither the NIH nor UGR responded to Snopes requests to verify the documents published by WCW, but a spokesperson for WCW sent our team a letter, written by NIAID Government Information Specialist Lauren Bartok in response to the FOIA request under case number 55876. The letter referenced the experimental documents obtained by WCW, confirming that the experiments took place. Image of the filarial worm Dirofilaria immitis (heartworms) in a lymph node of a dog with lymphoma. Lance Wheeler/Public DomainThe UGR contract noted the vaccine was for lymphatic filariasis, a mosquito-borne parasitic infection, caused by microscopic, thread-like worms. When inside of their human hosts, these filarial worms live in the human lymph system and can cause elephantiasis and, in men, a condition called hydrocele that causes the swelling of the scrotum, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).Lymphatic filariasis affects an estimated 120 million people worldwide with another 1.2 billion at risk of infection, wrote researchers in 2014. Currently, there is no vaccine available for human cases, though treatment typically consists of chemotherapy and multiple drug therapies.But as the White Coat Project reported, vaccines for the disease have been tested in mice and were shown to be 90% effective and macaques (70% effective). In fact, at least 27 related animal experiments have been conducted since the 1940s on filarial worms. While WCW deemed the experiments "cruel and unnecessary" and claimed that some of the dogs were "bitten to death," the NIH contends that all research involving animals is overseen by the agency's Office of Laboratory Welfare to ensure it is conducted ethically. All animals used in NIH-funded research are protected by laws, regulations, and policies that ensure the smallest number of subjects and the greatest commitment to their welfare, notes the agency on its website.In an interview with Newsweek, Greg Trevor, associate vice president for marketing and communications at UGR, confirmed that the research was for a potential vaccine that was developed and another institution. In an emailed statement, Trevor reportedly told the publication that under federal rules, a vaccine must be tested in two animal species before it can be cleared for human clinical trials. NIAID decided to fund this research and that it needed to be conducted on a dog model, of which beagles are the standard.The third study took place in Tunisia and analyzed whether a species of sand fly (Phlebotomus perniciosus) was noticeably attracted to beagles who were infected with Leishmania infantum, the parasite that causes the skin disease leishmaniasis. Sand flies are the main vector of L. infantum and dogs are the main host and reservoir of the disease. Though the research took place, NIAID did not fund the study and the journal that published the study, PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases, issued a correction after reporting that the federal agency did support the study. The manuscript mistakenly cited support from NIAID, when in fact NIAID did not support this specific research shown in the images of the beagles being circulated, NIAID told Politifact.PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases confirmed to MedPage Today that the mistake was made and posted a correction online, adding that NIAID did not provide any funding for this research and any such claim was made in error. Research conducted on behalf of NIAID is funded in large part through congressional and executive actions deciding how to allocate taxpayer dollars. These annual allocations are then signed off on by the sitting president.NIAID funding for the fiscal year 2021 was awarded $5.4 billion by then-U.S. President Donald Trump in 2020. The following year, President Joe Biden requested an increase of $178.9 million, or 2.9% compared with the fiscal year 2021 enacted level, for a total of $6.2 billion to be awarded in the fiscal year 2022. It is true that research conducted at UGR and SRI International was at least in part funded by NIAID with taxpayer dollars, though it is unclear whether such allocations were personally approved by Fauci.

Catholic Services in Jeopardy During Government Shutdown

['Are Catholic priests barred from conducting religious services on U.S. military bases during the federal government shutdown?']

Claim: Catholic priests may not conduct religious services on U.S. military bases during the federal government shutdown. Contract priests are prohibited from conducting religious functions on U.S. military bases during the federal government shutdown. Example: [Collected via e-mail, September 2013] Did President Obama really order that military priests be arrested for saying the Mass during the government shutdown? Origins: One of the many issues affecting both the public and government workers during the federal government shutdown of October 2013 is the Antideficiency Act, a piece of legislation originally passed in 1870 that prohibits the federal government from incurring any monetary obligations for which Congress has not appropriated funds. Under the terms of that legislation, federal employees may not perform their job duties during a government shutdown (except for certain legally exempted activities, such as "emergencies involving the safety of human life or the protection of property") even if they volunteer to do so on an unpaid basis. Federal workers who violate the Antideficiency Act may be subject to disciplinary action (such as suspension or job termination), fines, and imprisonment. The application of the Antideficiency Act is open to a fair amount of interpretation, however. For example, does it violate the terms of the Antideficiency Act for federal workers to check their cell phones or e-mail for work-related messages during the government shutdown, even if they don't act on those messages? Executive branch departments have had to review and decide what government activities they believe may or may not be allowed during the shutdown without running afoul of the Antideficiency Act. Due to a confluence of circumstances, one group affected by the Antideficiency Act is some Catholic priests. Due to a chronic shortage of active duty Catholic military chaplains in the U.S. armed forces, the Department of Defense has had to hire about 234 priests from outside the military (variously known as contract priests, GS priests, or non-active duty priests) to perform Catholic services and other religious functions on U.S. military bases. Although active duty military personnel (including chaplains) are exempt from the Antideficiency Act, government contract workers are not, so contract priests may not perform religious services or otherwise minister to Catholics on U.S. military bases during the government shutdown, even on a volunteer basis. Therefore, a subset of Catholic military personnel who are stationed at bases that have no active duty Catholic chaplains and are instead being staffed by contract priests will have to go elsewhere for religious services during the shutdown. If they wish to attend Mass or take part in a baptism, for example, they will have to go to local churches or other off-base locations for those functions. (U.S. military personnel stationed in some parts of the world may not be able to find local English-speaking priests, or any priests at all, however.) It isn't true that "President Obama ordered that military priests be arrested for saying the Mass during the government shutdown." As explained above, the issue with contract priests in the military was created by the intersection of the Antideficiency Act and a shortage of active duty Catholic military chaplains, two factors that have neither been instigated by nor are under the control of President Obama. Although imprisonment is technically one of the potential punishments spelled out in the law for federal workers who violate the Antideficiency Act, President Obama has not ordered that penalty to be applied to contract priests or any other federal employees, and that penalty is unlikely to be applied to anyone except for the most egregious violations. Update: On 5 October 2013, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a measure (by a 400 to 1 vote) in favor of allowing military chaplains to minister on Sunday without violating the Antideficiency Act. The Senate has not yet taken up the bill. Last updated: 5 October 2013.

['funds']

True

Origins: One of the many issues affecting both the public and government workers during the federal government shutdown of October 2013 is the Antideficiency Act, a piece of legislation originally passed back in 1870 that prohibits the federal government from incurring any monetary obligations for which Congress has not appropriated funds. Under the terms of that legislation, federal employees may not perform their job duties during a government shutdown (save for certain legally exempted activities, such as "emergencies involving the safety of human life or the protection of property") even if they volunteer to do so on an unpaid basis, and federal workers who violate the Antideficiency Act may be subject to disciplinary action (such as suspension or job termination), fines, and imprisonment.

Almost 10 percent of Canadians came to visit Florida last year ... (Canadians) buy 7.4 percent of our homes in the state.

[]

Fresh off a five-day trade mission to Canada, Florida Gov. Rick Scott was eager to share a few tidbits about the country's relationship with the Sunshine State. In a news conference with the Capitol press corps on June 16, 2011, Scott showcased his Florida-Canada knowledge, claiming that almost 10 percent of Canadians visited Florida last year and that they purchased 7.4 percent of our homes in the state. Interesting claims, right? But are they true? The number of Canadians visiting Florida each year is collected by Visit Florida, the state's official tourism marketing corporation. Visit Florida bases its data on credit card information and statistics supplied by the Canadian government. The agency found that about 3.05 million Canadians visited Florida in 2010, which is approximately 9 percent of the country's total population of about 34 million. The Toronto Star noted in a recent story—based on the Visit Florida data—that the Canadian boost to Florida's tourism occurred even as oil from the Deepwater Horizon disaster threatened Gulf of Mexico beaches. So Scott is correct about the tourists. But what about Canadian homeowners? Scott's press office directed us to a 2010 study on Florida's international home buyers. The study was conducted by the National Association of Realtors, which creates an annual report on the country's housing market and additional reports for states with a high rate of sales to foreign buyers. The national group surveys Florida members each year, including a question about foreign clients. Florida has the strongest international home sales market in the country. In 2010, foreign clients were responsible for 22 percent of existing home purchases in the state, according to the study. Florida has consistently been the No. 1 destination among foreign buyers, said Lawrence Yun, a National Association of Realtors economist. Canadians are a significant part of that distinction, having out-bought all international buyers in 2010, accounting for 36 percent of Florida's foreign sales that year. Residents of the United Kingdom are the next-best buyers at 15 percent. Indeed, residents of the Great White North love the state's beaches and warm climate. Furthermore, Yun noted that these slices of paradise don't cost nearly as much as they used to, and the Canadian dollar is stronger than its weakened U.S. counterpart. There's greater consumer confidence among Canadians, which is beneficial for Florida. "It's absolutely helpful," Yun said. "Anytime the market is down, one way to help alleviate the pain or aid the healing process is for buyers to come into the market and absorb the inventory." We wanted to find the percentage of Canadians who bought homes in Florida in 2010. So we multiplied 0.22 (the portion of Florida home sales to foreign buyers in 2010) by 0.36 (Canada's share of international sales among foreign buyers) to get 0.0792, or 7.92 percent. Scott's office did not specify how he arrived at 7.4 percent, but he's close enough. He is correct that there's a clear Canadian infatuation with Florida. As one Canadian-turned-Floridian real estate agent joked in a National Public Radio report on the housing phenomenon, "If there ever was an 11th (Canadian) province, it probably would be Florida." Scott has his Canada trivia down cold, and we were unable to find any statistics that contradict him.

['Housing', 'Tourism', 'Trade', 'Florida']

True

Fresh off afive-day trade missionto Canada, Florida Gov. Rick Scott was eager to drop a few tidbits about the country's relationship with the Sunshine State.The number of Canadians visiting Florida each year is collected by Visit Florida, the state's official tourism marketing corporation. Visit Florida bases its data on credit card information and statistics supplied the Canadian government. The agency found that about 3.05 million Canadians visited Florida in 2010. That's about 9 percent of thecountry's total population of about 34 million.The Toronto Starnoted in a recent story -- based on the Visit Florida data -- that the Canadian boost to Florida's tourism happened even as oil from the Deepwater Horizon disaster threatened Gulf of Mexico beaches.Scott's press office directed us to a2010 studyon Florida's international home buyers. The study is researched by the National Association of Realtors, which creates an annual report on the country's housing market and additional reports for states with a high rate of sales to foreign buyers. The national group takes a survey of Florida members each year, and that includes a question about foreign clients.He's right that there's a clear Canadian infatuation with Florida. As one Canadian-turned-Floridian-real-estate-agent joked in aNational Public Radio reporton the housing phenomenon, If there ever was an 11th (Canadian) province, it probably would be Florida.

ALDI Coupons Facebook Scam

['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 themselves 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: "

['share']

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:

'So Far No One Has Found Another Number' Walmart Gift Card Facebook Scam

['Legitimate gift card giveaways from Walmart are not hosted by random users in Facebook groups.']

In late July 2023, readers directed our attention to several posts made within Facebook groups. The users who created these posts, whose profiles all suggested they might be from Bangladesh, claimed to be offering Walmart gift cards to anyone who could find a special number in an image. For example, one post read, "So far, no one has found another number apart from 86. No winners yet (Walmart gift card). We still have 24 more wins." The only other number visible in the image was 96. Users who commented with "96" received replies from the post's creator containing a link that eventually led to a survey scam website. Survey scam websites typically promise cash prizes, expensive electronics, and other enticing purported "rewards," all supposedly in exchange for a few minutes of the user's time to answer some questions. However, as we have reported for the last two decades, survey scam websites have historically proven to be a waste of time. They often ask users to provide personal and financial information on various websites and to sign up for trials of unfamiliar streaming services. All of this appeared to be an attempt to receive affiliate marketing commissions based on the amount of information given away when users provide personal and financial data to these websites. Sometimes, these scammers might instead provide a link directing users to hidden subscription scams that supposedly offer "free" prizes. However, such scams conceal monthly fees in the fine print, much like a Cash App scam we once reported. These types of scammers might also sometimes direct users to phishing websites that claim a gift card or other prize could be ordered for "free," only requiring a small shipping and handling charge. Of course, there would be no real gift card or other prize. This would simply be an attempt to obtain a victim's financial information for criminal activities, such as a credit card number or PayPal login. This type of scam was similar to another one we previously reported concerning the U.S. Postal Service. If readers are looking for legitimate promotions for Walmart gift cards, we recommend our previous reporting that found the company truly does give away $80,000 in prizes every three months. Such promotions are offered by the company in official email correspondence and on receipts handed out in its brick-and-mortar stores.

['credit']

False

In late July 2023, readers pointed us to several posts that had been made inside of Facebook groups. The users who made these posts, whose profiles all indicated they may have been from Bangladesh, claimed to be offering Walmart gift cards to anyone who could find a special number in an image. For example, one post read, "So Far No One Has Found Another Number Apart From 86, No Winners Yet (Walmart Gift Card). We Still Have 24 More Wins."Survey scam websites usually promise cash prizes, pricey electronics, and other interesting purported "rewards," all supposedly if the user takes a few minutes to answer some questions. However, as we've reported for the last two decades or so, survey scam websites have historically proven to be a waste of time. They often ask users to provide personal and financial information on various websites, as well as to sign up for trials of unfamiliar streaming services. All of this appeared to be an attempt at receiving affiliate-marketing commission based on the amount of information given away when providing personal and financial data to these websites.Sometimes, these kinds of scammers might instead provide a link sending users to hidden subscription scams that supposedly offer "free" prizes. However, such scams hide monthly fees in the fine print, much like a Cash App scam we once reported about.These sorts of scammers might also sometimes direct users to phishing websites that claim a gift card or other prize could be ordered for "free," only with a small shipping and handling charge. Of course, there would be no real gift card or other prize. This simply would be an attempt to obtain a victim's financial information for criminal activities, such as a credit card number or PayPal login. This kind of a scam was similar to another one we previously reported about concerning the U.S. Postal Service.If readers are looking for legitimate promotions for Walmart gift cards, we recommend our previous reporting that found the company truly does give away $80,000 in prizes every three months. Such promotions are offered by the company in official email correspondence and on receipts handed out in its brick-and-mortar stores.

Harvard Science Endowment

['Is Harvard offering tuition-free education to African-American students majoring in the sciences?']

Claim: Harvard is offering tuition-free education to African-American students majoring in the sciences. Example: [Collected via e-mail, June 2009] Greetings: A quick note about an exciting scholarship opportunity in case you know anyone who might be interested. Harvard University wants to get the word out that the University has a massive science endowment for African American high school juniors and seniors who are interested in majoring in the sciences, such as Chemistry, Biology, and Physics. This program offers a four-year tuition-free education at Harvard University, regardless of parents' income! The professor to contact for more information is Professor Gregory Tucci at tucci@fas.harvard.edu or 617-496-4668. If you know any African American junior or senior students who excel and are passionate about the sciences, please pass along this information. Origins: This item promoting a "massive science endowment" that supposedly provides "four-year tuition-free educations" for African-American science students at Harvard has been circulating since at least mid-2009 and has been reprinted in a number of online bulletins and newsletters that publish information about educational opportunities. Although Harvard does provide a number of financial aid opportunities that prospective students might qualify for, a completely tuition-free, four-year program for African-American students majoring in the sciences is not among them, according to the professor whose name, address, and phone number have been attached to this item. Thank you very much for your interest in financial support for students interested in the sciences at Harvard University. Unfortunately, the information you received regarding "four-year tuition-free education ... regardless of parents' income" appears to be a hoax. Additionally, I am not involved in admissions or financial aid. Harvard has very generous financial aid support for all students who qualify based on need. On a very positive note, families with incomes below $60,000 need not contribute to the cost of sending their children to Harvard. Furthermore, families with incomes up to $180,000 with assets typical for that income level need not pay more than 10 percent of their incomes. No student should be discouraged from applying to Harvard because of financial concerns. The Financial Aid Office is always eager to work with talented students to ensure they receive the financial support that will make a Harvard education possible for them. For more information, please visit the financial aid website: https://www.fao.fas.harvard.edu/, or call 617-495-1581. Additional information: Financial Aid Overview (Harvard College) Last updated: 27 March 2010.

['asset']

True

Harvard has very generous financial aid support for all students who qualify on the basis of need. On a very positive note, families with incomes below $60,000 need not contribute to the cost of sending their children to Harvard. Further, families with incomes up to $180,000 with assets typical for the income level need not pay more than 10 percent of their incomes. No student should be discouraged from applying to Harvard because of financial concerns. The Financial Aid Office is always eager to work with talented students to make sure they receive the financial support that will make a Harvard education possible for them. For more information, please visit the financial aid web site: https://www.fao.fas.harvard.edu/, or call 617-495-1581. Financial Aid Overview (Harvard College)

SaysTed Cruz distributed the ad showing a nude Melania Trump on a rug.

[]

Call it the war over the wives. An ad suggesting that Donald Trump's wife, Melania, might not be modest enough to be first lady sparked a series of nasty exchanges between Trump and Sen. Ted Cruz that have dominated the campaign for more than a week. CNN's Anderson Cooper grilled Trump about the ad during a March 29 interview in Wisconsin, questioning him about his accusation, made in a March 22 tweet, that Cruz was responsible for the picture. "I did not start this," Trump told Cooper seven days after the tweet. "He sent out a picture, and he knew very well it was a picture..." "He didn't send out a picture," Cooper interrupted. "It was an anti-Trump super PAC." When Cooper asked Trump if he had any proof that Cruz was behind the ad, Trump replied, "No. Everybody knows he sent it out. He knew the people in the super PAC. He knew. I would be willing to bet he wrote the phrase," referring to the words that accompanied the nude photograph of Mrs. Trump, a model posed on a rug. "Meet Melania Trump, your next first lady," the ad stated. "Or, you could support Ted Cruz on Tuesday," a reference to the March 22 Utah primary. "I didn't send the photo to everybody in the state of Utah. He did," said Trump. "It was his people, who were his friends." For this fact-check, we'll examine whether Trump is correct in claiming that Cruz distributed this Facebook ad containing a nude photograph of Trump's wife. Federal law states that political ads must clearly identify their source, and this one lists the source as a political action committee called Make America Awesome. Such groups are known as super PACs because they can spend unlimited amounts of money advocating for or against a candidate or a point of view. Super PACs have one major restriction: They cannot coordinate their efforts with a candidate's official campaign, which is limited in its spending. If Cruz did arrange for the ad under the auspices of the super PAC, it would be a serious violation of federal law. The super PAC stated, "The Cruz campaign had nothing to do with this ad whatsoever. We didn't get the image or the idea for the ad from them," said Republican strategist Liz Mair, who is behind the super PAC. Make America Awesome, based in Virginia, was founded in December and reported $20,752 in contributions through February, with most of the money spent on small purchases of airtime in nine states, according to the Federal Election Commission website. "I would guess that including money that has come in since our last filing, we have raised about $35,000," said Mair. There's also no evidence that the PAC is a front for the Cruz campaign. When we checked the PAC's YouTube page, we found four commercials, only two of which are the standard length for broadcast. The Jan. 20 "Buyer Beware" commercial, obviously made on a shoestring budget, includes a light-hearted rundown of nine Republican presidential candidates as breakfast cereals. They include Jeb Bush ("Good source of experience and wonkiness. The brand you know."), Ben Carson ("With extra nice guy doctorness."), Chris Christie ("100% RDA of telling it like it is."), and Ted Cruz ("Two Scoops of Conservatism!"). In the ad, the shopper buys the Trump cereal ("Guaranteed success and a free 'Screw the Liberal Establishment!' voucher inside") and ends up regretting the purchase. The only ads we've run in favor of any candidate are the three Facebook ads we ran targeting Mormons in Utah and Arizona, of which the Melania one was one, and the one with the least money put behind it (about $300, maybe even less than that, honestly), Mair wrote in an email. The Melania ad, she wrote, was targeted only to Mormon women of (if I recall correctly) ages 45-65 living in Utah and Arizona who self-identified as moderate, conservative, or very conservative. "The shot we used was chosen because of the presence of handcuffs, which was particularly bothersome to the target audience," Mair said. However, there are definitely racier shots of her out there that would no doubt be considered more scandalous by a lot of voters across the entire political spectrum—too racy for us to use in Facebook ads, candidly. Although the ads urge voters to support the Texas senator, he was only one of two viable alternatives to Trump currently on the ballot in those states. In a March 27 interview with ABC News, Trump claimed Cruz or his campaign bought the rights to the Melania photo and gave it to the super PAC. There's no evidence that Cruz, the campaign, or Mair's group purchased rights to the photo, taken when she was Trump's girlfriend. "The image was, at the time we concepted out and then created the ad, already republished all over the Internet at numerous sites," Mair told us in an email. The photographer who took the image for the 2000 photo spread in British GQ, Antoine Verglas, told our friends at FactCheck.org that nobody contacted him to buy rights to the picture. The magazine reprinted that photo, along with other pictures from the shoot, online March 4 under the headline, "The Future First Lady? Sexy Melania Trump's Nude Photo Shoot." As for Cruz himself, Mair said, "I think I've met him at gatherings attended by many people maybe once or twice in my life (and it will have been some time ago), and I have never spoken to him privately." We contacted the Trump campaign but didn't receive a response. Our ruling: Trump said Cruz was responsible for the racy ad questioning whether people wanted Melania Trump to be first lady. One of the tenets of PolitiFact is that the person making the claim is responsible for substantiating it. Trump stated on CNN that he has no real proof. All the evidence we found points to the ad being the work of a political action committee whose goal has been to block Trump's nomination. There's no proof of Cruz working with that committee, which would be illegal. We rate Trump's claim as False.

['National', 'Campaign Finance', 'Candidate Biography', 'Elections', 'Legal Issues', 'Negative Campaigning', 'Pop Culture']

False

CNN's Anderson Cooper grilled Trump about the ad during aMarch 29interview in Wisconsin, questioning Trump about his accusation, made ina March 22 tweet, that Cruz was responsible for the picture.Federal law says political ads must clearly identify their source, and this one lists the source as a political action committee calledMake America Awesome. Such groups are called super PACs because they can spend limitless amounts of money advocating for or against a candidate or a point of view.When we checked the PAC'sYouTube page, we found four commercials, only two of which are the standard length for broadcast. The Jan. 20 Buyer Beware commercial, obviously made on a shoestring budget, includes a light-hearted rundown of nine Republican presidential candidates as breakfast cereals.The photographer who took the image for the 2000 photo spread inBritish GQ, Antoine Verglas, told our friends at FactCheck.org thatnobody contacted himto buy rights to the picture.The magazine reprinted that photo, along with other pictures from the shoot,onlineMarch 4 under the headline, The Future First Lady? Sexy Melania Trump's Nude Photo Shoot.

Hispanic Leaders Speak Out!

['Quotes from various Hispanic leaders and newspaper articles regarding U.S. immigrants']

Claim: List reproduces quotes from various Hispanic leaders and newspaper articles regarding U.S. immigrants. Example: [Collected via e-mail, April 2006] "You old white people. It is your duty to die." HISPANIC LEADERS SPEAK OUT! Augustin Cebada, Brown Berets; "Go back to Boston! Go back to Plymouth Rock, Pilgrims! Get out! We are the future. You are old and tired. Go on. We have beaten you. Leave like beaten rats. You old white people. It is your duty to die ... Through love of having children, we are going to take over. Richard Alatorre, Los Angeles City Council. "They're afraid we're going to take over the governmental institutions and other institutions. They're right. We will take them over ... We are here to stay." Excelsior, the national newspaper of Mexico, "The American southwest seems to be slowly returning to the jurisdiction of Mexico without firing a single shot." Professor Jose Angel Gutierrez, University of Texas; "We have an aging white America. They are not making babies. They are dying. The explosion is in our population ... I love it. They are shitting in their pants with fear. I love it." Art Torres, Chairman of the California Democratic Party, "Remember 187 proposition to deny taxpayer funds for services to non-citizens was the last gasp of white America in California." Gloria Molina, Los Angeles County Supervisor, "We are politicizing every single one of these new citizens that are becoming citizens of this country ... I gotta tell you that a lot of people are saying, 'I'm going to go out there and vote because I want to pay them back.'" Mario Obledo, California Coalition of Hispanic Organizations and California State Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare under Governor Jerry Brown, also awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom by President Bill Clinton, "California is going to be a Hispanic state. Anyone who doesn't like it should leave." Jose Pescador Osuna, Mexican Consul General, "We are practicing 'La Reconquista' in California." Professor Fernando Guerra, Loyola Marymount University; "We need to avoid a white backlash by using codes understood by Latinos ..." Are these just the words of a few extremists? Consider that we could fill many pages with such quotes. Also, consider that these are mainstream Mexican leaders. THE U.S. VS MEXICO: On February 15, 1998, the U.S. and Mexican soccer teams met at the Los Angeles Coliseum. The crowd was overwhelmingly pro-Mexican even though most lived in this country. They booed during the National Anthem, and U.S. flags were held upside down. As the match progressed, supporters of the U.S. team were insulted, pelted with projectiles, punched, and spat upon. Beer and trash were thrown at the U.S. players before and after the match. The coach of the U.S. team, Steve Sampson, said, "This was the most painful experience I have ever had in this profession." Did you know that immigrants from Mexico and other non-European countries can come to this country and get preferences in jobs, education, and government contracts? It's called affirmative action or racial privilege. The Emperor of Japan or the President of Mexico could migrate here and immediately be eligible for special rights unavailable to Americans of European descent. Recently, a vote was taken in the U.S. Congress to end this practice. It was defeated. Every single Democratic senator except Ernest Hollings voted to maintain special privileges for Hispanic, Asian, and African immigrants. They were joined by thirteen Republicans. Bill Clinton and Al Gore have repeatedly stated that they believe that massive immigration from countries like Mexico is good. They have also backed special privileges for these immigrants. Corporate America has signed on to the idea that minorities and third-world immigrants should receive special, privileged status. Some examples are Exxon, Texaco, Merrill Lynch, Boeing, Paine Weber, Starbucks, and many more. DID YOU KNOW? Did you know that Mexico regularly intercedes on the side of the defense in criminal cases involving Mexican nationals? Did you know that Mexico has NEVER extradited a Mexican national accused of murder in the U.S. in spite of agreements to do so? According to the L.A. Times, Orange County, California is home to 275 gangs with 17,000 members; 98% of which are Mexican and Asian. How's your county doing? According to a New York Times article dated May 19, 1994, 20 years after the great influx of legal immigrants from Southeast Asia, 30% are still on welfare compared to 8% of households nationwide. A Wall Street Journal editorial dated December 5, 1994 quotes law enforcement officials as stating that Asian mobsters are the "greatest criminal challenge the country faces." Not bad for a group that is still under 5% of the population. Is education important to you? Here are the words of a teacher who spent over 20 years in the Los Angeles School system. "Imagine teachers in classes containing 30-40 students of widely varying attention spans and motivation, many of whom aren't fluent in English. Educators seek learning materials likely to reach the majority of students, and that means fewer words and math problems and more pictures and multicultural references." WHEN I WAS YOUNG: When I was young, I remember hearing about the immigrants that came through Ellis Island. They wanted to learn English. They wanted to breathe free. They wanted to become Americans. Now too many immigrants come here with demands. They demand to be taught in their own language. They demand special privileges—affirmative action. They demand ethnic studies that glorify their culture. HOW CAN YOU HELP?: Send copies of this letter to at least two other people; 100 would be even better. Help us get the word out. And did you know that at the hospital, these illegals cannot be turned down if they can't pay, and they certainly don't pay? I saw a man on TV who took his Caucasian neighbor to an emergency room. He was slowly bleeding to death, yet he had to wait for three hours for emergency treatment because the staff was busy giving prenatal treatment, cold and flu remedies, aspirin, etc., to illegals who could not speak English. They were all treated for free. When the bleeding Caucasian man's turn finally came, they would not touch him until he proved that he had insurance. Because of the overwhelming number of illegals in this country, this past year alone, 84 hospitals in the Los Angeles area went out of business. If you think there is something seriously sick going on in our country, you had better write a letter to your congressman letting him know how you feel. Soon it will be too late, so you might consider getting a head start and enrolling in a Spanish class. Origins: With immigration reform being one of the hot-button political issues in the U.S. in early 2006, the above-quoted collection of quotes from various Hispanic leaders and newspaper articles regarding U.S. immigrants started circulating widely on the Internet. Even though the issue was timely, this collection was actually compiled several years earlier and references statements made by Californians during 1990 (when immigration reform was also a hot-button political issue in California due to the controversial Proposition 187 ballot measure). Audio clips of many of the quotes reproduced above were collected on a CD offered for sale by the California Coalition for Immigration Reform (CCIR), and we include a link to the relevant clip after the discussion of each item below: immigration reform collection CCIR "Go back to Boston! Go back to Plymouth Rock, Pilgrims! Get out! We are the future. You are old and tired. Go on. We have beaten you. Leave like beaten rats. You old white people. It is your duty to die ... Through love of having children, we are going to take over." This is an excerpt from a statement by Augustin Cebada of the Brown Berets de Aztlán, a paramilitary offshoot of the Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlán (MEChA), delivered during a Fourth of July rally held outside the Federal Building in Westwood, California, in 1996: Brown Berets We're here today to show L.A., show the minority people here, the Anglo-Saxons, that we are here, the majority, we're here to stay. We do the work in this city, we take care of the spoiled brat children, we clean their offices, we pick the food, we do the manufacturing in the factories of L.A., we are the majority here, and we are not going to be pushed around. We're here in Westwood; this is the fourth time we've been here in the last two months, to show white Anglo-Saxon Protestant L.A., the few of you who remain, that we are the majority, and we claim this land as ours, it's always been ours, and we're still here, and uh, none of this talk about deporting. If anybody's going to be deported, it's going to be you. [SHOUTING] Go back to Simi Valley, you skunks! Go back to Woodland Hills! Go back to Boston! Go back to the Plymouth Rock, Pilgrims! Get out! We are the future. You're old and tired. Go on. We have beaten you; leave like beaten rats. You old white people, it is your duty to die. Even their own ethicists say that they should die; that they have a duty to die. They're taking up too much space, too much air. We are the majority in L.A. There's over seven million Mexicans in L.A. County alone. We are the majority. And you're going to see every day more and more of it, as we ... we manifest as our young people grow up, graduate from high school, go on to college, and start taking over this society. Our people ... are ... the vast majority of our people are under the age of 15 years old. Right now we're already controlling those elections, whether it's through violence or nonviolence. Through love of having children, we are gonna take over. [Audio link] Audio link "They're afraid we're going to take over the governmental institutions and other institutions. They're right. We will take them over ... We are here to stay." This is an excerpt from a statement made by Richard Alatorre (then a member of the Los Angeles City Council) at a Latino summit conference in Los Angeles in September 1996, about the upcoming Proposition 209 ballot measure, which sought to prohibit governmental agencies in California from "discriminating against or giving preferential treatment to any individual or group in public employment ... on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin" (also known as the "end of affirmative action" proposition): Proposition 209 Because our numbers are growing, they're afraid about this great mass of minorities that now live in our community. They're afraid that we're going to take over the governmental institutions and other institutions. They are right, we will take them over, and we are not going to go away—we are here to stay, and we are saying 'ya basta' (enough!) and we are going to turn ... and uh, de ... not elect or re-elect people that believe that they are going to advance their political careers on the backs of immigrants and the backs of minorities. [Audio link] Audio link (NOTES: Richard Alatorre served in the California State Assembly from 1973 to 1985 and was a member of the Los Angeles City Council from 1985 to 1999. He was twice fined for violating conflict of interest provisions while a council member, and in 2001 he agreed to plead guilty to a federal criminal charge of felony tax evasion, admitting that "he failed to report to the Internal Revenue Service nearly $42,000 in cash he received from individuals attempting to influence [him] in his official duties." Proposition 209 was passed by 54% of California voters in November 1996.) fined tax evasion "The American southwest seems to be slowly returning to the jurisdiction of Mexico without firing a single shot." We haven't been able to verify this quote (or find the context) for this statement purportedly taken from Excélsior, a Mexico City newspaper. Excélsior "We have an aging white America. They are not making babies. They are dying. The explosion is in our population ... I love it. They are shitting in their pants with fear. I love it." This is an excerpt from a statement by José Angel Gutiérrez, then an Associate Professor of Political Science at the University of Texas at Arlington (and a former leader of the La Raza Unida political party) at a Latino conference held at the University of California, Riverside on 14 January 1995, regarding the effects of California's recently-passed Proposition 187 ballot measure (which sought to bar illegal immigrants from public education and other social services provided by the state): Associate Professor of Political Science La Raza Unida Proposition 187 The border remains a military zone. We remain a hunted people. Now you think you have a destiny to fulfill in this land that historically has been ours for forty thousand years, and we're a new Mestizo nation. And they want us to discuss civil rights. Civil rights! What law made by white men to oppress all of us of color, female and male! This is our homeland. We cannot, we will not, and we must not be made illegal in our own homeland. We are not im-mi-grants that came from another country to another country; we are migrants, free to travel the length and breadth of the Americas because we belong here. We are millions. We just have to survive. We have an aging white America. They are not making babies. They are dying. It's a matter of time. [laughter] The explosion is in our population. [Audio link] Audio link (NOTE: We haven't been able to verify the last portion of Professor Gutiérrez's statement, about white America "shitting in their pants with fear," as it does not appear in the audio clip provided. The constitutionality of Proposition 187 was challenged within days of its passage, and most of its provisions were eventually voided.) "Remember 187 (proposition to deny taxpayer funds for services to non-citizens) was the last gasp of white America in California." This is a sentence taken from a statement given by Art Torres, a former California State Assembly member and State Senator, at the UC Riverside conference referenced above: Art Torres It is an honor to be with the new leadership of the Americas, here meeting at UC Riverside. So with 187 on the ballot, what is it going to take for our people to vote, to see us walking into the gas ovens? It is electoral power that is going to make the determination of where we go as a community. And power is not given to you; you have to take it. Remember: 187 is the last gasp of white America in California. Understand that. And people say to me on the Senate floor when I was in the Senate, 'Why do you fight so hard for affirmative action programs?' And I tell my white colleagues, 'because you're going to need them' [laughter]. [Audio link] Audio link (NOTE: A month after making this statement, Art Torres was appointed Chairman of the California Democratic Party, a position he held until 2009.) "We are politicizing every single one of these new citizens that are becoming citizens of this country ... I gotta tell you that a lot of people are saying, 'I'm going to go out there and vote because I want to pay them back.'" This is an excerpt from a statement made by Gloria Molina, a Los Angeles County Supervisor, at a Southwest Voter Registration Project (SVREP) rally in June 1996: Gloria Molina SVREP Tonight Latinos across this country are coming together and they are shouting one thing: we are united. And we are united because we want to demand the kind of political respect that we should have. We demand to be counted. And what we know as well is that the big giant that they keep talking about is awakening. And he's pretty angry about what's going on. Ya basta! (enough). This community is no longer going to stand for it. Because tonight we are organizing across this country in a single mission, in a plan. We are going to organize like we've never organized before. We are going to go into our neighborhoods. We are going to register voters. We are going to talk to all of those young people that need to become registered voters and go out to vote, and we are politicizing every single one of those new citizens that are becoming citizens of this country. And, what we are saying is by November we will have one million additional Latino voters in this country, and we're gonna march ... and our vote is going to be important. But I gotta tell you, there's a lot of people that are saying, 'I'm gonna go out there and vote because I want to pay them back!' And this November, we are going to remember those that stood with us and we are also going to remember those that have stood against us on the issues of immigration, on the issues of education, on the issues of health care, on the issues of the minimum wage. [Audio link] Audio link "California is going to be a Hispanic state. Anyone who doesn't like it should leave." Mario Obledo was a co-founder of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF) and the La Raza Lawyers of California bar association, and he formerly served as California's Secretary of Health and Welfare. We don't know exactly when and where he first made his controversial statement about California's becoming a "Hispanic state," but he has confirmed he said it at least twice: during an appearance on Ray Briem's talk radio show in May or June of 1998, and again on Tom Leykis' talk radio show: MALDEF La Raza Lawyers appearance again Obledo: "We're going to take over all the political institutions of California. In five years the Hispanics are going to be the majority population of this state." Caller: "You also made the statement that California is going to become a Hispanic state, and if anyone doesn't like it, they should leave. Did you say that?" Obledo: "I did. They ought to go back to Europe." "We are practicing 'La Reconquista' in California." "La Reconquista" (Spanish for "the reconquest") is a term that has historically been applied to the process whereby Christians recaptured rule over the Iberian Peninsula from Muslims between 718 and 1492. The term's appearance in the quote above reflects a modern political usage that refers to the retaking of portions of the U.S. Southwest that were once part of Mexico. The above-quoted sentence is attributed to José Pescador Osuna, the Mexican consul general in Los Angeles. We haven't been able to verify when and in what context he supposedly said it, but it is widely cited as the end portion of a statement he made in 1998: "Even though I'm saying this part serious and part joking, I believe we are practicing 'La Reconquista' in California." "We need to avoid a white backlash by using codes understood by Latinos." This sentence is attributed to Fernando J. Guerra, Ph.D., an Associate Professor in the Department of Chicano Studies and Political Science at Loyola Marymount University in Los Angeles. We haven't been able to verify when and in what context he supposedly said it, other than to note that the words are part of a longer statement also widely attributed to him: "We need to avoid a white backlash by using codes understood by Latinos ... non-Latinos aren't watching; they aren't raising questions." Fernando J. Guerra On February 15, 1998, the U.S. and Mexican soccer teams met at the Los Angeles Coliseum. The crowd was overwhelmingly pro-Mexican even though most lived in this country. They booed during the National Anthem, and U.S. flags were held upside down. As the match progressed, supporters of the U.S. team were insulted, pelted with projectiles, punched, and spat upon. Beer and trash were thrown at the U.S. players before and after the match. The coach of the U.S. team, Steve Sampson, said, "This was the most painful experience I have ever had in this profession." On February 15, 1998, Mexico's national soccer team scored a 1-0 victory over the United States team in the CONCACAF Gold Cup championship game before a crowd of 91,255 at the Los Angeles Coliseum. News accounts of the match noted that some of the large number of fans who turned out to root for the Mexican team whistled during the playing of the U.S. national anthem, booed the U.S. team, and threw debris at U.S. players: The pro-Mexican throng that filled the entire Coliseum—including areas without seats because of construction—booed the Americans and showered them with debris on several occasions. "It seemed like we were playing in Mexico City," said U.S. forward Preki, a native of Yugoslavia who gained his U.S. citizenship on October 25, 1996. "When we played down there in Mexico City, the crowd wasn't as bad as it was here. I think that was a shame. "When they were playing the United States (national) anthem, all these people were whistling (the international version of booing). I assume all these people are living in the states. I think they should respect the national anthem." Did you know that Mexico has NEVER extradited a Mexican national accused of murder in the U.S. in spite of agreements to do so? This absolute is not true. In December 2005, the Mexican government extradited Raul Gomez Garcia to the U.S. to stand trial in Colorado for the murder of Denver Police Officer Donald Young and the attempted murder of Officer John Bishop. According to a New York Times article dated May 19, 1994, 20 years after the great influx of legal immigrants from Southeast Asia, 30% are still on welfare compared to 8% of households nationwide. The original piece skips a gear here, as the preceding statement refers to immigration from Southeast Asia, not Mexico: This information was indeed taken from the beginning of a front-page May 19, 1994 New York Times article: Nearly 20 years after the end of the war in Southeast Asia brought thousands of Cambodians, Laotians, and Vietnamese refugees to this country, many still languish in poverty, giving Southeast Asians the highest rate of welfare dependency of any racial or ethnic group. More than 30 percent of all Southeast Asian households in the nation now depend on welfare for survival, according to a report on the economic diversity of Asian-Americans released Wednesday in Washington. Among some groups, like Cambodians and Laotians in California, the percentage of those on welfare reaches 77 percent. Nationwide, only 8 percent of households received public assistance in 1991. Still, Southeast Asians account for a small fraction of the welfare budget. Of the one million here, about 300,000 receive public aid, making up about 2 percent of the total welfare population. In addition to highlighting the poverty of Southeast Asians here, the report seeks to add depth to the nation's often two-dimensional picture of Asian-Americans, who are the fastest-growing segment of the population. Their numbers have risen from 1.4 million in 1960 to more than 7 million in 1990, or 3 percent of the nation's total. A Wall Street Journal editorial dated December 5, 1994 quotes law enforcement officials as stating that Asian mobsters are the "greatest criminal challenge the country faces." Not bad for a group that is still under 5% of the population. The previous statement also references Asian immigrants and appeared in a December 5, 1994 Wall Street Journal editorial about the growth of Asian criminal gangs: Triads, Asia's famous criminal gangs, may always be with us, but right now they seem to be posing special worries for the world's crime busters. With China opening up, gangs from Hong Kong and Taiwan are re-establishing themselves on the mainland. In turn, these gangs are largely responsible for directing a massive illegal emigration of Chinese citizens to every corner of the globe. Technology and the seamlessness of the global economy seem to give these crime groups a power and impunity that they never had before. The potential is alarming, as was made clear by speakers at the recent meeting of top law officers from around the world in Naples. Now even Beijing's Justice Minister Xiao Yang is decrying the triads as a threat to the mainland's "social stability." In the U.S., law enforcement officials have started calling Asian mobsters the greatest criminal challenge the country faces. Taiwanese gangs, such as United Bamboo and the Four Seas Gang, are believed to mastermind the flow of refined heroin into America and other Western countries. "Operation Dry Dock," a U.S.-mounted sting, revealed that Taiwanese crooks were also behind the worldwide, $3.5 billion-a-year business of smuggling people out of the mainland. Even Moscow now has an estimated 50,000 illegal Chinese residents. (As noted in the New York Times piece cited above, in 1990 Asian-Americans comprised about 3% of the total U.S. population.) Last updated: May 24, 2010 Ramus, Richard. "Mexico Has Road-Field Advantage." The [Riverside] Press Enterprise. February 16, 1998 (p. D1). The Wall Street Journal. "Global Gangs." December 5, 1994 (p. A14).

['economy']

NEI

Origins: With immigration reform being one of the hot-button political issues in the U.S. in early 2006, the above-quoted collection of quotes from various Hispanic leaders and newspaper articles regarding U.S. immigrants started circulating widely on the Internet. Even though the issue was timely, this collection was actually compiled several years earlier and references statements made by Californians during 1990 (when immigration reform was also a hot-button political issue in California due to the controversial Proposition 187 ballot measure). Audio clips of many of the quotes reproduced above were collected on a CD offered by for sale by the California Coalition for Immigration Reform (CCIR), and we include a link to the relevant clip after the discussion of each item below:This an excerpt from a statement by Augustin Cebada of the Brown Berets de Aztln, a paramilitary offshoot of the Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztln (MEChA), delivered during a Fourth of July rally held outside the Federal Building in Westwood, California, in 1996:[Audio link]This is an excerpt from a statement made by Richard Alatorre (then a member of the Los Angeles City Council) at a Latino summit conference in Los Angeles in September 1996, about the upcoming Proposition 209 ballot measure, which sought to prohibit governmental agencies in California from "discriminating against or giving preferential treatment to any individual or group in public employment ... on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin" (also known as the "end of affirmative action" proposition):[Audio link](NOTES: Richard Alatorre served in the California State Assembly from 1973 to 1985 and was a member of the Los Angeles City Council from 1985 to 1999. He was twice fined for violating conflict of interest provisions while a council member, and in 2001 he agreed to plead guilty to a federal criminal charge of felony tax evasion, admitting that "he failed to report to the Internal Revenue Service nearly $42,000 in cash he received from individuals attempting to influence [him] in his official duties." Proposition 209 was passed by 54% of California voters in November 1996.) We haven't been able to verify this quote (or find the context) for this statement purportedly taken from Exclsior, a Mexico City newspaper. This is an excerpt from a statement by Jos Angel Gutirrez, then an Associate Professor of Political Science at the University of Texas at Arlington (and a former leader of the La Raza Unida political party) at a Latino conference held at the University of California, Riverside on 14 January 1995, regarding the effects of California's recently-passed Proposition 187 ballot measure (which sought to bar illegal immigrants from public education and other social services provided by the state):[Audio link]This is a sentence taken from a statement given by Art Torres, a former California State Assembly member and State Senator, at the UC Riverside conference referenced above: [Audio link]This is an excerpt from a statement made by Gloria Molina, a Los Angeles County Supervisor, at a Southwest Voter Registration Project (SVREP) rally in June 1996:[Audio link]Mario Obledo was a co-founder of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF) and the La Raza Lawyers of California bar association, and he formerly served as California's Secretary of Health and Welfare. We don't know exactly when and where he first made his controversial statement about California's becoming a "Hispanic state," but he has confirmed he said it at least twice: during an appearance on Ray Briem's talk radio show in May or June of 1998, and again on Tom Leykis' talk radio show:This sentence is attributed to Fernando J. Guerra, Ph.D, an Associate Professor in the Department of Chicano Studies and Political Science at Loyola Marymount University in Los Angeles. We haven't been able to verify when and in what context he supposedly said it, other than to note that the words are part of a longer statement also widely attributed to him: "We need to avoid a white backlash by using codes understood by Latinos ... non-Latinos aren't watching; they aren't raising questions."This absolute is not true. In December 2005, the Mexican government extradited Raul Gomez Garca to the U.S. to stand trial in Colorado for the murder of Denver Police Officer Donald Young and the attempted murder of Officer John Bishop.

Has Education Secretary Betsy DeVos officially listed her yacht in the Cayman Islands?

["Several viral memes made unfounded assumptions based on the complicated inner workings of the DeVos family's business interests."]

Education Secretary Betsy DeVos has been the subject of intense scrutiny since even before her appointment, both regarding her qualifications and positions on education policy, as well as her (and her family's) financial connections, investments, and donations. That scrutiny continued in August 2018, when the investigative website Capital & Main published a report detailing the registration and management of a yacht associated with the DeVos family. When someone untied a yacht owned by U.S. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos's family, Fox News portrayed the episode as an illustration of uncouth anti-Trump sentiment. The yacht's foreign flag, however, illustrated how an allegedly America First administration is filled with moguls who have eagerly stashed their wealth offshore—if doing so means avoiding taxes, regulations, transparency requirements, and domestic employment laws. When her family's 164-foot yacht was untied from a Huron, Ohio dock, it was flying a flag of the Cayman Islands, where VesselTracker states the yacht is registered. According to federal records, the yacht is owned by RDV International Marine, which is an affiliate of the company that controls the DeVos family's fortune. When buying a vessel or cruising in U.S. waters, American yacht owners like the DeVoses could face state sales or use taxes. However, registering a yacht in a locale like the Caymans—under what has come to be known as a flag of convenience—allows those American yacht owners to effectively characterize themselves as foreigners for tax purposes, thereby avoiding the obligation of paying the standard sales and use levies while enjoying police and Coast Guard services during times their vessels are untied. The report, which was also published by Newsweek, prompted several memes from left-wing and progressive social media accounts. The yacht in question, Seaquest, is registered in the Cayman Islands, an arrangement that has potentially allowed its owner(s) to avoid paying taxes that they would otherwise face when traveling in the United States. However, it cannot be affirmed with certainty that this was the motivation behind the overseas registration. Furthermore, Betsy DeVos is not the owner of the vessel (although members of her family are), and a spokesperson for the DeVos family's main management company stated that neither she nor her husband Dick was responsible for the decision to register the yacht in the Cayman Islands. The yacht Seaquest is a 164-foot long (50-meter) yacht built by Westport and registered in George Town, the capital of the Cayman Islands. It is owned and managed by R.D.V. International Marine, according to the website VesselTracker.com. The country's Shipping Registry confirmed that Seaquest's official Cayman Islands vessel number is 740641. R.D.V. International Marine is an entity of R.D.V. Corporation, the Michigan-registered management company that oversees the substantial financial investments and business interests of the DeVos family, headed by 92-year-old Richard DeVos, a multi-billionaire businessman and one of the co-founders of the multi-level marketing giant Amway. Dick DeVos (Richard DeVos Jr.), the husband of Betsy DeVos, is a director of R.D.V. Corporation, as is the couple's daughter Elisabeth ("Elissa") Lowery, Dick's sister Suzanne ("Cheri") DeVos, and his brothers Doug and Dan and their wives Maria and Pamella. Betsy DeVos was herself a company director until November 2016, according to her financial disclosure. However, the Chief Operating Officer of the Windquest Group, Greg McNeilly, stated that Dick and Betsy DeVos are not the owners of Seaquest. (The Windquest Group is a private investment firm founded by Dick DeVos, who is its president. Betsy DeVos was a director at Windquest until November 2016.) This was corroborated by Nick Wasmiller, a spokesperson for R.D.V. Corporation, who stated by email that Seaquest is owned (through R.D.V. International Marine) by Richard DeVos, who previously owned it in conjunction with his wife Helen prior to her death in October 2017: "Dick and Betsy DeVos do not own Seaquest and have never held ownership in the watercraft... Dick and Betsy DeVos had no role in the registration of Seaquest nor the management of any subsequent efforts to maintain that registration." So the three memes referenced above are factually inaccurate in alleging that Betsy DeVos both owns Seaquest and registered it in the Cayman Islands, or that she registered "her family's fleet of 10 yachts" in the Cayman Islands. The yacht Seaquest is, and has always been, owned by Betsy DeVos's father-in-law, according to spokespersons for two DeVos family companies, and Betsy herself has never made any management or registration decisions about it, according to a spokesperson for R.D.V. Corporation. A 2017 investigation by the Wall Street Journal outlined how the extended DeVos family structures and manages their investments, business interests, and assets, which include nine vessels other than Seaquest. In response to our question, Wasmiller confirmed that these other nine vessels are "owned by various DeVos family entities" but said they are "registered in the United States." We checked the U.S. Coast Guard's Vessel Documentation Center database and found that the nine DeVos family-related vessels listed by the Wall Street Journal are indeed all registered to ports in the United States, specifically in Michigan, Delaware, and Florida. So the Americans for Tax Fairness meme is also false on the grounds that it claims Betsy DeVos registered "her family's fleet of 10 yachts in the Cayman Islands," but in reality, nine of those vessels are registered in the United States, and the one that is registered in the Cayman Islands is not managed or owned by Betsy DeVos. While Betsy DeVos does not personally own or manage Seaquest, it is possible that its registration in the Cayman Islands, as opposed to the United States, might have allowed its owner, Richard DeVos (via RDV International Marine), to avoid incurring certain taxes, as Capital & Main reported: If the vessel were registered in, say, Grand Rapids, Michigan—the state where RDV is located and that has in the past made an effort to compel yacht owners to pay use taxes—the Seaquest would likely be subject to Michigan's six percent use tax. That would require the DeVos empire to cough up about $2.4 million. The figure of $2.4 million represents six percent of $40 million, which is the estimated value given to Seaquest in several news reports, including Capital & Main's investigation. The source of that evaluation is not clear, with many articles describing the yacht as being "reportedly valued at $40 million," without providing any attribution for that number. We found one online broker selling a brand-new 164-foot Westport yacht (like Seaquest) for $42.5 million, and another 2013 listing for a similar vessel which presented a sale price of $34 million. Seaquest was built in 2008, so it's possible its purchase price was lower than $40 million. Furthermore, it's unclear whether Seaquest would actually incur a tax liability even if it were registered in Michigan. What's in question here is a type of taxation called "use tax," which applies to tangible products and entities that are brought into and used or consumed in a particular jurisdiction (in this case, the state of Michigan), in circumstances where sales tax does not apply. Section 205.93 of Michigan's Compiled Laws states that: "There is levied upon and there shall be collected from every person in this state a specific tax, including both the local community stabilization share and the state share, for the privilege of using, storing, or consuming tangible personal property in this state at a total combined rate equal to 6% of the price of the property or services." So, in principle at least, if you own a yacht that is habitually docked or sailed in Michigan, that is likely to be regarded as storage or usage, and you would owe the state of Michigan use tax of six percent of the price of the yacht. However, certain exemptions from this use tax exist when the property is purchased outside Michigan, is "used solely for personal, nonbusiness purposes," and "the property is purchased by a person who is not a resident of this state at the time of purchase and is brought into this state more than 90 days after the date of purchase" or "the property is purchased by a person who is a resident of this state at the time of purchase and is brought into this state more than 360 days after the date of purchase." We don't know whether Richard DeVos was a resident of Michigan at the time he bought Seaquest in 2008, and we don't know how much time elapsed between his purchase of the yacht and its arrival in the state. Therefore, even if Seaquest were registered in Michigan and not the Cayman Islands, it's not certain that the vessel would be subject to use tax, although this is certainly a possibility. Wasmiller, on behalf of R.D.V. Corporation, provided an alternative explanation for the decision to register Seaquest in the Cayman Islands: "Non-commercial watercraft exceeding 100 feet, such as Seaquest, are commonly registered in the Cayman Islands. The country's strict safety, manning, and operation standards for non-commercial watercraft are widely recognized in international waters and closely align with requirements commonly encountered during global travel. As a result, registration in the Cayman Islands provides for the most efficient entrance and exit of various jurisdictions." In boating terms, it's a widely recognized flag—a significant benefit when traveling internationally, thus the registration of Seaquest there. Also of note, it is the policy of RDV International Marine that all employees aboard Seaquest are eligible to work in the United States, as the boat does periodically enter U.S. waterways. The claims contained in the viral memes we listed are based on several assumptions made without sufficient evidence and contradicted by spokespersons for Dick and Betsy DeVos and Richard DeVos. First, RDV International Marine owns Seaquest, and RDV International Marine is an entity of RDV Corporation, the DeVos "family office" which oversees the family's substantial business interests, assets, and investments. However, even though Betsy DeVos is a former director of RDV Corporation, and her family members are closely intertwined with the company, this does not mean that every asset owned by every entity of RDV Corporation is also owned (even in part) by every member of the DeVos family. It is a family company, but it is not a co-op. This logical and evidentiary leap is also directly contradicted by spokespersons for two DeVos-related companies, who stated on the record that Richard DeVos owns Seaquest, and that neither Betsy nor Dick DeVos have ever owned even part of it nor have ever made decisions about its management and registration. Second, there is a significant evidentiary leap from the fact that one DeVos-related yacht is registered in the Cayman Islands to the claim that 10 DeVos-related vessels are registered there. This is factually inaccurate. Nine of the vessels listed as DeVos assets in a Wall Street Journal article are registered in the United States. Finally, there is an assumption (albeit a more reasonable one) involved in the claim that registering Seaquest in the Cayman Islands allows its owner(s) to avoid paying taxes in the United States. Michigan state law allows for certain exemptions from the obligation to pay "use tax," and it cannot be said with certainty that Richard DeVos, the owner of Seaquest, did not meet the criteria for those exemptions. The claim that the tax obligation allegedly being avoided amounts to $2.4 million is also based on an assumption about the price of the yacht itself, which is not known for certain.

['investment']

False

Education Secretary Betsy DeVos has been the subject of intense scrutiny since even before her appointment, both about her qualifications and positions on education policy and also about her (and her family's) financial connections, investments, and donations.That scrutiny continued in August 2018, when the investigative web site Capital & Main published a report detailing the registration and management of a yacht associated with the DeVos family:The report, which was also published by Newsweek, prompted several memes from left-wing and progressive social media accounts, such as the following Occupy Democrats post:"The Other 98%" posted a similar meme of their own:On Facebook, the progressive "Americans for Tax Fairness" coalition posted a meme which claimed that the Cayman Islands registration applied to all the yachts owned by the DeVos family:Seaquest is a 164-foot long (50-meter) yacht built by Westport and registered in George Town, the capital of the Cayman Islands. It is owned and managed by R.D.V. International Marine, according to the web site VesselTracker.com. The country's Shipping Registry confirmed to us that Seaquest's official Cayman Island's vessel number is 740641.R.D.V. International Marine is an entity of R.D.V. Corporation, the Michigan-registered management company which oversees the substantial financial investments and business interests of the DeVos family, headed by 92-year-old Richard DeVos, a multi-billionaire businessman and one of the co-founders of the "multi-level marketing" giant Amway.Dick DeVos (Richard DeVos Jr.), the husband of Betsy DeVos, is a director of R.D.V. Corporation, as is the couple's daughter Elisabeth ("Elissa") Lowery, Dick's sister Suzanne ("Cheri") DeVos, and his brothers Doug and Dan and their wives Maria and Pamella. Betsy DeVos was herself a company director until November 2016, according to her financial disclosure.A 2017 investigation by the Wall Street Journal outlined how the extended DeVos family structures and manages their investments, business interests, and assets, which include nine vessels other than Seaquest: Blue Sky, Quantum Racing, Delta Victor, Reflection, Attitude, Sterling, Windquest, Zorro, and De Lus.We checked the U.S. Coast Guard's Vessel Documentation Center database, and found that the nine DeVos family-related vessels listed by the Wall Street Journal are indeed all registered to ports in the United States, specifically in Michigan, Delaware, and Florida.While Betsy DeVos does not personally own or manage Seaquest, it is possible that its registration in the Cayman Islands, as opposed to the United States, might have allowed its owner, Richard DeVos (via RDV International Marine) to avoid incurring certain taxes (though this is not certain), as Capital & Main reported:We found one online broker selling a brand-new 164-foot Westport yacht (like Seaquest) for $42.5 million, and another 2013 listing for a similar vessel which presented a sale price of $34 million. Seaquest was built in 2008, so it's possible its purchase price was lower than $40 million. Section 205.93 of Michigan's Compiled Laws states that:

Even after collective bargaining reforms, most Wisconsin public employees are still paying about 12 to 13 percent of their health insurance premiums, while most state residents who work in the private sector pay 20 to 25 percent.

[]

Less than a month after his inauguration in January 2011, Gov. Scott Walker drew a bead on state employees and what they pay toward their health insurance premiums. Even if what most of the workers paid were doubled, Walker said in his first state of the statespeech, they would still only being paying half the national average. We rated that claimTrue. State workers were paying about 6 percent of their premiums, so doubling would put that at 12 percent; meanwhile, the national average -- for public and private employees -- was 29 percent. Nearly three years later, the Republican governor, on a higher platform as an author and potential presidential candidate, made a similar assertion. In a Nov. 27, 2013interviewon Wisconsin Public Radio about hisnew book, Walker reflected on Act 10, the law that made most state -- as well as local -- government employees pay more for benefits. It also erased most of their collective bargaining powers. In the end, do public employees -- including me and my family -- pay a little bit more for pensions and health care? Absolutely, Walker told host Joy Cardin. But still far less than what our counterparts pay outside of government. Most people in this state pay 20 to 25 percent, for example, of their health insurance. Most of our public employees are still paying about 12 to 13 percent. Lets hit the ledgers again. Act 10 and state workers When we contacted Walker spokesman Tom Evenson about Walkers new claim, he insisted that when the governor said public employes, he was referring only to state employees; Evenson also said state employees and public employees are synonymous. But that certainly would not have been clear to listeners. In the radio interview, Walker referred twice in quick succession to public employees, which would include not only state workers -- who number about 70,000 -- but some200,000local government and school employees, as well. Indeed, Act 10, the focus of Walkers remarks, applies to that much larger group of public employees (except for police and firefighters, who were exempted from the law). Walker signedthe innocuously labeled budget-repair bill, known formally as Act 10, in March 2011, after unprecedented protests in and around the state Capitol. The law did double, from 6 percent to 12 percent, what the vast majority of state employees pay toward health insurance premiums. That also applies to nearly 13,000 local government workers who get health insurance through the state. But Act 10 does not determine how much the vast majority of local public employees pay toward their premiums. Other public workers Local schoolsemploy 99,000full-time-equivalent employees statewide. Before Act 10, school workers who got health insurance through school districts paid an average of 4 percent to 5 percent of their premiums, according to school districts responding to a2010-11 surveyby the Wisconsin Association of School Boards. Now,the averageis 10 percent. The associations data is by district and isnt broken down to indicate what percentage most school employees pay. But the average figure show goes to Walkers point that school employees are paying significantly less than private-sector workers. There are no such surveys for employees of cities, villages, towns and counties. Dan Thompson, executive director of the League of Wisconsin Municipalities, said Walkers claim of 12 percent to 13 percent might be a little high, but is a reasonable estimate as an average of what city and village employees around the state pay toward their premiums. So, that figure also helps Walker make his case. The municipalities group had no hard number. Nor did the Wisconsin Counties Association or the Wisconsin Towns Association. So, Walkers figure of 12 percent to 13 percent is accurate for state employees and a significant number of other public employees are paying that rate or less. Private sector As for the second part of Walkers claim, Walkers spokesman pointed us to2012 figuresfrom the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services for Wisconsin residents working in the private sector. They show employees paid 22 percent of the cost of the health insurance premiums for single coverage and 24 percent for family coverage. We posed Walkers claim to Dave Jensen, editorial director ofHCTrends, a Milwaukee health care research organization. He cited the same federal figures, known as the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. Jensen pointed out that the federal figures include public- as well as private-sector employees. But he said the proportion of public employees is so small that the federal figures still provide a solid estimate of how much private-sector employees are paying for health insurance. Our rating Walker said that even after his collective bargaining reforms, most Wisconsin public employees are still paying about 12 to 13 percent of their health insurance premiums, while most state residents who work in the private sector pay 20 to 25 percent. The available figures indicate many if not most public employees are paying at or less than 12 percent and Walker was right on the private-sector workers part of his claim. We rate his statement Mostly True. To comment on this item, go to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinelwebsite.

['Health Care', 'State Budget', 'Unions', 'Wisconsin']

True

Even if what most of the workers paid were doubled, Walker said in his first state of the statespeech, they would still only being paying half the national average.We rated that claimTrue. State workers were paying about 6 percent of their premiums, so doubling would put that at 12 percent; meanwhile, the national average -- for public and private employees -- was 29 percent.In a Nov. 27, 2013interviewon Wisconsin Public Radio about hisnew book, Walker reflected on Act 10, the law that made most state -- as well as local -- government employees pay more for benefits. It also erased most of their collective bargaining powers.In the radio interview, Walker referred twice in quick succession to public employees, which would include not only state workers -- who number about 70,000 -- but some200,000local government and school employees, as well.Walker signedthe innocuously labeled budget-repair bill, known formally as Act 10, in March 2011, after unprecedented protests in and around the state Capitol.Local schoolsemploy 99,000full-time-equivalent employees statewide. Before Act 10, school workers who got health insurance through school districts paid an average of 4 percent to 5 percent of their premiums, according to school districts responding to a2010-11 surveyby the Wisconsin Association of School Boards. Now,the averageis 10 percent.As for the second part of Walkers claim, Walkers spokesman pointed us to2012 figuresfrom the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services for Wisconsin residents working in the private sector.We posed Walkers claim to Dave Jensen, editorial director ofHCTrends, a Milwaukee health care research organization. He cited the same federal figures, known as the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey.To comment on this item, go to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinelwebsite.

Was One of These Webs Spun by an LSD-Tripping Spider?

['Like humans, the cognitive abilities of spiders appear to be impaired by drugs. ']

Orb-weaving spiders are known for their meticulous ability to create suspended, intricate wheel-shaped webs characterized by nearly parallel grids that have inspired Halloween decorations for decades. The quality of a web's construction can determine the likelihood of its weaver's survival. Decades of scientific research have shown that when a spider is under the influence of drugs, its web can take on a variety of uncharacteristic shapes and patterns. A reverse image search revealed that the photographs featured in the tweet in question have been shared on the internet more than 100 times, including a viral Reddit post from May 2021. Though the above images are authentic, they were not all included as part of a 1995 NASA experiment (more on what exactly NASA funded later). In the decades following studies surrounding the web-weaving skills of hallucinating spiders, social media users have mixed and matched photographs taken during various research projects and, in some cases, have erroneously described the details of such work. Since at least the 1950s, scientists have conducted experiments exploring the effects of various drugs on spiders, the first of which resulted in a 1954 piece titled "Spider Webs and Drugs," published in Scientific American. Among the first of those researchers was Peter Witt, a Swiss pharmacologist who studied how drugs impact the cognitive effects on the geometry of orb spider webs. In particular, the photograph depicting the web of an acid-tripping spider is authentic, but it was not published as part of the 1995 NASA research, nor was it connected with Witt, who died at the age of 80 three years later. The photograph was published in a 1957 article in the American fashion journal Gravure Magazine, with an accompanying caption that read, "Web built after administration of d-lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD)." The image from Twitter (left) is compared to the image published on Witt's website (right). To get a spider to take acid, a medical student at the time provided an ingenious solution. The drug was mixed in a sugar solution, which was then injected into a small fly. A tuning fork was used, and the vibrations set up in the signal thread were the clue to the bait. Apparently, the mixture was delicious because there was no problem getting the spider to take the bait, read the Gravure Magazine article. The 1957 research noted that spiders on LSD seemed unaware of outside influences and concentrated on the task at hand. An interesting parallel, the writers noted, can be drawn when compared to a person who has ingested a hallucinogen and has a very rich inner life, appearing out of contact with reality. With depressants, they forgot to finish what they had started, resulting in a very ineffective food-gathering device. Humans react in much the same way, read the article. The researchers also injected spiders with blood serum taken from catatonic individuals diagnosed with schizophrenia, which they said caused the spiders to withdraw from all activity and exhibit only feeble attempts at spinning or none at all. Thankfully, science is an ever-evolving field. Witt, who was also a mental health researcher and consultant to NASA, stated in 1973 that the testing was done in part to determine how spiders spinning inside the orbit of a space station would be impacted by zero gravity and the stress of space travel. In the decades that followed, NASA also took a keen interest in building upon Witt's research. On April 1, 1994, NASA researchers David Noever, Raymond Cronise, and Rachna Relwani published a four-paragraph description of an experiment called "Using Spider-Web Patterns To Determine Toxicity" in a 124-page issue of NASA Tech Briefs. Researchers described having similarly used spiders as a means to test toxic chemicals as a less costly alternative and to avert potential conflicts with recent animal-rights legislation issues. However, the 1995 study, which has been archived here, only published a graphic that depicted the effects of marijuana, Benzedrine, caffeine, and chloral hydrate—not LSD. Spiders recorded in the NASA study were either left sober or were given an unspecified dose of marijuana, Benzedrine, caffeine, or chloral hydrate. However, it did not appear that the arachnids had been given LSD or speed, as the popular meme suggested. The changes in webs reflect the degree of toxicity of a substance. The more the chemical, the more deformed a web becomes in comparison with a normal web, wrote NASA. Each image was digitized and processed by an image-data analysis program that computed measures of cellular structures of each web, including the area, perimeter, and radii of its cells. It appears that one of the most telling measures of toxicity is a decrease in the number of completed sides in the cell compared to a normal web: the greater the toxicity, the more sides the spider fails to complete, wrote the study authors.

['interest']

True

Orb-weaving spiders are known for their meticulous ability to create suspended, intricate wheel-shaped webs characterized by nearly parallel grids that have inspired Halloween decorations for decades. How well a web is constructed can determine the likelihood that its weaver will survive.And decades of scientific research have revealed that when a spider is under the influence of drugs, its web can take on a variety of uncharacteristic shapes and patterns.A reverse image search revealed that the photographs featured in the tweet in question have been shared to the internet more than 100 times, including a viral Reddit post posted in May 2021.Since at least the 1950s, scientists have conducted experiments exploring the effects of various drugs on spiders, the first of which resulted in a 1954 piece titled Spider Webs and Drugs published in Scientific American. Among the first of those researchers was Peter Witt, a Swiss pharmacologist who studied how drugs impact the cognitive effects of drugs on the geometry of orb spider webs.In particular, the photograph depicting the web of an acid-tripping spider is authentic, but it was not published as part of the 1995 NASA research nor was it connected with Witt, who died at the age of 80 three years later. The photograph was published in a 1957 article published in the American fashion journal Gravure Magazine with an accompanying caption that read, Web built after administration of d-lysergic acid diethylamide (lsd). The image from Twitter (left) is compared to the image published on Witt's website (right).And in the decades that followed, NASA also took a keen interest in adding onto Witts research. On April 1, 1994, NASA researchers David Noever, Raymond Cronise and Rachna Relwani published a four-paragraph description of an experiment called Using Spider-Web Patterns To Determine Toxicity in a 124-page issue of NASA Tech Briefs. Researchers describe having similarly used spiders as a means to test toxic chemicals at a less costlier alternative, and to avert potential conflicts with the recent animal-rights legislation issues. But the 1995 study, which has been archived here, only published a graphic that depicted the effects of marijuana, Benzedrine, caffeine, and chloral hydrate not LSD. NASA

Are Doctors and Hospitals Paid More for COVID-19 Patients?

['Questions were raised on cable news about whether hospitals have financial incentives to diagnose patients with COVID-19.']

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 mid-April 2020, social media users shared a meme implying that hospitals had a financial incentive to inflate the number of COVID-19 patients they were admitting in the midst of the ongoing COVID-19 coronavirus disease pandemic. The meme contained red text that said, "So, hospitals get an extra $13,000 if they diagnose a death as COVID-19 and an additional $39,000 if they use a ventilator!" and prompted readers to ask Snopes.com to verify whether the statement is true:The idea that hospitals are getting paid $13,000 for patients with COVID-19 diagnoses and $39,000 more if those patients are placed on ventilators appears to have originated with an interview given on the Fox News prime-time program "Ingraham Angle" by Dr. Scott Jensen, a physician who also serves as a Republican state senator in Minnesota. During the April 9, 2020 interview, Jensen suggested to host Laura Ingraham that he believed the number of COVID-19 cases in the U.S. was being artificially inflated. "The idea that were going to allow people to massage and sort of game the numbers is a real issue because were going to undermine the (public) trust," he said. interview suggested Ingraham then played footage from a press conference with comments from Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, in which Fauci called claims that the number of coronavirus cases are being "padded" a conspiracy theory. In an exchange that followed, Jensen suggested that Medicare, the national health care plan for the elderly, was paying hospitals set amounts for each patient diagnosed and treated for COVID-19: INGRAHAM: Dr. Fauci was asked about the COVID death count today. Here's what he said, in part. [Cut to briefing] REPORTER: What do you say to those folks who are making the claim without really any evidence that these deaths are being padded, that the number of COVID-19 deaths are being padded? FAUCI: You will always have conspiracy theories when you have very challenging public health crises. They are nothing but distractions. [Cut back to Ingraham] INGRAHAM: Conspiracy theories, doctor? So you're engaging in conspiracy theories. What do you say to Dr. Fauci tonight? JENSEN: Well I would remind him that any time health care intersects with dollars it gets awkward. Right now Medicare has determined that if you have a COVID-19 admission to the hospital, you'll get paid $13,000. If that COVID-19 patient goes on a ventilator, you get $39,000, three times as much. Nobody can tell me after 35 years in the world of medicine that sometimes those kinds of things impact on what we do. We attempted to reach Jensen by phone and email, but did not get a response in time for publication. We also reached out to the U.S. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) to ask whether the statement that Medicare was paying hospitals $13,000 and $39,000, respectively, for patients admitted with COVID-19 diagnoses and patients with the disease who are placed on ventilators. A spokesperson for CMS told us that whether hospitals are paid by Medicare for care of a COVID-19 patient would depend on whether that patient was covered by Medicare insurance. CMS also told us there is no set or predetermined amount paid to hospitals for diagnosing and treating COVID-19 patients, and the amounts would depend on a variety of factors driven by the needs of each patient. Pay-outs would also depend on the variance of the costs of medical care in different regions. The closest match for the numbers cited by Jensen we could locate was in an April 7, 2020, article published by the health care nonprofit Kaiser Family Foundation. As a starting point to estimate how much hospitals might get paid by the federal government for treating uninsured COVID-19 patients, the article used average payments for hospital admissions for similar conditions in 2017: article For less severe hospitalizations, we use the average Medicare payment for respiratory infections and inflammations with major comorbidities or complications in 2017, which was $13,297. For more severe hospitalizations, we use the average Medicare payment for a respiratory system diagnosis with ventilator support for greater than 96 hours, which was $40,218. But while these industry estimates are similar to the numbers Jensen cited, they do not represent actual Medicare payments to hospitals for COVID-19 diagnoses or treatment, or even a national average of such payments. We therefore rate this claim "Mixture." While it seems plausible that Medicare disbursements to hospitals treating COVID-19 patients could be in the range given by Jensen in the Fox News interview (if those patients are covered by Medicare), we found no evidence to support Jensen's assertion that "Medicare has determined" that hospitals will be paid $13,000 for patients with COVID-19 diagnoses or $39,000 for COVID-19 patients place on ventilators. Gillum, Jack, et al."Theres Been a Spike in People Dying at Home in Several Cities. That Suggests Coronavirus Deaths Are Higher Than Reported." ProPublica.14 April 2020. WNBC TV."Massive Spike in NYC Cardiac Arrest Deaths Seen as Sign of COVID-19 Undercounting." 10 April 2020. Brown, Emma, et al."Which Deaths Count Toward the COVID-19 Death Toll? It Depends on the State." The Washington Post.16 April 2020. Levitt, Larry, et al."Estimated Cost of Treating the Uninsured Hospitalized with COVID-19." Kaiser Family Foundation.7 April 2020. Fox News."Dr. Jensen Calls Out 'Ridiculous' CDC Guidelines for Coronavirus-Related Deaths." 9 April 2020.

['insurance']

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. The meme contained red text that said, "So, hospitals get an extra $13,000 if they diagnose a death as COVID-19 and an additional $39,000 if they use a ventilator!" and prompted readers to ask Snopes.com to verify whether the statement is true:The idea that hospitals are getting paid $13,000 for patients with COVID-19 diagnoses and $39,000 more if those patients are placed on ventilators appears to have originated with an interview given on the Fox News prime-time program "Ingraham Angle" by Dr. Scott Jensen, a physician who also serves as a Republican state senator in Minnesota.During the April 9, 2020 interview, Jensen suggested to host Laura Ingraham that he believed the number of COVID-19 cases in the U.S. was being artificially inflated. "The idea that were going to allow people to massage and sort of game the numbers is a real issue because were going to undermine the (public) trust," he said.The closest match for the numbers cited by Jensen we could locate was in an April 7, 2020, article published by the health care nonprofit Kaiser Family Foundation. As a starting point to estimate how much hospitals might get paid by the federal government for treating uninsured COVID-19 patients, the article used average payments for hospital admissions for similar conditions in 2017:

Did Archaeologists Dig Up an 800-Year-Old Alien Cellphone?

['A picture of an ancient cellphone supposedly unearthed by archaeologists was just a photograph of a modern replica.']

On 23 December 2015, the conspiracy theory web siteMysterious Universepublished a photo purportedly showing an ancient clay tablet resembling a cellphone which was dug up by archaeologists "earlier this year" in Austria: published While Mysterious Universefailed to provide the details you'd expect from a possibly world-changing dig,such as the names of the archaeologists, secondary photos of the tablet, comments from the team, the object's dimensions, etc., the web site did manage to add some wild speculation about the object: A controversial theory proposed by author Zecharia Sitchin is that aliens known as the Anunnaki came from Nibiru (the rumored Planet X beyond Neptune) and created the Sumerian civilization. The tablet looks surprisingly like a modern phone, with the 12 keys, a display and a talk button. Could these extraterrestrials have tried to introduce the Sumerians to a phone-like communications device, only to find they werent ready for it and dialed them back to a stylus and clay tablets? While the theory that the this cellphone was created by the alien race Anunnaki from the planet Nibiru in order to introduce the Sumerian civilization to modern technology is interesting, this "alien cellphone" was actually created by a German sculptor and is only a few years old. Karin and Karl Weingrtnerof the Art Replik Studio created the clay tablet in January 2012. While the photo was originally shared with a description similar to the one published byMysterious Universe (Art Replik never mentioned aliens) there are several indications that this post was simply a joke, such as thetitle of the object ("BablyoNokia"), comments on the photogrAPH("Yes, exactly!" in response to "is that my old phone?"), and the fact that the image was watermarked art-replik.com. created shared The "alien phone" was created in jest and was likely used as a marketing tool: The above-displayed "ancient cellphone" was not discovered by a group of archaeologists in Austria and it was not left behind by aliens. It was created by a German sculptor who specializes in making replicas of ancient art.

['lien']

False

On 23 December 2015, the conspiracy theory web siteMysterious Universepublished a photo purportedly showing an ancient clay tablet resembling a cellphone which was dug up by archaeologists "earlier this year" in Austria:Karin and Karl Weingrtnerof the Art Replik Studio created the clay tablet in January 2012. While the photo was originally shared with a description similar to the one published byMysterious Universe (Art Replik never mentioned aliens) there are several indications that this post was simply a joke, such as thetitle of the object ("BablyoNokia"), comments on the photogrAPH("Yes, exactly!" in response to "is that my old phone?"), and the fact that the image was watermarked art-replik.com.

Paul Ryan Refuses to Tip Elderly Black Waiter

['Did Rep. Paul Ryan refuse to tip an elderly waiter at a Washington-area restaurant?']

Claim: Rep. Paul Ryan refused to tip an elderly waiter at a Washington-area restaurant. Example: [Collected via e-mail, April 2013] This is being circulated on Face Book and I am curious to know if it's true. Rep. Paul Ryan refused to tip an elderly waiter today at a Washington-area soul food restaurant. According to witnesses at Auntie Ruth's Bistro in Northeast D.C., Ryan stiffed his server on the grounds of "personal austerity" and proceeded to tell the 72-year-old man to "get a real job." Origins: On 8 April 2013, the Daily Currant published an article stating that Paul Ryan, the Wisconsin congressman who serves as House Budget Committee Chairman, had refused to leave a tip for an elderly black waiter after dining at a Washington-area restaurant: article According to witnesses at Auntie Ruth's Bistro in Northeast D.C., Ryan stiffed his server on the grounds of "personal austerity" and proceeded to tell the 72-year-old man to "get a real job." When Ryan attempted to leave the premises without paying any tip at all, [waiter James] Anderson politely asked Ryan if he was satisfied with the service. "Listen, I was satisfied with the service," Ryan explained, "but I'm not paying you a cent. You know why? Because you're a taker. I've already paid for my meal. I've spent the money I'm legally obligated to spend and here you are begging for more. "Why don't you go out and get yourself a real job? Get an education and then go be an engineer or something. Don't sit around doing shitty jobs your whole life and then expect me to pay for your bad decisions. "You don't like the fact that you work a minimum wage job? Tough. You should have used your parents' inheritance money to get a college education instead of wasting it on booze and women."' By the end of the day links and excerpts referencing this article were being circulated via social media, with many of those who encountered it mistaking it for a genuine news article. However, the article was just a bit of political humor which satirized Ryan's political stances on economic issues (such as his proposed "austerity budget"). austerity budget As noted in the Daily Currant's "About" page, that web site deals strictly in satire: About The Daily Currant is an English language online satirical newspaper that covers global politics, business, technology, entertainment, science, health and media. Q. Are your news stories real? A. No. Our stories are purely fictional. However they are meant to address real-world issues through satire and often refer and link to real events happening in the world. Last updated: 8 April 2013

['budget']

False

Origins: On 8 April 2013, the Daily Currant published an article stating that Paul Ryan, the Wisconsin congressman who serves as House Budget Committee Chairman, had refused to leave a tip for an elderly black waiter after dining at a Washington-area restaurant:By the end of the day links and excerpts referencing this article were being circulated via social media, with many of those who encountered it mistaking it for a genuine news article. However, the article was just a bit of political humor which satirized Ryan's political stances on economic issues (such as his proposed "austerity budget").As noted in the Daily Currant's "About" page, that web site deals strictly in satire:

There are 3.6 million jobs sitting vacant, in part because there arent enough qualified applicants to fill them.

[]

Rep. Virginia Foxx, R-N.C., recently took to the House floor to tout abillshes sponsoring that would change the structure of job training programs. She warned that the economy faces a paradox -- despite historically high unemployment rates, many jobs are going vacant.There are 3.6 million jobs sitting vacant, in part because there arent enough qualified applicants to fill them, Foxx said in the March 12, 2013,speech.To check Foxxs claim, we turned to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the federal governments scorekeeper on employment data.We easily found the source of her 3.6 million figure. It comes from a monthly survey called the Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey, or JOLTS. Themost recent seasonally adjusted dataat the time of Foxxs speech covered January 2013. It showed that there were just under 3.7 million job openings in January, which was up slightly from 3.6 million in December 2012.So Foxx essentially got the number right. However, her use of the term sitting vacant and her warning about a shortage of qualified applicants suggests that employers are having trouble filling these 3.6 million jobs. A close look at the survey reveals it doesnt actually support that thesis.The bureaus official definition of a job opening is a specific position of employment to be filled at an establishment that satisfy these conditions: there is work available for that position, the job could start within 30 days, and the employer is actively recruiting for the position.But there are always job openings -- even in a healthy economy. In a phenomenon known as churn, people change jobs. Just because their old job is unoccupied when the BLS takes its monthly data snapshot doesnt necessarily mean that the employer is having trouble filling the job. Rather, the employer could simply be going through the process of hiring, with the job filled a month later.The data from this survey has important limitations, said Steven J. Davis, an economist at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business, because it provides little information about the distribution of vacancy durations and no direct information about the reason why some job openings take a long time to fill.In some ways, vacancies are actually a hallmark of a healthy economy. Job openings often arise either because someone leaves one job for a better one, or because a company is hiring new workers. Both are positive signs. If you look at the monthly December job opening totals going back a decade, the years just prior to the recession had the most job openings, while the years during and immediately after the recession hit had the least job vacancies:2012:3.6 million2011:3.5 million2010:2.9 million2009:2.5 million2008:3.2 million2007:4.0 million2006:4.4 million2005:3.9 million2004:3.5 million2003:2.9 millionBut while the number Foxx used doesnt provide much support for her claim, other evidence, both anecdotal and statistical, suggests that she has a point that theres a problem with unfilled jobs today.The most solid evidence for a lengthening of job vacancies comes from astudyby Davis, R. Jason Faberman and John C. Haltiwanger. It found that the time before a vacancy is filled has expanded from 15 days in 2009 to 23 today. As a result, the job vacancy rate and the unemployment rate, which historically have moved in tandem,began to divergeduring the most recent recession and have not yet returned to their historical pattern.Why is this happening? Foxxs office provided links to avarietyofnewsreportsthatsuggesta mismatch between applicants job skills and the ones employers are seeking. Economists agree that that is part of the issue, particularly with high-skill jobs. But its probably not the only reason.For instance, there appears to be a hiring paralysis among employers who are acting with unusual caution because they are uncertain whether the economy will remain strong rather than stagnating, according to economists and hiring professionals quoted in theNew York Timesearlier this year. This has sometimes led to employers piling on extra tests and rounds of interviews as a way of stalling, experts told theTimes.Our rulingFoxx said, There are 3.6 million jobs sitting vacant, in part because there arent enough qualified applicants to fill them. Shes right that there are 3.6 million vacancies and she's right that there aren't enough qualified job applicants, but she wrong to link the two because that statistic doesnt take into account how long a job has been open. Still, there is strong evidence that the duration of job vacancies has grown since the onset of the most recent recession, and the skills mismatch Foxx cites is likely part of the reason. We rate her claim Mostly True.

['National', 'Economy', 'Jobs']

True

Rep. Virginia Foxx, R-N.C., recently took to the House floor to tout abillshes sponsoring that would change the structure of job training programs. She warned that the economy faces a paradox -- despite historically high unemployment rates, many jobs are going vacant.There are 3.6 million jobs sitting vacant, in part because there arent enough qualified applicants to fill them, Foxx said in the March 12, 2013,speech.To check Foxxs claim, we turned to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the federal governments scorekeeper on employment data.We easily found the source of her 3.6 million figure. It comes from a monthly survey called the Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey, or JOLTS. Themost recent seasonally adjusted dataat the time of Foxxs speech covered January 2013. It showed that there were just under 3.7 million job openings in January, which was up slightly from 3.6 million in December 2012.So Foxx essentially got the number right. However, her use of the term sitting vacant and her warning about a shortage of qualified applicants suggests that employers are having trouble filling these 3.6 million jobs. A close look at the survey reveals it doesnt actually support that thesis.The bureaus official definition of a job opening is a specific position of employment to be filled at an establishment that satisfy these conditions: there is work available for that position, the job could start within 30 days, and the employer is actively recruiting for the position.But there are always job openings -- even in a healthy economy. In a phenomenon known as churn, people change jobs. Just because their old job is unoccupied when the BLS takes its monthly data snapshot doesnt necessarily mean that the employer is having trouble filling the job. Rather, the employer could simply be going through the process of hiring, with the job filled a month later.The data from this survey has important limitations, said Steven J. Davis, an economist at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business, because it provides little information about the distribution of vacancy durations and no direct information about the reason why some job openings take a long time to fill.In some ways, vacancies are actually a hallmark of a healthy economy. Job openings often arise either because someone leaves one job for a better one, or because a company is hiring new workers. Both are positive signs. If you look at the monthly December job opening totals going back a decade, the years just prior to the recession had the most job openings, while the years during and immediately after the recession hit had the least job vacancies:2012:3.6 million2011:3.5 million2010:2.9 million2009:2.5 million2008:3.2 million2007:4.0 million2006:4.4 million2005:3.9 million2004:3.5 million2003:2.9 millionBut while the number Foxx used doesnt provide much support for her claim, other evidence, both anecdotal and statistical, suggests that she has a point that theres a problem with unfilled jobs today.The most solid evidence for a lengthening of job vacancies comes from astudyby Davis, R. Jason Faberman and John C. Haltiwanger. It found that the time before a vacancy is filled has expanded from 15 days in 2009 to 23 today. As a result, the job vacancy rate and the unemployment rate, which historically have moved in tandem,began to divergeduring the most recent recession and have not yet returned to their historical pattern.Why is this happening? Foxxs office provided links to avarietyofnewsreportsthatsuggesta mismatch between applicants job skills and the ones employers are seeking. Economists agree that that is part of the issue, particularly with high-skill jobs. But its probably not the only reason.For instance, there appears to be a hiring paralysis among employers who are acting with unusual caution because they are uncertain whether the economy will remain strong rather than stagnating, according to economists and hiring professionals quoted in theNew York Timesearlier this year. This has sometimes led to employers piling on extra tests and rounds of interviews as a way of stalling, experts told theTimes.Our rulingFoxx said, There are 3.6 million jobs sitting vacant, in part because there arent enough qualified applicants to fill them. Shes right that there are 3.6 million vacancies and she's right that there aren't enough qualified job applicants, but she wrong to link the two because that statistic doesnt take into account how long a job has been open. Still, there is strong evidence that the duration of job vacancies has grown since the onset of the most recent recession, and the skills mismatch Foxx cites is likely part of the reason. We rate her claim Mostly True.

George Zimmerman Files Civil Suit Against Trayvon Martin's Parents

["Is George Zimmerman suing Trayvon Martin's parents for their failure to control their son?"]

Claim: George Zimmerman is suing Trayvon Martin's parents for their failure to control their son. Example: [Collected via e-mail, July 2013] Facebook is sharing that George Zimmerman is suing Trayvon Martin's parents for failure to control him. I find this very difficult to believe. I think this is bogus. Origins: On 15 July 2013, the National Report published an article ("George Zimmerman Files Civil Suit Against Trayvon Martin's Parents") about acquitted defendant George Zimmerman's filing a civil lawsuit against the parents of the teenager he shot, Trayvon Martin. The article states that George Zimmerman filed a civil suit today just before 5 PM EST at the Seminole County, Florida, Courthouse. The suit alleges that the parents of Trayvon Martin failed to control their minor-age son on the evening of February 26, 2012, when Martin repeatedly assaulted Zimmerman, placing him in imminent fear for his life and resulting in Martin's death. The civil action specifies that Zimmerman acted in self-defense, leading to the case being ruled a justifiable homicide by a jury trial that ended on Saturday with a verdict of not guilty. Desperate state prosecutors charged the victim with second-degree murder, despite having no evidence of a crime, hoping to prevent further violence and avoid Florida being engulfed in riots months before the start of the state's tourist season. The complaint further specifies that Zimmerman shares "zero liability" in Martin's death, as he acted without malice and solely in self-defense. The amount of damages Zimmerman is seeking is unspecified. By the following 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, the article was merely a piece of satire from the National Report, a website that publishes outrageous fictional stories such as "IRS Plans to Target Leprechauns Next," "Boy Scouts Announce Boobs Merit Badge," and "New CDC Study Indicates Pets of Gay Couples Worse at Sports, Better at Fashion Than Pets of Straight Couples." Last updated: 16 July 2013.

['liability']

False

Origins: On 15 July 2013, the National Report published an article ("George Zimmerman Files Civil Suit Against Trayvon Martin's Parents") about acquitted defendant George Zimmerman's having filed a civil lawsuit against the parents of the teenager he shot, Trayvon Martin:

Nordstrom Gift Card Survey Scam

['A slicker-than-average Facebook coupon scam is circulating, baiting users with the promise of a $200 Nordstrom gift card.']

In early February 2016, social media users began sharing various versions of the above link, claiming that the retailer Nordstrom was offering a $200 gift card to Facebook users who "referred three friends" to the promotion. The embedded links pointed to a URL that was typically some variation of nordstrom.egiftcards.co, which was not hosted on the official Nordstrom website. Users who attempted to complete the steps and claim the Nordstrom gift card were directed to a well-designed (but still illegitimate) page with the following instructions: "To Celebrate Valentine's Day, Get a Nordstrom $200 Gift Card! Simply Invite 3 Friends to Get Your Gift Card After 3 Friends Click Your Link. Get Your Gift Card Instantly!" The landing page in question didn't resemble other popular Facebook coupon scams. However, it did display a rapidly decreasing number of "available gift cards," suggesting users should comply urgently or miss out. Coupon and gift card scams appear frequently on Facebook; Kohl's, Costco, Home Depot, Lowe's, Kroger, Best Buy, Macy's, Olive Garden, Publix, Target, Wegmans, and Walmart were among the popular retailers impersonated by scammers seeking personal information from social media users. On 3 February 2016, a Nordstrom representative responded to our inquiry about the circulating gift card scam: "You're correct, this is a fraudulent promotion as it is not affiliated with Nordstrom, and we are not sponsoring any giveaways of gift cards. We recommend not clicking the link or entering any personal information. Our team is actively working to make customers aware of the situation and apologize for any confusion." A July 2014 Better Business Bureau article advised social media users on how to avoid survey and coupon scams: "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."

['banking']

False

Coupon and gift card scams appear frequentlyon Facebook; Kohl's,Costco, Home Depot, Lowe's, Kroger, Best Buy, Macy's, Olive Garden, Publix, Target, Wegmans, and Walmartwere among popular retailers impersonated byscammersseeking personal information from social media users.A July 2014 Better Business Bureauarticleadvisedsocial media userson how to avoid survey and coupon scams:

Was a 'Terrorist who was found guilty' a member of the board of a BLM funding organization?

['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.

['finance']

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."

Legend: Drunk Groom Accidentally Returns Home Alone from His Honeymoon

["A group returns a soused young man to his hometown, not realizing he's a newly-married groom on his honeymoon."]

This legend is another example of the "good samaritans gone wrong" motif: though the would-be good deed doers depicted here don't realize it, they've left a very confused young bride sitting alone in a hotel room back in Blackpool. As a belief tale, however, this one is fraught with improbabilities. Would a freshly-minted groom really spend a whole day socializing in a bar yet never once mention that he'd just gotten married the day before? Indeed, what was he doing in the bar at all? If he'd left his bride alone on the first day of their honeymoon to go an an all-day bender, perhaps they were both better off for his being returned to his mother. Sightings: Something akin to this legend happens in the 1916 Douglas Fairbanks silent film His Picture in the Papers. Pete Prindle (Fairbanks) asks a club member for a dollar so he can visit the psychic Vera Carewes. The fellow member misunderstands the purpose of the loan and, duly impressed that Prindle can manage the trip on a dollar, gets him liquored up at the bar. Hours later an insensible Prindle is delivered to the docks and loaded onto a ship bound for Vera Cruz. His Picture in the Papers Brunvand, Jan Harold. The Baby Train. New York: W. W. Norton, 1993. ISBN 0-393-31208-9 (pp. 229-230). Smith, Paul. The Book of Nastier Legends. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1986. ISBN 0-7102-0573-2 (p. 29). The Big Book of Urban Legends. New York: Paradox Press, 1994. ISBN 1-56389-165-4 (p. 17).

['loan']

True

Sightings: Something akin to this legend happens in the 1916 Douglas Fairbanks silent film His Picture in the Papers. Pete Prindle (Fairbanks) asks a club member for a dollar so he can visit the psychic Vera Carewes. The fellow member misunderstands the purpose of the loan and, duly impressed that Prindle can manage the trip on a dollar, gets him liquored up at the bar. Hours later an insensible Prindle is delivered to the docks and loaded onto a ship bound for Vera Cruz.

Did Trump Just End Obama's 'Vacation Scam'?

['President Donald Trump supposedly sent former President Barack Obama a bill for all the vacations the latter took before leaving office.']

On 14 February 2017, the web site America's Last Line of Defense published an article reporting that President Donald Trump had ended "Obama's vacation scam." article According to the story, former President Barack Obama had taken funds from the "Office of Presidential Visits and Vacations" to pay for vacations for himself, his family, and two dozen staff members through the year 2036. Once the "scam" was uncovered, the article said, Trump allegedly sent a bill to Obama to repay the money used for those vacations: Before Obama left office he arranged with the State Department for a series of official visits to foreign countries spanning the next 20 years. Using discretionary funds from the Office of Presidential Visits and Vacations, Obama was able to weasel what would have been another $2.1 billion in free vacations for him and up to 24 members of his family plus staff and a dog sitter until the year 2036. He would have, that is, had he not lost his office to Donald Trump. Trump, who is always looking for ways to save money, was having the office used for vacations repainted with 24 karat gold leaf trim and having the shelves lined with leather when he was presented with a ledger that contained all of the travel plans and expenses. The ledger was found by one of the 31 workers Trump hired from outside the typical White House staff to make alterations requiring specialized craftsmen. Our President immediately canceled the plans and recalled all Secret Service agents scheduled to protect the Obamas anywhere outside of the United States. The Obamas, who are still waiting in Kenya for their documents so they can re-enter the country, are also facing another new challenge at the hands of Trump: Theyre going to have to repay the government for all of those vacations that werent official state business. Of course, there is absolutely no truth to this story. President Obama did not steal $2.1 billion to fund family vacations until 2036, nor did President Trump end his "vacation scam" or send Obama a bill to repay the money. TheLastLineOfDefense.orghas a long history of publishing false information, and while the web site also reported that the Obamas were "waiting in Kenya" for their documents, the former President was actually with former First Lady Michelle Obama in the British Virgin Islands. On 14 February 2017, Michelle Obama posted a photograph from the beach, wishing her husband a happy Valentine's Day: history British Virgin Islands photograph An argument could be made here that Kenya also has beaches, which it does; in fact, its beaches are renowned for their beauty. However, before you conclude that the Obama family is lying about where in the world they are (and somehow fooling the press assigned to cover their stay in the islands), consider the following disclaimer, taken directly from TheLastLineOfDefense.org's own "About" page: beauty About DISCLAIMER: The Resistance may include information from sources that may or may not be reliable and facts that dont necessarily exist. All articles should be considered satirical and any and all quotes attributed to actual people complete and total baloney. Pictures that represent actual people should be considered altered and not in any way real. Horton, Helena. "Barack Obama Tweets Romantic Valentine's Day Message to His Wife Michelle." The Telegraph. 14 February 2017. The Last Line of Defense. "Trump Just Ended Obamas Vacation Scam and Sent Him a Bill You Have to See to Believe." 13 February 2017.

['funds']

False

On 14 February 2017, the web site America's Last Line of Defense published an article reporting that President Donald Trump had ended "Obama's vacation scam."TheLastLineOfDefense.orghas a long history of publishing false information, and while the web site also reported that the Obamas were "waiting in Kenya" for their documents, the former President was actually with former First Lady Michelle Obama in the British Virgin Islands. On 14 February 2017, Michelle Obama posted a photograph from the beach, wishing her husband a happy Valentine's Day:An argument could be made here that Kenya also has beaches, which it does; in fact, its beaches are renowned for their beauty. However, before you conclude that the Obama family is lying about where in the world they are (and somehow fooling the press assigned to cover their stay in the islands), consider the following disclaimer, taken directly from TheLastLineOfDefense.org's own "About" page:

Does a Student Whose Roommate Commits Suicide Receive a 4.0 GPA?

["There are a variety of rumors surrounding higher education bereavement policies that affect students' grades."]

Variations: Origins: Although many schools offer some form of bereavement consideration under exceptional circumstances, no college or university in the United States has a policy awarding a 4.0 average (or anything else) to a student whose roommate dies. This rumor, or at least its widespread distribution, appears to have originated fairly recently, dating back to approximately the mid-1970s. It most likely began as an expression of the pressures students feel to achieve good grades, taking the form of a morbid joke (i.e., "Even if the pressures of school cause some people to off themselves, there's no reason we can't profit by it!"). The joke evolved into a legend when it was spread as true by credulous students, picking up variations along the way. A similar theme of suicide, along with student grade consideration for witnessing it, can be found in the pencil suicide legend. Pencil Sightings: Dead Man on Campus, Dead Man's Curve. Additional information: Bennett, Gillian and Paul Smith. A Nest of Vipers. Sheffield: Univ. of Sheffield Press, 1990. ISBN 1-85075-256-7 (pp. 69-76). Bronner, Simon J. Piled Higher and Deeper. Little Rock: August House, 1990. ISBN 0-87483-154-7 (pp. 32-33). Piled Higher and Deeper. Brunvand, Jan Harold. Curses! Broiled Again! New York: W. W. Norton, 1989. ISBN 0-393-30711-5 (pp. 295-298). Curses! Broiled Again! Dickson, Paul and Joseph Gouldon. Myth-Informed. New York: Perigee Books, 1993. ISBN 0-399-51839-8 (p. 62). Myth-Informed. Reisberg, Leo. "Hollywood Discovers an Apocryphal Legend." The Chronicle of Higher Education. 11 September 1998.

['profit']

False

Origins: Although many schools will offer some sort of bereavement consideration under exceptional circumstances, no college or university in the United States has a policy awarding a 4.0 average (or anything else) to a student whose roommate dies. This rumor (or at least its widespread distribution) appears to be of fairly recent origin, dating from approximately the mid-1970s. It most likely started out as an expression of the pressures students feel to achieve good grades in the form of a morbid joke (i.e., "Even if the pressures of school cause some people to off themselves, there's no reason we can't profit by it!"), and the joke became a legend when it was spread as true by credulous students, picking up variations along the way. A similar theme of suicide (and student grade consideration for witnessing it) can be found in the pencil suicide legend.Bronner, Simon J. Piled Higher and Deeper. Little Rock: August House, 1990. ISBN 0-87483-154-7 (pp. 32-33).Brunvand, Jan Harold. Curses! Broiled Again! New York: W. W. Norton, 1989. ISBN 0-393-30711-5 (pp. 295-298).Dickson, Paul and Joseph Gouldon. Myth-Informed. New York: Perigee Books, 1993. ISBN 0-399-51839-8. (p. 62).

Bills Passed by Paul Ryan

['Paul Ryan has sponsored two Congressional bills that have been passed into law?']

Claim: Paul Ryan has sponsored two Congressional bills that have been passed into law. Examples: [Collected via e-mail, August 2012] Is it true or false that Paul Ryan managed to get only 2 bills passed during his 13 years in the House of Representatives? If true, what were they? Rumor is one of them was to name a post office after himself. In his 13 years in Congress, Paul Ryan got only two bills passed. One was to change the name of the post office in his home town. Origins: In August 2012 Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney tapped as his vice presidential running mate Congressman Paul Ryan, who has represented Wisconsin's 1st district in Congress since 1999. That selection focused attention on the legislative record of Ryan, including the number of bills he sponsored that had been passed into law. According to the Library of Congress' THOMAS legislative THOMAS information source, Rep. Ryan in his Congressional career has been the primary sponsor of two bills that have been passed and enacted as law: a 2000 bill to name a United States Postal Service facility in his hometown of Janesville, Wisconsin, and a 2004 bill to modify the excise taxes on arrows used as archery equipment. (In the former case, the bill did not name a USPS building after Ryan himself, as mentioned in one of the examples reproduced above, but after Les Aspin, a Democratic Congressman who for twenty-two years represented the same Wisconsin district that Ryan currently does.) During his tenure in Congress Rep. Ryan has also sponsored 73 bills that were not passed and signed on as co-sponsor of another 975 bills. name arrows In general, several thousand bills are introduced in every Congress, but only about 5% of them roughly an average of one per Congressmember per term are eventually passed into law. introduced Last updated: 16 August 2012

['taxes']

False

According to the Library of Congress' THOMAS legislative information source, Rep. Ryan in his Congressional career has been the primary sponsor of two bills that have been passed and enacted as law: a 2000 bill to name a United States Postal Service facility in his hometown of Janesville, Wisconsin, and a 2004 bill to modify the excise taxes on arrows used as archery equipment. (In the former case, the bill did not name a USPS building after Ryan himself, as mentioned in one of the examples reproduced above, but after Les Aspin, a Democratic Congressman who for twenty-two years represented the same Wisconsin district that Ryan currently does.) During his tenure in Congress Rep. Ryan has also sponsored 73 bills that were not passed and signed on as co-sponsor of another 975 bills.In general, several thousand bills are introduced in every Congress, but only about 5% of them roughly an average of one per Congressmember per term are eventually passed into law.

Are African nations implementing a massive tree barrier to halt the advance of the Sahara Desert?

['The Great Green Wall is an ambitious effort to tackle climate change. ']

An ambitious effort by a group of African countries to tackle the effects of climate change and desertification has been in the works since 2007. The Great Green Wall (GGW) initiative plans to have trees extend like a belt across the Sahel region, which is at the base of the Sahara, in order to prevent the expansion of the desert due to climate change. According to a meme shared with us by our readers, more than 20 African countries are part of this effort, and the wall of trees, the meme says, will spread 7,000 km across the continent from coast to coast. This meme is largely true, though the length of the GGW varies, as the project itself is far from being completed. According to the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD), the project aims to restore Africa's degraded landscapes and transform millions of lives in one of the world's poorest regions, the Sahel. Once complete, the Wall will be the largest living structure on the planet—an 8,000 km natural wonder of the world stretching across the entire width of the continent. The project aims to have the "wall" extend from Senegal in the west to Djibouti in the east by 2030. The official website for the GGW details the reason for all their efforts: the catalyst for the Great Green Wall is the daily impact of desertification and climate change that is undermining the futures of millions of communities across Africa's Sahel region. Since the 1970s, the Sahel has been heavily affected by recurrent periods of drought. These droughts have threatened the livelihoods and futures of entire populations across the region. The lack of rain has led to the disappearance of livestock and the destruction of cereal crops. The great famines that rocked the Sub-Saharan region in the 80s each affected millions of people. In addition, the high population growth rate is increasing demand for food and pressure to gain access to other natural resources, which are the basis for livelihoods and the survival of the rural population. Millions of people—particularly rural youth—are currently facing an uncertain future due to the lack of decent rural jobs and the continuous loss of livelihoods caused by land degradation and falling yields. But according to The Associated Press, since the project's inception in 2007, millions of the planted trees have died due to diminishing rains and rising temperatures. Only 4% of the project's original goal has been met, and around $43 billion is needed to complete it. Given the challenges facing them, the focus of the project has also shifted from planting just a wall of trees to a mosaic of smaller and more durable projects that emphasize community-focused solutions that support agriculture and prevent desertification. The GGW Accelerator, announced in January 2021, detailed these changes: the Great Green Wall Initiative has evolved from its initial focus on tree planting towards a comprehensive rural development initiative aiming to transform the lives of Sahelian populations by creating a mosaic of green and productive landscapes across 11 countries (Senegal, Mauritania, Mali, Burkina Faso, Niger, Nigeria, Chad, Sudan, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Djibouti). Progress has been achieved into the second decade of the initiative, with almost 18 million hectares of degraded lands restored and 350,000 jobs created across the Sahel and the Great Green Wall countries. The Accelerator also highlighted additional challenges they encountered in the process of creating the GGW, which included insufficient coordination, exchange, and flow of information at the regional and national levels, weak organizational structures, and a lack of consideration in national environmental priorities. Some of the changes include planting orchards and circular gardens where large trees strategically protect smaller ones. A number of these have been thriving in Senegal's portion of the GGW. According to the GGW's official website, there have been a number of successes. Senegal planted around 12 million drought-resistant trees in less than a decade, while 5 million hectares of degraded land were restored in Nigeria, and 15 million hectares in Ethiopia. A November 2021 report in the Nature Sustainability journal assessed the economic impact of the program and concluded that it was economically worthwhile: the Great Green Wall program is a colossal initiative to restore 100 million hectares of degraded ecosystems across 11 countries in the region. We evaluated the economic costs and benefits of future land restoration projects under this program. We applied different scenarios that account for both market-priced and non-market benefits from restored ecosystems and consider the heterogeneity of local decision-making contexts in terms of investment planning horizons, discount rates, and the time needed for the restored ecosystems to start yielding their benefits in full. The results show that every US dollar invested in land restoration yields, on average, US$1.2 under the base scenario, ranging from US$1.1 to US$4.4 across the scenarios. At most, ten years are needed for land restoration activities to break even from the social perspective, accounting for both market-priced and non-market ecosystem benefits. To fund all proposed land restoration activities, an investment of US$44 billion is needed under the base scenario (US$187 billion across scenarios). The report added that violent conflicts in the Sahel are estimated to reduce accessibility to these degraded ecosystems from 27.9 million hectares to 14.1 million hectares. While originally only 11 countries were part of the effort, today there are more than 20 African nations involved. You can learn more about the impact and current projects here, and in this video. Given that the focus of the GGW has evolved beyond just planting trees and it is still an effort in progress, we rate this claim as true.

['loss']

True

An ambitious effort by a group of African countries to tackle the effects of climate change and desertification has been in the works since 2007. The Great Green Wall (GGW) initiative plans to have trees extend like a belt across the Sahel region which is at the base of the Sahara, in order to prevent the expansion of the desert through climate change.This meme is largely true, though the length of the GGW varies, as the project itself is far from being completed. According to the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD), the project aims to restore Africas degraded landscapes and transform millions of lives in one of the worlds poorest regions, the Sahel. Once complete, the Wall will be the largest living structure on the planet an 8,000 km natural wonder of the world stretching across the entire width of the continent.The project aims to have the "wall" extend from Senegal in the west to Djibouti in the east, by 2030. The official website for the GGW details the reason for all their efforts:But according to The Associated Press, since the projects inception in 2007, millions of the planted trees have died due to diminishing rains and rising temperatures. Only 4% of the projects original goal has been met and around $43 billion dollars is needed to complete it. Given the challenges facing them, the focus of the project has also shifted from planting just a wall of trees to a mosaic of smaller and more durable projects that emphasize community-focused solutions that support agriculture and prevent desertification.The GGW Accelerator, announced in January 2021, detailed these changes:The Accelerator also highlighted additional challenges they encountered in the process of creating the GGW which included insufficient coordination, exchange and flow of information at the regional and national level, weak organizational structures, and a lack of consideration in national environmental priorities.Some of the changes include planting orchards and circular gardens where large trees strategically protect smaller ones. A number of these have been thriving in Senegals portion of the GGW. According to GGWs official website, there have been a number of successes. Senegal planted around 12 million drought resistant trees in less than a decade, while 5 million hectares of degraded land was restored in Nigeria, and 15 million hectares in Ethiopia. A November 2021 report in the Nature Sustainability journal assessed the economic impact of the program and concluded that it was economically worthwhile:While originally only 11 countries were a part of the effort, today there are more than 20 African nations involved. You can learn more about the impact and current projects here, and in this video:

Did a 1933 Article Report That Hitler Would Not 'Disrupt' Germany?

['Events always seem more obvious and predictable after they have already taken place.']

In perhaps one of the worst miscalculations in modern political history, Adolf Hitler was appointed chancellor of Germany in January 1933 in the hopes that he could successfully form a coalition government amidst a collection of competing minority parties (including his own Nazi Party) and that the worst impulses of Hitler and the Nazis could be "controlled" or "tamed" once they bore responsibility for leading the national government (rather than criticizing others' administration of it). But shortly after Hitler's swearing-in as chancellor on January 30, 1933, the Nazis began to systematically suspend civil liberties and eliminate political opposition, with the passage of the Enabling Act two months later effectively establishing Hitler's government as a legal dictatorship that could issue decrees without the involvement of the German parliament (Reichstag) or president. One example of the naiveté that held sway in Germany at that time caught the attention of Americans in February 2020, in the wake of impeachment proceedings against U.S. President Donald Trump. That example took the form of a snippet from a purported 1933 Wall Street Journal article that was widely circulated via social media: This article did in fact appear in the February 2, 1933, edition of the Wall Street Journal (WSJ). Under the headline "Berlin Views Hitler Calmly," the report from the WSJ's Berlin bureau briefly referenced contemporaneous assessments of Hitler—that "there is usually wide discrepancy between the speeches of opposition politicians and the actions of the group when it gains power," that Hitler would not "disrupt the nation's affairs," and that it was "not believed" Hitler would "accomplish a change in the constitution"—and that a rise in stock prices indicated public confidence in these assessments: Rise in Stocks Reflects Confidence He Will Not Disrupt Nation's Affairs Berlin is settling down to pass judgment on political developments. Politicians, economists, and bankers declare there is usually wide discrepancy between the speeches of opposition politicians and the actions of the group when it gains power. Consequently, it is not believed that Hitler will accomplish a change in the constitution or that [Reich Minister of Economics Alfred] Hugenberg will bring about a general reduction of interest rates. The government wants to obtain an adjournment of the Reichstag for several months, but it is questionable whether the Centre [Party] will approve of such action. After calmly dismissing the threat that Hitler posed (and which would come to pass in just a few short months), the article provided a short summary of the "considerable gains in stocks" that supposedly indicated good times were ahead under the new government—including, ironically, a rise in the price of stock in I.G. Farben, the German chemical company that manufactured the Zyklon B gas later used to kill millions of Jews during the Holocaust: I.G. Farben The Börse closed with considerable gains in stocks. Rhenish Coal advanced 7, Mannesmann Tube 5, I.G. Farben 4, and Rhine-Westphalia Electric 4. Bonds registered average losses of 2 points. Common stocks were favored as being less susceptible to talk of devaluing the currency or of other inflationary experiments. Furthermore, profits are expected to increase for many industries from expanded public works projects. The Wall Street Journal. "Berlin Views Hitler Calmly." 1 February 1933 (p. 12)

['interest']

True

But shortly after Hitler's swearing-in as chancellor on Jan. 30, 1933, the Nazis began to systematically suspend civil liberties and eliminate political opposition, with the passage of the Enabling Act two months later effectively establishing Hitler's government as a legal dictatorship that could issue decrees without the involvement of the German parliament (Reichstag) or president.After calmly dismissing the threat that Hitler posed (and which would come to pass in just a few short months) the article provided a short summary of the "considerable gains in stocks" that supposedly indicated good times were ahead under the new government -- including, ironically, a rise in the price of stock in I.G. Farben, the German chemical company that manufactured the Zyklon B gas later used to kill millions of Jews during the Holocaust:

Did a Church Close Its Food Bank 'Because It Attracts Poor People'?

['One would think poor people are most at risk around food insecurity.']

For many years, internet users have been sharing an image that purportedly reproduces an article from the Ottawa Citizen newspaper headlined, "Church closes food bank because it attracts poor people": The text of the article, as seen in that image, reads as follows: A busy church food bank, known for offering warm drinks and snacks to its regulars, has announced its closing because it is attracting too many poor people. Its attracting a lot of street people that made it uncomfortable, said Charlotte Prossen, Unity Truth Centre minister, Its creating social unrest in the church. A food bank is a social service and that is not who we are. Ms. Prossen said the program is being cancelled to focus on more church-specific activities. The churchs board of trustees made the decision to cancel the bimonthly food bank after receiving an e-mail from a sister church in Victoria. Most clients of food banks have not yet come to a sense of personal responsibility in life. They are still in denial, blame or seeing the world as owing them, wrote Rev. David Durksen of the Unity Church of Victoria. Ms. Prossen praised the work done by food banks, and said the church will still collect food for baskets but focus more on peoples spiritual hunger. This image did in fact reflect an article genuinely published in the Ottawa Citizen (and several other Canadian newspapers) back in 2000, about the closure of a Winnipeg church's food bank program, although some of those involved might dispute whether the issue was as simple as the headline implied. A follow-up article from CBC News cited the Unity Truth Centre's minister, Charlotte Prossen, as stating that the food bank project was shut down for "several reasons" and denying "news reports that suggest the food bank was really shut down because some church members were uncomfortable with the street people who came to their building." However, that article did not quote the minister as repudiating any of the statements attributed to her in the earlier Ottawa Citizen piece: article Prossen says people in the congregation meant well when they first decided to get involved in the food bank. But she says the group had been without a minister or leadership for years, and now, it needs to return to more spiritual pursuits. "I don't know why it would be hard to understand that we are a church and we must identify ourselves as that in our community. We need to use our space, to introduce our programs to the community." Prossen says there were several reasons she closed the project, including concerns about whether it was covered by the church's insurance. She denies news reports that suggest the food bank was really shut down because some church members were uncomfortable with the street people who came to their building Instead, Prossen makes references to "unpleasant" and "unfortunate" situations that led to the decision. She says she's not at liberty to say what those situations are, although a prepared statement issued by the church does mention safety and protection concerns. CBC News. "Church Reaffirms Food Bank Decision." 21 February 2000. The Ottawa Citizen. "Church Closes Food Bank Because It Attracts Poor People." 19 February 2000.

['insurance']

True

A follow-up article from CBC News cited the Unity Truth Centre's minister, Charlotte Prossen, as stating that the food bank project was shut down for "several reasons" and denying "news reports that suggest the food bank was really shut down because some church members were uncomfortable with the street people who came to their building." However, that article did not quote the minister as repudiating any of the statements attributed to her in the earlier Ottawa Citizen piece:

Is Ukraine Preparing to Legalize Porn Production to Raise Military Funding?

['Viral posts mischaracterized a legislative proposal to decriminalize pornography in the country.']

On Oct. 17, 2023, an account on X (formerly Twitter) posted a screenshot of what it alleged was an Aug. 19, 2023, headline about the Ukrainian government legalizing the production of pornography to help fund its military during the country's war with Russia. Snopes was unable to identify any website with this alleged headline, but it closely matched the framing of a story published that same day (Aug. 19) on the Russian state-backed media outlet RT. That story by RT referenced a real legislative proposal by a member of Ukraine's parliamentary body, Yaroslav Zhelezniak, to decriminalize pornography in the country. However, that measure is an attempt by supporters to limit the state's control over consensual sexual activity, not an effort to raise money for the country's military. Nowhere in the legislation is military funding mentioned, and it does not spell out how the proposed changes to the porn industry would drive more money for Ukraine's armed forces. Like many former Soviet Bloc countries, pornography is entirely illegal in Ukraine. In August 2023, however, Zhelezniak introduced the proposal titled (via Google Translate), "Draft Law on Amendments to the Criminal Code of Ukraine on Ensuring Freedom from Interference in a Person's Private Life," to remove some restrictions on the production of porn specifically. As described by the Kyiv Independent, an English-language news outlet in Ukraine, producing and distributing pornography is currently illegal in Ukraine. Broad interpretations of the law mean that even sharing a nude photograph with a partner can land a person in jail. In 2023 alone, 699 cases have been opened over the distribution, sale, and production of pornography, not including cases of child pornography. In one case in July, a court in Poltava Oblast fined a woman almost $1,000 for sending two videos to her boyfriend. Meanwhile, in Sumy Oblast, a man was sentenced to three years in prison with one year of probation for sending intimate photos and videos via a dating website. Lawmakers and advocates say this has to change. In their view, the decades-old prohibition of pornography harms ordinary citizens by prosecuting them for consensual sexual content, wasting state resources in the process. Zhelezniak argued that current Ukrainian law prohibits the production and distribution of material that many Ukrainians already produce or engage with. He believes the law should do more to prevent people from sharing nude photos without consent by including additional legal penalties and protect individual adult content creators against abuse by law enforcement authorities by removing other legal penalties. Supporters say the current legal climate allows authorities to coerce people who produce adult content or perform on webcams. As Zhelezniak explained to the Kyiv Post in August 2023, one of the problems with the current legislation is that law enforcement officers, namely cyber police officers, correspond with users of pornographic platforms— for example, those who strip for clients on webcams. They pretend to be customers and then offer them cover for a price, Zhelezniak said. The proposal would add explicit protections against victims of revenge porn, reaffirm the illegality of child pornography and "extreme" pornography, and remove criminal penalties for the production and distribution of legal porn. The proposed legislation was in committee as of this writing. Nowhere in the draft law was military funding mentioned. An explanatory note attached to the bill, however, pointed out— in an apparent attempt to highlight the current system's alleged flaws— that the Ukrainian government spends money to prosecute models on the adult content creation platform OnlyFans using tax revenue it receives from the same site. In 2021, Ukraine implemented a so-called Google tax that levels a 20% tax on foreign corporations that provide services in Ukraine. That tax applies to London-based OnlyFans, despite the fact that, in some cases, it hosts content that is technically illegal in the country. The explanatory note mentions that surpluses in the government's annual budget generally go toward the Ukrainian military. It is plausible that such a law could provide funding to the armed forces, but that was not its intent. Additionally, the explanatory note argues that the government spends significant resources investigating and prosecuting cases against models generating revenue for OnlyFans and, by extension, Ukraine. As described in the Kyiv Independent, OnlyFans, one of the world's largest platforms for erotic content, has already generated more than Hr 34 million ($920,000) in tax revenue for Ukraine's state budget from value-added tax in the first six months of the year, Ukrainian lawmaker Yaroslav Zhelezniak, who has been spearheading the latest effort to legalize porn, told the Kyiv Independent. It's stupid to collect taxes for that and say it's criminal at the same time, Zhelezniak said. If we decriminalize porn, it means less corruption and more taxes for the budget. The explanatory note also referenced an organization that allows Ukrainians to donate erotic photos to people who provide evidence of a donation to the armed forces of Ukraine— TerOnlyfans. That group is independent of the Ukrainian government. It was referenced only in the draft law's explanatory note, nowhere in the actual legislation. That section (via Google Translate) read: TerOnlyfans. Adult pornography is widely available in Ukraine, and most of its aspects do not cause public disturbance. On the contrary, such an approach usually causes positive public reaction and media coverage. For almost one and a half years of existence of the TerOnlyfans platform, volunteers collected about UAH 31.5 million in donations for the Armed Forces of Ukraine for erotic photo cards. Quotes from TerOnlyfans Executive Director Anastasia Kuchmenko were included in most news stories about the draft law, and that media focus seemingly contributed to the spread of false claims that the proposal to decriminalize the production of porn was connected to military funding. In reality, however, while the bill indeed proposed lighter restrictions on porn production, it did not call for the government to use revenue from that proposed change for its armed forces.

['budget']

False

On Oct. 17, 2023, an account on X (formerly Twitter) posted a screenshot of what it alleged was an Aug. 19, 2023, headline about the Ukrainian government legalizing the production of pornography to help fund its military during the country's war with Russia:Snopes was unable identify any website with this alleged headline, but it closely matched the framing of a story that published that same day (Aug. 19) on the Russian state-backed media outlet RT:Like many former Soviet Bloc countries, pornography is entirely illegal in Ukraine. In August 2023, however, Zhelezniak introduced the proposal titled (via Google translate), "Draft Law on Amendments to the Criminal Code of Ukraine on Ensuring Freedom from Interference in a Person's Private Life," to remove some restrictions on the production of porn, specifically. As described by the Kyiv Independent, an English-language news outlet in Ukraine:Zhelezniak argued current Ukrainian law prohibits the production and distribution of material that many Ukrainians already produce or engage with. He said he believes the law should do more to prevent people from sharing nude photos without consent by including additional legal penalties, and protect individual adult content creators against abuse by law enforcement authorities by removing other legal penalties. Supporters say the current legal climate allows authorities to coerce people who produce adult content or perform on webcams. As Zhelezniak explained to the Kyiv Post in August 2023:The proposal would add explicit protections against victims of revenge porn, reaffirm the illegality of child pornography and "extreme" pornography, and remove criminal penalties for the production and distribution of legal porn. The proposed legislation was in committee, as of this writing.Nowhere in the draft law was military funding mentioned. An explanatory note attached to the bill, however, pointed out in an apparent attempt to highlight the current system's alleged flaws the Ukrainian government spends money to prosecute models on the adult content creation platform OnlyFans using tax revenue it receives from the same site. In 2021, Ukraine implemented a so-called Google tax that levels a 20% tax on foreign corporations that provide services in Ukraine. That tax applies to London-based OnlyFans, despite the fact that, in some cases, it's hosting content that is technically illegal in the country. The explanatory note mentions that surpluses in the government's annual budget generally go toward the Ukrainian military. It is plausible such a law could provide funding to the armed forces, but that was not its intent.Additionally, the explanatory note argues the government spends significant resources investigating and prosecuting cases against models generating revenue for OnlyFans and, by extension, Ukraine, as described in the Kyiv Independent: The explanatory note also referenced an organization that allows Ukrainians to donate erotic photos to people who provide evidence of a donation to the armed forces of Ukraine TerOnlyfans. That group is independent of the Ukrainian government. It was referenced only in the draft law's explanatory note, nowhere in the actual legislation. That section (via Google translate) read:Quotes from TerOnlyfans Executive Director Anastasia Kuchmenko were included in most news stories about the draft law, and that media focus seemingly contributed to the spread of false claims that the proposal to decriminalize the production of porn was connected to military funding. In reality, however, while the bill indeed proposed lighter restrictions on porn production, it did not call for the government to use revenue from that proposed change on its armed forces. For that reason, we rated this claim

Have July 4th Events at Military Installations Been Called Off?

['Rumor: President Obama has canceled July 4 celebrations at U.S. military bases to save money.']

Claim: President Obama has canceled July 4 celebrations at U.S. military bases to save money. OUTDATED Example: [Collected via e-mail, July 2013] Supposedly, the president has canceled 4th of July celebrations for the troops on military bases to save money. Origins: This item about President Obama's cancellation of Independence Day celebrations at U.S. military bases scheduled for July 4, 2013, began circulating a few days before that holiday. It is true that some U.S. military bases, which typically stage larger July 4 shows, cut back or canceled their celebrations that year, but those bases individually chose to do so due to budgetary constraints, not because President Obama directed all U.S. bases to skip celebrating Independence Day that year to "save money." The mandatory $85 billion budget cut imposed by sequestration as of March 2013—an outcome for which Congress and the President shared some measure of blame due to their inability to resolve deficit reduction issues—affected many federal departments, including the military. Therefore, some U.S. military bases had to make the choice to scrap annual fireworks shows (which can cost upwards of $100,000) or other Independence Day events in order to allocate funds to more vital areas. The Fourth of July won't have a patriotic boom in the sky over some military bases because budget cuts and furloughed workers also mean furloughed fireworks. Independence Day celebrations have been canceled at the Camp Lejeune Marine Corps Base and at the Army's Fort Bragg, both in North Carolina. The annual July Fourth celebration has also been scrapped at the Marine Corps Logistics Base in Albany, Ga. The reason is money—namely, the lack of it. The failure in Washington to follow up a 2011 budget pact with additional spending cuts meant $85 billion in across-the-board cuts that began in March. Budgets tightened, the military took a major hit, and many federal workers absorbed pay cuts through forced furloughs. When the decision was made to forgo fireworks at Camp Lejeune, the commanding general, Brig. Gen. Thomas Gorry, said the cancellation would "ensure that we can mitigate the fiscal challenges we are currently facing." Last year's Independence Day at the base cost about $100,000, including $25,000 for the fireworks. The big issue is paying the overtime to personnel for security, transportation, logistics, and safety. Base officials said they couldn't justify paying overtime when federal workers are losing pay while furloughed. Marines and their families at Lejeune will instead be able to participate in some free activities—golf, bowling, skeet shooting, archery, and movies. Other bases that are canceling ceremonies to mark the nation's birthday include Shaw Air Force Base in South Carolina, where the annual Jammin' July 4th event put on by the 20th Fighter Wing at Shaw and local city and county officials has been scrapped. The base plans a smaller "freedom bash" on July 3 with pool games, face painting, and bouncy castles. The Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam in Hawaii is scaling back by canceling the fireworks and instead hosting a daytime celebration featuring the Pacific Fleet Band and the Air Force Band of the Pacific. New Jersey's Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst. Last updated: June 8, 2015. Kerr, Jennifer C. "A Fourth of July with No Fireworks for Some Military Bases." The Washington Post. July 1, 2013.

['budget']

False

The mandatory $85 billion budget cut imposed by sequestration as of March 2013 an outcome for which Congress and the President shared some measure of blame due to their inability to resolve deficit reduction issues affected many federal departments, including the military. Therefore, some U.S. military bases had to make the choice of scrapping annual fireworks shows (which can cost upwards of $100,000) or other Independence Day events in order to allocate funds to more vital areas:

In 2010, (Wisconsin Republicans) inherited a multi-Billion dollar deficit Today we are looking at a projected surplus approaching 7 Billion.

['Then-Gov.', 'Jim Doyle argued the projected shortfall was as low as $1.5 billion in 2010, but others placed the figure at more than $2 billion., Estimates show ahistoric budget surplus of more than $7.1 billionat the end of the current fiscal year., But the claim glosses past at least $19.9 billion in COVID-19 pandemic-related relief sent to state and local governments, helping bolster Wisconsins economy.']

With Gov. Tony Evers, a Democrat, poised torelease the 2023-25 state budgeton Feb. 15, 2023 deficits and surpluses in Wisconsin have again come to the forefront of the debate. In his state of the state speech, Evers gave a bit of a preview of his budget, outlining more than $1 billion in new spending. Republicans, who control the Legislature, called his plans too expensive and pledged to toss aside his budget and start from scratch. All of this even as, in December, officials said the statesbudget surplus was at an all-time high. In a Jan. 3, 2023address to the state Senate, Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu, R-Oostburg, credited action by former Gov. Scott Walker, a Republican, and the GOP-led Legislature with putting the state on a solid financial footing: In 2010, we inherited a multi-billion dollar deficit, he said. Over the last 12 years we have focused on investing in core priorities, responsible budgeting, reducing the tax burden on the hard- working families of Wisconsin and passing meaningful legislative reforms. Today we are looking at a projected surplus approaching 7 billion. Were interested in the first and last part of the statement: Was there a multi-billion dollar deficit in 2010, and is it nearing $7 billion now? As we examine the claim, well also look at what other factors were at work. In 2010, there was considerable debate around the size of the gap in the budget. Then-Gov. Jim Doyle, a Democrat, argued the projected shortfall was as low as $1.5 billion. But his administrations official budget statementsuggested it was closer to $2.2 billion. Heres what we wrote in a Nov. 29, 2010fact-check: Even Department of Administration Secretary Daniel Schooff, who signed the deficit report, says $2.2 billion not $1.5 billion is the best starting point because the Medicaid and patient fund monies likely will fall to the state to cover. Indeed, the Legislative Fiscal Bureau had estimated that the shortfall could be as much as$2.7 billion. And University of Wisconsin-Madison economist Andrew Reschovsky estimated it could even reach$3.1 billion. So, on the first part of the claim, LeMahieu is on target. On the second half of the claim, it has been well reported that estimates show ahistoric budget surplus of more than $7.1 billionat the end of the fiscal year. But by simply highlighting Republican policy moves over the past decade-plus, LeMahieu glosses past the pandemic in the room. As a Dec. 19, 2022report by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinelnoted: While the governor's office and the state legislative branch would like to take credit for prudent financial planning it's the federal government that helped reduce state spending and boosted state revenues by enacting pandemic relief bills in 2020 and 2021. That includes bills such as the American Rescue Plan (ARP), passed in March 2021 under President Joe Biden, and the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, passed in March 2020 under President Donald Trump. There was also the Families First Coronavirus Response Act also in March 2020. A June 2022Wisconsin Policy Forum reportestimated that state and local governments collected at least $19.9 billion in COVID-19 pandemic-related funds. That funding ultimately bolstered Wisconsins economy,Jason Stein, research director at the Wisconsin Policy Forum, told the Journal Sentinel. In the report, Stein noted that during the height of the Great Recession from 2009 through 2011, the state heavily used federal relief funds for both K-12 school aid and Medicaid. When those funds ran out, the state faced a difficult 2011-13 budget and ultimately cut state aid to schools and local governments substantially, he wrote. So, on this part, LeMahieu accurately quotes the number, but leaves out a key detail. In aSenate address, LeMahieu claimed: In 2010, (Wisconsin Republicans) inherited a multi-billion dollar deficit... Today we are looking at a projected surplus approaching 7 billion. He is right on the numbers, but in skipping past the role federal aid played in keeping state and local budgets afloat during the height of the pandemic, hes ignoring important information. Our definition of Mostly True is the statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information. That fits here.

['Deficit', 'Economy', 'State Budget', 'Wisconsin']

True

With Gov. Tony Evers, a Democrat, poised torelease the 2023-25 state budgeton Feb. 15, 2023 deficits and surpluses in Wisconsin have again come to the forefront of the debate.All of this even as, in December, officials said the statesbudget surplus was at an all-time high.In a Jan. 3, 2023address to the state Senate, Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu, R-Oostburg, credited action by former Gov. Scott Walker, a Republican, and the GOP-led Legislature with putting the state on a solid financial footing:Then-Gov. Jim Doyle, a Democrat, argued the projected shortfall was as low as $1.5 billion. But his administrations official budget statementsuggested it was closer to $2.2 billion.Heres what we wrote in a Nov. 29, 2010fact-check:Indeed, the Legislative Fiscal Bureau had estimated that the shortfall could be as much as$2.7 billion. And University of Wisconsin-Madison economist Andrew Reschovsky estimated it could even reach$3.1 billion.On the second half of the claim, it has been well reported that estimates show ahistoric budget surplus of more than $7.1 billionat the end of the fiscal year.As a Dec. 19, 2022report by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinelnoted: While the governor's office and the state legislative branch would like to take credit for prudent financial planning it's the federal government that helped reduce state spending and boosted state revenues by enacting pandemic relief bills in 2020 and 2021.A June 2022Wisconsin Policy Forum reportestimated that state and local governments collected at least $19.9 billion in COVID-19 pandemic-related funds.That funding ultimately bolstered Wisconsins economy,Jason Stein, research director at the Wisconsin Policy Forum, told the Journal Sentinel.In aSenate address, LeMahieu claimed: In 2010, (Wisconsin Republicans) inherited a multi-billion dollar deficit... Today we are looking at a projected surplus approaching 7 billion.

Did a Twitter Ad Show Rebel Wilson During Her College Years?

['The cruel and seemingly outdated Twitter advertisement in question led to a story that claimed Rebel Wilson and other celebrities "completely ruined their looks."']

On Dec. 20, 2020, the person who controlled the @TeddyFeed Twitter account created a tweet using Twitter Ads. The first of two pictures in the tweet showed actress Rebel Wilson during a 2015 appearance on "The Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon." The second photograph purportedly showed her years before in college wearing a crop top and ripped jeans. The tweet said, "Rebel Wilson Was Stunning In College," and appeared to compare her weight over time: tweet appearance However, the second photograph in this tweet did not accurately depict Wilson's change in weight over time, nor did it show Wilson at all. The woman in the second picture was British model Iskra Lawrence, photographed by Frank Lewis with startraksphoto.com. startraksphoto.com The owner of the @TeddyFeed Twitter account paid to advertise the misleading tweet. We confirmed that the ad was still running as of Jan. 20, 2021. Readers who clicked the ad were led to a lengthy slideshow article on TeddyFeed's website with the headline: "Unrecognizable Celebrities Who Completely Ruined Their Looks." The story spanned more than 30 pages. Wilson appeared on the final page with nothing but a picture comparison. No words accompanied her page to describe the photographs or her college days. In the past, Wilson shared a real photograph from her 2009 college graduation. She attended the University of New South Wales. real photograph The misleading advertisement from the @TeddyFeed Twitter account appeared to be comparing Wilson's weight over the years. The story on the TeddyFeed website was last updated on Dec. 20, 2020, (according to page source code). It completely omitted recent news. On Dec. 1, 2020, nearly three weeks before the TeddyFeed website's story was last updated, NBC's "Today" show published an article about Wilson's weight loss journey. It reported that the actress had lost 60 pounds: article She started calling 2020 her "year of health" in December 2019 and spent the past 12 months losing weight and getting healthy reaching her "goal weight" in late November. goal weight Wilson said she'd been getting so many questions about her wellness journey that she decided to do a sit-down Instagram Live on Tuesday night. Instagram Live "I was determined in 2020 the year of health to actually fully change my whole entire lifestyle," she explained in the video. "So it meant not only, like, physically but mentally as well." Wilson posted to her social media accounts multiple pictures and videos that showed a change in her weight. These photographs and videos were at odds with the 2015 "Late Night" appearance picture that was used by @TeddyFeed in the misleading Twitter ad: For further reading, browse our past "Fauxtography" stories for reports on other misleading photographs. "Fauxtography" stories 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

['loss']

False

On Dec. 20, 2020, the person who controlled the @TeddyFeed Twitter account created a tweet using Twitter Ads. The first of two pictures in the tweet showed actress Rebel Wilson during a 2015 appearance on "The Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon." The second photograph purportedly showed her years before in college wearing a crop top and ripped jeans. The tweet said, "Rebel Wilson Was Stunning In College," and appeared to compare her weight over time:However, the second photograph in this tweet did not accurately depict Wilson's change in weight over time, nor did it show Wilson at all. The woman in the second picture was British model Iskra Lawrence, photographed by Frank Lewis with startraksphoto.com.In the past, Wilson shared a real photograph from her 2009 college graduation. She attended the University of New South Wales.On Dec. 1, 2020, nearly three weeks before the TeddyFeed website's story was last updated, NBC's "Today" show published an article about Wilson's weight loss journey. It reported that the actress had lost 60 pounds:She started calling 2020 her "year of health" in December 2019 and spent the past 12 months losing weight and getting healthy reaching her "goal weight" in late November.Wilson said she'd been getting so many questions about her wellness journey that she decided to do a sit-down Instagram Live on Tuesday night.For further reading, browse our past "Fauxtography" stories for reports on other misleading photographs.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.

412-Pound Deer

['Photographs shows a 412-lb. deer killed in Nebraska.']

Photographs show a 412-lb. deer killed in Nebraska. Partly true. Example: [Collected via e-mail, 2006] For all you deer hunters: How about this deer? Could you imagine! A 412-pound deer killed along the Clarion River in Northwest Pennsylvania. Good GOD! This is one big deer! The deer was killed in Clarion County, Pa., and weighed 412 lbs. It could supposedly be the heaviest whitetail ever taken. Cabela's, HERE WE COME! Origins: Three common characteristics of nearly every set of Internet-circulated photos purporting to document someone's having killed a very large (if not the largest) example of a particular species are: The photographs will circulate in multiple versions, each stating a different locale where the killing supposedly took place. Viewers will debate the authenticity of the photographs, focusing on small details such as shadowing, coloring, and proportion as evidence that the images have been digitally manipulated. Hunters, wildlife experts, and others will maintain that the animal pictured is significantly smaller and/or lighter than claimed in the accompanying text. All of these characteristics apply to the above-displayed photographs of a claimed 412-lb. white-tailed buck deer killed by a hunter. The earliest versions of these e-mailed pictures said the deer was taken in Nebraska, but later versions changed the site of the kill to "along the Clarion River in Northwest Pennsylvania." Internet pundits maintained that the images were faked because the deer's coloration appeared inconsistent and/or its antlers looked too small. Media skeptics asserted that the deer was far smaller than claimed, as exemplified by this excerpt from a Utica Observer-Dispatch article: Some readers have been kind enough to send me photos of the 412-pound buck from Nebraska that is making the rounds on the internet. It's a big deer, to be sure, but it is not 412 pounds or anywhere close. Camera angles and advantageous poses make the buck appear to be much larger than it is. I contacted Kit Hams at the Nebraska Game and Parks Commission, and he said their staff has seen this photo many times. Hams doubts its authenticity for the same reasons I do. He said he was told the hunter was from Truman, Arkansas. The commission came up with a name but was unable to identify that person as a permit holder in Nebraska. A guy kills the biggest, fattest whitetail almost anyone has ever heard of, and his name isn't plastered all over the country? Not very likely. Hams said he believes the biggest deer he's ever checked in his state weighed in at about 250 pounds field-dressed. That would be a shade over 300 on the hoof, and that is a very, very big deer. A Toledo Blade columnist suggested the photographs were outright fakes: Call it a cabin-fever buck—the photographs of a supposed 412-pound white-tailed buck deer circulating among e-mails of late, that is. The thing, in a classic bowhunting "success" pose with the hunter and buddies, is so big that it pushes the envelope of credibility to the breaking point. It could simply be a dead-of-winter-and-there-ain't-no-ice-fishin' prank. It could be the clever work of photo-doctoring, which is so easy to do these days, even on a PC at home. A copy will not be printed with this column simply because it could encourage too many viewers of the photo to jump to conclusions. In January 2006, Dennis Anderson of the Minneapolis Star Tribune wrote a column expressing skepticism about these photos similar to that contained in the newspaper articles excerpted above. A few weeks later, Anderson reported that he had been contacted by an Arkansas resident named Stan Whitt, who said that he had killed the deer while bow hunting on a Nebraska Indian reservation in November 2005 (and that the deer was taken on an Indian reservation explained why Nebraska state wildlife officials were unaware of it). Whitt provided Anderson with all sorts of details about where and how he had killed the animal: Whitt says he was hunting on the reservation last November with three friends from Arkansas. He says he and his friends hunt with bows only and that he has hunted deer and other big game in about 20 states. He shot the deer on a Saturday morning as it moved from water to a bedding area, Whitt said. "I killed him at five paces," he said, from a portable stand about 25 feet high in a tree. Whitt said he had to hold his bowstring (he shoots a Mathews bow) back for 10 minutes while the deer approached. He said he shot the deer virtually straight down, the shot striking behind the left shoulder and 3 inches from the spine. His arrow carried a 100-grain Simmons broadhead. The animal disappeared in the far distance, Whitt said, losing the arrow as he ran. Four hours later, Whitt began his search for the deer. He said he looked alone until dark without finding the animal. The next morning, one of his friends joined the search, as well as a reservation game warden and another man. Whitt said his friend found the deer in a draw or ravine about noon that day, a Sunday. However, the true size of the deer is questionable and unconfirmable. Whitt admitted that the animal was "somewhat bloated" by the time they found it the following day and that he did not actually have it weighed. Instead, he took the deer to the reservation wildlife office, where its live weight was estimated at 412 lbs. from a procedure that involved measuring its girth behind its front legs. Although the procedure used supposedly has only a 6% margin of error, the 412-lb. estimate is nonetheless only an estimate, and one possibly subject to inflation due to the "somewhat bloated" condition of the deer. Last updated: 10 November 2006. Sources: Anderson, Dennis. "Bigger or Byte-Sized?" [Minneapolis] Star Tribune. 22 January 2006 (p. C18). Anderson, Dennis. "Claim Staked on Huge Deer That Caused Internet Stir." [Minneapolis] Star Tribune. 11 February 2006 (p. C18). Pitarresi, John. "Buck Unlikely to Be 412 Pounds." [Utica] Observer-Dispatch. 29 January 2006. Pollick, Steve. "Authorities Don't Buy Photos of 400-Pound Deer." The [Toledo] Blade. 31 January 2006.

['inflation']

True

For all you deer hunters; How about this deer?

Was the Dakota Territory divided into two states in order to gain additional Republican senators?

['It depends on who you ask.']

Amid discussions of statehood for Washington, D.C., in late April 2021, a meme spread on social media positing that the Dakota territory was split into the states now known as North and South Dakota in the late 1800s for the purpose of giving the Republican Party more political power, namely more senators and electors. One example is a meme from U.S. Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif.: The meme read, "Congress split the Dakota territory in half in 1889 to admit two new states with 4 Republican senators. So spare us the fake outrage over DC statehood." The text was taken from a tweet posted by journalist Ari Berman on April 22. tweet The meme generally responds to congressional Republicans who have stated that allowing D.C., a heavily Democratic region, to become a state will shift the balance of political power in Congress. Noting the racial demographics of D.C. versus other states, some Democrats have accused Republicans of stonewalling D.C. statehood because of racism. stated racial demographics accused It also characterizes current Republican opposition to D.C. statehood as hypocritical, noting that the national Republican party has benefited historically from addition of new states with Republican populations. Writing for The Atlantic in 2019, Boston College historian Heather Cox Richardson wrote: The Atlantic The number of states in the union has been fixed at 50 for so long, few Americans realize that throughout most of our history, the addition of new states from time to time was a normal part of political life. New states were supposed to join the union when they reached a certain population, but in the late 19th century, population mattered a great deal less than partisanship. While McConnell is right to suspect that admitting Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia now would shift the balance in Congress toward the Democrats, the Republican Party has historically taken far more effective advantage of the addition of new states. In 1889 and 1890, Congress added North Dakota, South Dakota, Montana, Washington, Idaho, and Wyomingthe largest admission of states since the original 13. This addition of 12 new senators and 18 new electors to the Electoral College was a deliberate strategy of late-19th-century Republicans to stay in power after their swing toward Big Business cost them a popular majority. The strategy paid dividends deep into the future; indeed, the admission of so many rural states back then helps to explain GOP control of the Senate today, 130 years later. Like most things viewed through the lens of history, the reasons North and South Dakota exist as two separate states are complicated by changing context. Business interests, local efforts, and national political wrangling all played a role, but without a doubt, adding North and South Dakota to the growing union of states had the effect of benefiting the national Republican party politically, and they didn't hide that motivation. But comparing the statehood process for North and South Dakota to current advocation for Washington, D.C. statehood is comparing apples to oranges, said Michael Card, associate professor of political science at the University of South Dakota. That period in American history was drastically different to the current circumstances in many ways namely, at that time, a large number of states were in the process of being added into the Union. One of the major factors in deciding statehood was population counts of non-indigenous American settlers. That figure was set at 60,000 in 1787. set at 60,000 Another contextual difference was that the nature of the political parties have evolved over time, meaning the Republicans and Democrats of today are not representative of the parties with those names from the late 19th century in many ways. Many of the non-indigenous settlers in the southern part of what was then Dakota territory were Union veterans of the Civil War and their families, who were Republicans. Many likely moved far away from the battlefields in the American South in an effort to get away from traumatic memories, Card noted. Scandinavian and Canadian immigrants tended to settle in the north. As USA Today pointed out, "the Republican Party was much more concerned with protecting African Americans and their voting rights from its founding through the early 20th century. In the mid-20th century, both parties' stances on racial equity began to switch." That switch came after Democratic legislators passed voting and civil rights legislation i the 1960s. pointed out Another important point of context the population counts in North and South Dakota justified statehood and that Democrats, who were at that time were in control of national government and aware of the territory's Republican leanings, had slowed the statehood process, in hopes of gaining a political toehold in the region. slowed the statehood But they couldn't stall forever. According to historian Elwyn B. Robinson in the book "History of North Dakota," there were 190,983 inhabitants in North Dakota in 1890, while there were 348,600 in South Dakota. And in the end, it was Democrats in Congress and Democratic U.S. President Grover Cleveland who relented, signing legislation granting statehood to North and South Dakota, along with Montana and Washington. In "History of North Dakota," Robinson noted that local advocacy also came into play when it came to the creation of the two states. At the local level, there was an internal push for statehood from a small group of influential men who were unhappy with the outside control that came with Dakota being a territory, and who wanted political equality of status. History of North Dakota Statehood was a quiet revolution, accomplished by less than two hundred men. The first leaders were Yankton politicians, but all came from southern Dakota and all were Republicans. With few exceptions, they were conservative, middle-class business and professional menbankers, lawyers, ministers, railroad employees, and newspaper editors. They were of the older American stock and came from New England, New York, or the states of the Old Northwest. They were Republicans because Dakota was a one-party regiona result of the long years of territorial status when the Republican party had control of the United States government. The idea of splitting the northern region off from the southern one started with this group, but not because of political power in Washington, D.C., Robinson wrote: "From the beginning the Yankton leaders, a small oligarchy with much influence, planned for the division of the territory at the forty-sixth parallel. Division seemed natural. The railroads ran east and west, so that southern and northern Dakota had little contact with each other." When Robinson described the decision to ultimately split the territory into two when admitting it into the Union though, he noted that it was pushed hard by the Republican Indiana senator who would become the 23rd U.S. president, Benjamin Harrison: Finally, the program of division, with southern Dakota becoming a state and northern Dakota a territory, was dropped in favor of a bill to admit two states. Senator Benjamin Harrison of Indiana pushed it hard and the large population of Dakota (in 1890, North Dakota alone had 190,983 inhabitants and South Dakota 348,600) made further denial seem unjust and irresponsible. In the presidential campaign of 1888 the Republican platform called for admission of two states. Ordway and the Dakota Democrats finally dropped their single-state bill. Both Republicans and Democrats voted for the Omnibus Bill of February 22, 1889, authorizing the framing of constitutions in North Dakota, South Dakota, Montana, and Washington. When the bill finally passed the House of Representatives, some of the members threw books and papers into the air in celebration and there was a general handshaking of congratulation. A step toward equality of status had been taken. Updated rating to "Mixture" and added additional context.

['equity']

NEI

The meme read, "Congress split the Dakota territory in half in 1889 to admit two new states with 4 Republican senators. So spare us the fake outrage over DC statehood." The text was taken from a tweet posted by journalist Ari Berman on April 22.The meme generally responds to congressional Republicans who have stated that allowing D.C., a heavily Democratic region, to become a state will shift the balance of political power in Congress. Noting the racial demographics of D.C. versus other states, some Democrats have accused Republicans of stonewalling D.C. statehood because of racism.Writing for The Atlantic in 2019, Boston College historian Heather Cox Richardson wrote:That period in American history was drastically different to the current circumstances in many ways namely, at that time, a large number of states were in the process of being added into the Union. One of the major factors in deciding statehood was population counts of non-indigenous American settlers. That figure was set at 60,000 in 1787.As USA Today pointed out, "the Republican Party was much more concerned with protecting African Americans and their voting rights from its founding through the early 20th century. In the mid-20th century, both parties' stances on racial equity began to switch." That switch came after Democratic legislators passed voting and civil rights legislation i the 1960s.Another important point of context the population counts in North and South Dakota justified statehood and that Democrats, who were at that time were in control of national government and aware of the territory's Republican leanings, had slowed the statehood process, in hopes of gaining a political toehold in the region.In "History of North Dakota," Robinson noted that local advocacy also came into play when it came to the creation of the two states. At the local level, there was an internal push for statehood from a small group of influential men who were unhappy with the outside control that came with Dakota being a territory, and who wanted political equality of status.

CDC Vaccination Profile

['E-mail solicits recipients to create CDC Vaccination Profiles.']

Phishing bait: E-mail solicits recipients to create CDC Vaccination Profiles. Example: [Collected via e-mail, November 2009] CDC [vaccination@cdcdelivery.gov] You have received this e-mail because of the launching of State Vaccination H1N1 Program. You need to create your personal H1N1 (swine flu) Vaccination Profile on the cdc.gov website. The Vaccination is not obligatory, but every person that has reached the age of 18 has to have his personal Vaccination Profile on the cdc.gov site. This profile has to be created both for the vaccinated people and the not-vaccinated ones. This profile is used for the registering system of vaccinated and not-vaccinated people. Create your Personal H1N1 Vaccination Profile using the link: create personal profile Origins: Swine flu is currently a strong concern among many people, especially with the vaccine's being difficult to obtain in many places. Therefore, an e-mail like the one displayed above (which was spammed to many recipients in December 2009), seemingly originating with the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and informing readers that they must go to the CDC's web site to create a "Personal H1N1 Vaccination Profile," was bound to catch people's attention. However, this message is just a phishing lure and did not originate with the CDC: That organization does not send out unsolicited e-mail, there is no requirement that everyone under 18 register a personal vaccination profile with the CDC, and the return address on the messages uses an apparently non-existent domain (cdcdelivery.gov). Clicking through on the "create personal profile" link provided takes the user to a phony CDC look-alike site within the .IM (Isle of Man) domain, which offers a page that includes a "Download Archive" link which (if clicked) triggers an executable file: Activating that file results in the installation of malwarewhich gives scammers access to the user's computer: malware The link provided in the email takes you to a very convincing imitation of a CDC web page where you are given a temporary ID and a link to your "vaccination profile." The link is in fact to an executable file that contains a copy of a Trojan most commonly identified as Zbot. This Trojan once installed on your PC, this Trojan will create a security-free gateway on your system and will proceed to download and install additional malware without your authorization. It also enables a remote hacker to take complete control of your computer. This malware can log your typed keystrokes and send confidential personal and financial data (including banking information, credit card numbers, and website passwords) to a remote hacker. The CDC has posted a notice on its web site advising that: notice CDC has received reports of fraudulent emails (phishing) referencing a CDC sponsored State Vaccination Program. The messages request that users must create a personal H1N1 (swine flu) Vaccination Profile on the cdc.gov website. The message then states that anyone that has reached the age of 18 has to have his/her personal Vaccination Profile on the cdc.gov site. The CDC has NOT implemented a state vaccination program requiring registration on www.cdc.gov. Users that click on the email are at risk of having malicious code installed on their system. Last updated: 1 December 2009

['credit']

False

Activating that file results in the installation of malwarewhich gives scammers access to the user's computer:The CDC has posted a notice on its web site advising that:

Are the majority of cruise ships registered under foreign flags?

['The economic strain of the COVID-19 pandemic prompted some to point fingers at companies perceived to be skirting the rules.']

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. As the COVID-19 pandemic threatened to shut down businesses across America in March 2020, the U.S. government faced the difficult task of deciding which industries should receive economic assistance to stay afloat. Public sentiment in some quarters was strongly against government bailouts for businesses such as airlines and cruise companies, on the grounds that many major operators had spent billions of dollars in profits buying back their own stock rather than paying down their debts. In USA Today, John M. Griffin and James M. Griffin wrote: "Start with the airlines. Rather than using their profits from the past five years to pay off debts and save for a rainy day, the big four—American, United, Delta, and Southwest—grew their combined liabilities to $166 billion, all while spending $39 billion on share repurchases." That amount, which is only from the big four, is almost 80% of what they are now asking for from U.S. taxpayers. Similarly, the three largest cruise companies—Carnival, Norwegian, and Royal Caribbean—have liabilities of $47.5 billion and engaged in share repurchases of $8 billion. Had these companies paid down their liabilities instead of using stock repurchases to inflate their stock prices, they would have been far better prepared to weather this emergency. Of course, higher share prices made their stock options more valuable, allowing top airline executives to pay themselves $666 million in compensation over the five-year period, while top cruise executives managed to earn $448 million. Now, taxpayers are unwillingly being called upon to bail out their extravagant behavior. A widely circulated meme on social media offered another reason why cruise lines were supposedly unworthy of government bailouts: although they might be headquartered in the U.S., their ships are foreign-flagged to evade U.S. law. That nearly every major cruise line registers their ships somewhere outside the U.S. is hardly disputable. As a 2011 news report noted, only a single major cruise ship at the time was U.S.-flagged: "Only one major cruise ship—NCL America's Pride of America—is registered in the United States, according to data from CyberCruises.com." Most of the big boats fly Bahamian flags, but other popular registries include Panama, Bermuda, Italy, Malta, and the Netherlands. In fact, according to the Cruise Lines International Association, 90% of commercial vessels calling on U.S. ports fly foreign flags. The three cruise lines mentioned in the meme—Disney, Celebrity, and Carnival—do indeed engage in this practice. It's not difficult to verify that Disney cruise ships are registered in the Bahamas, Celebrity ships in Malta, and Carnival ships in Panama. Of course, the cruise industry and its critics offer differing reasons for why cruise ships are flagged in countries other than the U.S. The Cruise Lines International Association (CLIA) maintains that there are many factors determining where a cruise ship—or any maritime vessel—is flagged. Those determinations are made by individual cruise lines and other ship operators based on various factors, including the capabilities of the flag to deliver the necessary services, the representation and reputation of the flag in the international shipping community, the performance of the flag state, the pool of seafarers able to meet the needs of the flag, and the flag's fees, charges, and taxes. This can be viewed as a robust free-market debate. Some maintain that burdensome U.S. regulations have forced cruise operators to plant their flags elsewhere, while others argue that these corporations seek to attract American dollars while skirting American safety and consumer protection laws. On the other hand, an academic paper by Caitlin E. Burke of the University of Florida about "Legal Issues Relevant to Cruise Ships" observed that reflagging of ships has long been used as a means of avoiding U.S. federal taxes, labor and safety laws, environmental laws, lawsuits, criminal investigations, and other regulations. Aside from the majority of revenue generated by U.S. passengers, cruise lines are independent of the U.S. economy. Even though nearly 75 percent of passengers are U.S. citizens, cruise line corporations and their ships are not traditionally American-owned or registered. Cruise line companies are not concerned about increasing minimum wage, rising insurance premiums, or higher corporate taxes. They escape federal taxes and labor laws by registering their corporations and vessels in foreign countries such as Panama, Liberia, and the Bahamas. In fact, employees of cruise lines are often mistreated due to lax labor laws, and worst of all, they find little to no recourse in pursuing litigation. Likewise, a U.S. citizen passenger faces the same predicament. A vessel's country of registration is commonly referred to as the "flag of convenience" (FOC). Flagging a ship under a foreign flag for the convenience of the cruise line is nothing new, nor is it rare. The majority of cruise ships today are registered in Panama, Liberia, or the Bahamas. It is important to note that many vessels within the same fleet are often registered in different countries. For example, Carnival Corporation has flagged its cruise vessel Celebration under Panama and Destiny under the Bahamas. Cruise lines often avoid drawing attention to the FOC by using the term "headquartered in Miami, Florida." While the majority of these cruise lines have their headquarters in Miami, they are not registered in the U.S. Thus, U.S. laws do not apply, and passengers are at the mercy of maritime law. The practice of ship reflagging is common and regular. Whether cruise lines headquartered in the U.S. but operating ships registered in foreign countries "deserve" government bailouts in a time of pandemic is a subjective issue with no definitive answer, but certainly, some critics have argued that they do not. Even in a crisis, companies with prudent balance sheets will survive and, in time, thrive. Despite what politicians might tell you, the airplanes and ships of imprudent companies are physical property that will not suddenly disappear. They will fly or sail again under the same or a different name, but hopefully with cheaper prices, better service, and different executives. Like a college student sleeping off a hangover, a crisis is a time to sober up by removing debt from the system. It's not time for another drink.

['profit']

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. As the COVID-19 coronavirus disease pandemic of March 2020 threatened to shut down businesses across America for an extended period of time, the U.S. government faced the difficult task of deciding which industries should be provided economic assistance to keep them afloat for the duration. Public sentiment in some quarters was strongly against government bailouts for businesses such as airlines and cruise companies, on the grounds that over the last several years many of the major operators had spent billions of dollars in profits buying up their own stock rather than paying down their debts. In USA Today, John M. Griffin and James M. Griffin wrote:That nearly every major cruise line registers their ships somewhere outside the U.S. is hardly a disputable point. As a 2011 news report noted, only a single major cruise ship at the time was U.S.-flagged:The three cruise lines called out by name in the meme -- Disney, Celebrity, and Carnival -- do indeed engage in this practice. It's not difficult to verify that Disney cruise ships are registered in the Bahamas, Celebrity ships in Malta, and Carnival ships in Panama. Of course, the cruise industry and their critics offer differing reasons for why cruise ships are flagged in countries other than the U.S., with the former asserting that:On the other hand, an academic paper by Caitlin E. Burke of the University of Florida about "Legal Issues Relevant to Cruise Ships" made no bones of observing that reflagging of ships had long been used as a means of avoiding U.S. federal taxes, labor and safety laws, environmental laws, lawsuits, criminal investigations, and other regulations:That the practice of ship-reflagging is common and regular is undeniable. Whether cruise lines headquartered in the U.S. but operating ships registered in foreign countries "deserve" government bailouts in a time of pandemic is a subjective issue with no definitive answer, but certainly some critics have argued that they do not:

Was it stated by Michael Bloomberg that Donald Trump is a 'con artist' and a 'cheat'?

['Michael Bloomberg did call Donald Trump\'s candidacy a "con," but he didn\'t refer to Trump as a "con artist" and a "cheat."']

A graphic featuring an image of former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg next to a quote ostensibly attributed to him about Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump, referring to the GOP candidate as a "con artist" and a "cheat," has been widely circulated on social media. The text of this image first started circulating in July 2016, shortly after Bloomberg made an appearance at the Democratic National Convention to endorse Hillary Clinton. Bloomberg issued several remarks critical of Donald Trump during his DNC speech, including referring to his candidacy as a "con" and mocking his business acumen, but he did not say the words attributed to him above. A full transcript of Bloomberg's speech can be found here, while the relevant portion has been reproduced below: "I'm a New Yorker, and New Yorkers know a con when we see one! Trump says he'll punish manufacturers that move to Mexico or China, but the clothes he sells are made overseas in low-wage factories. He says he wants to put Americans back to work, but he games the US visa system so he can hire temporary foreign workers at low wages. He says he wants to deport 11 million undocumented people, but he seems to have no problem hiring them. What did I miss here?! Truth be told, the richest thing about Donald Trump is his hypocrisy. He wants you to believe that we can solve our biggest problems by deporting Mexicans and shutting out Muslims. He wants you to believe that erecting trade barriers will bring back good jobs. He's wrong on both counts. We can only solve our biggest problems if we come together and embrace the freedoms that our Founding Fathers established right here in Philadelphia, which permitted our ancestors to create the great American exceptionalism that all of us now enjoy. Donald Trump doesn't understand that. Hillary Clinton does. And we can only create good jobs if we make smarter investments in infrastructure and do more to support small businesses, not stiff them. I understand the appeal of a businessman president. But Trump's business plan is a disaster in the making. He would make it harder for small businesses to compete, do great damage to our economy, threaten the retirement savings of millions of Americans, lead to greater debt and more unemployment, erode our influence in the world, and make our communities less safe. The bottom line is: Trump is a risky, reckless, and radical choice. And we can't afford to make that choice. Nonetheless, some newspapers misquoted Bloomberg and reported that he had referred to Trump as a "con artist." It was Florida Senator Marco Rubio who referred to Trump (more than once) as a "con artist" during the campaign for the Republican nomination. "We are so excited about what lies ahead for our campaign," Rubio said. "You see, just five days ago, we began to unmask the true nature of the front-runner so far in this race. Five days ago, we began to explain to the American people that Donald Trump is a con artist. Two weeks from tonight, right here in Florida, we are going to send a message loud and clear. We are going to send the message that the party of Lincoln and Reagan and the presidency of the United States will never be held by a con artist."

['economy']

False

The text of this image first started circulating in July 2016, shortly after Bloomberg made an appearance at the Democratic National Convention to endorse Hillary Clinton. Bloomberg issued several remarks critical of Donald Trump during his DNC speech, including referring to his candidacy as a "con" and mocking his business acumen, but he did not say the words attributed to him above.A full transcript of Bloomberg's speech can be found here, while the relevant portion has been reproduced below:Nonetheless, some newspapers misquoted Bloomberg and reported that he had referred to Trump as a "con artist":It was Florida senator Marco Rubio who referred to Trump (more than once) as a "con artist" during the campaign for the Republican nomination:

Drilling Rig Tornado

['Photograph taken in west Texas shows a tornado funnel and lightning bolt alongside an oil rig?']

Claim: A photograph taken in West Texas shows a tornado funnel and lightning bolt alongside a drilling rig. Example: [Collected via e-mail, July 2008] Drilling Rig Talk about your one-in-a-million photo. Imagine this... You are working the night shift on a drilling rig in West Texas, south of the small town of Ft. Stockton. It is very dark, and there have been thunderstorms in the area. The only lights in the vicinity are those on the drilling rig and some faint red glows from a nearby radio tower. You begin to wonder where that freight train sound is coming from since there are no tracks near the rig. A friendly bolt of lightning gives you the answer... one you may not have wanted to know. Remember that these monsters frequently happen at night. Origins: The photograph displayed above began circulating in mid-2008 with text claiming that it was taken in the West Texas town of Fort Stockton. However, although elements of the image are real, the underlying photograph was neither snapped in 2008 nor in Texas, and the image itself has been digitally manipulated to add a drilling rig that was not present in the original. The original image was forwarded around the Internet in the wake of a series of violent storms that hit Missouri in March 2006, with 44 different tornadoes touching down in the state on March 11-12, leaving 10 people dead and more than 100 injured, and destroying or damaging over 1,000 homes. Shortly afterward, the striking tornado funnel and lightning bolt photograph began to circulate, accompanied by text claiming it had been taken in Sedalia, Missouri, during that series of storms: "This photo was taken in Sedalia, Missouri, on 3/12/06 when over 113 tornadoes were reported. This was an excellent shot. This was posted in one of my weather groups, and as long as we give full credit where credit is due, credit is really due on this shot... Amazing... But it does make you wonder... Look at our logo... Mother Nature imitating art..." Although this version of the image was genuine, it was not snapped in Sedalia, Missouri, and it long antedates the series of storms that hit that state in March 2006. As recorded by the National Weather Service Forecast Office in Melbourne, Florida, the tornado funnel/lightning bolt photograph was taken near Lake Okeechobee, Florida, on June 15, 1991. It has been available for purchase (in poster form) through the Tornado Project's online store since at least mid-2001. Photograph purchase Last updated: May 20, 2009.

['credit']

False

The original image was forwarded around the Internet in the wake of a series of violent storms which hit Missouri in March 2006, with 44 different tornadoes touching down in the state on March 11-12, leaving 10 people dead and more than 100 injured, and destroying or damaging over 1,000 homes. Shortly afterwards, the striking tornado funnel and lightning bolt photograph began to circulate accompanied by text claiming it had been taken in Sedalia, Missouri, during that series of storms:Although this version of the image was genuine, it was not snapped in Sedalia, Missouri, and it long antedates the series of storms which hit that state in March 2006. As recorded by the National Weather Service Forecast Office in Melbourne, Florida, the tornado funnel/lightning bolt photograph was taken near Lake Okeechobee, Florida, on 15 June 1991. It has been available for purchase (in poster form) through the Tornado Project's on-line store since at least mid-2001.

IRS Notification: Rejected Federal Tax Return/Payment or Notice of Refund

['Is the IRS sending out e-mail notices about tax refunds or stimulus payments?']

Phishing bait: Notice from the IRS indicating the recipient's electronic tax return or payment has been rejected or that the recipient has a refund coming. Examples: [Collected via e-mail, October 2010] Subject: Your Federal Tax Payment ID 010357109 is rejected. Urgent Report. Your Federal Tax Payment ID: 01037524 has been rejected. Return Reason Code R21 - The identification number used in the Company Identification Field is not valid. Please, check the information and refer to Code R21 to get details about your company payment in transaction contacts section: EFTPS: The Electronic Federal Tax Payment System PLEASE NOTE: Your tax payment is due regardless of EFTPS online availability. In case of an emergency, you can always make your tax payment by calling the EFTPS. [Collected via e-mail, January 2008] After the last annual calculations of your fiscal activity we have determined that you are eligible to receive a Stimulus Payment. Please submit the Stimulus Payment Online Form in order to process it. A Stimulus Payment can be delayed for a variety of reasons.For example submitting invalid records or applying after the deadline. To submit your Stimulus Payment form, please download the document attached to your email. Note: If filing or preparation fees were deducted from your 2007 Refund or you received a refund anticipation loan, you will be receiving a check instead of a direct deposit. Regards,Internal Revenue Servicestimulus.payment@irs.gov [Collected via e-mail, August 2007] From: "Internal Revenue Service" Subject: IRS Notification - Fiscal ActivityDate: Sun, 26 Aug 2007 23:57:35 +0300 After the last annual calculations of your fiscal activity we have determined that you are eligible to receive a tax refund of $268.32. Please submit the tax refund request and allow us 6-9 days in order to process it. A refund can be delayed for a variety of reasons. For example submitting invalid records or applying after the deadline. To access the form for your tax refund, please click here Regards,Internal Revenue Service Copyright 2007, Internal Revenue Service U.S.A. All rights reserved. [Collected via e-mail, February 2009] Re: US Stimulus Check Information--------------------------------------------------------------------If you're one of the millions of Americans struggling in today's economy, help is available. You've been chosen for the chance to get a US Stimulus Check based on your annual income level. (Participation required. See below for details.) Refer to the chart below to determine the amount of money you can receive: --------------------------------------------------------------------$0 - $35,000........................$709 US Stimulus Check--------------------------------------------------------------------$35,000 - $70,000.................$615 US Stimulus Check--------------------------------------------------------------------$70,000+.............................$504 US Stimulus Check-------------------------------------------------------------------- Make your selection here, then follow the instructions on our website before this offer expires. [Collected via e-mail, July 2009] Tax Refund Notification After the last annual calculations of your fiscal activity, we have determined that you are eligible to receive tax refund of 488.50 GBP. You are require to submit the tax refund request using the tax refund reference below and allow up 6-9 working days in order to process it [link elided] Note : A refund can be delayed for different reasons, for example submitting invalid records or applying after deadline. we apologise for any inconveniences and thank you for your co-operation. Yours Sincerely HM Revenue & Customs [Collected via e-mail, June 2011] Department of Treasury Internal Revenue Source Important information about your tax return We are unable to process your tax return We recived your tax return. However, we are unable to process the return as field. Our records indicate that the person identified as the primary taxpayer or spouse on the tax return did not provided all the required documents shown on the tax form. Our records are based on information received from the Social Security Administration. Based on this information, the tax account for the individual has been locked What you need to do Print out the attached notification and list of missing documents, fill it in, add the documents and send the following information to the adress shown in the attached notification. List of required documents: 1. A copy of this letter 2. Notification letter 3. A photocopy of valid U.S. Federal or State Government issued identification. Keep this notice for your records. If you need assistance, please don'thesitate to contact us [Collected via e-mail, January 2012] IRS notice, The analysis of the last annual calculations of your fiscal activity has indicated that you are entitled to receive a tax refund of $115.25 Please submit a request of the tax refund and a processing of the request will take 7-14 days. A tax refund can be delayed by different reasons. For instance submission of invalid records or sending after the deadline. Please find the form of your tax refund attached and fill out it and send a report. Regards,Internal Revenue Service. Origins: Notices purporting to come from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) make good phishing bait for a number of reasons: phishing Notices from institutions of the federal government (especially an agency with the ominous reputation of the IRS) grab people's attention. Unlike other phishing schemes that emulate mailings from various private financial institutions (e.g., Bank of America) and are therefore easily recognized as phony by many recipients (because they do no business with those companies), a forged IRS notice has the potential to take in a much larger pool of victims, as most adult U.S. residents have dealings with that agency. Many people find the federal income tax filing process complicated and confusing, so the idea that they might have unclaimed refunds or payments waiting for them to claim seems plausible. An August 2007 mass phish e-mailing (reprised in January 2012) took advantage of those points, spamming millions of Internet users with phony notices that advised recipients they were eligible to receive tax refunds (of amounts such as $109.30 or $268.32) and invited them to click on a link that took them to a form through which they could claim those refunds. Of course, the link included in the messages didn't actually send users to the genuine IRS web site; it redirected claimants to an imposter site that instructed them to enter sensitive personal information (e.g., Social Security number and debit card number) in order to "deposit" their refunds. Similarly, January 2009 versions redirected claimants to an imposter site with a form for them to fill out in order to claim stimulus payments, and an October 2010 version used the lure of claiming that the recipients' Electronic Federal Tax Payments (EFTPS) had been rejected due to invalid information and sent them to a phony imitation of the real EFTPS site to enter new information. The IRS never offers refunds through e-mail or sends out unsolicited e-mails to taxpayers. When the IRS needs to contact a taxpayer, it sends notice via U.S. Mail, and every such notice includes a telephone number that the recipient can call for confirmation. Should you need to visit the IRS web site for any reason, go there directly (by entering the www.irs.gov URL into your web browser) rather than following links in e-mail messages. The IRS says about such e-mails that: IRS The IRS does not initiate taxpayer communications through e-mail. In addition, the IRS does not request detailed personal information through e-mail or ask taxpayers for the PIN numbers, passwords or similar secret access information for their credit card, bank or other financial accounts. Do not open any attachments to questionable e-mails, which may contain malicious code that will infect your computer. Please be advised that the IRS does not initiate contact with taxpayers via e-mails. The EFTPS web site also states that: EFTPS EFTPS values your privacy and security and will never attempt to contact you via e-mail. If you ever receive an e-mail that claims to be from EFTPS or from a sender you do not recognize that mentions a payment made through EFTPS, forward the e-mail to phishing@irs.gov or call the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration at 1.800.366.4484. Last updated: 9 January 2012

['loan']

NEI

Origins: Notices purporting to come from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) make good phishing bait for a number of reasons:The IRS says about such e-mails that:The EFTPS web site also states that:

Was a keto diet pill promoted on 'Shark Tank'?

['Nobody would ever lie in an ad for a diet product, right?']

In November 2019, several readers began inquiring about the existence of a keto pill that had allegedly been funded through the popular NBC TV show "Shark Tank" a program in which affluent judges decide for or against investing their personal funds in various entrepreneurial ventures pitched to them in front of the camera. Keto, in this context, is a form of dieting that proponents claim forces your body to metabolize body fat in the absence of other carbs like glucose. This post is not about the science behind such claims, but instead about the business of selling supplements with fake celebrity endorsements. For the record, no keto-based product has ever been pitched or funded on "Shark Tank." form of dieting In at least one notable instance, a product named PureFit KETO was marketed as if it had been successfully pitched on "Shark Tank." However, on June 22, 2019, the Better Business Bureau investigated the company, finding that the images appearing on PureFit KETO's website were taken from a separate 'Shark Tank' episode that does not mention PureFit KETO. Despite this, Amazon, among others, includes the "Shark Tank" claim in its product listing at the time of this reporting in late 2019. marketed finding Shark Tank" claim Claims of a "Shark Tank" approved keto pill are just one of a series of iterations of a broader scam. Among the many ways some people seek passive income from online marketing is to sell supplements via dropshipping a practice in which the person advertising and selling a given product never actually has physical possession of the product in question. The role of the dropshipper is to move the product by directing potential customers to order directly from a supplier and thereby earning a fraction of the profits from a sale in the process. Myriad individuals in this space evidently use a variety of dubious practices to juice those sales. dropshipping One such method is to lie about who has endorsed the product, as evidenced in claims that PureFit Keto had been funded on "Shark Tank." Similar products have also been advertised as if famous celebrities use them. For example, marketers of a product named Keto Fit claimed the supplement was endorsed by model Chrissy Teigen, providing made-up quotes from her to sell the product. Teigen publicly repudiated the practice when it was brought to her attention in January 2019: Claims of Keto Fits celebrity endorsements dont end with Teigen. False claims about Keto Fits endorsements include alleged support from celebrities such as Demi Lovato and Jameela Jamil. In some cases, claims of support come from websites designed to look like existing media properties the Teigen claims were made on a website pretending to be the popular site Bored Panda. In other cases, a common marketing method is the creation of fake diet pill reviews on blogs that exist solely to review that one keto product while highlighting impossible-to-miss links to order the product. Demi Lovato reviews on blogs Though these various keto products often change names the products are frequently rebranded into similar-sounding names over time the product generally remains the same. These products, with names like KetoFit, KetoBurn, KetoPlus, or KetoMelt, are all if you trust these companies to accurately report their contents made up of the same chemical: Beta-hydroxybutyrate (BHB). rebranded BHB is a ketone that the body is able under certain circumstances to burn for energy instead of glucose. Suggesting this widely available nutritional supplement is uniquely worthy to be an invention worthy of "Shark Tank," or a secret product used by the Hollywood elite is, on its face, absurd. More to the point, however, no keto diet pill has ever been discussed on the show "Shark Tank." a ketone Masood, Wajeed and Kalyan R. Uppaluri. Ketogenic Diet. StatPearls. As updated on 21 March 2019. BBB.com. PureFit KETO. Accessed 19 November 2019. Amazon.com. Purefit Keto Weight Loss Pills for Men and Women - Ketogenic Diet Supplement - Burn Fat for Energy - BHB Formula (1 Month). Accessed 19 November 2019. Shopify. The Ultimate Guide to Dropshipping. Accessed 19 November 2019. Brar, Faith. BHB: The Miracle Molecule of the Keto Diet? StatPearls. 28 September 2017.

['profit']

False

Keto, in this context, is a form of dieting that proponents claim forces your body to metabolize body fat in the absence of other carbs like glucose. This post is not about the science behind such claims, but instead about the business of selling supplements with fake celebrity endorsements. For the record, no keto-based product has ever been pitched or funded on "Shark Tank."In at least one notable instance, a product named PureFit KETO was marketed as if it had been successfully pitched on "Shark Tank." However, on June 22, 2019, the Better Business Bureau investigated the company, finding that the images appearing on PureFit KETO's website were taken from a separate 'Shark Tank' episode that does not mention PureFit KETO. Despite this, Amazon, among others, includes the "Shark Tank" claim in its product listing at the time of this reporting in late 2019.Claims of a "Shark Tank" approved keto pill are just one of a series of iterations of a broader scam. Among the many ways some people seek passive income from online marketing is to sell supplements via dropshipping a practice in which the person advertising and selling a given product never actually has physical possession of the product in question. The role of the dropshipper is to move the product by directing potential customers to order directly from a supplier and thereby earning a fraction of the profits from a sale in the process. Myriad individuals in this space evidently use a variety of dubious practices to juice those sales. Claims of Keto Fits celebrity endorsements dont end with Teigen. False claims about Keto Fits endorsements include alleged support from celebrities such as Demi Lovato and Jameela Jamil. In some cases, claims of support come from websites designed to look like existing media properties the Teigen claims were made on a website pretending to be the popular site Bored Panda. In other cases, a common marketing method is the creation of fake diet pill reviews on blogs that exist solely to review that one keto product while highlighting impossible-to-miss links to order the product.Though these various keto products often change names the products are frequently rebranded into similar-sounding names over time the product generally remains the same. These products, with names like KetoFit, KetoBurn, KetoPlus, or KetoMelt, are all if you trust these companies to accurately report their contents made up of the same chemical: Beta-hydroxybutyrate (BHB).BHB is a ketone that the body is able under certain circumstances to burn for energy instead of glucose. Suggesting this widely available nutritional supplement is uniquely worthy to be an invention worthy of "Shark Tank," or a secret product used by the Hollywood elite is, on its face, absurd. More to the point, however, no keto diet pill has ever been discussed on the show "Shark Tank."

On Lee Fishers watch, almost nine out of 10 jobs that Ohio lost were lost to other states, not to other countries.

[]

Rob Portman makes a unique bogeyman for his opponent : Hes a Republican who not only supported foreign trade policies, which his foes blame for Ohio job losses, but he also personally advised a president on expanding trade. He personifies the policy.Yet Portman, a Republican running for U.S. Senate, has a uniquely good comeback.He says that while many companies have survived thanks to the export opportunities of foreign trade, Ohio lost lots of other jobs to other states on the watch of his opponent, Lee Fisher -- the irony being that Fisher, a Democrat and Ohios lieutenant governor, was also Ohios development director, in charge of bringing new jobs to the state.Its a blame game with resumes perfectly tailored for the respective attacks. But whos more to blame for Ohios job losses? The guy who promoted trade with China and Mexico and saw jobs cross those borders? Or the guy who as Ohio development director saw too much development cross state borders, not international ones? Portman, appearing with Fisher before The Plain Dealer editorial board on Sept. 14, said that if you want to compare the validity of these opposing claims, data from the state backs up his: more jobs went to other states than went abroad.It may surprise you to learn that when you look at the states own data in terms of job loss, that almost nine out of 10 jobs we have lost in the last three and a half years during the Strickland-Fisher administration have gone to other states, not to other countries, Portman said, referring to Fisher and Gov. Ted Strickland. Think about that. So companies have left Cleveland to go to Indiana. Companies have left Cleveland to go across the border to Michigan. And yet its easy in a campaign to fan the flames of protectionism and to claim that the jobs went to Mexico or Canada or, more likely, China.We asked about that data, went to thestates websiteto see for ourselves, and laid it out in an Excel file. What we saw, however, were alternate versions of the same reality -- one that supports Portman and yet simultaneously presents as many holes as aged Emmental cheese.So before we put this to the Truth-O-Meter, let us show you the numbers, starting with Portmans view of them.The states own data comes from the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services, or ODJFS. In concert with the U.S. Department of Labor, ODJFS publishes quarterly reports of Mass Layoff Events, based on surveys of companies with 50 or more initial unemployment claims filed within a five-week period. The surveys, conducted by telephone, ask why the layoffs occurred and whether they were associated with jobs being moved from one place to another. If so, the survey asks where these jobs went: Somewhere else in Ohio? Some other state? Some other country?Reviewing these quarterly reports, we found missing numbers and an error the state had made. After we discussed this with ODJFS, the agency went back and updated one quarterly set of numbers. That changed the outcome of the tally, but only slightly. Because Portman relied on the old data, we will still use the old data to evaluate his claim.From January 2007 through March of 2010, 842 jobs were lost in Ohio because companies moved operations overseas, the old reports showed. Thats a small number compared with the 5,215 jobs lost in Ohio because companies moved their operations to other states, as the state data showed.Put another way, it means that of the jobs that left Ohio, only 13.9 percent went overseas -- and 86 percent went to other states. Now consider Portmans words: The states own data shows that almost nine out of ten jobs we have lost in the last three and a half years during the Strickland-Fisher administration have gone to other states, not to other countries.Eighty-six percent is close enough to nine out of ten. So Portman is right -- yes?Well, yes -- except for the caveats. Lets start with those from the state. ODJFS quarterly reports note that employers with fewer than 50 workers are not part of the surveys, so these numbers do not include small companies. That exclusion partly explains why the total number of lost jobs counted in these Ohio quarterly reports -- 264,016 since January 2007, including the vast majority that had little to do with the movement of work -- is lower than youll see in other reports of job losses.Then theres the U.S. Department of Labor, whose Bureau of Labor Statistics sets the survey standards and points out that movement of work is defined as work that will be performed by a company or for a company in a new location. Movement is easy to report when a company shutters one plant and reopens another, whether in Juarez, Mexico, or Kokomo, Ind. The definition also applies if a company signs a contract to have its widgets manufactured in Shanghai, China. These are hypothetical examples, because the state reports do not give the exact place of relocation. But if a large company with a big supply chain starts using a widget supplier in Mexico and stops buying from a supplier in Ohio, and that Ohio supplier loses so much revenue that it shuts down, those lost jobs are not counted in the movement of work column. Those jobs, then, do not wind up in Portmans comparison.Thats the biggest problem. We asked Policy Matters Ohio, a think tank, for itslatest report on trade adjustment assistance, or TAA, a federal assistance program for workers displaced because of foreign trade. In 2009, 20,677 Ohio workers were deemed potentially eligible for the program, and 9,455 more were in 2008, according to TAA certification reports reviewed by Policy Matters. That suggests that job losses from trade were massively higher than those attributable to companies moving out of state.But some of those workers eligible for TAA wound up keeping their jobs or getting rehired, such as when General Motors Lordstown plant began rehiring. Others found work elsewhere; a precise number does not exist, which presents a problem for all of these comparisons. Everyone is talking about fruit, but theyre often comparing apples with persimmons.PolitiFact Ohio has previously examined claims by Strickland and Fisher that trade deals cost specific numbers of job losses in Ohio. We have found trend lines that appear believable, but the reports and statistics the officials cite rely on extrapolations or suppositions. Someday the comparative data may exist; until then, each side in this debate simply argues a point that sounds as if it could be true -- and certainly rings true to those affected -- but that lacks the accuracy that advocates suggest when they trot out their numbers.So we return to Portmans claim. Portmans spokeswoman, Jessica Towhey, says the candidate made clear that he was referring solely to state data and the movement of jobs out of state, compared with those moved out of the country, when he said that nine out of 10 jobs lost in Ohio went to other states, not other countries. In such a narrow construct, Portmans statement might be considered accurate but there is more to this picture. Here are the numbers as updated: From Jan. 1, 2007, through March 31, 2010, Ohio lost 4,820 jobs due to company moves out of state (not the 5,215 in the reports that existed when Portman viewed them). It lost 1,125 more when companies closed operations in one part of the state but relocated elsewhere in Ohio. And it lost 842 jobs when companies moved operations abroad.This is out of 264,016 jobs counted as lost altogether in this particular series of reports -- reports that ODJFS spokesman Ben Johnson say capture just a subset of all layoffs.When a statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information, the Truth-O-Meter says it is mostly true. Thats how we find Portmans claim: accurate in a narrow context but needing clarification, and so, Mostly True.

['Ohio', 'Economy']

True

Portman, appearing with Fisher before The Plain Dealer editorial board on Sept. 14, said that if you want to compare the validity of these opposing claims, data from the state backs up his: more jobs went to other states than went abroad.It may surprise you to learn that when you look at the states own data in terms of job loss, that almost nine out of 10 jobs we have lost in the last three and a half years during the Strickland-Fisher administration have gone to other states, not to other countries, Portman said, referring to Fisher and Gov. Ted Strickland. Think about that. So companies have left Cleveland to go to Indiana. Companies have left Cleveland to go across the border to Michigan. And yet its easy in a campaign to fan the flames of protectionism and to claim that the jobs went to Mexico or Canada or, more likely, China.We asked about that data, went to thestates websiteto see for ourselves, and laid it out in an Excel file. What we saw, however, were alternate versions of the same reality -- one that supports Portman and yet simultaneously presents as many holes as aged Emmental cheese.So before we put this to the Truth-O-Meter, let us show you the numbers, starting with Portmans view of them.The states own data comes from the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services, or ODJFS. In concert with the U.S. Department of Labor, ODJFS publishes quarterly reports of Mass Layoff Events, based on surveys of companies with 50 or more initial unemployment claims filed within a five-week period. The surveys, conducted by telephone, ask why the layoffs occurred and whether they were associated with jobs being moved from one place to another. If so, the survey asks where these jobs went: Somewhere else in Ohio? Some other state? Some other country?Reviewing these quarterly reports, we found missing numbers and an error the state had made. After we discussed this with ODJFS, the agency went back and updated one quarterly set of numbers. That changed the outcome of the tally, but only slightly. Because Portman relied on the old data, we will still use the old data to evaluate his claim.From January 2007 through March of 2010, 842 jobs were lost in Ohio because companies moved operations overseas, the old reports showed. Thats a small number compared with the 5,215 jobs lost in Ohio because companies moved their operations to other states, as the state data showed.Put another way, it means that of the jobs that left Ohio, only 13.9 percent went overseas -- and 86 percent went to other states. Now consider Portmans words: The states own data shows that almost nine out of ten jobs we have lost in the last three and a half years during the Strickland-Fisher administration have gone to other states, not to other countries.Eighty-six percent is close enough to nine out of ten. So Portman is right -- yes?Well, yes -- except for the caveats. Lets start with those from the state. ODJFS quarterly reports note that employers with fewer than 50 workers are not part of the surveys, so these numbers do not include small companies. That exclusion partly explains why the total number of lost jobs counted in these Ohio quarterly reports -- 264,016 since January 2007, including the vast majority that had little to do with the movement of work -- is lower than youll see in other reports of job losses.Then theres the U.S. Department of Labor, whose Bureau of Labor Statistics sets the survey standards and points out that movement of work is defined as work that will be performed by a company or for a company in a new location. Movement is easy to report when a company shutters one plant and reopens another, whether in Juarez, Mexico, or Kokomo, Ind. The definition also applies if a company signs a contract to have its widgets manufactured in Shanghai, China. These are hypothetical examples, because the state reports do not give the exact place of relocation.We asked Policy Matters Ohio, a think tank, for itslatest report on trade adjustment assistance, or TAA, a federal assistance program for workers displaced because of foreign trade. In 2009, 20,677 Ohio workers were deemed potentially eligible for the program, and 9,455 more were in 2008, according to TAA certification reports reviewed by Policy Matters. That suggests that job losses from trade were massively higher than those attributable to companies moving out of state.But some of those workers eligible for TAA wound up keeping their jobs or getting rehired, such as when General Motors Lordstown plant began rehiring. Others found work elsewhere; a precise number does not exist, which presents a problem for all of these comparisons. Everyone is talking about fruit, but theyre often comparing apples with persimmons.PolitiFact Ohio has previously examined claims by Strickland and Fisher that trade deals cost specific numbers of job losses in Ohio. We have found trend lines that appear believable, but the reports and statistics the officials cite rely on extrapolations or suppositions. Someday the comparative data may exist; until then, each side in this debate simply argues a point that sounds as if it could be true -- and certainly rings true to those affected -- but that lacks the accuracy that advocates suggest when they trot out their numbers.So we return to Portmans claim. Portmans spokeswoman, Jessica Towhey, says the candidate made clear that he was referring solely to state data and the movement of jobs out of state, compared with those moved out of the country, when he said that nine out of 10 jobs lost in Ohio went to other states, not other countries. In such a narrow construct, Portmans statement might be considered accurate but there is more to this picture. Here are the numbers as updated: From Jan. 1, 2007, through March 31, 2010, Ohio lost 4,820 jobs due to company moves out of state (not the 5,215 in the reports that existed when Portman viewed them). It lost 1,125 more when companies closed operations in one part of the state but relocated elsewhere in Ohio. And it lost 842 jobs when companies moved operations abroad.This is out of 264,016 jobs counted as lost altogether in this particular series of reports -- reports that ODJFS spokesman Ben Johnson say capture just a subset of all layoffs.When a statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information, the Truth-O-Meter says it is mostly true. Thats how we find Portmans claim: accurate in a narrow context but needing clarification, and so, Mostly True.

In Wisconsin, even multimillionaires can be on BadgerCare because we don't even ask people what their income level is to qualify for free health care.

['There has always been an initial check to make sure peoplesincomes arebelow the threshold that qualifies for BadgerCare before they can be enrolled, according to the Wisconsin health department., But during the pandemic, federal law mandated that states could not perform typical checks to ensure that peoples incomes hadnt risen to a point that would disqualify them., That law is still in effect for all states, not just Wisconsin.', 'It ends March 31, after which states will need to start checking the qualifications of their enrollees, which number millions more in total than three years ago.']

As a new year and a new legislative session begin, Wisconsin Republicans are looking to place limits on government benefits to residents. That issue will appear on the ballot for the April election, as lawmakersvoted last monthto include an advisory referendum asking voters whether people should be required to look for work to receive welfare benefits. It also arose on the Assembly floor Jan. 19, in a speech from Speaker Robin Vos, R-Rochester, about BadgerCare,the states health care coverage programfor low-income people and people with disabilities. Heres his full quote: Wisconsin has been a national leader in so many ways. Preliminary data shows that we have more people on BadgerCare today than we did before the pandemic. Why? Because we dont even ask people what their income level is to qualify for free health insurance from the government. So, on Day One, you qualify. On Day Two, you win the lottery. Youre a multimillionaire. You still get the benefits from the state. How is that right? Its not. There are a couple of claims in there one being that Wisconsin has more people on BadgerCare today than before the pandemic, which we noted ina prior fact-check is correct. But what about his other claim that you could be a multimillionaire and still get BadgerCare benefits? Is he right about that, too? Lets take a look. One important point that Vos statement doesnt quite make clear: There is always an initial check of peoples incomes to make sure they fit within the programs requirements before they can enroll in BadgerCare. Proof of income has always been required, Elizabeth Goodsitt, a state Department of Health Services spokesperson, said in an email. A spokesperson for Vos said the speakers phrasing, Day One, you qualify, referred to that first check. Fair enough. So what if the next day, a person gets a large influx of money and moves above the programs income limits? What happens next changed as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. Before the pandemic, people were required to report an income change that could disqualify them from receiving benefits, and there were other external checks to ensure their incomes remained below that threshold. When the COVID-19 pandemic began, federal lawmakers passed theFamilies First Coronavirus Response Act. Among other things, it increased the number of federal dollars that states could be reimbursed for their Medicaid programs. To get that increase, though, states had toagree to keep people continuously enrolledin Medicaid coverage until the end of the public health emergency. The idea was to promote stable health care coverage during the pandemic. In other words, if people enrolled in BadgerCare in 2020, theyd have had coverage for the last almost three years without needing to renew it, even if their income changed. In a spending plan passed late last year, Congressset an end date for the continuous enrollment provision: March 31, 2023. After that date, Wisconsin and other states can start disenrolling people who no longer meet the requirements for that coverage. The law allows states a full year to complete that step and process renewals for those who will keep their coverage. This will surely take a while, with anestimated increase of almost 20 million people enrolledin Medicaid nationwide since the start of the pandemic, according to data from the Kaiser Family Foundation. Goodsitt said all members of BadgerCare will have their eligibility rechecked between June of this year and May 2024. Vos sidestepped that in his claim, suggesting its been a longstanding preferred practice of state policy. Still, since those eligibility checks are at least a few months away, a situation like Vos laid out is plausible at the moment. Vos argued that even a multimillionaire could receive BadgerCare benefits in Wisconsin, because, We dont even ask people what their income level is to qualify for free health care. But there is an initial income check to qualify for coverage. After that, starting on Day Two, a federal law passed during the pandemic prevents states from rechecking eligibility based on income though that will end this spring. So, the overnight millionaire scenario Vos describes could theoretically happen and individuals, because of a new job or other more modest income gains, could rise above the threshold. But Vos skirts past this not being something the state initiated, nor something the state can avoid. And it will end soon. We rate a statement Mostly True if it is accurate, but needs clarification or additional information. That fits here.

['Health Care', 'Public Health', 'Wealth', 'Wisconsin']

True

That issue will appear on the ballot for the April election, as lawmakersvoted last monthto include an advisory referendum asking voters whether people should be required to look for work to receive welfare benefits.It also arose on the Assembly floor Jan. 19, in a speech from Speaker Robin Vos, R-Rochester, about BadgerCare,the states health care coverage programfor low-income people and people with disabilities.There are a couple of claims in there one being that Wisconsin has more people on BadgerCare today than before the pandemic, which we noted ina prior fact-check is correct.When the COVID-19 pandemic began, federal lawmakers passed theFamilies First Coronavirus Response Act. Among other things, it increased the number of federal dollars that states could be reimbursed for their Medicaid programs.To get that increase, though, states had toagree to keep people continuously enrolledin Medicaid coverage until the end of the public health emergency. The idea was to promote stable health care coverage during the pandemic.In a spending plan passed late last year, Congressset an end date for the continuous enrollment provision: March 31, 2023. After that date, Wisconsin and other states can start disenrolling people who no longer meet the requirements for that coverage.The law allows states a full year to complete that step and process renewals for those who will keep their coverage. This will surely take a while, with anestimated increase of almost 20 million people enrolledin Medicaid nationwide since the start of the pandemic, according to data from the Kaiser Family Foundation.

The Replaced Rabbit

["A family legendarily replaced their neighbor's dead rabbit after mistakenly believing their own dog had killed it."]

A tale nearly identical in structure to the legend about the dead animal shipped by air freight (which handlers mistakenly thought had died in transit) is the following: dead animal A man moves to town and hunts around for an apartment to rent, but he's turned down by most landlords because of his large dog (mastiff, doberman, etc.). He finally secures a carriage house that's in the backyard of a house owned by two old women by assuring the ladies that the dog is perfectly friendly, which, of course, it is. The landladies have a rabbit hutch in the backyard which contains two white rabbits. Months pass, and everyone gets along just fine. The man had trained the dog not to pester the rabbits while he's away at work, and the dog is quite obedient. One night, though, the man returns from a long weekend away on business. His dog is beside itself with joy to see the master return, but it's late, the man is tired, so he plops right down in bed and falls asleep, leaving the dog outside. In the middle of the night the man is woken up by the strange sounds that his dog is making outside the bedroom window, a kind of muffled whimpering. When he opens the front door he sees the dog standing there with one of the rabbits in its mouth! After a quick smack or two on the head the dog drops the rabbit on the ground, and the man immediately picks the bunny up and brings it inside where it's light. The rabbit is brown with dirt but apparently undamaged, so the man rushes to wash it off and dry it. He slips out the door into the dark night, returns the rabbit to the hutch, and brings the dog inside. Thinking the women won't notice, he falls asleep. In the morning, as he's leaving the carriage house for work, he sees the two old ladies standing around the rabbit hutch, which he must pass by on his way out of the backyard. He figures everything's alright and the rabbit is unhurt, but when he walks up and says good morning he notices that the women are completely distraught and crying. In fact, one of the women is making the sign of the cross over and over again. The man knows that he's probably been caught, but he decides to be cagey and asks, "What happened? Did the rabbits die?" "Well, one of them did," replies one of the women, "but we buried him three days ago and now he's back in the hutch!" Both legends feature persons who, mistakenly believing themselves to be responsible for the death of someone else's pet, try to cover up their culpability by replacing the dead animals only to find that they have exacerbated an unfortunate situation by substituting a live (or seemingly live) pet in place of one that was already dead. A reader tried to slip one past "Dear Abby" advice columnist Jeanne Phillips by submitting an even more twisted version of this tale to her as a first-person experience in September 2004. To her credit, Ms. Phillips spotted it as an urban legend: DEAR ABBY: Last year, my husband's pet rabbit, "Blossom," died. My husband, "Edwin," went into the back yard one morning and found her dead in her cage. He buried her in our yard. Later that day, our neighbor's dog dug up the rabbit. When the neighbor came home, he found the little body on his doorstep. Thinking his dog had killed Blossom, he panicked. He ran out, bought another rabbit that looked just like Blossom, and placed her in our cage. When Edwin returned from work that night, he was stunned to find the rabbit sitting in its cage and immediately concluded that Blossom had returned from the dead. Ever since, my husband has treated the rabbit like a little deity. He built an altar for her and sits in front of her cage in the lotus position and talks to her. The neighbors have since moved, but last week I ran into the wife and she told me the story. Thinking it might help Edwin, I repeated the story to him. He became irate and accused me of trying to ruin the only miraculous thing that had ever happened to him. Should I insist that Edwin seek counseling, or should I continue to live with this? I really don't know where it will end. - At My Wit's End DEAR WIT'S END: You may not, but I do. It's going to end here and now. According to snopes.com, your rabbit tale is an urban legend, and so old it has whiskers. Thank you for sharing it with me. It's still a thigh-slapper. Variations: In some versions the dead pet or the "killer" pet is a cat. The rabbit's owners generally believe some demented person exhumed their pet and replaced it in its pen. In a few versions, however, they think they mistakenly buried the animal alive, and it clawed its way back to the surface, only to die of exhaustion after reaching its cage. The dog's owners learn that the rabbit was already dead from the police, or by talking to the rabbit's owners across the backyard fence. Sightings: We're told a non-talk show sighting of this legend appears in Jeff Foxworthy's 1989 recording, Sold Out, and this tale also formed the plot of an episode of The Chris Isaak Show ("Crimes and Punishment," original air date 26 March 2001). The same story plays out in the 2003 film, Dickie Roberts: Former Child Star. Dickie Roberts: Former Child Star Brunvand, Jan Harold. Curses! Broiled Again! New York: W. W. Norton, 1989. ISBN 0-393-30711-5 (pp. 151-156). Brunvand, Jan Harold. Too Good to Be True. New York: W. W. Norton, 1999. ISBN 0-393-04734-2 (pp. 40-43). de Vos, Gail. Tales, Rumors and Gossip. Englewood: Libraries Unlimited, 1996. ISBN 1-56308-190-3 (p. 216). Phillips, Jeanne. "Hare-Raising Tale Is Too Good to Be True." [syndicated column] Universal Press Syndicate. 8 September 2004. Healey, Phil and Rick Glanvill. Gruesome Urban Myths. Bucks, Great Britain: Ginn and Company, 1995. ISBN 0-602-26200-3 (pp. 32-35). The Big Book of Urban Legends. New York: Paradox Press, 1994. ISBN 1-56389-165-4 (p. 41). Healey, Phil and Rick Glanvill. Now! That's What I Call Urban Myths. London: Virgin Books, 1996. ISBN 0-86369-969-3 (pp. 99-100).

['returns']

True

A tale nearly identical in structure to the legend about the dead animal shipped by air freight (which handlers mistakenly thought had died in transit) is the following:We're told a non-talk show sighting of this legend appears in Jeff Foxworthy's 1989 recording, Sold Out, and this tale also formed the plot of an episode of The Chris Isaak Show ("Crimes and Punishment," original air date 26 March 2001). The same story plays out in the 2003 film, Dickie Roberts: Former Child Star.

Since 1990, production of metals in the U.S. has held roughly constant, but the number of people employed in the industry has fallen steadily.

[]

As President Donald Trump weighed imposing tariffs on foreign steel and aluminum, some commentators warned that this would be a misguided approach. Noah Smith, a columnist for Bloomberg View and a former finance professor, wrote a column in which he noted, among other things, that a crucial issue facing metals-producing industries isn't foreign competition; it's automation. Tariffs, Smith wrote, won't bring back good jobs at steel and aluminum factories. Since 1990, production of metals in the U.S. has remained roughly constant, but the number of people employed in the industry has fallen steadily. That's due to technological improvements, he wrote: productivity has improved, even as demand has stayed more or less constant. Mathematically, that means fewer jobs for steel and aluminum workers. Tariffs won't change that equation. If anything, by hurting downstream industries like car and equipment manufacturers, the new import taxes will probably kill more factory jobs than they save. We can't predict what will happen in the future, but we wondered whether Smith is right about the trend lines for production and employment in the American metals-producing sector since 1990. When we took a closer look, we found that he's on target. We found data for employment in the primary metals-producing sector, which incorporates five subcategories: iron and steel mills, steel product manufacturing from purchased steel, aluminum production and processing, production and processing of metals other than iron and aluminum, and foundries. Employment levels in this sector have declined reasonably steadily since 1990, despite a period of stable employment during the late 1990s, a sharp but temporary fall during the Great Recession, and a modest uptick over the past year or two in which metals employment growth has outpaced that of the overall economy, said Jed Kolko, chief economist at the jobs site Indeed.com. Overall, since 1990, employment has declined by about 42 percent. At the same time, production in primary metals has remained roughly the same since 1990, except for the Great Recession. For most of that period, production has ranged between 90 percent and 110 percent of the benchmark level (the amount produced in 2012). If you put these two statistics together, the overall pattern becomes clear: as production stays roughly the same and as fewer workers make it happen, productivity rises over time. The idea that steel, in particular, has experienced a productivity revolution due to technology is the same story I have been telling since the early 1990s, said Gary Burtless, an economist with the Brookings Institution. The basic story is that one person can produce a lot more metal today than he or she could produce a few decades ago. Burtless said he has a brother who's been working in the coke oven of a steel plant since the mid-1970s and who has seen first-hand the dramatic reduction in person-power needed to keep integrated steel mills running at full capacity, as well as improvements in quality. Michael J. Hicks, the director of the Center for Business and Economic Research at Ball State University, agreed that Smith's analysis is on target. I would agree that the most likely cause of the productivity gains is technology, though I would interpret technology broadly to include not just machinery but the way that factories organize production, such as internal logistics and the reduction of redundant operations that might be enabled by technology, Hicks said. J. Bradford Jensen, a professor of international business at Georgetown University's McDonough School of Business, added that imports did have something to do with the loss of employment in steel and aluminum, but the more important factor is technological change and productivity growth. Tariffs won't change that, much like relaxing regulations on coal and pollution will not bring back many coal-mining jobs, he said. Smith wrote, "Since 1990, production of metals in the U.S. has held roughly constant, but the number of people employed in the industry has fallen steadily." His numbers are solid, and experts agree that automation has done significant harm to employment levels in the metal industry. We rate the statement True.

['Economy', 'Jobs', 'PunditFact']

True

Noah Smith, a columnist for Bloomberg View and a former finance professor, wrote acolumnin which he noted, among other things, that a crucial issue facing metals-producing industries isnt foreign competition its automation.

Did Stacey Abrams' Sister Oversee a Court Case Involving Abrams?

['A Republican Congressman saw a conflict of interest involving the Abrams sisters in December 2020.']

In December 2020, right-leaning observers and prominent Republican politicians cried foul after a federal court judge blocked attempts to remove thousands of names from voter rolls in Georgia, ahead of January's two U.S. Senate run-off elections in the state. On Dec. 28, Politico reported that: Politico A federal judge in Georgia on Monday ordered two counties to reverse a decision removing more than 4,000 voters from the rolls ahead of the Jan. 5 runoff elections that will decide control of the U.S. Senate. The judge, Leslie Abrams Gardner the sister of former gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams, a prominent ally of President-elect Joe Biden who has led voter registration efforts across the state concluded that the counties appeared to have improperly relied on unverified change-of-address data to invalidate registrations in the two counties. The bulk of the registrations that the counties sought to rescind, more than 4,000, were in Muscogee County, which Biden won handily in November. An additional 150 were from Ben Hill County, which Trump won by a wide margin. U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas responded by tweeting: "This is absurd. This is an obvious case for recusal. For Stacey Abrams sister to refuse to recuse and issue this decision despite her indisputable bias undermines the integrity of the entire judicial system." Donald Trump Jr. wrote "Nothing shady here..." tweeting wrote Doug Collins, the outgoing Republican congressman who ran unsuccessfully for the U.S. Senate in 2020, said Abrams Gardner should recuse herself from the case because "her own sister is a party!" said In reality, Abrams was not a party to the case on which her sister ruled in December 2020. Collins stated a significant falsehood in claiming otherwise. Former Georgia gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams and Leslie Abrams Gardner are indeed sisters. Over the years, Abrams has repeatedly confirmed as much, including when she congratulated Abrams Gardner on her U.S. Senate confirmation and appointment as U.S. District Court judge for the Middle District of Georgia, in 2014 and 2015. 2014 2015 The case in question was Majority Forward and Gamaliel Warren Turner vs. Ben Hill County Board of Elections et al. Majority Forward is a non-profit voter registration organization, and Turner is a resident of Muscogee County, Georgia. According to Abrams Gardner's Dec. 28 ruling, the basic facts of the case were as follows. Earlier in December 2020, Tommy Roberts a City Council member in Fitzgerald in Ben Hill County challenged the eligibility of 328 registered voters in the county. Based on his own cross-referencing of the U.S. Postal Service's National Change of Address database, Roberts contended that those voters had moved out of the state and were therefore no longer eligible to vote in Ben Hill County. ruling The board of elections in Ben Hill County determined that Roberts' challenge to the eligibility of 152 of those voters was likely valid, and they designated those 152 voters "pending hearing" and contacted them to advise that they would only be allowed to cast provisional ballots in the January 2021 Senate run-off election, and would subsequently have to "cure" those ballots by providing proof of their residency. In Muscogee County, a man named Ralph Russell brought a similar challenge, claiming to have found 4,033 registered voters in Muscogee County who, according to the National Change of Address database, had moved out of state. The Muscogee County Board of Elections determined that Russell's challenge was probably valid, and contacted those 4,033 "targeted voters" to inform them they could only cast provisional ballots, and would have to provide proof of residency. Turner was one of those targeted voters. On Dec. 23, Majority Forward challenged the actions of Muscogee and Ben Hill counties, and filed for a temporary restraining order on Dec. 27. On Dec. 28, Abrams Gardner granted that order, meaning the counties were ordered, for the next eight days, not to remove the targeted voters from registration lists, or require them to cast only provisional ballots. Since that time period covered the Jan. 5, 2021, elections, the targeted voters were therefore allowed to vote as normal in the U.S. Senate run-off elections. Abrams Gardner's reasoning can be examined in the ruling itself. ruling The defendants in the case filed a motion to request that Abrams Gardner recuse herself. They argued, in part, that Fair Fight the voting rights group founded and chaired by Abrams was involved in similar litigation before the U.S. District Court in Georgia's Northern District, and the same lawyers represented Fair Fight and Majority Forward in the cases. They also argued that Abrams Gardner's ruling in the Majority Forward case could have a bearing on the judge's decision-making in the Fair Fight litigation, which directly involved Abrams, since she is the chairperson of that organization. The defendants wrote: motion wrote In addition, any relief rendered in the instant case as it relates to the NCOAR [National Change of Address Registry] would likely be cited as persuasive authority in the Fair Fight Litigation. Abrams interest could therefore be substantially affected by the outcome of this proceeding. For this reason, Judge Gardners impartiality might reasonably be questioned were this case to proceed before her. In a footnote to her Dec. 28 ruling, Abrams Gardner noted the request for her to recuse herself, but stated simply, "The Court has reviewed the motion and finds no basis for recusal." Abrams Gardner added that "an order detailing the court's reasoning" was forthcoming. As of Dec. 31, no such order was available on the case's online docket. Contrary to Collins' claim, Abrams was not a "party" to the Majority Forward litigation on which her sister ruled in December 2020. However, she is the chairperson of Fair Fight, a voting rights organization that acted as a plaintiff in a very similar case, albeit in a different U.S. District Court, in Georgia, at the same time. Whether that connection, in combination with her familial relationship with Abrams Gardner, should constitute grounds for recusal, is ultimately a matter of subjective interpretation. But Collins undoubtedly erred when he claimed that "Stacey Abramss sister is ruling on a case in which her own sister is a party!"

['profit']

False

On Dec. 28, Politico reported that:U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas responded by tweeting: "This is absurd. This is an obvious case for recusal. For Stacey Abrams sister to refuse to recuse and issue this decision despite her indisputable bias undermines the integrity of the entire judicial system." Donald Trump Jr. wrote "Nothing shady here..."Doug Collins, the outgoing Republican congressman who ran unsuccessfully for the U.S. Senate in 2020, said Abrams Gardner should recuse herself from the case because "her own sister is a party!"Former Georgia gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams and Leslie Abrams Gardner are indeed sisters. Over the years, Abrams has repeatedly confirmed as much, including when she congratulated Abrams Gardner on her U.S. Senate confirmation and appointment as U.S. District Court judge for the Middle District of Georgia, in 2014 and 2015.According to Abrams Gardner's Dec. 28 ruling, the basic facts of the case were as follows. Earlier in December 2020, Tommy Roberts a City Council member in Fitzgerald in Ben Hill County challenged the eligibility of 328 registered voters in the county. Based on his own cross-referencing of the U.S. Postal Service's National Change of Address database, Roberts contended that those voters had moved out of the state and were therefore no longer eligible to vote in Ben Hill County. On Dec. 23, Majority Forward challenged the actions of Muscogee and Ben Hill counties, and filed for a temporary restraining order on Dec. 27. On Dec. 28, Abrams Gardner granted that order, meaning the counties were ordered, for the next eight days, not to remove the targeted voters from registration lists, or require them to cast only provisional ballots. Since that time period covered the Jan. 5, 2021, elections, the targeted voters were therefore allowed to vote as normal in the U.S. Senate run-off elections. Abrams Gardner's reasoning can be examined in the ruling itself. The defendants in the case filed a motion to request that Abrams Gardner recuse herself. They argued, in part, that Fair Fight the voting rights group founded and chaired by Abrams was involved in similar litigation before the U.S. District Court in Georgia's Northern District, and the same lawyers represented Fair Fight and Majority Forward in the cases. They also argued that Abrams Gardner's ruling in the Majority Forward case could have a bearing on the judge's decision-making in the Fair Fight litigation, which directly involved Abrams, since she is the chairperson of that organization. The defendants wrote:

Does Stacey Abrams Owe More Than $50,000 in Back Taxes?

['A graphic criticizing the 2018 Georgia gubernatorial candidate was not inaccurate, but neither was it a "gotcha" moment.']

A graphic circulated online about 2018 Georgia gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams owing a large sum in back taxes was technically accurate, but it omitted several key details in an attempt to frame her as irresponsible or dishonest. The meme showed a photograph of Abrams along with a caption reading, "This is Stacy [sic] Abrams, the Democrat on the ticket for Georgia governor. She owes the IRS $50,000 in back taxes." Abrams publicly revealed that she owed a $54,000 debt to the Internal Revenue Service when she released her personal financial disclosure documents in March 2018. However, although she is in debt, she is not delinquent in her taxes, as documents show she is on a payment plan after deferring payments for the tax years 2015 and 2016. The candidate elaborated on her situation in an op-ed published by Fortune magazine on April 24, 2018, stating that even though she earned $95,000 a year at her first job after graduating college, the cost of her education left her with more than $100,000 in debt before she had to take on additional financial responsibilities. She wrote, "I'd love to say that was the end of my financial troubles, but life had other plans. In 2006, my youngest brother and his girlfriend had a child they could not care for due to their drug addictions. Instead, my parents took custody when my niece was five days old. Underpaid, raising an infant, and battling their own illnesses, my parents' bills piled up. I took on much of the financial responsibility to support them, and even today I remain their main source of financial support. Paying the bills for two households has taken its toll. Nearly twenty years after graduating, I am still paying down student loans and am on a payment plan to settle my debt to the IRS. I have made money mistakes, but I have never ignored my responsibilities; I will meet my obligations—however slowly but surely." Abrams' opponent in the 2018 gubernatorial race (which she lost), Republican Brian Kemp, was reportedly also in heavy debt. He was sued by an investment company in June 2018 after allegedly failing to repay a $500,000 loan he guaranteed for an agricultural company in which he invested, Hart AgStrong LLC. Kemp has claimed that he is not responsible for paying the loan, but the Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported in September 2018 that, according to court documents, Kemp also promised to cover around $10 million in other loans for the company.

['loan']

True

Abrams publicly revealed that she owed a $54,000 debt to the Internal Revenue Service when she released her personal financial disclosure documents in March 2018. But although she is in debt, she is not delinquent in her taxes, as documents show her to be on a payment plan after deferring payments for tax years 2015 and 2016.The candidate elaborated on her situation in an op-ed published by Fortune magazine on 24 April 2018, saying that even though she earned $95,000 a year at her first job after graduating college, the cost of her education still left her more than $100,000 in debt before she had to take on even more financial responsibilities:Abrams' opponent in the 2018 gubernatorial race (which she lost), Republican Brian Kemp, was reportedly also in heavy debt. He was sued by an investment company in June 2018 after allegedly failing to repay a $500,000 loan he guaranteed for an agricultural company in which he invested, Hart AgStrong LLC. Kemp has claimed that he is not responsible for paying the loan, but the Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported in September 2018 that according to court documents, Kemp also promised to cover around $10 million in other loans for the company.

Bush on Ribs

["Does a transcript record President Bush's remarks to reporters at a New Mexico restaurant?"]

Claim: Transcript records President Bush's remarks to reporters at a New Mexico restaurant. Example: [whitehouse.gov, 2004] Remarks by the President to the Press PoolNothin' Fancy CafeRoswell, New Mexico 11:25 A.M. MST THE PRESIDENT: I need some ribs. Q Mr. President, how are you? THE PRESIDENT: I'm hungry and I'm going to order some ribs. Q What would you like? THE PRESIDENT: Whatever you think I'd like. Q Sir, on homeland security, critics would say you simply haven't spent enough to keep the country secure. THE PRESIDENT: My job is to secure the homeland and that's exactly what we're going to do. But I'm here to take somebody's order. That would be you, Stretch what would you like? Put some of your high-priced money right here to try to help the local economy. You get paid a lot of money, you ought to be buying some food here. It's part of how the economy grows. You've got plenty of money in your pocket, and when you spend it, it drives the economy forward. So what would you like to eat? Q Right behind you, whatever you order. THE PRESIDENT: I'm ordering ribs. David, do you need a rib? Q But Mr. President THE PRESIDENT: Stretch, thank you, this is not a press conference. This is my chance to help this lady put some money in her pocket. Let me explain how the economy works. When you spend money to buy food it helps this lady's business. It makes it more likely somebody is going to find work. So instead of asking questions, answer mine: are you going to buy some food? Q Yes. THE PRESIDENT: Okay, good. What would you like? Q Ribs. THE PRESIDENT: Ribs? Good. Let's order up some ribs. Q What do you think of the democratic field, sir? THE PRESIDENT: See, his job is to ask questions, he thinks my job is to answer every question he asks. I'm here to help this restaurant by buying some food. Terry, would you like something? Q An answer. Q Can we buy some questions? THE PRESIDENT: Obviously these people they make a lot of money and they're not going to spend much. I'm not saying they're overpaid, they're just not spending any money. Q Do you think it's all going to come down to national security, sir, this election? THE PRESIDENT: One of the things David does, he asks a lot of questions, and they're good, generally. END 11:29 A.M. MST Origins: This transcript, archived at the White House web site, certainly reads as one of the more unusual Presidential press conferences in recent memory. But much of the oddness stems from the fact that the transcript provides no context for the remarks contained therein; a little background helps to make it more understandable. White House After delivering his State of the Union address on 20 January 2004, President Bush undertook a two-day, three-state swing through Ohio, Arizona, and New Mexico. The morning of 22 January found the President in Roswell, New Mexico, where he delivered a 40-plus minute speech at the town's Convention and Civic Center in front of 1,800 cadets from the New Mexico Military Institute, law enforcement officers studying at the International Law Enforcement Academy's graduate center and the Federal Law Enforcement Training center, and local residents. The President wrapped up his speech a bit before 11:30 AM, and he then surprised many Roswell residents by sending his motorcade to the Nuthin' Special Cafe on Main Street described as "a local eatery known more for its 50-cent beer than its food" for lunch. After entering the restaurant and shaking some hands, the President decided to give the local economy a boost by strolling behind the counter and cajoling members of the traveling press into ordering some food. A couple of White House correspondents, David Gregory of NBC (referred to in the transcript as "Stretch") and Terry Moran of ABC, tried to turn the occasion into an impromptu press conference, but President Bush held firm, stating in no uncertain terms that he was there to take food orders, not to answer questions from the press. According to cafe owner Armando Aceves, the President ordered pork ribs and buttermilk pie and autographed a menu. However, Jim Lakely of the Washington Times, a designated pool reporter for the Roswell trip, noted that the President was unsuccessful in convincing the reporters in question to purchase any ribs themselves. Once President Bush and his entourage were back on-board Air Force One with their take-out orders, someone from the White House staff sent some ribs back to the press corps. There wasn't enough to go around, though. A letter writer to the Albuquerque Journal later noted that President Bush did not leave a tip when he departed. But, as that newspaper reported, the Nuthin' Fancy Cafe staff still ended up with a larger payment than they were expecting: "But you don't expect a tip from take-out," said Beverly Patterson, one of the servers who helped with the president's order of ribs, corn bread, butter and honey. "And how many other people can say they had the pleasure and honor of having the president visit their place?" adds Patterson, who has worked at the cafe for three years. Bush paid for the order with $30 in cash. Patterson says the president called later from Air Force One and said, "You didn't charge me enough, and I'm going to send more money." But Edward Zavala, Nuthin' Fancy's manager, says he told the president they didn't want any more money. "We were willing to give him the meal free, but the president wanted to pay," Zavala adds. "We didn't care for the money. This was a once-in-a-lifetime deal." Last updated: 19 August 2007 Sources: Coleman, Michael. "From These Ribs ." Albuquerque Journal. 24 January 2004 (p. A8). Hoffman, Leslie. "Bush Touts Policies, Focuses on War on Terrorism During Roswell Visit." The Associated Press. 22 January 2004. Moskos, Harry. "Mr. Bush Paid Bill in Cash." Albuquerque Journal.. 8 February 2004 (p. C1).

['economy']

True

Origins: This transcript, archived at the White House web site, certainly reads as one of the more unusual Presidential press conferences in recent memory. But much of the oddness stems from the fact that the transcript provides no context for the remarks contained therein; a little background helps to make it more understandable.

Delta Air Lines Scams Promise '$500 Gift Card for $1' and '$100 Reward'

['We looked at the origins of two supposed gift card or "reward" promotions that seemed way too good to be true.']

In May 2023, a reader informed us by email about a scam appearing in Facebook and Instagram ads that claimed Delta Air Lines was holding a promotion to give away $500 gift cards for $1 each. On the same day, we reviewed a second "Delta Airlines Online Shopper" scam in an email from an address ending in asahi.com that promised a "$100 reward" or gift card simply for taking a survey. Needless to say, these were not legitimate giveaways, nor were they offered by Delta Air Lines. Always remember that with online offers, if they seem too good to be true, they probably are. Worse, they are likely to be phishing scams that can result in both privacy and monetary losses for victims. First, Delta Air Lines was not giving away $500 gift cards for $1 each. Even something as small as $5 gift cards for $1 each would make little sense, as it would put Delta or other airlines in a position of losing money to the throngs who would buy up the cards. The scam ads read as follows: "Elevate your travel experience with Delta! We're giving you an extraordinary opportunity to fuel your dreams of exploration. For only $1, you can get a $500 gift card - a limited-time offer that's too good to pass up. It's time to see why Delta isn't just an airline; it's the Delta difference. Apply now and book your next Delta journey today!" The paid ads on Facebook and Instagram led to a fake survey on onduwucuu.info. After filling out the survey, the scam directed users to towbgiftgiveaways.xyz, where they were asked to provide personal information and a credit card number. As for the email scam that promised $100 Delta Air Lines "rewards" or gift cards for taking a survey, the messages often came from "ozdxuofbqh.asahi.com via loi5sir.classyield.site." Clicking the link in the message led to a strangely labeled "Hitech Research" website on ignitesurge.org. The page instructed users to take a survey and then pick a "free" offer on gadgetspromodeals.com or other websites. However, these "free" offers came with monthly subscription fees that were hidden in the terms and conditions. Nowhere on these pages did we find a box for customers to check to indicate that they agreed to the fine print that appeared on another page. The domain name giftgiveaways.xyz was last registered on May 15, just seven days before we looked into the "$500 gift cards for $1" scam. Meanwhile, ignitesurge.org, the website associated with the $100 Delta Air Lines "reward" email scam, was last registered on April 5. Newly registered domain names are often a significant red flag associated with scams. We advise all readers to do their due diligence before giving their credit card number to a website they've never heard of. Scammers often hide subscription fees in terms and conditions and purposely do not mention these fees anywhere on the product checkout pages. Contact your credit card company immediately if you believe you have given your credit card number to scammers. Delta Air Lines hosts a page about the scams they've seen over the years, including gift card promotional websites. Over the years, Delta has received reports of attempts by parties not affiliated with them to fraudulently gather customer information in various ways, including fraudulent emails, social media sites, postcards, gift card promotional websites claiming to be from Delta Air Lines, and letters or prize notifications promising free travel. These messages were not sent by Delta Air Lines. They do not market to their customers in this way, but individuals or groups intending to gather and use your personal data for their gain can be inventive in their approach, often adding messages to generate a sense of urgency so you take action. Scammers know that airfare can be quite pricey. By pushing fake offers for cheaper airline tickets, they attempt to scam the masses with their fraudulent schemes. If readers encounter offers in the future that seem suspicious, we recommend contacting the airline company directly to ask questions. For further reading in the realm of "way too good to be true," we once covered another scam that claimed Delta Air Lines was giving away first-class air travel tickets and $10,000 in cash.

['credit']

False

Delta Air Lines hosts a page about the scams they've seen over the years, including gift card promotional websites:For further reading n the realm of "way too good to be true," we once covered anotherscam that claimed Delta Air Lines was giving away first-class air travel tickets and $10,000 in cash.

Lifetime passes for complimentary fast food

["Popular fast food outlets aren't giving away free lifetime passes to celebrate their anniversaries. Such offers are survey scams."]

In January2015, links began circulating on Facebook promisingusers free lifetime passes to popular fast food outlets such as KFC, McDonald's, Wendy's, Starbucks, Subway, and Burger King, typically presented as promotions offeredin celebration of the brands' purported anniversaries: The embedded links led to severalURLs, and users who clicked through on them to claim the promised lifetime passes were routed to a pages that clonedthe style of Facebook-based content (but werehostedoff Facebook): As noted, the visible URLs in the above-reproduced imagesdon't belong to any official domains owned by these fast food chains. The ads are survey/sweepstakes scams that urge usersto share their enticementsvia Facebook in order to recruit friends to further the fake promotions and dupevisitors intosubscribing to various expensive offers to claim their "free" passes.Most social media users are familiar with survey scams conducted in this fashion: Kohl's, Costco, Home Depot, Lowe's,Kroger, Best Buy, Macy's, Olive Garden, Publix, Target, and Walmart are among retailers used asbait byscammers, withmany of these scams aiming to capturepersonal information and valuable page likes from Facebook users.A July 2014 article from the Better Business Bureau explainedhow userscan spot and avoid scammersimitating high-profilebrands on social media: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.A nearly identical scam commonin October 2015 promised a lifetime pass to Starbucks in the same manner. Many users who completed the steps were dismayed to discover that no such reward awaited them. As noted, the visible URLs in the above-reproduced imagesdon't belong to any official domains owned by these fast food chains. The ads are survey/sweepstakes scams that urge usersto share their enticementsvia Facebook in order to recruit friends to further the fake promotions and dupevisitors intosubscribing to various expensive offers to claim their "free" passes.Most social media users are familiar with survey scams conducted in this fashion: Kohl's, Costco, Home Depot, Lowe's,Kroger, Best Buy, Macy's, Olive Garden, Publix, Target, and Walmart are among retailers used asbait byscammers, withmany of these scams aiming to capturepersonal information and valuable page likes from Facebook users. Kohl's Costco Home Depot Lowe's Kroger Best Buy Macy's Olive Garden Publix Target Walmart scammers A July 2014 article from the Better Business Bureau explainedhow userscan spot and avoid scammersimitating high-profilebrands on social media: 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. A nearly identical scam commonin October 2015 promised a lifetime pass to Starbucks in the same manner. Many users who completed the steps were dismayed to discover that no such reward awaited them. Starbucks

['share']

False

The embedded links led to severalURLs, and users who clicked through on them to claim the promised lifetime passes were routed to a pages that clonedthe style of Facebook-based content (but werehostedoff Facebook):As noted, the visible URLs in the above-reproduced imagesdon't belong to any official domains owned by these fast food chains. The ads are survey/sweepstakes scams that urge usersto share their enticementsvia Facebook in order to recruit friends to further the fake promotions and dupevisitors intosubscribing to various expensive offers to claim their "free" passes.Most social media users are familiar with survey scams conducted in this fashion: Kohl's, Costco, Home Depot, Lowe's,Kroger, Best Buy, Macy's, Olive Garden, Publix, Target, and Walmart are among retailers used asbait byscammers, withmany of these scams aiming to capturepersonal information and valuable page likes from Facebook users.A July 2014 article from the Better Business Bureau explainedhow userscan spot and avoid scammersimitating high-profilebrands on social media: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.A nearly identical scam commonin October 2015 promised a lifetime pass to Starbucks in the same manner. Many users who completed the steps were dismayed to discover that no such reward awaited them.As noted, the visible URLs in the above-reproduced imagesdon't belong to any official domains owned by these fast food chains. The ads are survey/sweepstakes scams that urge usersto share their enticementsvia Facebook in order to recruit friends to further the fake promotions and dupevisitors intosubscribing to various expensive offers to claim their "free" passes.Most social media users are familiar with survey scams conducted in this fashion: Kohl's, Costco, Home Depot, Lowe's,Kroger, Best Buy, Macy's, Olive Garden, Publix, Target, and Walmart are among retailers used asbait byscammers, withmany of these scams aiming to capturepersonal information and valuable page likes from Facebook users.A July 2014 article from the Better Business Bureau explainedhow userscan spot and avoid scammersimitating high-profilebrands on social media:A nearly identical scam commonin October 2015 promised a lifetime pass to Starbucks in the same manner. Many users who completed the steps were dismayed to discover that no such reward awaited them.

Joe Biden wants to raise taxes on 82% of all Americans.

['Joe Bidens tax plan does not call for direct tax increases on anyone earning below $400,000 per year.', 'Corporations and the nations highest earners would be hit hardest., Other earners would experience small hits from the indirect impact of a higher corporate tax rate.', 'By one analysis, about 82% of Americans would feel these effects., Theres a difference between direct tax increases and indirect effects felt in the form of lower investment returns or wages.', 'Raise taxes suggests that Biden would hit 82% of Americans with new direct taxes, which is not the case.']

Donald Trump Jr.claimedin a widespread tweet that former Vice President Joe Biden wants to raise taxes on 82% of all Americans. The eldest son of President Donald Trump wasrepeatingarefrainfrom the Republican National Convention, where Republican National Committee ChairRonna McDanielandEric Trumpmade similar claims. But the claim is misleading. Joe Biden wants to raise taxes on 82% of all Americans. Biden, the Democratic nominee for president, has pledged not to raise taxes on Americans making less than $400,000 per year,aswevereported. Independent tax analysts have found that his plan does not call for direct tax increases on anyone below that threshold. Tax analysts say the indirect effects of Bidens proposal to raise the corporate tax rate could mean slightly lower after-tax incomes for some lower earners. By one analysis, about 82% of Americans would feel these effects though for many, the hit would be small. But thatdoesnt mean82% of Americans will have higher tax rates or owe more to the Internal Revenue Service, as the phrase raise taxes suggests. To the extent that the Trump campaign is using this figure to imply that individual income and payroll taxes will rise for 82% of Americans, the claim is misleading, said John Ricco, a senior analyst at the Penn Wharton Budget Model, which is the basis for the 82% figure. Bidens tax plan aims to raise up to $4 trillion in revenues over a decade, according to theTax Policy Center. It would do so in part byrolling backsome of the tax cuts for corporations and people with taxable incomes over $400,000 that Trump signed into law in 2017. Among Bidens proposed changes, he would: Increase the top corporate tax rate from 21% to 28%. Raise the top federal marginal income tax rate for individuals to 39.6%. Place a 12.4% Social Security payroll tax on incomes above $400,000. Tax capital gains at the same rate as ordinary income for very high earners. Other independent groups have also examined Bidens tax plan, including theTax Foundation, thePenn Wharton Budget Model, theAmerican Enterprise Instituteand theCommittee for a Responsible Federal Budget. The groups havegenerally agreedthat Bidens plan largely targets corporations and the nations biggest earners. The Tax Policy Center, for example,estimatedthat more than 90% of the tax increases from Bidens plan would be borne by the top 20% of earners. No direct taxes are imposed on any household making less than $400,000 per year, the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budgetwrotein its analysis. Garrett Watson, a senior policy analyst at the Tax Foundation, said there aresome specific scenarioswhere Bidens proposals related to itemized deductions, retirement benefits and payroll taxes could result in potential direct tax hikes for some households under $400,000. For example, in a scenario where one spouse makes more than $400,000 but the other incurs a loss that brings the adjusted gross income for their two-income household below $400,000, they could be hit by the Biden payroll tax, Watson said. In interviews, economic advisers to the Biden campaign said any final tax law would have mechanisms written in to prevent anybody making less than $400,000 from being inadvertently affected. Its not hard to have a hold harmless provision to deal with any oddball cases that seem unlikely to even ever arise, said Gene Sperling, a campaign adviser who was director of the National Economic Council under Presidents Barack Obama and Bill Clinton. The groups that examined Bidens tax plan also estimated that over time, some of the burden of Bidens tax increases would fall to people making less than $400,000 in the form of lower wages or investment returns indirect effects of the proposed corporate tax rate increase. These effects would berelatively small, and tax analysts say they make up the bulk of the hits dealt to lower earners under Bidens tax plan. But they form the basis for Donald Trump Jr.s claim that 82% of Americans would see their taxes raised. A Trump campaign spokesperson argued that the impact of the corporate tax rate increase is effectively a tax increase on individuals. The Biden campaign, on the other hand, said the two are not equal. Nobody filling out their 1040 is going to see a tax increase, and nobody would consider that type of economic impact as a tax increase, even if it happened, said Sperling. (AP Photo) According to theTax Policy Center, the lowest 20% of earners would see their 2021 incomes drop by an average of $30 under Biden; the next would see an average loss of $110; the middle would see an average drop of $260; and the second-highest would see an average loss of $590. ThePenn Wharton Budget Modelprojects smaller average declines for 2021: $15 for the bottom 20%; $90 for the second quintile; $180 for the third quintile; and $360 for the fourth quintile. Trump Jr.s 82% figure comes from the Penn Wharton Budget Model, which estimated what share of each income group would experience a tax change as a result of Bidens proposals. A little math gets to 82% of people affected. But the concept of indirect effects is distinct from how most normal people think about taxes, said Ricco, the Penn Wharton analyst. Only families with adjusted gross incomes of more than $400,000 would be sending a larger check to the IRS, or having more federal taxes withheld from their paychecks, Ricco said. Those taxpayers were between the top 1% and 2% of filers in 2017, said Watson, the Tax Foundation analyst, citing the IRS. The Penn Wharton Budget Model also shows how Bidens tax plan would affect Americans if the indirect effects of the corporate tax are excluded. With the corporate tax plan removed from the analysis, the average tax change drops to zero for the bottom 90% of earners. We expect that between 1% and 2% of American families would see increases in individual income and payroll taxes, Ricco said. There are other aspects of Bidens plans that arent reflected in independent tax analyses. The Trump campaign, for example, said Bidens plan to reinstate the penalty for not complying with the Affordable Care Actsindividual mandateshould be thought of as a tax which is in line with theSupreme Courts reasoningwhen it upheld the mandate in 2012. The Biden campaign said its a fee, pointing to the Health and Human Services Departmentslanguage. Economic advisers to the Biden campaign, meanwhile, said the tax analysesdont account forBidens proposed tax credits and spending programs aimed at middle-class and lower earners. Those and other Biden proposals will substantially boost middle-class incomes for families across the country, said Biden campaign spokesperson Andrew Bates. Gordon Mermin, a senior research associate at the Tax Policy Center, said Biden has proposed many tax credits, including recent proposals for a refundable child- and dependent-care tax credit, a refundable tax credit for first-time homebuyers, and a low-income renters credit. If the Penn Wharton Budget Model factored in Bidens tax credits and it did not then the 82% figure representing the percent of Americans who would experience changes to their after-tax incomes would be substantially lower, Mermin said. Ricco said the Penn Wharton analysis focused only on revenue-raising provisions. Donald Trump Jr. said, Joe Biden wants to raise taxes on 82% of all Americans. Trump inaccurately described an analysis from the Penn Wharton Budget Model. The 82% is a calculation made using the models estimates that represents the percentage of people whose after-tax incomes would change under Bidens plan. But theres a difference between a tax increase and the share of corporate tax increases borne by individual taxpayers in the form or lower investment returns or incomes. Biden has pledged not to directly raise taxes on people earning less than $400,000 per year. Some Biden tax credits not included in Penn Wharton analysis could potentially offset some of the indirect hits posed to lower earners as a result of Bidens proposed corporate tax hike. We rate this statement False.

['Economy', 'Taxes']

False

Donald Trump Jr.claimedin a widespread tweet that former Vice President Joe Biden wants to raise taxes on 82% of all Americans.The eldest son of President Donald Trump wasrepeatingarefrainfrom the Republican National Convention, where Republican National Committee ChairRonna McDanielandEric Trumpmade similar claims. But the claim is misleading.Biden, the Democratic nominee for president, has pledged not to raise taxes on Americans making less than $400,000 per year,aswevereported. Independent tax analysts have found that his plan does not call for direct tax increases on anyone below that threshold.But thatdoesnt mean82% of Americans will have higher tax rates or owe more to the Internal Revenue Service, as the phrase raise taxes suggests.Bidens tax plan aims to raise up to $4 trillion in revenues over a decade, according to theTax Policy Center. It would do so in part byrolling backsome of the tax cuts for corporations and people with taxable incomes over $400,000 that Trump signed into law in 2017.Other independent groups have also examined Bidens tax plan, including theTax Foundation, thePenn Wharton Budget Model, theAmerican Enterprise Instituteand theCommittee for a Responsible Federal Budget.The groups havegenerally agreedthat Bidens plan largely targets corporations and the nations biggest earners. The Tax Policy Center, for example,estimatedthat more than 90% of the tax increases from Bidens plan would be borne by the top 20% of earners.No direct taxes are imposed on any household making less than $400,000 per year, the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budgetwrotein its analysis.Garrett Watson, a senior policy analyst at the Tax Foundation, said there aresome specific scenarioswhere Bidens proposals related to itemized deductions, retirement benefits and payroll taxes could result in potential direct tax hikes for some households under $400,000.These effects would berelatively small, and tax analysts say they make up the bulk of the hits dealt to lower earners under Bidens tax plan.According to theTax Policy Center, the lowest 20% of earners would see their 2021 incomes drop by an average of $30 under Biden; the next would see an average loss of $110; the middle would see an average drop of $260; and the second-highest would see an average loss of $590.ThePenn Wharton Budget Modelprojects smaller average declines for 2021: $15 for the bottom 20%; $90 for the second quintile; $180 for the third quintile; and $360 for the fourth quintile.The Trump campaign, for example, said Bidens plan to reinstate the penalty for not complying with the Affordable Care Actsindividual mandateshould be thought of as a tax which is in line with theSupreme Courts reasoningwhen it upheld the mandate in 2012. The Biden campaign said its a fee, pointing to the Health and Human Services Departmentslanguage.Economic advisers to the Biden campaign, meanwhile, said the tax analysesdont account forBidens proposed tax credits and spending programs aimed at middle-class and lower earners.

Is It Dangerous to Wear a COVID-19 Protective Mask for Too Long?

['Prolonged usage of certain masks can cause some health concerns. ']

During the COVID-19 coronavirus disease pandemic in the spring of 2020, questions arose about protective measures. Social media users shared related images, and in one case, a newspaper column claimed that continual or prolonged use of face masks resulted in breathing too much of one's own exhaled carbon dioxide, which can lead to health concerns. images, one case, "Dr. Dennis A Castro B" wrote in the Nigerian newspaper Vanguard, for instance, that prolonged use of face masks causes hypoxia: Vanguard Breathing over and over exhaled air turns into carbon dioxide, which is why we feel dizzy. This intoxicates the user and much more when he must move, carry out displacement actions. It causes discomfort, loss of reflexes and conscious thought. It generates great fatigue. In addition, oxygen deficiency causes glucose breakdown and endangered lactic acid rise. The post does not specify what kinds of masks cause these issues (though the article image does show N95 respirator masks), nor does it indicate whether this affects people with respiratory conditions more. It should be noted that hypoxia is a condition in which the tissues of the body are starved of oxygen. hypoxia Another post on Facebook argued that prolonged mask usage caused hypercapnia, a condition arising from too much carbon dioxide in the blood. Facebook hypercapnia Image via Facebook. Symptoms cause hypoxia But research articles and experts suggest that such extreme symptoms are unlikely to occur in most people. Dr. Abrar Ahmad Chughtai, an epidemiologist and lecturer at the School of Public Health and Community Medicine at University of New South Wales Australia, says the risk of hypoxia and hypercapnia are unlikely to take place with cloth and surgical masks, because they are not tight-fitting: Dr. Abrar Ahmad Chughtai Some people with pre-existing respiratory illnesses (like asthma, COPD), may face breathing difficulty with use of certain types of tight fitted masks, called respirators. [There is] less chance of hypoxia as they may discontinue using masks in that case. Risk is very low with cloth and surgical masks as they are not tight around [the] face. He also argued that in the case of prolonged usage of any of these masks, "Dizziness [was] less likely, but fatigue may occur." The N95 respirator is an example of personal protective equipment (PPE) usually worn by health workers to protect the wearer from airborne particles and from liquid contaminating the face. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) does not recommend that the general public use these masks because health workers and other medical first responders need them more. N95 respirator A team of Stanford engineers is developing an N95 face mask to counteract the side effects of oxygen deficiency. In an interview, John Xu, a mechanical engineer behind the effort, said: interview N95 masks are estimated to reduce oxygen intake by anywhere from 5 to 20 percent. Thats significant, even for a healthy person. It can cause dizziness and lightheadedness. If you wear a mask long enough, it can damage the lungs. For a patient in respiratory distress, it can even be life threatening. And their focus is on getting these masks to healthcare workers first. We are targeting this to anyone who has to wear a mask for the long term, first responders, doctors, nurses and even patients who dont want to infect others. In the near term, we hope to get these into healthcare workers as soon as possible. The general public is unlikely to wear masks for a prolonged period other than for short stints outside of homes, according to Reuters. A CDC representative spoke to Reuters: Reuters The CO2 will slowly build up in the mask over time. However, the level of CO2 likely to build up in the mask is mostly tolerable to people exposed to it. Youmight get a headache but you most likely [would] not suffer the symptoms observed at much higher levels of CO2. The mask can become uncomfortable for a varietyof reasons including a sensitivity to CO2 and the person will be motivated to remove the mask. It is unlikely that wearing a mask will cause hypercapnia. The CDC recommends that the general public wear cloth masks, leaving N95 respirators and surgical masks to healthcare workers. They also offer exceptions for who should be wearing them: recommends exceptions Cloth face coverings should not be placed on young children under age 2, anyone who has trouble breathing, or is unconscious, incapacitated or otherwise unable to remove the mask without assistance. With these recommendations comes the additional guidance that face masks should not be a substitute for social distancing. guidance The CDC also responded to Snopes about the impact an N95 respirator would have on healthcare workers: Hypoventilation (deficient ventilation of the lungs) is a primary cause of significant discomfort while wearing an N95 filtering facepiece respirator (FFR). However, studies [indicate] that hypoventilation did not pose a significant risk to healthcare workers over the course of less than one hour of continuous N95 use. When healthcare workers are working longer hours without a break while continuously wearing an N95 FFR, CO2 may accumulate in the breathing space inside of the respirator and continuously increase past the 1-hour mark, which could have a significant physiological effect on the wearer, including headache, altered cognitive judgement, and increased breathing frequency, among other symptoms. deficient To fix the problem of breathing too much CO2 that has built up within the respirator facepiece, a worker can simply remove the respirator. Some facilities practice oxygen supplementation during these breaks from respirator use, but there really is no need for this as the oxygen in the environment is more than enough to relieve most of the symptoms listed above. The Vanguard piece also says it is dangerous to use masks in cars: Some people drive their car with the mask on, that is very dangerous, because, the stale air can make the driver lose consciousness. Chughtai said he believed such danger was "less likely," and that running while wearing such a mask also was "unlikely" to cause breathing issues, unless the runner had a pre-existing respiratory illness. In all, little research has been done on the impact of masks on wearers, according to Chughtai. In some studies, participants noted breathing difficulties, but not hypoxia. Ultimately, the impact of a mask on its wearer depends on the wearer's health, any pre-existing respiratory illnesses, the type of mask, and the length of time the person wears it. In most instances, the effects of prolonged cloth mask usage are small. Masks, like most short-term measures to prevent the spread of COVID-19, should be worn only if the wearer has to be in close proximity to others, and be used in addition to necessary measures like social distancing, and more. As such, we rate this claim about the dangers of masks as "false." only if Castro B, Dennis A. "WARNING: Prolonged use of facemask produces hypoxia." Vanguard. 3 May 2020. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. "How to Protect Yourself & Others." 24 April 2020. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. "Use of Cloth Face Coverings to Help Slow the Spread of COVID-19." 13 April 2020. Encyclopaedia Britannica. "Hypoxia." Updated 17 October 2019. Medical News Today. "What to know about hypercapnia." 5 January 2018. Medical News Today. "What to know about COPD hypoxia." 4 December 2019. Reuters. "Partly false claim: Continually wearing a mask causes hypercapnia." 5 May 2020. Stanford. "COVID-19 prompts Stanford engineers to rethink the humble face mask." 14 April 2020. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. "N95 Respirators and Surgical Masks (Face Masks)." 5 April 2020.

['loss']

False

During the COVID-19 coronavirus disease pandemic in the spring of 2020, questions arose about protective measures. Social media users shared related images, and in one case, a newspaper column claimed that continual or prolonged use of face masks resulted in breathing too much of one's own exhaled carbon dioxide, which can lead to health concerns. "Dr. Dennis A Castro B" wrote in the Nigerian newspaper Vanguard, for instance, that prolonged use of face masks causes hypoxia: The post does not specify what kinds of masks cause these issues (though the article image does show N95 respirator masks), nor does it indicate whether this affects people with respiratory conditions more. It should be noted that hypoxia is a condition in which the tissues of the body are starved of oxygen. Another post on Facebook argued that prolonged mask usage caused hypercapnia, a condition arising from too much carbon dioxide in the blood. Image via Facebook.But research articles and experts suggest that such extreme symptoms are unlikely to occur in most people. Dr. Abrar Ahmad Chughtai, an epidemiologist and lecturer at the School of Public Health and Community Medicine at University of New South Wales Australia, says the risk of hypoxia and hypercapnia are unlikely to take place with cloth and surgical masks, because they are not tight-fitting: The N95 respirator is an example of personal protective equipment (PPE) usually worn by health workers to protect the wearer from airborne particles and from liquid contaminating the face. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) does not recommend that the general public use these masks because health workers and other medical first responders need them more. A team of Stanford engineers is developing an N95 face mask to counteract the side effects of oxygen deficiency. In an interview, John Xu, a mechanical engineer behind the effort, said:The general public is unlikely to wear masks for a prolonged period other than for short stints outside of homes, according to Reuters. A CDC representative spoke to Reuters: The CDC recommends that the general public wear cloth masks, leaving N95 respirators and surgical masks to healthcare workers. They also offer exceptions for who should be wearing them:With these recommendations comes the additional guidance that face masks should not be a substitute for social distancing. Hypoventilation (deficient ventilation of the lungs) is a primary cause of significant discomfort while wearing an N95 filtering facepiece respirator (FFR). However, studies [indicate] that hypoventilation did not pose a significant risk to healthcare workers over the course of less than one hour of continuous N95 use. When healthcare workers are working longer hours without a break while continuously wearing an N95 FFR, CO2 may accumulate in the breathing space inside of the respirator and continuously increase past the 1-hour mark, which could have a significant physiological effect on the wearer, including headache, altered cognitive judgement, and increased breathing frequency, among other symptoms.Ultimately, the impact of a mask on its wearer depends on the wearer's health, any pre-existing respiratory illnesses, the type of mask, and the length of time the person wears it. In most instances, the effects of prolonged cloth mask usage are small. Masks, like most short-term measures to prevent the spread of COVID-19, should be worn only if the wearer has to be in close proximity to others, and be used in addition to necessary measures like social distancing, and more. As such, we rate this claim about the dangers of masks as "false."

: Brand New iPhone 6 for $1

['Rumor: Apple is selling brand new iPhone 6S units for $1 each.']

Claim: Apple is selling brand new iPhone 6S units for $1 each. Example: [Collected via Facebook, October 2015] Apple iPhones for $1....is it a trap/scam? Origins: Yet another form of the ubiquitous "sweepstakes scam" hit social media in October 2015, with the repeated posting of a Facebook item promoting "Apple's Shocking 2015 Sale," under which customers "Can Now Get a Brand New iPhone 6 for $1." Those who clicked on the link underlying such posts were taken to a page imitating a news article, reporting that "As part of a special promotion, Apple is working with its trusted distribution partner, FunkyClock, to give away iPhone 6S's that cost 99% off the regular retail price." However, FunkyClock isn't a "trusted distribution partner" of Apple, and they aren't participating in a promotion to "give away" iPhone 6S or sell them for $1 each. FunkyClock is a game site, and users who read the fine print for this promotion will note that they have to sign up with FunkyClock, supply a credit card number, play at least 10 complete games, and agree to pay a hefty monthly subscription fee of $119, all to gain a one in 500 chance of winning a "free" iPhone 6. Of course, $1 isn't the price of a "New iPhone 6S"; it's a charge that will be applied against the credit card number you supply to FunkyClock to ensure it's valid (and thus open to future additional charges). It's also unlikely there will be any actual "winners" of "free" iPhone 6S in this promotion, but even if there were, agreeing to pay $119 per month to gain a 0.2% chance of winning an iPhone that retails in the $700-800 range is a very bad bet indeed. Last updated: 13 October 2015.

['credit']

False

But FunkyClock isn't a "trusted distribution partner" of Apple, and they aren't participating in a promotion to "give away' iPhone 6s or sell them for $1 each. FunkyClock is a game site, and users who read the fine print for this promotion will note that they have to sign up with FunkyClock, supply a credit card number, play at least 10 complete games, and agree to pay a hefty monthly subscription fee of $119, all to gain a one in 500 chance at winning a "free" iPhone 6.

Fraudulent Scheme Involving Government Grants

['Are telephone solicitors looking to hook you up with a variety of government grants?']

Scam: Telephone solicitors call out of the blue, looking to hook you up with thousands of dollars worth of government grants (aka free money) they claim you are eligible for. REAL FRAUD WHICH COSTS ITS VICTIMS AROUND $250. Example: [Collected on the Internet, 2004] There is a telephone scam targeting people across the nation. The caller identifies himself as a representative of the Government Grant Association. The caller then leads the person to believe they have qualified for a government grant, and in order to pay out the grant, they need the person's bank account number or they have the account number and need the person to verify it. Origins: A new form of the "prepayment" con has been blanketing the US throughout 2004. Through it, the unsuspecting are lured by the promise of government grants into agreeing to have an "up-front fee" (usually $249) siphoned from their bank accounts. Though the fee is taken immediately, the grants never materialize, leaving those who have been led to believe they were about to be enriched to the tune of thousands of dollars sadly disappointed and a few hundred dollars poorer. "Prepayment" frauds are far from brand new; many successful flim-flams hold out the carrot of big money (which never materializes no matter how hard it is chased after) to seduce the gullible into parting with some of their hard-earned funds. Those so deceived have acted on the belief they were arranging hard-to-secure loans at very favorable rates, often with distant countries said to be eager to lend to Americans. Or they were promised access to little-known and almost-forgotten college grants. Or they received the news they'd won foreign fabulous wealth in lotteries they had no recollection of entering. Even the venerable Nigerian scam is a prepayment con: though its victims initially believe that for helping distressed foreigners move large sums of cash from their country they will receive millions of dollars, very early in the process they discover they will have to pay numerous sums to various individuals to bring this about. Folks conned via prepayment schemes mistakenly believe they stand to gain vast amounts of something for practically nothing. Acting on that faith, they willingly part with funds they would ordinarily be reluctant to spend, yet which, by comparison to the prizes about to be gained, momentarily appear to be relatively small sums. The 2004 'government grant' fraud operates on that principle. Those contacted by such cheats are told they are entitled to claim government grants worth anywhere from $8,000 to $25,000. In return for their banking information and what now seems an insignificant processing fee of $249, said grants will be directly deposited into their accounts. Those who suspect something might be wrong with the notion of the government handing them money for no discernible reason are told they are eligible for this form of largesse as a reward for having paid their taxes promptly for the past few years or because they are senior citizens. Individuals who further question the process are issued all manner of guarantees, including the provision of 800 numbers to call if at any time they wish to bow out and have their up-front fees refunded. "Supervisors" may join phone conversations between scam artists and their potential victims to assure those expressing doubts about the government wanting to give them money that everything is meticulously legitimate. The doubters may also be given the addresses of websites to examine which, they are told, will explain in far greater detail how these grants operate. These promises and seeming proofs serve only one purpose, and it is not the protection of the consumer; they work to lend an air of legitimacy to the pitch so as to soothe the suspicions of those about to be taken. Very few will think to call those numbers; they will instead trust that what they have been told are guarantees are, in fact, valid ones. Those inquisitive enough to dial those 800 numbers find they either go unanswered or have been disconnected. Those operating versions of this scam have, in the past, identified themselves as representatives of granting agencies with names such as the Government Grant Center, Consumer Grants USA, Ultimate Funding Inc., Government Grant USA, Federal Government Information Center, Federal Government Grant Information Center, National Grant Center, Federal Research Funding, Customer Care Plus, and Department of Revenue. However, the absence of a purported grant facilitation entity from this list does not prove it is legitimate, so no comfort should be taken from its absence. Swindlers routinely invent impressive-sounding names and titles for themselves and the entities they supposedly represent. "That's what scam artists do," said Pat Coakley of the Better Business Bureau, "they operate under a variety of names and phone numbers, then leave town and start all over again under other assumed names." As to how the con is run, one of our readers who was contacted by someone intent on victimizing him with the 'government grant' scheme reported this exchange: [Bryan] Good morning, this is Bryan. [Swindler] My name is Alec Watson. (Female with an Indian or Pakistani accent.) [Bryan] This is Bryan. [Swindler] Can I speak with Bryan P. please? [Bryan] Speaking. (I never answer in an affirmative manner anymore. I once had my long-distance carrier changed because I said yes when they asked me if I was Bryan. Once they recorded my yes, they had me saying yes to anything.) [Swindler] Again, my name is Alec Watson from the Las Vegas Government Grant Processing Center. And you have been approved to receive an eight thousand dollar grant. We would like to verify your information. Do you live at _____? Do you still work for _____? [Bryan] Correct. Why would I get a grant for $8,000? [Swindler] We have noticed that you have paid your taxes on time for the last 20 years. Can you please verify your bank? [Bryan] North Island Financial Credit Union. [Swindler] Can you tell me what your bank routing number is? [Bryan] No, I cannot. [Swindler] Bryan, we can process you for $8,000 for a full free grant. We can automatically withdraw the processing amount from your bank account. Do you think that a cost of $257 is worth receiving $8,000? [Bryan] Well, if you're charging me $257, then it isn't free, now is it? [Swindler] I can give you a few minutes to get your checkbook. [Bryan] I am at work. I do not have a checkbook with me. (Not kidding; my wife knows better than to send me to work with a checkbook during the holidays.) [Swindler] A deposit slip? [Bryan] No. [Swindler] Sir, we cannot finish without your banking routing number; can you call someone at home and receive it? [Bryan] Why can't you subtract the money from the grant? [Swindler] Because we are not allowed to touch the grant money. Did you get your checking information yet? [Bryan] Please remove me from your calling list. [Swindler] Bryan, you don't want the $8,000? We are not authorized to remove you. [Bryan] Okay, I found you on the web, and it says you are a rip-off. Please let me talk to a supervisor. [Swindler] CLICK. As Bryan experienced, the quite reasonable question of "Why can't you deduct the fee from the funds you'll be sending me?" is always countered by the claim that it is impossible to do so. Others who have been party to such come-ons report being told laws precluded the use of the grant (or loan or scholarship or lottery prize) for anything other than its designated purpose, which included barring the use of even a small part of those funds for payment of processing fees. Bryan's example also shows how much he was pressured to provide his banking information. Someone less aware of the possibility of being conned might well have given up that number under such a barrage. The scam succeeds as well as it does, thanks in part to the many television commercials touting free government money. (Such advertisers are vending books containing the contact information for a variety of government grants, loans, and subsidies.) Though there are genuine government grants to be had, they are not available to just anyone for no purpose. Forget about the ads on TV; there are not untold troves of government funds available just for the asking. Grants are awarded on the basis of specific criteria having been met for specific programs. Such grants are very strictly administered, require the completion of a great deal of paperwork, and are overseen at every step. These are not "Fill out a simple form, then cash a huge check" types of propositions; these are "Prove to us that you qualify under this program, then, provided you are engaged in the activity we are interested in fostering, we might subsidize some of your costs" sorts of deals. The hoops to be jumped through are many and varied, and there is precious little by way of a freebie to it. Regarding the government grant scam, keep these three points in mind: The U.S. Government does not telephone people to offer them grants. Grants are never guaranteed, nor are they issued for no apparent purpose, so folks should be downright suspicious of any talk of grants where the words "free" or "guarantee" are mentioned. Real government grants require extensive documentation with great attention to detail. There is nothing simple or painless about securing a government grant. How To Avoid Falling Victim To Prepayment Scams: Above all else, have nothing to do with 'deal of a lifetime' offers that require payment in advance of fees. Do not fall for schemes whereby you are required to prepay taxes on lottery winnings, or pay to have a prize shipped to you, or are to be charged a loan application fee. Do not pay someone for the privilege of working for them. With regard to 'free government grants' come-ons, disabuse yourself of the notion that the U.S. government is in the business of providing grants (aka free money) to whichever of its citizens have made it their habit to pay their taxes on time. (Rather, the U.S. government offers a disincentive to those who are tardy with their payments; it assesses penalties for deadlines missed and charges interest on the amounts overdue.) Stop believing in the chimera of "something for nothing."

['loan']

NEI

"Prepayment" frauds are far from brand-spanking new many successful flim-flams hold out the carrot of big money (which never materializes no matter how hard it is chased after) to seduce the gullible into parting with some of their hard-earned funds. Those so gulled have acted on the belief they were arranging hard-to-secure loans at very favorable rates, often with distant countries said to be rabid with desire to lend to Americans. Or they were promised access to little-known and almost-forgotten college grants. Or they received the news they'd won foreign fabulous wealth in lotteries they had no recollection of entering. Even the venerable Nigerian scam is a prepayment con: though its victims initially believe that for helping distressed foreigners move large sums of cash from their country they will receive millions of dollars, very early into the process they discover they will have to dole out innumerable sums to various folks to bring this about.

Visa Fraud Investigation Scam

['Scam: Callers pretend to be fraud investigation agents for Visa and MasterCard in order to obtain credit card security codes.']

Scam: Callers pretend to be fraud investigation agents for Visa and MasterCard in order to obtain credit card security codes. Example: [Collected on the Internet, 2003] We all receive emails regarding one scam or another, but last week I REALLY DID get scammed! Both VISA and MasterCard informed me that this scam is currently being perpetrated throughout the Midwest, with some variation in the product or amount. If you receive a call, just hang up. My husband was called on Wednesday from "VISA," and I was called on Thursday from "MasterCard." It worked like this: The person calling says, "This is Carl Patterson (any name), and I'm calling from the Security and Fraud department at VISA. My badge number is 12460. Your card has been flagged for an unusual purchase pattern, and I'm calling to verify. This would be on your VISA card issued by 5/3 Bank. Did you purchase an Anti-Telemarketing Device for $497.99 from a marketing company based in Arizona?" When you say "No," the caller continues, "Then we will be issuing a credit to your account. This is a company we have been watching, and the charges range from $297 to $497, just under the $500 purchase pattern that flags most cards. Before your next statement, the credit will be sent to (gives you your address), is that correct?" You say, "Yes." The caller continues, "I will be starting a fraud investigation. If you have any questions, you should call the 800 number listed on your card, 1-800-VISA, and ask for Security. You will need to refer to this Control #." Then they give you a six-digit number. "Do you need me to read it again?" The caller then says he "needs to verify you are in possession of your card. Turn the card over. There are seven numbers; the first four are 1234 (whatever), and the next three are the security numbers that verify you are in possession of the card. These are the numbers you use to make internet purchases to prove you have the card. Read me the three numbers." Then he says, "That is correct. I just needed to verify that the card has not been lost or stolen and that you still have your card. Do you have any other questions? Don't hesitate to call back if you do." You actually say very little, and they never ask for or tell you the card number. However, after we were called on Wednesday, we called back within 20 minutes to ask a question. Are we glad we did! The REAL VISA security department told us it was a scam, and in the last 15 minutes, a new purchase of $497.99 WAS put on our card. To make a long story short, we filed a real fraud report, closed the VISA card, and they are reissuing it with a new number. What the scam wants is the three-digit number, and once the charge goes through, they keep charging every few days. By the time you get your statement, you think the credit is coming, and then it's harder to actually file a fraud report. The real VISA reinforced that they will never ask for anything on the card (they already know). What makes this more remarkable is that on Thursday, I received a call from "Jason Richardson of MasterCard," with a word-for-word repeat of the VISA scam. This time, I didn't let him finish; I hung up. We filed a police report (as instructed by VISA), and they said they are taking several of these reports daily and to inform friends, relatives, and coworkers. Origins: There are five points we generally try to apply in evaluating warnings about possible criminal schemes or activities: 1) Is the phenomenon outlined in the warning technically possible as described? 2) Is the phenomenon outlined in the warning plausible? (That is, some criminal schemes are technically possible, but they're too difficult, cumbersome, or expensive to plausibly enact on anything more than a very limited basis.) 3) Are there any verifiable instances of people having been victimized in the manner described by the warning? 4) Is there evidence that the criminal activity described in the warning is widespread? 5) Is the criminal activity described in the warning something the average person might fall victim to? The scheme outlined in the message quoted above might be categorized as a "social engineering" scam—a technique that preys upon people's unquestioning acceptance of authority and willingness to cooperate in order to extract sensitive information (such as computer passwords or credit card numbers). In this case, the scammers' target data are the three-digit security codes found on the back of MasterCard and Visa cards. Just as the Internet and other technologies have greatly expanded the possibilities for making credit card purchases without the need to physically present a card to the seller, they have also created additional opportunities for identity thieves to profit from stolen credit card numbers. After obtaining credit card numbers (often through simple means such as rummaging through trash to find discarded receipts or statements), criminals can employ various methods (e.g., mail order, phone order, Internet purchases, posing as merchants) to obtain money and merchandise by charging against the cardholder's account—even though the credit card itself remains securely inside the cardholder's wallet. The victim may not even realize anything is amiss until they receive their next statement in the mail several weeks later. Although safeguards have been enacted to catch most of these types of fraud, they are often defeated by a combination of lax security and clever criminals who know how to circumvent them. One of those safeguards is the addition of three-digit security codes (known as CVC2 or CVV2 codes) to every MasterCard and Visa card, codes that are indent-printed in the signature panels on the backs of the cards but are not encoded in the magnetic stripes and do not print on sales receipts. Many vendors cannot process credit card transactions without obtaining these security codes from their customers, thereby ensuring that persons placing orders have physical possession of the cards being used (and haven't simply scammed the sixteen-digit account numbers imprinted on the front of the cards). Thus, the scheme described above might be used by identity thieves who have managed to collect credit card numbers but need to obtain the associated security codes to process charges against the accounts. So, back to our five points: 1) Is this possible? Yes, it's possible that scammers might obtain credit card numbers and then use the technique described above to acquire security codes and process fraudulent transactions against the accounts. 2) Is this plausible? The scam as described above is not extraordinarily difficult or expensive to execute; all it requires is access to a telephone and the establishment of a merchant account for processing credit card transactions. It also assumes the scammer already has the names, addresses, phone numbers, and credit card numbers (plus expiration dates) of their victims, but that information might be obtained in various ways (such as breaking into and stealing customer data from merchant websites). Whether the same scammer could process more than a handful of fraudulent charges before complaints cause their merchant account to be shut down is questionable, though, and most credit card issuers now have checks in place to prevent the shipping of merchandise to any address other than the card's registered billing address and other "card not present" (CNP) scams. 3) Are there known instances of this occurring? We spoke with a representative of MasterCard, who told us that although she couldn't verify the specific details of the message reproduced above, this type of scam does occur and isn't new; it's been happening ever since MasterCard started putting CVC2 security codes on all its cards back in 1997. (Visa did not add CVV2 codes to all their credit cards until 2001.) She also reiterated that MasterCard would not ask a cardholder to disclose security codes or provide any information verifying physical possession of a card; any such inquiries regarding security matters would come from the financial institution that issued the credit card, not from MasterCard itself. 4) Is this a widespread phenomenon? Unfortunately, neither MasterCard nor VISA would provide us with any statistics regarding the specific scam described here or confirm any actual instances of its occurrence (other than to note that using the telephone to trick cardholders into divulging their security codes is a type of fraud that has been occurring for several years and is ongoing). However, numerous readers have informed us that they've received calls from individuals identifying themselves as fraud investigation agents and asking for sensitive personal data, so (even allowing for the possibility that some of those calls were legitimate) we would have to say anecdotal evidence indicates this scam is still being perpetrated, if only infrequently. 5) Is this something that might affect the average person? Yes, anyone who holds a credit card is a potential victim of this type of fraud. The best protection against these types of telephone schemes for obtaining sensitive credit card information is to always verify the identities of the people with whom you speak. If you have security questions or concerns about your credit card, call the financial institution that issued your card directly. If someone contacts you by phone about your credit card, ask the caller to provide their name, department, and extension, then hang up and call them back through the phone number listed on your credit card or billing statement. Additional information: Recognizing Credit Card Fraud (Consumer @ction) Last updated: 1 April 2015

['credit']

False

2) Is this plausible? The scam as described above is not extraordinarily difficult or expensive to pull off; all it requires is access to a telephone and the establishment of a merchant account for processing credit card transactions. It also assumes the scammer already has the names, addresses, phone numbers, and credit card numbers (plus expiration dates) of his victims, but that information might be obtained in a variety of ways (such as breaking into and stealing customer data from merchant web sites). Whether the same scammer could process more than a handful of phony charges before complaints caused his merchant account to be shut down is problematic, though, and most credit card issuers now have checks in place to prevent the shipping of merchandise to anywhere other than the card's registered billing address and other "card not present" (CNP scams). Recognizing Credit Card Fraud (Consumer @ction)

Reselling U.S. Postage Stamps

['Is it illegal to resell U.S. postage stamps for a price greater than their face value?']

Claim: U.S. postage stamps may not be resold for a price greater than their face value. Example: [Collected via e-mail, October 2007] I was always under the impression that selling a regular US First-Class stamp for profit was illegal. I thought you could only sell it for face value, is this true? Origins: These days postal customers have a multiplicity of options for buying postage: They can purchase stamps not only at post offices but also from private mailbox chain outlets and from many grocery, warehouse, and convenience stores; they can order stamps by phone, through the mail, or over the Internet; and they can even print out postage stamps themselves through programs operated by authorized U.S. Postal Service (USPS) vendors. It wasn't all that long ago, however, when many customers had few (if any) alternatives for obtaining stamps other than by trekking down to the local post office. It might be memories from those days when the U.S. Post Office Department was strictly a government agency (i.e., prior to the creation of the USPS in 1970) and its offices were the only sales outlet for stamps for many people that have fostered the mistaken belief it is illegal to re-sell U.S. postage stamps for a price greater than their face value. Perhaps people viewed postage stamps as a type of government service, and therefore they thought making aprofit from the resale of stamps was a form of illegal profiteering. We know this not to be true from anecdotal evidence: Years ago, one of the few sources of stamps other than the post office was the mechanical, lever-operated machines commonly found in grocery stores which dispensed individual stamps (rather than booklets) and were notorious for not providing full value depositing a dime in such a machine would typically fetch the customer something like one five-cent stamp and two one-cent stamps, or a quarter might buy three six-cent stamps and one three-cent stamp. Even today, the private mailbox outlets that have sprung up across the country often add surcharges to the price of stamps they offer their customers as a convenience. (Plus, if selling stamps for more than their face value were truly prohibited by law, then all philatelic sales of uncancelled stamps would be illegal.) In any case, we don't need to rely on anecdotal evidence, because the Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) section of the USPS's web site explains that it has no control over the prices other entities charge for reselling U.S. postage stamps: FAQ Selling stamps at a higher price The Postal Service sells stamps at face value to everyone. We have no control over the pricing policies of private entrepreneurs, companies or agencies who resell our products. A charge at a higher price is most likely imposed to earn a return on their investment of capital and effort. The prices they charge are, no doubt, established on the basis of their needs and market evaluations. Customers may avoid paying more than the stated value for First-Class Mail postage by purchasing stamps at their Post Office, through Stamps By Mail, phone, online, Automated Postal Centers and retail outlets that are involved with our consignment programs or from one of the many postal stores. Last updated: 19 August 2013

['profit']

False

In any case, we don't need to rely on anecdotal evidence, because the Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) section of the USPS's web site explains that it has no control over the prices other entities charge for reselling U.S. postage stamps:

Deficit spending exploded during the Obama administration to $5.3 trillion over four years, compared to $2 trillion in eight years under President George W. Bush.

[]

Remember those nerdy charts that Ross Perot flashed during his third-party run for president in 1992? The Texas billionaire's visual aids warned of the perils of America's mounting government debt. Twenty years later, Wisconsin's junior U.S. Senator, Republican Ron Johnson, is taking a page from Perot as he acts as a surrogate for Mitt Romney and advocates for a spending slowdown. Explaining one of his digital charts during a Sept. 11, 2012 campaign stop in Sheboygan, Johnson criticized Obama for saying his administration's proposed Buffett Rule tax plan for million-dollar earners would stabilize our debt and deficits for the next decade. "I haven't yet publicly called President Obama a liar," Johnson told his audience. "But I'm saying he lies. Slight diplomatic difference." Johnson stated that the Buffett Rule would raise just $5 billion a year. He is correct, as PolitiFact Ohio found in rating a claim by Sen. Rob Portman that it would bring in less than $5 billion per year... Enough to pay one week's interest on the national debt. Johnson's presentation uses a chart to contrast the Buffett Rule's revenue potential with the deficits accumulated under Obama (2009-2012) and over the two terms of his predecessor, Republican George W. Bush (2001-2008). The chart shows deficits totaling $2 trillion in eight years under Bush and $5.3 trillion under Obama in just four years. A caption on the chart states that those deficits exploded during the Obama administration. Is Johnson right about the deficit numbers and their rapid growth? As backup, Johnson's campaign cited numbers from the White House's Office of Management and Budget. The figures show red-ink budgets in seven of eight years that coincide with Bush's term. The annual deficits totaled $820 billion in his first term and nearly $1.2 trillion in his second. Add them up, and there's the $2 trillion figure cited by Johnson. That same White House table shows four years of deficits for 2009-12, the time frame that coincides with the Obama era, ranging from $1.29 trillion to $1.4 trillion. The total, including estimated figures for 2012, is $5.33 trillion. That's nearly triple the Bush deficit figure in half the time. It seems simple, with the numbers and the trend matching up with Perot's, er, Johnson's chart. We wish it were that simple. But there is considerable disagreement in academic and political circles over how to assign responsibility to presidents for spending and deficits. Using the same table and a slightly different approach can put a somewhat different spin on the trend line—though we found no scenario under which the Bush-era deficits top those under Obama. Here's why. The big question any researcher faces is when to start and end the clock when looking at spending and deficits by presidents. It would be tidy to start the clock on Inauguration Day, but the federal budget year begins on Oct. 1. That means an incoming president inherits a budget in progress from his predecessor, though he often makes changes. That timing mismatch makes a pretty big difference, for example, in pinning deficit numbers on Bush and Obama. To wit: Democrat Bill Clinton's last budget, for fiscal 2001, resulted in a surplus of $128 billion—the last black-ink budget on record. But Johnson attributed that surplus to Bush, who entered office on Jan. 20, 2001. Johnson argues that once elected, the budget can be changed by the new president. Similarly, on the back end of the Bush years, Johnson assigns the eye-popping 2009 deficit of $1.4 trillion entirely to Obama—even though Obama was working with Bush's last budget, which took effect in October 2008, during the final months of Bush's second term. That methodology becomes even more important when you consider that just before Bush left office, the deficit for fiscal year 2009 was already projected to be $1.2 trillion, according to the scorekeeping agency for Congress, as reported by PolitiFact. So, Johnson attributes the 2009 deficit entirely to Obama even though much of it was already anticipated before the Democrats' inauguration. (By the end of the 2009 fiscal year, the deficit rose to $1.4 trillion in part due to Obama's economic stimulus plan). What about Johnson's methodology? We asked three experts who closely follow the budget, and each said there is no consensus on how to attribute the overlapping budget years. Steve Ellis, vice president of Taxpayers for Common Sense, said apportioning responsibility is really tricky. "Looking at what has happened—budget deficit-wise—during the Bush and the Obama presidencies doesn't tell the whole picture because of the differences in the fiscal year and the impacts of policies that were enacted prior to either of them assuming office," Ellis wrote in an email. Still, Ellis said he considered Johnson's numbers correct even if the presentation was simplistic. What's more, there are some extra complicating factors unique to the Bush-Obama changeover, such as how best to parcel out the deficit blame for such things as Bush's major tax cuts and Obama's more modest tax trims, two wars that overlap their presidencies, two recessions, a Wall Street bailout that each supported, and major new programs under each (Medicare prescription drugs, stimulus). The Great Recession of 2007-2009, which fueled deficits when tax collections fell, also overlapped the two presidencies. Jason Peuquet, research director for the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, said Johnson's numbers were defensible. He suggested looking at the increase in debt—as opposed to deficits—because it can be tracked to the day a president starts and ends a term. By that measure, we found a $4.9 trillion increase in gross public debt in Bush's two terms vs. $5.4 trillion so far in Obama's single term. Gary Burtless, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, said there is no good answer to your question that is going to satisfy everyone. Our rating: Johnson's chart showed $2 trillion in deficits under Bush and $5.3 trillion under Obama, and concluded that deficits exploded during the Obama administration. The numbers check out, but comparing presidents' budget records is not as simple as Johnson's chart suggests. For instance, Bush owns some debatable piece of the Obama deficits. We rate Johnson's claim Mostly True.

['Debt', 'Deficit', 'Federal Budget', 'Taxes', 'Wisconsin']

True

Remember those nerdychartsthat Ross Perot flashed during his third-party run for president in 1992?The Texas billionaires visual aids warned of the perils of Americas mounting government debt.Twenty years later, Wisconsins junior U.S. Senator, RepublicanRon Johnson, is taking a page from Perot as he acts as a surrogate for Mitt Romney and advocates for a spending slowdown.Explaining one of hisdigital chartsduring a Sept. 11, 2012 campaign stop in Sheboygan, Johnson ripped Obama forsayinghis administrations proposedBuffett ruletax plan for million-dollar earners would stabilize our debt and deficits for the next decade.I havent yet publicly called President Obama a liar, Johnsontold his audience. But Im saying he lies. Slight diplomatic difference.Johnson said the Buffett rule would raise just $5 billion a year. Hes right, as PolitiFact Ohio found in ratingTruea claim by Sen. Rob Portman that it would bring in less than $5 billion per year... Enough to pay one weeks interest on the national debt.Johnsons presentation uses a chart to contrast the Buffett Rules revenue potential to the deficits accumulated under Obama (2009-2012) and over the two terms of his predecessor, Republican George W. Bush (2001-2008).The chart shows deficits totalling $2 trillion in eight years under Bush, and $5.3 trillion under Obama in just four years. A caption on the chart says those deficits exploded during the Obama administration.Is Johnson right on the deficit numbers and their rapid growth?As backup, Johnsons campaign cited numbers from the White HousesOffice of Management and Budget.The figures show red-ink budgets in seven of eight years that coincide with Bushs term. The annual deficits totalled $820 billion in his first term and nearly $1.2 trillion in his second.Add them up and theres the $2 trillion figure cited by Johnson.That same White House table shows four years of deficits for 2009-12, the time frame that coincides with the Obama era, ranging from $1.29 trillion to $1.4 trillion. The total, including estimated figures for 2012, is $5.33 trillion.Thats nearly triple the Bush deficit figure, in half the time.It seems simple, with the numbers and the trend matching up with Perots, er, Johnsons chart.We wish it were that simple.But there is considerable disagreement in academic and political circles over how to assign responsibility to presidents for spending and deficits.Using the same table and a slightly different approach can put a somewhat different spin on the trend line -- though we found no scenario under which the Bush-era deficits top those under Obama.Heres why.The big question any researcher faces is when to start and end the clock when looking at spending and deficit by presidents.It would be tidy to start the clock on Inauguration Day, but the federal budget year begins Oct. 1. That means an incoming president inherits a budget-in-progress from his predecessor, though he often makes changes.That timing mismatch makes a pretty big difference, for example, in pinning deficit numbers on Bush and Obama.To wit: Democrat Bill Clintons last budget, for fiscal 2001, resulted in a surplus of $128 billion -- the last black-ink budget on record. But Johnson attributed that surplus to Bush, who entered office Jan. 20, 2001. Johnson argues that once elected the budget can be changed by the new president.Similarly, on the back end of the Bush years, Johnson gives the eye-popping 2009 deficit of $1.4 trillion all to Obama -- even though Obama was working with Bushs last budget, which took effect in October 2008, during the final months of Bushs second term.That methodology becomes even more important when you consider that just before Bush left office, the deficit for fiscal year 2009 already was projected to be $1.2 trillion, according to the scorekeeping agency for Congress, as reported byPolitiFact.So, Johnson attributes the 2009 deficit entirely to Obama even though much it was already anticipated before the Democrats inauguration. (By the end of the 2009 fiscal year, the deficit rose to $1.4 trillion in part due to Obamas economic stimulus plan).What about Johnsons methodology?We asked three experts who closely follow the budget, and each said there is no consensus on how to attribute the overlapping budget years.Steve Ellis, vice president of Taxpayers for Common Sense, said apportioning responsibility is really tricky.Looking at what has happened -- budget deficit-wise -- during the Bush and the Obama presidencies doesnt tell the whole picture because of the differences of the fiscal year and impacts of policies that were enacted prior to either of them assuming office, Ellis wrote in an email.Still, Ellis said he considered Johnsons numbers correct even if the presentation was simplistic.Whats more, there are some extra complicating factors unique to the Bush-Obama changeover, such as how best to parcel out the deficit blame for such things as Bushs major tax cuts and Obamas more modest tax trims, two wars that overlap their presidencies, two recessions, a Wall Street bailout that each supported, and major new programs under each (Medicare prescription drugs, stimulus).The Great Recession of 2007-2009, which fueled deficits when tax collections fell, also overlapped the two presidencies.Jason Peuquet, research director for the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, said Johnsons numbers were defensible. He suggested looking at theincrease in debt-- as opposed to deficits -- because it can be tracked to the day a president starts and ends a term.By that measure, we found a $4.9 trillion increase in gross public debt in Bushs two terms vs. $5.4 trillion so far in Obamas single term.Gary Burtless, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, said there is no good answer to your question that is going to satisfy everyone.Our ratingJohnsons chart showed $2 trillion in deficits under Bush and $5.3 trillion under Obama, and concluded that deficits exploded during the Obama administration.The numbers check out, but comparing presidents budget records is not as simple as Johnsons chart suggests. For instance, Bush owns some debatable piece of the Obama deficits.We rate Johnsons claim Mostly True.

Was This Ship Built Using Steel from the World Trade Center?

["The USS New York's bow stem was said to incorporate 7.5 tons of scrap steel from the World Trade Center."]

The name New York has been borne by at least seven different U.S. military ships, most recently the nuclear submarine USS New York City, commissioned in 1979 and retired in 1997. Construction on another ship bearing that name, the 684-foot amphibious transport dock ship USS New York, began at a shipyard in Avondale, Louisiana. On 1 March 2008 the new vessel was christened there, and it was commissioned in November 2009: commissioned Artist's Rendering of the USS New York With a year to go before it even touches the water, the Navy's amphibious assault ship, USS New York, has already made history. It was built with 24 tons of scrap steel from the World Trade Center. It is the fifth in a new class of warship designed for missions that include special operations against terrorists. It will carry a crew of 360 sailors and 700 combat-ready Marines to be delivered ashore by helicopters and assault craft. Steel from the World Trade Center was melted down in a foundry in Amite, La., to cast the ship's bow section. When it was poured into the molds on Sept. 9, 2003, "those big rough steelworkers treated it with total reverence," recalled Navy Capt. Kevin Wensing, who was there. "It was a spiritual moment for everybody there." Junior Chavers, foundry operations manager, said that when the trade center steel first arrived, he touched it with his hand and the "hair on my neck stood up." "It had a big meaning to it for all of us," he said. "They knocked us down. They can't keep us down. We're going to be back." The ship's motto? 'Never Forget' The vessel was of interest because its bow stem was said to incorporate 7.5 tons of scrap steel from the World Trade Center which was melted down at a foundry in Amite, Louisiana. (A photograph of employees pouring the molten scrap steel at the Amite Foundry can be viewed here.) The name New York was reportedly revived for the warship (which was already under construction) at the request of New York governor George Pataki to commemorate the September 11 terrorist attacks on the U.S., creating an exception to current U.S. Navy policy of using state names only for nuclear submarines. here According to the Associated Press, the USS New York would be the fifth ship of its class, at least two more of which will also be named for locations associated with the 9/11 attacks: USS New York USS New York is the fifth in a new class of warship designed for missions that include special operations against terrorists. It will carry a crew of 360 sailors and 700 combat-ready Marines to be delivered ashore by helicopters and assault craft. Later ships in the class will include USS Arlington, the location of the Pentagon, also struck by a hijacked jetliner on Sept. 11, and USS Somerset, named for the Pennsylvania county where United Flight 93 crashed after its passengers fought off hijackers apparently planning to attack another Washington target. The quotes from Navy personnel and shipyard workers included in the e-mailed version reproduced above were taken from an Associated Press article about the ship. article In December 2006, the following image began to circulate with this e-mail in place of the artist's rendition displayed above, although it is not a photograph of the USS New York but rather the then-recently commissioned USS San Antonio: USS San Antonio The following set of photographs was taken at the christening of LPD 21 with the name USS New York at Northrop Grumman's Avondale, Louisiana, shipyard on 1 March 2008: christening On 13 October 2009. the USS New York left the Louisiana shipyard for New York, where it was scheduled to be formally commissioned on 7 November 2009: A Navy assault ship built with tons of steel salvaged from the World Trade Center towers began its journey to New York [on October 13], sailing down the Mississippi River in a pea-soup fog as watchers along the levee strained for a glimpse. The USS New York, named to commemorate the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, left the Northrop Grumman shipyard where it was built for the trip to its namesake city. The $1 billion ship will be formally commissioned in New York in early November. The New York is 684 feet long and can carry up to 800 Marines. It has a flight deck that can handle helicopters and the MV-22 Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft. Four tugboats performed an intricate set of maneuvers to pull the warship from the dock at the New Orleans-area shipyard and turn it 180 degrees toward the waters of Gulf of Mexico. An armed Coast Guard speedboat and a helicopter flying overhead guarded the vessel. The ship will sail through the Gulf and around Florida before turning north and continuing to New York. Bohrer, Becky. "Ship Built with WTC Steel Christened." Associated Press. 1 March 2008. Sayre, Alan. "Ship Built with WTC Steel Sails for Namesake City." Associated Press. 13 October 2009. Associated Press. "New Navy Ship Being Built with WTC Steel." ABC News. 3 April 2006.

['interest']

True

The name New York has been borne by at least seven different U.S. military ships, most recently the nuclear submarine USS New York City, commissioned in 1979 and retired in 1997. Construction on another ship bearing that name, the 684-foot amphibious transport dock ship USS New York, began at a shipyard in Avondale, Louisiana. On 1 March 2008 the new vessel was christened there, and it was commissioned in November 2009:The vessel was of interest because its bow stem was said to incorporate 7.5 tons of scrap steel from the World Trade Center which was melted down at a foundry in Amite, Louisiana. (A photograph of employees pouring the molten scrap steel at the Amite Foundry can be viewed here.) The name New York was reportedly revived for the warship (which was already under construction) at the request of New York governor George Pataki to commemorate the September 11 terrorist attacks on the U.S., creating an exception to current U.S. Navy policy of using state names only for nuclear submarines.According to the Associated Press, the USS New York would be the fifth ship of its class, at least two more of which will also be named for locations associated with the 9/11 attacks:The quotes from Navy personnel and shipyard workers included in the e-mailed version reproduced above were taken from an Associated Press article about the ship.In December 2006, the following image began to circulate with this e-mail in place of the artist's rendition displayed above, although it is not a photograph of the USS New York but rather the then-recently commissioned USS San Antonio:The following set of photographs was taken at the christening of LPD 21 with the name USS New York at Northrop Grumman's Avondale, Louisiana, shipyard on 1 March 2008:

The Minnesota Vikings have opened their stadium to provide shelter for homeless individuals.

['Several news outlets filed reports incorrectly stating that the Minnesota Vikings had opened their stadium to shelter the homeless on a cold winter night.']

On 18 December 2016, Twitter user David Dellanave posted a message claiming that the Minnesota Vikings football team had opened up U.S. Bank Stadium to shelter the homeless on a particularly cold winter night: posted Although Dellanave is not a reporter or a spokesperson for the Minnesota Vikings, his message was picked up and reported as fact by several news outlets, including Yahoo News and CBS Sports: Yahoo News CBS Sports The Minnesota Vikings are embracing the Christmas spirit early and helping out the community on Sunday night. According to David Dellanave, U.S. Bank Stadium will be open to the local homeless population during a night with crazy cold temperatures. The Minnesota Vikings, however, did not open U.S. Bank Stadium on 18 December 2016 to shelter the homeless. Dellanave eventually deleted his original tweet and posted follow-up messages claiming that he had posted the false information as an attempt to draw attention to a social issue: Tweet deleted. Point was to highlight a social issue and waste of taxpayer money that could help people instead of make private profits 1/3 David Dellanave (@ddn) December 19, 2016 December 19, 2016 Zero interest in retweets or followers, have never cared and never will. 2/3 David Dellanave (@ddn) December 19, 2016 December 19, 2016 But most importantly if I thought for a second someone in need would take it seriously, wouldn't be worth the potential good. 3/3 David Dellanave (@ddn) December 19, 2016 December 19, 2016 I'm sorry if this obviously misguided attempt at highlighting a social issue hurt anyone. Didn't think a tweet would go so far & I regret it David Dellanave (@ddn) December 19, 2016 December 19, 2016

['profit']

False

On 18 December 2016, Twitter user David Dellanave posted a message claiming that the Minnesota Vikings football team had opened up U.S. Bank Stadium to shelter the homeless on a particularly cold winter night:Although Dellanave is not a reporter or a spokesperson for the Minnesota Vikings, his message was picked up and reported as fact by several news outlets, including Yahoo News and CBS Sports: David Dellanave (@ddn) December 19, 2016 David Dellanave (@ddn) December 19, 2016 David Dellanave (@ddn) December 19, 2016 David Dellanave (@ddn) December 19, 2016

During the pandemic, did Trump contribute to the U.S. economy by generating 11.6 million jobs?

['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 for 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.

['taxes']

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:

No, Sean Connery's family did not become emotional over his net worth.

['We recently saw the same misleading advertising network "arbitrage" ploy about a celebrity\'s net worth used on "Jeopardy" game show host Alex Trebek.']

Known as a famous Hollywood actor and one of the original men to portray the iconic character James Bond, Sean Connery died on October 31, 2020. According to TMZ, he passed away at 1:30 a.m. "at his home in the Bahamas." TMZ reported that Connery died in his sleep from pneumonia, heart failure, and old age, according to his death certificate. The certificate shows he died from respiratory failure as a result of pneumonia, old age, and atrial fibrillation—an irregular heart rate that can increase the risk of strokes, heart failure, and other heart-related complications. Entertainment Tonight contacted the family, reporting that "Connery's wife, Micheline Roquebrune, and his two sons, Jason and Stephane, told ET that he died peacefully in his sleep, surrounded by family." Following his death, at least one advertiser purchased ad space on the social media platform Reddit or on a mobile app that displays Reddit content. The ad read: "sean connery's Net Worth Left His Family In Tears." Connery's name was in lowercase, likely because the "Net Worth Left His Family In Tears" part is a template. It's not true; it's fabricated and completely baseless. Sean Connery's family was not left "in tears" because of his net worth. The advertisement in question appeared to lead to Life Exact, a viral content website. It was first documented by Reddit user JezCon. It's unclear if the advertisement is still active on the website. We were unable to locate the ad, but it likely led to a slideshow with multiple pages, where the idea was to make more money on the advertisements displayed during the slideshow than it cost to run the original ad alongside Reddit content. This is known as advertising "arbitrage." Business and technology blog Margins is managed by Ranjan Roy and Can Duruk, and Roy defined "arbitrage" as "leveraging an inefficient set of systems to make a riskless profit, usually by buying and selling the same asset." He also called it "the mythical free lunch that economics tells us does not exist." 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. 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.

['profit']

False

Known as a famous Hollywood actor and one of the original men to portray the iconic character James Bond, Sean Connery died on Oct. 31, 2020. According to TMZ, he died at 1:30 a.m. "at his home in the Bahamas."Entertainment Tonight made contact with the family, reporting that "Connery's wife, Micheline Roquebrune, and his two sons, Jason and Stephane, told ET that he died peacefully in his sleep, surrounded by family."It's not true. It's fabricated and completely baseless. Sean Connery's family was not left "in tears" because of his net worth. We previously reported on the "net worth left his family in tears" advertising ploy with "Jeopardy" host Alex Trebek. The late Kenny Rogers also appeared to be a victim of the ploy.The advertisement in question appeared to lead to Life Exact, a viral content website. It was first documented by Reddit user JezCon. It's unclear if the advertisement is still active on the website. We were unable to locate the ad, but it likely lead to a slideshow with multiple pages, where the idea was to make more money on the advertisements displayed during the slideshow than it cost to run the original ad alongside Reddit content. This is known as advertising "arbitrage."Business and technology blog Margins is managed by Ranjan Roy and Can Duruk, and Roy defined "arbitrage" as "leveraging an inefficient set of systems to make a riskless profit, usually by buying and selling the same asset." He also called it "the mythical free lunch that economics tells us does not exist."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.

Fired for Being Gay

["Map shows states in which employees can be 'fired for being gay.'"]

Claim: The map shows states in which employees can be "fired for being gay." PARTLY Example: [Collected via e-mail, April 2013] I saw a map of states where you can be fired for being gay. Is this true? Origins: The map displayed above identifies twenty-nine states (shown in red) where, according to the accompanying title, "you can be fired for being gay." This map is "true" in the broad sense that it identifies states that do not currently have statewide laws prohibiting all employers from engaging in discrimination based on sexual orientation, but it is not the case that those states are completely devoid of protections against that form of discrimination. Anti-discrimination laws typically address not just discrimination in the termination of employees but also in other job-related aspects, such as hiring, promotion, job assignment, and compensation. In general, employees who work on an at-will basis may (with some narrow exceptions) be terminated without cause and without their employers incurring legal liability. However, members of certain protected classes may not be discriminated against in employment for reasons related to the characteristics that define those classes (e.g., sex, race, religion, national origin, age). Since the U.S. has not yet enacted national regulations establishing sexual orientation as a protected class, most employees who have such protection are afforded it based on state laws. While the twenty-nine states shown in red above may currently lack statewide laws prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation, it is not true that all employers in all of those states may freely fire employees "for being gay." Some of those red states have laws that protect public (i.e., government) employees from sexual orientation discrimination (but not those who work in the private sector), some of those states have laws passed at county or city levels that protect employees in those local areas from such discrimination, and some of those states protect public employees from employment discrimination through means other than laws (e.g., executive orders, administrative orders, personnel regulations). Maps like the ones displayed below present more detailed representations (at both the statewide and local levels) of the status of laws banning employment discrimination based on sexual orientation in the United States: Last updated: 10 April 2013

['liability']

True

Anti-discrimination laws typically address not just discrimination in the termination of employees but also in other job-related aspects, such as hiring, promotion, job assignment, and compensation. In general, employees who work on an at-will basis may (with some narrow exceptions) be terminated without cause and without their employers incurring legal liability. However, members of certain protected classes may not be discriminated against in employment for reasons related to the characteristics that make them members of those classes (e.g., sex, race, religion, national origin, age). Since the U.S. has not yet enacted national regulations establishing sexual orientation as a protected class, most employees who have such protection are afforded it on the basis of state laws.

Cicero on Government Budgeting

['This quotation from Roman statesman Cicero about balancing the budget comes from a 1965 novel, not from history.']

As we've noted many times in these pages, one common way in which people attempt to demonstrate the aptness of a particular social or political viewpoint is to put its expression into the mouth of a revered historical figure. [Collected via e-mail, April 2008] This quote is going around the internet. I would like to know if it really came from Cicero as claimed. "The budget should be balanced, the Treasury should be refilled, public debt should be reduced, the arrogance of officialdom should be tempered and controlled, and the assistance to foreign lands should be curtailed lest Rome become bankrupt. People must again learn to work, instead of living on public assistance." Cicero, 55 BC Surely if one of great minds of our civilization, someone who lived hundreds (or even thousands) of years ago, said the very same thing we're thinking today, then surely that's proof we've hit upon some eternal truth that should be sagaciously heeded. In short, attributing apocryphal quotations to everyone from Confucius to Abraham Lincoln is an attempt to capitalize on the maxim that "great minds think alike." One prime representative of this phenomenon is the passage reproduced above, which warns about the perils of governments' overspending their budgets and lavishing too much money on foreign aid and welfare programs. For the last half century it has been attributed to Roman philosopher and statesman Marcus Tullius Cicero and widely quoted by politicians and pundits seeking to bolster their arguments in favor of fiscal conservatism. For example, Louisiana representative Otto Passman, who for thirty years "pursued a relentless battle against spending for foreign aid" in the U.S. Congress, read these words into the Congressional Record on April 25, 1968: read these words into the Congressional Record Mr. Speaker, the record shows that in all ages where republican forms of government have been lost, it has been through the pretense of a share-the-wealth program, a blind faith in public officials, and apathy on the part of those who could act but did not. To mention only one of many, many examples from past history, may I quote from a statement made by Cicero over 2,000 years ago: The budget should be balanced, the treasury should be refilled, public debt should be reduced, the arrogance of officialdom should be tempered and controlled, and the assistance to foreign lands should be curtailed lest Rome become bankrupt, the mobs should be forced to work and not depend on government for subsistence. History reveals that public officials heeded not the warning therefore, the government collapsed. On March 29, 1971 the Chicago Tribune published a letter from a reader who invoked the same words to make a similar point: Someone said years ago: "The more things change, the more they are the same." Today's problems are not new. The Roman Empire faced bankruptcy 2,000 years ago, as more and more power was concentrated in central government and government spending grew. Cicero spoke out against the trend. This great Roman senator said: "The budget should be balanced, the treasury should be refilled, public debt should be reduced, the arrogance of officialdom should be tempered and controlled, assistance to foreign lands should be curtailed lest Rome become bankrupt. The mobs should be forced to work and not depend on government for subsistence." Romans ignored Cicero; Rome fell. History is great if we learn from it. It is not too late for the United States to heed those words out of the past. Those words were never uttered by Cicero, however; and the reason no one ever quoted them as such until about fifty years ago is because they weren't written until 1965. They sprang from the pen of Taylor Caldwell, a fiction writer best known for historical novels such as Captains and the Kings, her 1972 best-selling chronicle of the rise to wealth and power of an Irish immigrant named Joseph Francis Xavier Armagh (which was also made into a popular television mini-series in 1976). popular television mini-series Caldwell penned several novels based on real-life religious and historical figures, including Genghis Khan (The Earth Is the Lord's), Cardinal Richelieu (The Arm and the Darkness), Saint Luke (Dear and Glorious Physician), Saint Paul (Great Lion of God), Aspasia (Glory and the Lightning), and Judas Iscariot (I, Judas). Her 1965 effort A Pillar of Iron was a historical novel about the life of Cicero, the great Roman statesman who "is a pillar of iron as he publicly maintains his search for honor and justice under law in the face of plots against his life and his country." Although A Pillar of Iron often drew directly from the recorded speeches and letters of Cicero for its dialogue, it was nonetheless a work of fiction, and the now famous statement from Cicero about "balancing the budget" was an invention of Caldwell's and not a reproduction of Cicero's own words. In fact, the novel doesn't even present these words as something spoken by Cicero, but rather as a summation of Cicero's political philosophy presented as a preface to an imagined conversation between Cicero and Gaius Antonius Hybrida: Reared in republican virtues, Cicero found himself frequently confounded by Antonius. Antonius heartily agreed with him that the budget should be balanced, that the Treasury should be refilled, that public debt should be reduced, that the arrogance of the generals should be tempered and controlled, that assistance to foreign lands should be curtailed lest Rome become bankrupt, that the mobs should be forced to work and not depend on the government for subsistence, and that prudence and frugality should be put into practice as soon as possible. But when Cicero produced facts and figures how all these things must and should be accomplished, by austerity and discipline and commonsense, Antonius became troubled. "But this or that would bring hardship on this or that class," Antonius said. "The people are accustomed to lavish displays in the circuses and the theaters, and the lotteries, and free grain and beans and beef when they are destitute, and shelter when they are homeless and a part of the city is rebuilt. Is not the welfare of our people paramount?" "There will be no welfare of the people if we become bankrupt," said Cicero, grimly. "We can become solvent again, and strong, only by self-denial and by spending as little as possible until the public debt is paid and the Treasury refilled." "But one cannot if one has a heart at all deprive the people of what they have received for many decades from government, and which they expect. It will create the most terrible hardships." "Better that all of us tighten our girdles than Rome fall," said Cicero. As Jess Stearn observed in In Search of Taylor Caldwell, this imagined historical conversation was reflective of Caldwell's own political outlook much more than Cicero's: "She was a conservative politically, believing the spoils belonged to those who toiled for them. There were not free lunches. She abhorred the welfare philosophy that gave handouts to free-loaders, decrying rewards for indolence and incompetence." Or, as John Blundell aptly quipped in Ladies for Liberty, "Taylor Caldwell gives us fiscal policy, civil service reform, cuts in aid to less developed countries, and welfare reform all in one sentence." The reproductions of Caldwell's words as a historical quote from Cicero have altered the original a fair bit over the years: the admonition that "prudence and frugality should be put into practice as soon as possible" was quickly dropped from the end of the sentence; "people" have replaced "mobs" as the ones who should be "forced to work and not depend on the government for subsistence"; the proclamation that the "arrogance of the generals should be tempered and controlled" now refers to generic "officialdom" rather than military figures; and the warning that this advice need be followed "lest Rome become bankrupt" has mutated into the more ominous-sounding "lest Rome fall." Blundell, John. Ladies for Liberty: Women Who Made a Difference in American History. New York: Algora Publishing, 2013. 0-875-86865-7 (p. 145). Caldwell, Taylor. A Pillar of Iron. Lake Oswego, OR: eNet Press Inc., 2013. ASIN B00CEINOCW. Collins, John H. "False Quotations." Chicago Tribune. 20 April 1971. Connolly, Jerry. "Warning from the Past." Chicago Tribune. 29 March 1971 (p. 14). Lueck, Thomas J. "Otto Passman, 88, Louisiana Congressman Who Fought Spending." The New York Times. 14 August 1988. Stearn, Jess. In Search of Taylor Caldwell. New York: Stein & Day, 1981. 0-812-82791-0. Tench, Helen. "Cicero's Rome Quarried for a Scholarly Novel." Ottawa Citizen. 14 August 1965 (p. 24). Congressional Record [House]. "History's Warning." 25 April 1968 (p. 10635).

['debt']

False

One prime representative of this phenomenon is the passage reproduced above, which warns about the perils of governments' overspending their budgets and lavishing too much money on foreign aid and welfare programs. For the last half century it has been attributed to Roman philosopher and statesman Marcus Tullius Cicero and widely quoted by politicians and pundits seeking to bolster their arguments in favor of fiscal conservatism. For example, Louisiana representative Otto Passman, who for thirty years "pursued a relentless battle against spending for foreign aid" in the U.S. Congress, read these words into the Congressional Record on April 25, 1968:Those words were never uttered by Cicero, however; and the reason no one ever quoted them as such until about fifty years ago is because they weren't written until 1965. They sprang from the pen of Taylor Caldwell, a fiction writer best known for historical novels such as Captains and the Kings, her 1972 best-selling chronicle of the rise to wealth and power of an Irish immigrant named Joseph Francis Xavier Armagh (which was also made into a popular television mini-series in 1976).

Did Hillary Clinton Say 'We Must Destroy Syria for Israel' in a Leaked E-Mail?

['Controversy around military action in Syria led to the recirculation of an inaccurate claim about Hillary Clinton.']

Following controversial airstrikes on Syria in April 2018, a 2017 article published by repeat offender YourNewsWire.com with the claim that Hillary Clinton voiced support for destroying Syria in a "leaked" e-mail popped up and began to circulate again: Syria article Lest We Forget Hillary Clinton: We Must Destroy Syria For israel https://t.co/VxkzUu1IkE pic.twitter.com/Zf4iagpqsv https://t.co/VxkzUu1IkE pic.twitter.com/Zf4iagpqsv Michael Lee (@MichaelLee2009) April 15, 2018 April 15, 2018 The piece included a screenshot of what were purportedly Clinton's views taken from an e-mail, as well as quotes: Clinton Email: We Must Destroy Syria For Israel [...] The best way to help Israel deal with Irans growing nuclear capability is to help the people of Syria overthrow the regime of Bashar Assad, Clinton forthrightly starts off by saying. Even though all US intelligence reports had long dismissed Irans atom bomb program as a hoax (a conclusion supported by the International Atomic Energy Agency), Clinton continues to use these lies to justify destroying Syria in the name of Israel. She specifically links Irans mythical atom bomb program to Syria because, she says, Irans atom bomb program threatens Israels monopoly on nuclear weapons in the Middle East. A nearly identical claim (since deleted) was published by a separate site in March 2016. Both attribute the text of the purported e-mail to Clinton during her tenure as Secretary of State, a position she held for approximately four years between 2009 and 2013. published held The text is indeed a part of WikiLeaks' "Hillary Clinton Email Archive," and the title search returns three documents in that data set. The same document was also available via FOIA.state.gov [PDF]. three FOIA.state.gov PDF Although its content was characterized as an e-mail authored by Hillary Clinton, that is misleading. It appears that she actually received and forwarded an attachment from James P. Rubin. In all three documents (two forwards and an attachment) it is clear that Rubin authored and sent the commentary to Clinton, stating in his preface that the then-Secretary of State "may not agree" with his stance on Syria: forwarded attachment James P. Rubin commentary From: James P. RubinSent: Monday, April 30, 2012 11:03 AMTo: H Subject: Best of luck on China trip First, I want to wish you and Kurt best of luck getting out of the pickle Mr Chen has you in as you arrive in China. I wanted to pass on something I intend to publish on Syria and Iran, because I think it is worth trying to urge the President and his political advisers to act. As you can see from today's column by Jackson Diehl, the pundits and many in the media will push the Syria issue very hard for the foreseeable future. It may not be on the front burner every day, but it will be close to or at the top of the media's attention indefinitely. Interestingly, the Republicans have showed their hand on the foreign policy debate, in which inaction on Syria is pretty much the only serious criticism they can offer that will stick. As you will see from the attached piece, I believe that action on Syria will forestall the biggest danger on the horizon, that Israel launches a surprise attack on Iran's nuclear facilities. Although the pressure has now eased for a variety of reasons, it will return. Action by Washington on Syria, on the other hand, I believe will eliminate much of the urgency for Israeli action. In other words, a more aggressive policy on Syria will eliminate the best case the republican's have going into the November election, will ease substantially the pressure on Israel to attack Iran and possibly spark a wider war in the Middle East, and finally would be the right stance on Syria going forward. I know you may not agree but I thought it was better to share this with you first as at least a new way to look at the problem. All best, your friend,Jamie James P. Rubin Walsh, Nick Paton. "What Do The US, UK And French Airstrikes Mean For Syria's War?" CNN. 15 April 2018.

['share']

False

Following controversial airstrikes on Syria in April 2018, a 2017 article published by repeat offender YourNewsWire.com with the claim that Hillary Clinton voiced support for destroying Syria in a "leaked" e-mail popped up and began to circulate again:Lest We Forget Hillary Clinton: We Must Destroy Syria For israel https://t.co/VxkzUu1IkE pic.twitter.com/Zf4iagpqsv Michael Lee (@MichaelLee2009) April 15, 2018A nearly identical claim (since deleted) was published by a separate site in March 2016. Both attribute the text of the purported e-mail to Clinton during her tenure as Secretary of State, a position she held for approximately four years between 2009 and 2013.The text is indeed a part of WikiLeaks' "Hillary Clinton Email Archive," and the title search returns three documents in that data set. The same document was also available via FOIA.state.gov [PDF].Although its content was characterized as an e-mail authored by Hillary Clinton, that is misleading. It appears that she actually received and forwarded an attachment from James P. Rubin. In all three documents (two forwards and an attachment) it is clear that Rubin authored and sent the commentary to Clinton, stating in his preface that the then-Secretary of State "may not agree" with his stance on Syria:

Did a TV Station Report Biden-Sanders Primary Results Before the Election?

['A test graphic using dummy data was never meant to hit the airwaves. ']

On March 16, 2020, a Facebook user was watching a local news broadcast when an image graphic supposedly showing results from a 2020 Democratic presidential primary election popped up on the screen. This wouldn't have been very unusual except for one thing: The election hadn't happened yet. The Facebook user posted a video of the broadcast on Facebook. The image graphic in question, shown below, shows former U.S. Vice President Joe Biden winning the Illinois primary with 50% of the vote and defeating Sen. Bernie Sanders: video WCIA truly did broadcast the above-displayed graphic the day before the 2020 Illinois primary. However, this is not a story about election rigging or a news station with unusual prognosticating abilities. This is a story about a broadcasting error. Television news stations do a lot of prep work before live broadcasts, especially for an election. One thing they do is make image graphics similar to the one above. Once the visuals are set, reporters can plug in the results and quickly produce an image ready for television. In the case above, one of these "test" visuals was accidentally aired on television. CNN made a similar mistake in 2013 when they accidentally published pre-written obituaries for people who were still very much alive. pre-written obituaries WCIA reporter Mark Maxwell reached out to the Facebook user after her post went viral and explained that this was a "test" graphic that was never meant to air: We do routine test rehearsals before every election to make sure the graphics work properly and to give directors some practice. The error was in putting the dry run on air. That shouldnt have happened and were looking into it. Obviously, we never intended to give the wrong information or wrong impression. None of those numbers were based on any real polling returns. Since your post is being widely shared, Id appreciate it if you would consider updating the original post so people dont get the wrong idea. Rich Flesch, the News Director of WCIA, also reached out, writing: WCIA 3 News --- Sorry it was an error by our team. We are currently doing election rehearsals with test data and not intended to go on TV. We apologize for any inconvenience. The user updated her Facebook post to include both of these responses. The claim that this image shows "tomorrow's results" can also be debunked by looking at the actual results of the primary election in question. On March 17, 2020, the day after WCIA accidentally published the test graphic, the election took place and the real results were made available. While the test graphic showed Biden winning with 986,341 votes (or 50%), Biden actually ended up getting 913,067 votes (or 59.1% of the vote). Sanders fared better in the test graphic with 893,249 votes (for 45%); in the election he took in 556,904 votes (or 36%). real results The New York Times. "Live: Illinois State Primary Election Results 2020." 17 March 2020.

['returns']

False

The Facebook user posted a video of the broadcast on Facebook. The image graphic in question, shown below, shows former U.S. Vice President Joe Biden winning the Illinois primary with 50% of the vote and defeating Sen. Bernie Sanders:Television news stations do a lot of prep work before live broadcasts, especially for an election. One thing they do is make image graphics similar to the one above. Once the visuals are set, reporters can plug in the results and quickly produce an image ready for television. In the case above, one of these "test" visuals was accidentally aired on television. CNN made a similar mistake in 2013 when they accidentally published pre-written obituaries for people who were still very much alive. On March 17, 2020, the day after WCIA accidentally published the test graphic, the election took place and the real results were made available. While the test graphic showed Biden winning with 986,341 votes (or 50%), Biden actually ended up getting 913,067 votes (or 59.1% of the vote). Sanders fared better in the test graphic with 893,249 votes (for 45%); in the election he took in 556,904 votes (or 36%).

Regulating and taxing marijuanamuch like we do alcoholwould generate more than $165M in revenue starting in 2022

['Experts, generally speaking, had no quarrel with the states math, but questioned the implementation schedule in the estimates., That is, the assumptions in the plan may be too rosy, so less money would be generated in the 2021-23 budget window., In any case, the issue is a nonstarter for raising revenue, since legalized marijuana lacks support in the Republican-controlled Legislature.']

Gov. Tony Evers proposed that Wisconsin keep up with three of its neighbors and legalize marijuana, but the plan has already gone up in smoke. The GOP-controlled Legislatures budget-writing committee on May 6, 2021 removed legalizing marijuana -- and hundreds of other provisions -- from the governors proposed 2021-23 spending plan. In making the changes, and starting fresh, the panel created agap of about $3.4 billion. With that gap, and polls showing general public support for legalized marijuana, it brought to mind a claim from Evers that we had set aside: Regulating and taxing marijuana much like we do alcohol would generate more than $165M in revenue starting in 2022, Evers tweetedApril 14, 2021. In all, 36 states have medical marijuana programs (including Iowa), while14 states-- including neighboring Illinois and Michigan -- have legalized marijuana for recreational use: But what about the money? Is Evers correct that his plan would add $165 million to the states coffers in the upcoming budget? When asked for backup to the claim, Britt Cudaback, Evers communications director, pointed us to the states Budget in Brief document, released in February 2021, which includes more detail on how his plan would work. Under the plan, the state Department of Revenue would issue permits to those wishing to sell recreational marijuana. The Governors proposal imposes a 15 percent excise tax on the sales price of each wholesale sale by a permit-holding producer to a permit-holding processor, according to the budget document. In addition, the proposal imposes a 10 percent excise tax on the sales price of each retail sale. Retail sales, except for medical use, would be subject to the sales tax. So, how did the governor arrive at that $165 million figure? According to Cudaback, the budget office looked at data from other states, including Colorado, which was the first state to legalize marijuana, and made adjustments for population and reported marijuana usage. She noted that other states have relied on Colorados data in developing their own budgets, and noted that the estimates were on the conservative side, meaning they could be closer to the low end of potential tax revenue. According to the Evers figures, if sales were to begin Jan. 1, 2022 -- roughly six months after expected passage of the budget -- $165.8 million would be reached if tax collections were $19 per-capita. That is, if -- on average -- every person in the state bought enough marijuna to generate $19 in annual tax revenue. Here is the math: $19 per capita per year x 5.8 million population x 1.5 years = $165.8 million. That includes a projected $65 million from taxes on sales at the wholesale level, $67.1 million from retail taxes and $33.6 million from the sales tax. Its difficult to compare states because of their varying size and different taxing structures around marijuana sales. For instance, Illinois has a lower excise tax, but far higher sales taxes on recreational marijuana, and more than double Wisconsins population. According to the Public Policy Forum, a non-partisan think tank that has analyzed the Wisconsin budget, Illinois likely collectedaround $175 millionin revenue in its first year of recreational implementation. Thats not much more -- despite twice the population size -- than what Evers is anticipating. The administration's estimate appears to imply a pretty rapid implementation, the Policy Forum said. Nevada, meanwhile, has a 15% tax on wholesale sales and a 10% tax on retail sales, so its framework is generally similar. Infiscal year 2020, with just over half of Wisconsins population, Nevada collected $105.2 million. That said, the Policy Forum notes Nevadas unique tourism industry -- i.e., legalized gambling -- may make it a poor basis for comparison. Andrew Reschovsky, University of Wisconsin-Madison Professor Emeritus of Public Affairs and Applied Economics pointed out that forecasting revenue from a new tax is always difficult. He said the State Budget Office has taken the sensible approach and based its estimates on the experience of other states that have already legalized marijuana sales. But that doesnt mean its sure to come true. The Administrations forecast, like all revenue forecasts, is based on a set of assumptions, he wrote. While some of the Administrations assumptions may result in an under-estimate of tax revenues, I do worry that the state may be overly optimistic about the time needed to implement the issuing of both medical and recreational marijuana retail sales licenses and the time needed to open retail outlets throughout the state. In other words, the state may not be able to get a system up and running in time to meet the Jan. 1, 2022 date the budget projections are based upon. Based on the experiences in Massachusetts and California, this may be an overly optimistic estimate of the time it takes to license and open retail sales outlets, Reschovsky wrote. If the rollout process is in fact slower than anticipated, revenue during the next biennium may be lower than the Administrations forecast. Evers tweeted Regulating and taxing marijuana much like we do alcohol would generate more than $165M in revenue starting in 2022. Experts consulted by PolitiFact Wisconsin, generally speaking, had no quarrel with the states math, but questioned the implementation schedule baked into the estimates. In other words, if legalized marijuana were to go forward, it may not generate the revenue Evers claimed because it may take too long to get a licensing system in place, and to license and open retail outlets. In a nutshell, the Evers projections are plausible, but may be overly optimistic. For a statement that is accurate but needs clarification or additional information, our rating is Mostly True.

['Legal Issues', 'Taxes', 'Marijuana', 'Wisconsin']

True

The GOP-controlled Legislatures budget-writing committee on May 6, 2021 removed legalizing marijuana -- and hundreds of other provisions -- from the governors proposed 2021-23 spending plan. In making the changes, and starting fresh, the panel created agap of about $3.4 billion.Regulating and taxing marijuana much like we do alcohol would generate more than $165M in revenue starting in 2022, Evers tweetedApril 14, 2021.In all, 36 states have medical marijuana programs (including Iowa), while14 states-- including neighboring Illinois and Michigan -- have legalized marijuana for recreational use:When asked for backup to the claim, Britt Cudaback, Evers communications director, pointed us to the states Budget in Brief document, released in February 2021, which includes more detail on how his plan would work.For instance, Illinois has a lower excise tax, but far higher sales taxes on recreational marijuana, and more than double Wisconsins population. According to the Public Policy Forum, a non-partisan think tank that has analyzed the Wisconsin budget, Illinois likely collectedaround $175 millionin revenue in its first year of recreational implementation.Nevada, meanwhile, has a 15% tax on wholesale sales and a 10% tax on retail sales, so its framework is generally similar. Infiscal year 2020, with just over half of Wisconsins population, Nevada collected $105.2 million. That said, the Policy Forum notes Nevadas unique tourism industry -- i.e., legalized gambling -- may make it a poor basis for comparison.

Seattle Chase Wheedle could be rephrased as Seattle pursued a sly or cunning approach.

['']

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. false 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: 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:

Ulta Beauty Email Scam Promises $500 Gift Card

['The email phishing scam led to a survey that asked for a credit card number, which we strongly advise against providing to suspicious websites.']

On Jan. 9, 2023, we reviewed an Ulta Beauty email scam that claimed recipients had won a $500 gift card. This was a phishing scam, and it did not come from Ulta Beauty. The Ulta Beauty email scam claimed to come from "Ulta Department 74130" via an email address that ended with the domain name, climatekids.net. "Answer and win a brand new $500 Ulta Beauty gift card," the email read. We scanned the link in the scam email with IPQualityScore.com's helpful malicious URL scanner, which readers can use for free. The scan found that the link was "very risky" and contained "suspicious activity." malicious URL scanner We visited the link in a safe way and noted that it began on cosmosis.org, then redirected to quinyspike.com. The browser then redirected once more to resonatorbang.com, where we were presented with the fake survey. The fake survey began, "Congratulations! You've been chosen to receive a brand new $500 Ulta Beauty Gift Card! To claim, simply answer a few quick questions regarding your experience with us.Attention: This survey offer expires today, January 9, 2023." After the fake survey, we were redirected for the final time togillydealdays.com, where we were asked to provide our personal information and a credit card number. The credit card number was supposedly needed to pay shipping costs for the $500 gift card. We strongly advise against providing any such details to websites that readers are unfamiliar with. Always safeguard your personal and financial data when browsing online. Remember that if an offer seems too good to be true, it probably is. We checked the Whois domain information for the registration ofgillydealdays.com. According to the details we found, the website had been registered for the first time ever just four days before on Jan. 5. Brand new websites can often be a sign of a scam, and that's exactly what was happening here. "Malicious URL Scanner | Scan URLs for Malware | Malware URL Checker." IP Quality Score, https://www.ipqualityscore.com/threat-feeds/malicious-url-scanner. "Wayback Machine." Internet Archive, https://web.archive.org/. "WHOIS Domain Lookup." GoDaddy, https://www.godaddy.com/whois.

['credit']

False

We scanned the link in the scam email with IPQualityScore.com's helpful malicious URL scanner, which readers can use for free. The scan found that the link was "very risky" and contained "suspicious activity."

Will Entering Your PIN in Reverse at an ATM Summon the Police?

['Entering your PIN in reverse at any ATM will not automatically send an alarm to local police. The idea is nothing more than an unimplemented concept.']

Messages offering a seemingly helpful heads-up about how to deal with a situation in which one is forced to hand over money withdrawn from an ATM under duress began circulating on the Internet in September 2006: I just found out that should you ever be forced to withdraw monies from an ATM machine, you can notify the police by entering your Pin # in reverse. The machine will still give you the monies you requested, but unknown to the robber, etc, the police will be immediately dispatched to help you. The broadcast stated that this method of calling the police is very seldom used because people don't know it exist, and it might mean the difference between life and death. Hopefully, none of you will have to use this, but I wanted to pass it along just in case you hadn't heard of it. Please pass it along to everyonepossible. [Collected via e-mail, December 2008] PIN NUMBER REVERSAL If you should ever be forced by a robber to withdraw money from an ATM machine, you can notify the police by entering your PIN # in reverse. For example if your pin number is 1234 then you would put in 4321. The ATM recognizes that your pin number is backwards from the ATM card you placed in the machine The machine will still give you the money you requested, but unknown to the robber, the police will be immediately dispatched to help you. This information was recently broadcast on CTV and it states that it is seldom used because people don't know it exists. I checked with my Bank of Nova Scotia to see if this was correct and staff said yes this information is correct. Please pass this along to everyone possible. [Collected via e-mail, June 2009] WHEN A THIEF FORCES YOU TO TAKE MONEY FROM THE ATM, DO NOT ARGUE OR RESIST, YOU MIGHT NOT KNOW WHAT HE OR SHE MIGHT DO TO YOU. WHAT YOU SHOULD DO IS TO PUNCH YOUR PIN IN THE REVERSE, I..E IF YOUR PIN IS 1254, YOU PUNCH 4521. THE MOMENT YOU PUNCH IN THE REVERSE, THE MONEY WILL COME OUT BUT WILL BE STUCK INTO THE MACHINE HALF WAY OUT AND IT WILL ALERT THE POLICE WITHOUT THE NOTICE OF THE THIEF. EVERY ATM HAS IT; IT IS SPECIALLY MADE TO SIGNIFY DANGER AND HELP. NOT EVERYONE IS AWARE OF THIS. FORWARD THIS TO ALL YOUR FRIENDS AND THOSE YOU CARE However, the word "seemingly" applies in this case because the tip is only a chimera, as entering one's Personal Identification Number (PIN) in reverse at Automated Teller Machines (ATMs) does not automatically summon the police. The Credit Card Accountability Responsibility and Disclosure Act of 2009 compelled the Federal Trade Commission to provide an analysis of any technology, either then currently available or under development, which would allow a distressed ATM user to send an electronic alert to a law enforcement agency. The following statements were made in the FTC's April 2010 report in response to that requirement: report FTC staff learned that emergency-PIN technologies have never been deployed at any ATMs. The respondent banks reported that none of their ATMs currently have installed, or have ever had installed, an emergency-PIN system of any sort. The ATM manufacturer Diebold confirms that, to its knowledge, no ATMs have or have had an emergency-PIN system. Ergo, there aren't and haven't ever been "reverse PIN" technologies despite online claims dating to September 2006 that anyone being robbed at an ATM simply had to enter his or her PIN in reverse to summon help. Moreover, said that FTC report: The available information suggests that emergency-PIN and alarm button devices: (1) may not halt or deter crimes to any significant extent; (2) may in some instances increase the danger to customers who are targeted by offenders and also lead to some false alarms (although the exact magnitude of these potential effects cannot be determined); and (3) may impose substantial implementation costs, although no formally derived cost estimates of implementing these technologies are currently available. The reverse PIN system was first imagined in 1994 and patented in 1998 by Joseph Zingher, a Chicago businessman. His SafetyPIN System would alert police that a crime was in progress when a cardholder at an ATM keyed in the reverse of his personal identification numbers. The flip-flopped PIN would serve as a "panic code" that sent a silent alarm to police to notify them that an ATM customer was acting under duress. Because palindromic PINs (e.g., 2002, 7337, 4884) cannot be reversed, Zingher's system included work-arounds for such numeric combinations. However, Zingher had little success in interesting the banking community in SafetyPIN despite his pitching it to them with great persistence over the years. He did in 2004 succeed in getting the Illinois General Assembly to adopt a "reverse PIN" clause in SB 562, but the final version of the bill watered down the wording so as to make banks' implementation of the system optional rather than mandatory: "A terminal operated in this State may be designed and programmed so that when a consumer enters his or her personal identification number in reverse order, the terminal automatically sends an alarm to the local law enforcement agency having jurisdiction over the terminal location." SB 562 In 2006, Michael Boyd pressed the Georgia State Assembly to pass a law requiring banks to create ATM panic codes that would operate the machines normally while also alerting police. His wife, Kimberly Boyd, was killed on 12 September 2005 after being carjacked by convicted sex offender Brian O'Neil Clark and forced to withdraw cash at an ATM. (She died when Clark crashed her SUV while being followed by a civilian who ultimately shot Clark to death afterwards.) Such a bill was placed before the Georgia Senate on 29 December 2005 (SB 379), but nothing came of it. SB 379 In 2004, the Kansas state senate sent to its Financial Institutions and Insurance Committee SB 333, a bill that stated: "Any automated teller machine operated in this state shall be designed and programmed so that when a consumer enters such consumer's personal identification number in reverse order, the automated teller machine automatically sends an alarm to the local law enforcement agency having jurisdiction over the automated teller machine location." That bill died in committee that year. SB 333 All this talk of various bills in three different state legislatures may serve to obscure some of the more important points attaching to this issue, points that are key to making up one's mind about whether having such a system in place is actually a good idea. No one in the banking industry seems to want the technology. The banks argue against its implementation, not only on the basis of cost but also because they doubt such an alert would help anyone being coerced into making an ATM withdrawal. Even if police could be summoned via the keying of a special "alert" or "panic" code, they say, law enforcement would likely arrive long after victim and captor had departed. They have also warned of the very real possibility that victims' fumbling around while trying to trigger silent alarms could cause their captors to realize something was up and take those realizations out on their captives. Finally, there is the problem of ATM customers' quickly conjuring up their accustomed PINs in reverse: Even in situations lacking added stress, mentally reconstructing one's PIN backwards is a difficult task for many people. Add to that difficulty the terror of being in the possession of a violent and armed person, and precious few victims might be able to come up with reversed PINs seamlessly enough to fool their captors into believing that everything was proceeding according to plan. As Chuck Stones of the Kansas Bankers Association said in 2004: "I'm not sure anyone here could remember their PIN numbers backward with a gun to their head." Hazim, Madinah. "Creators Pitch ATM Safety System." Topeka Capital-Journal. 13 June 2001. Kellner, Tomas. "Banking on ATM Safety." Forbes. 28 June 2004. McDermott, Kevin. "Inventor Urges Idea to Thwart Holdups at ATMs." St. Louis Post-Dispatch. 28 March 2005 (p. B1). Plummer, Don. "Push on for ATM Alert Code." The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. 14 January 2006 (p. E3).

['banking']

False

The Credit Card Accountability Responsibility and Disclosure Act of 2009 compelled the Federal Trade Commission to provide an analysis of any technology, either then currently available or under development, which would allow a distressed ATM user to send an electronic alert to a law enforcement agency. The following statements were made in the FTC's April 2010 report in response to that requirement:However, Zingher had little success in interesting the banking community in SafetyPIN despite his pitching it to them with great persistence over the years. He did in 2004 succeed in getting the Illinois General Assembly to adopt a "reverse PIN" clause in SB 562, but the final version of the bill watered down the wording so as to make banks' implementation of the system optional rather than mandatory: "A terminal operated in this State may be designed and programmed so that when a consumer enters his or her personal identification number in reverse order, the terminal automatically sends an alarm to the local law enforcement agency having jurisdiction over the terminal location."In 2006, Michael Boyd pressed the Georgia State Assembly to pass a law requiring banks to create ATM panic codes that would operate the machines normally while also alerting police. His wife, Kimberly Boyd, was killed on 12 September 2005 after being carjacked by convicted sex offender Brian O'Neil Clark and forced to withdraw cash at an ATM. (She died when Clark crashed her SUV while being followed by a civilian who ultimately shot Clark to death afterwards.) Such a bill was placed before the Georgia Senate on 29 December 2005 (SB 379), but nothing came of it.In 2004, the Kansas state senate sent to its Financial Institutions and Insurance Committee SB 333, a bill that stated: "Any automated teller machine operated in this state shall be designed and programmed so that when a consumer enters such consumer's personal identification number in reverse order, the automated teller machine automatically sends an alarm to the local law enforcement agency having jurisdiction over the automated teller machine location." That bill died in committee that year.

Did Twitter Label CBC's Account '69% Government-Funded Media'?

['Opinions were mixed on whether Elon Musk was making a sex joke or just thumbing his nose at the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, or both.']

Editor's note: As of April 20, 2023, Twitter had dropped all "state-affiliated" and "government-funded" labels on the accounts of government officials and media outlets, including the CBC. On April 17, 2023, several social media posts surfaced claiming that Twitter, under Elon Musk's leadership, had labeled the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) as "69% Government-funded Media." As of this writing on April 18, CBC's Twitter profile indeed included the label "69% Government-funded Media" above its bio reading, "The official CBC Twitter. Bringing you the best of Canada." Initially, the figure was reportedly 70%, according to a screenshot shared by Musk. It was unclear when, exactly, the social media platform decreased the number by 1%, which some observers interpreted as an allusion to a sex joke. Sharing a screenshot depicting the "69%" figure, Musk tweeted in the early hours of April 18: "Canadian Broadcasting Corp said they're 'less than 70% government-funded', so we corrected the label." The "government-funded media" label was attached after the leader of the Conservative Party of Canada, Pierre Poilievre, posted a message on social media asking for it. "I believe that Twitter should apply the Government-funded Media label to the CBC's various news-related accounts, including @CBC, @CBCNews, and @CBCAlerts," wrote Poilievre, who is challenging Justin Trudeau as prime minister, in the letter. CBC's new "government-funded" designation also followed Twitter's move to label Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) and National Public Media (NPR) as "government-funded media," and those media outlets' subsequent decision to go silent on the platform. As far as we can determine, no other accounts labeled as government-funded media had a percentage attached to the label. For the purposes of this fact check, we are not attempting to confirm or deny whether the label was appropriate or accurate considering CBC's budget composition. Rather, we are focusing on whether such a designation was actually made. The CBC receives some funding through Canadian Parliament appropriations. According to CBC's annual financial report, the media outlet received $1.24 billion (in Canadian dollars) in public funding through parliamentary appropriations in 2021-2022. That accounts for roughly 66% of that year's revenue. However, the "69%" figure did not seem to be based on the factual makeup of CBC's budget. Rather, it appeared to be an instance of Musk thumbing his nose at the CBC, possibly making a joke about a sex position, which would not have been out of character for Musk. When we asked Twitter's communications team how, or why, it picked the number to supposedly depict the proportion of CBC's budget that is government funding, we received a poop emoji autoreply. (Musk instituted that autoreply to all questions from journalists on March 19.) We asked CBC spokesperson Leon Mar about Twitter's recent labeling of the media outlet's Twitter profile, and the spokesperson said, "With regard to the latest from Elon Musk, this is not a serious response. Journalistic independence is not a game." The CBC official stated that the real issue was that "Twitter's definition of 'Government-funded Media' means [that account is] open to editorial interference by government," or that it takes editorial direction from government officials. The spokesperson shared a statement from CBC Editor-in-Chief Brodie Fenlon in which the top editor said, "[The] government has zero involvement in our editorial content or journalism." Considering the government money that helps fund CBC's operations, Michael Geist, who is a Canada Research Chair in internet and e-commerce law at the University of Ottawa, said "publicly-funded media" would be a more accurate designation on the media outlet's Twitter profile, rather than "government-funded media." The former group, according to Geist's interpretation of Twitter's policies, "includes media organizations with public financing and does not reference government involvement in editorial content." On April 20, Twitter removed all "government-funded" and "state-affiliated" profile labels, including those on CBC accounts.

['budget']

True

Editor's note: As of April 20, 2023, Twitter had droppedall "state-affiliated" and "government-funded" labels on the accounts of government officials and media outlets, including the CBC.On April 17, 2023, several social media posts surfaced claiming that Twitter, under Elon Musk's leadership, had labeled the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) as "69% Government-funded Media." The claim was true.As of this writing on April 18, CBC's Twitter profile indeed included the label "69% Government-funded Media" above its bio reading, "The official CBC Twitter. Bringing you the best of Canada."Initially, the figure was reportedly 70%, according to a screenshot shared by Musk. It was unclear when, exactly, the social media platform decreased the number by 1% in what some observers took to be an allusion to a sex joke.Sharing a screenshot depicting the "69%" figure, Musktweetedin the early hours of April 18: "Canadian Broadcasting Corp said they're 'less than 70% government-funded', so we corrected the label."The "government-funded media" label wasattachedafter the leader of the Conservative Party of Canada, Pierre Poilievre, posted a message on social mediaasking for it. "I believe that Twitter should apply the Government-funded Media label to the CBC's various news-related accounts, including @CBC, @CBCNew and @CBCAlerts," wrote Poilievre, who is challenging Justin Trudeau as prime minister, in theletter. CBC's new "government-funded" designation also followed Twitter'smove to label Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) and National Public Media (NPR) "government-funded media," and those media outlets' subsequent decision to go silent on the platform. As far as we can determine, no other accounts labeled as government-funded media had a percentage attached to the label.The CBC receives some funding through Canadian Parliament appropriations. (According toCBC's annual financial report,the media outlet received $1.24 billion (in Canadian dollars) in public funding through parliamentary appropriations in 2021-2022. That accounts to roughly 66% of that year's revenue.)However,the "69%" figure was not seemingly based on the factual makeup of CBC's budget. Rather, it appeared to be an instance of Musk thumbing his nose at the CBC (and possibly making a joke about a sex position, which would not have been out of character for Musk).When we asked Twitter's communications team how, or why, it picked the number to supposedly depict the proportion of CBC's budget that is government funding, we got a poop emoji autoreply. (Musk instituted that autoreply to all questions from journalists on March 19.)We asked CBC spokesperson Leon Mar about Twitter's recent labeling of the media outlet's Twitter profile, and the spokesperson said, "With regard to the latest from Elon Musk,this is not a serious response. Journalistic independence is not a game."The CBC official said the real issue was that "Twitter's definition of 'Government-funded Media' means [that account is] open to editorial interference by government," or that it takes editorial direction from government officials. The spokesperson shared a statement from CBC Editor-in-Chief Brodie Fenlon'sin which the top editor said, "[The] government has no zero involvement in our editorial content or journalism."Considering the government money that helps fund CBC's operations, Michael Geist, who is a Canada Research Chair in internet and e-commerce law at the University of Ottawa, said "publicly-funded media" would be a more accurate designation on the media outlet's Twitter profile, rather than "government-funded media." The former group, according to Geist'sinterpretation of Twitter's policies, "includes media organizations with public financing and does not reference government involvement in editorial content."On April 20, Twitter removed all "government-funded" and "state-affiliated" profile labels, including those on CBC accounts.

Did Lloyd Austin's DOD Approve Contracts for a Company He Owns Stocks in?

["A popular meme regarding the financial entanglements of Biden's secretary of defense used flawed numbers but described a potential conflict of interest."]

This article has been updated and its rating has been changed from "True" to Following initial publication, Pentagon Press Secretary John Kirby provided us with this statement: "By prior arrangement, Secretary Austin divested his entire Raytheon portfolio on Jan. 22, 2021, immediately following the Senate vote confirming him as the new Secretary of Defense. Snopes initially received no comment on a Feb. 24, 2021 inquiry about his divestment from Raytheon, and as such, our initial article relied on a divestment timeline provided by Secretary Austin in filings with the Office of Government Ethics. On Feb. 19, 2021, an identically phrased claim went viral on multiple social media accounts, including that of a sitting congressman, after it was posted by a self-described MAGA "global recruiter" with the Twitter handle "@johnnyrwhitsett." The claim references an alleged $285 million defense contract awarded to a company that U.S. President Joe Biden's secretary of defense, Lloyd Austin, "owns over [$1 million] of stock in." posted The memes are referring to Austins past financial interest in the military contractor Raytheon. While Austin served on the Board of Directors of Raytheon and once held shares in the company given to him through executive compensation, the statement that he was invested in the company during the time he was in office is, according to Pentagon Spokesperson John Kirby, false. The specific monetary value in these memes appears to have their origin in a viral Feb. 17 YouTube video that despite discussing the value 85 million in the actual clip was shared by its creator with the higher number on Twitter. That video derived the number $85 million from an announcement by the State Department which does not award defense contracts approving a proposed sale of missiles produced by the company Raytheon to the government of Chile. YouTube video announcement does not Austin's divestment aside, senators have raised concerns over the close relationship between Raytheon and Austin in general. In correspondence with U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren, Austin pledged to extend his recusal from Raytheon Technologies for four years and to not seek a position on the board of a defense contractor or become a lobbyist after his government service. raised concerns It bears mentioning that Mark Esper, who served as former President Donald Trumps secretary of defense, served as Raytheons vice president of government relations directly before his confirmation. When asked by Warren during his confirmation hearing if he would recuse himself from decisions involving Raytheon, he refused. served refused From 2016 to the day of his confirmation as secretary of defense on Jan. 22, 2021, Austin served on the Board of Directors for Raytheon or a company, United Technologies Corp, that would merge with it. Prior to his confirmation, according to documents filed with the Office of Government Ethics, Austin held vested deferred stock units and vested and unvested restricted stock units in Raytheon. merge documents filed These are special forms of stock-based executive compensation. Deferred stock units are shares inaccessible to the owner until after that person has left the company. Restricted stocks are ownership shares of a company subject to special Securities and Exchange (SEC) restrictions intended, among other things, to prevent premature selling. Both options are often given on a vesting schedule, meaning that the full amount of the stock compensation is not available to that executive (i.e., it remains unvested) until the executive has worked at the company for a certain period of time. Deferred Restricted Austin sold these stocks the day of his confirmation. In his White House financial disclosure form, Austin indicated the value of his vested deferred stocks to be between $500,000 and $1,000,000 and the value of his vested restricted stocks to be between $50,000 and $100,000. Austin, a DOD spokesperson told us, "will file a Periodic Transaction Report and a Certificate of Ethics Agreement Compliance which will both be publicly available on the OGE website." disclosure form Raytheon performs a prodigious amount of work for the Department of Defense. Based on an analysis performed by Snopes, in the first month that Austin served as its secretary, the DOD granted at least $569,756,040 in new contracts or contract modifications to Raytheon or various divisions of Raytheon branches: an analysis $19,950,844 $290,704,534 $49,195,531 $53,861,439 $7,580,414 $8,377,372 $8,220,193 $74,238,334 $13,208,180 $14,921,191 $29,498,008 As part of Austin's ethics pledge, he stated that he would "not participate personally and substantially in any particular matter that to my knowledge has a direct and predictable effect on the financial interests of Raytheon." We asked the DOD how this arrangement would work, given the large volume of business conducted with Raytheon. In response, a spokesperson told us: ethics pledge Through a formal screening arrangement, the Secretary has directed his staff to identify all matters that involve Raytheon as a party or a representative of a party, as well as any matters that could directly and predictably affect the financial interests of Raytheon. Any such matters involving Raytheon are referred to the Deputy Secretary of Defense or another senior official for action or assignment. A copy of the Screening Arrangement is available in the DoD FOIA Reading Room. DoD FOIA Reading Room Because Austin divested entirely from Raytheon prior to any contract being awarded to the company under his leadership, the claim is Updated [March 2, 2021]: Changed rating from True to False based on a late-arriving statement from Pentagon Press Secretary John Kirby informing us that Austin divested entirely from Raytheon immediately after the Senate voted to confirm him.

['interest']

False

On Feb. 19, 2021, an identically phrased claim went viral on multiple social media accounts, including that of a sitting congressman, after it was posted by a self-described MAGA "global recruiter" with the Twitter handle "@johnnyrwhitsett." The claim references an alleged $285 million defense contract awarded to a company that U.S. President Joe Biden's secretary of defense, Lloyd Austin, "owns over [$1 million] of stock in." The specific monetary value in these memes appears to have their origin in a viral Feb. 17 YouTube video that despite discussing the value 85 million in the actual clip was shared by its creator with the higher number on Twitter. That video derived the number $85 million from an announcement by the State Department which does not award defense contracts approving a proposed sale of missiles produced by the company Raytheon to the government of Chile.Austin's divestment aside, senators have raised concerns over the close relationship between Raytheon and Austin in general. In correspondence with U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren, Austin pledged to extend his recusal from Raytheon Technologies for four years and to not seek a position on the board of a defense contractor or become a lobbyist after his government service.It bears mentioning that Mark Esper, who served as former President Donald Trumps secretary of defense, served as Raytheons vice president of government relations directly before his confirmation. When asked by Warren during his confirmation hearing if he would recuse himself from decisions involving Raytheon, he refused.From 2016 to the day of his confirmation as secretary of defense on Jan. 22, 2021, Austin served on the Board of Directors for Raytheon or a company, United Technologies Corp, that would merge with it. Prior to his confirmation, according to documents filed with the Office of Government Ethics, Austin held vested deferred stock units and vested and unvested restricted stock units in Raytheon.These are special forms of stock-based executive compensation. Deferred stock units are shares inaccessible to the owner until after that person has left the company. Restricted stocks are ownership shares of a company subject to special Securities and Exchange (SEC) restrictions intended, among other things, to prevent premature selling. Both options are often given on a vesting schedule, meaning that the full amount of the stock compensation is not available to that executive (i.e., it remains unvested) until the executive has worked at the company for a certain period of time.Austin sold these stocks the day of his confirmation. In his White House financial disclosure form, Austin indicated the value of his vested deferred stocks to be between $500,000 and $1,000,000 and the value of his vested restricted stocks to be between $50,000 and $100,000. Austin, a DOD spokesperson told us, "will file a Periodic Transaction Report and a Certificate of Ethics Agreement Compliance which will both be publicly available on the OGE website."Raytheon performs a prodigious amount of work for the Department of Defense. Based on an analysis performed by Snopes, in the first month that Austin served as its secretary, the DOD granted at least $569,756,040 in new contracts or contract modifications to Raytheon or various divisions of Raytheon branches:As part of Austin's ethics pledge, he stated that he would "not participate personally and substantially in any particular matter that to my knowledge has a direct and predictable effect on the financial interests of Raytheon." We asked the DOD how this arrangement would work, given the large volume of business conducted with Raytheon. In response, a spokesperson told us:Through a formal screening arrangement, the Secretary has directed his staff to identify all matters that involve Raytheon as a party or a representative of a party, as well as any matters that could directly and predictably affect the financial interests of Raytheon. Any such matters involving Raytheon are referred to the Deputy Secretary of Defense or another senior official for action or assignment. A copy of the Screening Arrangement is available in the DoD FOIA Reading Room.

About 2 percent of Americans get paid the minimum wage.

[]

Ohio Republican Sen. Rob Portman questioned Democrats who want to raise the federal minimum wage and offered a flurry of statistics to help make his point. Speaking Sunday on ABC'sThis Week, Portman suggested that raising the $7.25 an hour minimum wage could force employers to cut jobs. If you want to deal with income inequality, the No. 1 way to do it is to get people to work. That's what all the statistics show. About 2 percent of Americans get paid the minimum wage. Of that group, by the way, less than .3 of 1 percent of Americans are both under poverty -- under the line of poverty and on minimum wage. So it's a lot of young people. About 50 percent of them are between 16 and 24 years old. For a lot of them, it's a part-time job. So what you don't want to do is raise the minimum wage to the point that you're actually losing jobs. That exchange includes a bunch of different statistics, but here well be checking this one: About 2 percent of Americans get paid the minimum wage. We wont get into the question of what this means for minimum-wage policy here; for now, well just look at the numbers. To do so, we turned to a study published by Bureau of Labor Statistics -- the federal governments official chronicler of employment and wage data -- titled, Characteristics of Minimum Wage Workers: 2012. It was released on Feb. 26, 2013. The study found that a little under 3.6 million workers were paid either at or below the federal minimum wage. (The study did not look at whether workers were paid higher minimum wage rates set by their state, as many states have done.) To determine the percentage,we looked at the number of Americans employed. That number ranged between about 133 million and 134 million during 2012. If you divide the two numbers, it turns out that, by the official statistics, roughly 2.6 percent of all American workers were earning the minimum wage in 2012. Thats slightly higher than Portman indicated, but his estimate was definitely in the ballpark. That said, we do see a few caveats, none of which strike us as particularly troublesome for the accuracy of his comment. Portman said 2 percent of Americans, but to be entirely accurate, he really should have said 2 percent ofworkers. To figure out the percentage of Americans earning the minimum wage, we turned to the U.S. Census Bureau, whichestimatedthat the U.S. population in 2012 was 313,914,040. That would mean that minimum-wage workers accounted for just over 1 percent of Americans. That said, dividing by the number of Americans would not be a very useful number -- it includes a lot of people who arent old enough to work or who have retired. Portman referred to people who get paid the minimum wage. Actually, the numbers he cited refer to Americans who either get paid the minimum wage or get paidless thanthe minimum wage. How can you get paid less than the minimum wage? The minimum-wage law actuallyexempts whole classes of workersfrom the $7.25 standard -- vocational education students, full-time students employed by retail or service establishments, agriculture, or institutions of higher education, and those impaired by a physical or mental disability. This is not a trivial population -- for 2012 at least, the number earning less than the minimum wage (about 2 million) actually exceeded the number who earned the minimum wage exactly (about 1.6 million). In addition, its worth noting that workers in tipped professions, such as wait staff, get a legal minimum wage thatswell below $7.25. By factoring in tips earned, the employer only has to pay workers a minimum of $2.13 an hour. One other note: The BLS offers some words of caution about its data. It counted only minimum-wage workers who are actually paid by the hour. Salaried and other non-hourly workers are excluded from the BLS analysis. BLS says the number of salaried workers earning at or below the minimum wage is probably modest, but the data is sufficiently opaque that the agency warns that the actual number of workers with earnings at or below the prevailing federal minimum is undoubtedly understated. BLS also warns that this study is based on a sample, and samples are imperfect. Our ruling Portman said that about 2 percent of Americans get paid the minimum wage. He didnt word the statement with complete accuracy; he would have been better off saying that, according to official statistics, about 2 percent of American workers get paid at or below the federal minimum wage. Still, his number is close to accurate, and his general point -- that workers who are paid the federal minimum-wage represent a small percentage of the entire working population -- is backed up by official data. We rate his claim Mostly True.

['National', 'Economy', 'Poverty', 'Workers']

True

To do so, we turned to a study published by Bureau of Labor Statistics -- the federal governments official chronicler of employment and wage data -- titled, Characteristics of Minimum Wage Workers: 2012. It was released on Feb. 26, 2013.To figure out the percentage of Americans earning the minimum wage, we turned to the U.S. Census Bureau, whichestimatedthat the U.S. population in 2012 was 313,914,040. That would mean that minimum-wage workers accounted for just over 1 percent of Americans.How can you get paid less than the minimum wage? The minimum-wage law actuallyexempts whole classes of workersfrom the $7.25 standard -- vocational education students, full-time students employed by retail or service establishments, agriculture, or institutions of higher education, and those impaired by a physical or mental disability.In addition, its worth noting that workers in tipped professions, such as wait staff, get a legal minimum wage thatswell below $7.25. By factoring in tips earned, the employer only has to pay workers a minimum of $2.13 an hour.

Curves and organizations supporting the sanctity of life.

['Does Gary Heavin, founder and CEO of the fitness chain Curves, support pro-life causes?']

Claim: Gary Heavin, founder and CEO of the fitness chain Curves, supports pro-life causes. Example: [Collected on the Internet, 2004] Just so you know: Gary Heavin, the founder of the Waco, Texas-based chain of exercise studios called Curves, is a heavy contributor to several organizations allied with Operation Save America, the more muscular successor to Operation Rescue, the anti-choice group. The organizations he funds are spreading the falsehood that abortions lead to an increased risk of breast cancer. Planned Parenthood states that its operations in Texas are being threatened by Heavin-funded clinics based on the outdated therapeutic model of "you must carry your child to term." In an article in Today's Christian, Heavin expressed pride in his involvement with anti-choice groups, to which he donates 10 percent of Curves' profits. You may do with this information what you will. Origins: With more than 7,000 fitness and weight loss centers around the globe, Curves is the largest fitness franchise in the world. One in four health clubs in the U.S. is a Curves, a remarkable feat given that the company has only been around since 1992. Yet, for the utterly amazing, consider this: Prior to January 2004, Curves didn't have a national ad campaign. Almost all of its customers found out about the chain through word of mouth. You wouldn't think one exercise club could be that different from any other, but Curves is, and that difference accounts for the success of the chain. Curves exercise clubs are strictly for women. Their stripped-down, no-frills look will likely come as a shock to those who have been conditioned to believe that proper fitness palaces should be fashioned of glass and gleaming chrome and populated by herds of designer-clad, hard-bodied 20-somethings setting new land speed records on treadmills and exercise bikes. At Curves, there are no lockers or showers, and the clientele is predominantly middle-aged and overweight. The equipment members use is set up in a circle. Every 30 seconds, those working out are told to move to the next station, which is either another machine that works different muscle groups or a space between two machines where exercisers run or walk in place. A typical Curves workout regimen is 30 minutes a day, three times a week. Because the equipment is hydraulic, it adapts to each user's level of fitness, making these workouts suitable for anyone, regardless of physical conditioning. Women appreciate the Curves program for its "30 minutes and you're on your way" aspect, but also for the camaraderie that comes from exercising with others, which appears to be spurred on by the arrangement of the workout stations in a circle. Friendships form. Encouragement is given. A sense of "We're all in this together" pervades. More than 7,000 outlets since 1992. Obviously, they're doing something right. This highly successful chain is the brainchild of Gary Heavin, a Texas businessman who earlier in his life had a 17-location fitness center chain before filing for bankruptcy, divorcing, losing custody of his two children, and serving a six-month jail sentence for failure to pay child support. Although a Christian from his teen years, he recommitted his life to Christ while in jail, after which he and his new wife (whom he married just before his incarceration) opened the first Curves in Harlingen, Texas, in 1992. The text of the e-mail quoted above was written by Jon Carroll, a columnist with the San Francisco Chronicle. It appeared in that paper on April 20, 2004. The statements made by Carroll in those three short paragraphs about Gary Heavin, the founder and CEO of Curves, hold water for the most part. Heavin (pronounced "Haven") is a born-again Christian who is strongly pro-life and, according to an Operation Save America website (a pro-life group of a more radical orientation than Operation Rescue, which asserts there is a connection between abortion and an increased risk of breast cancer), is one of their supporters: Operation Save America Operation Rescue We then contacted Mr. Gary Heavin, Founder and CEO of Curves International. Mr. Heavin is a wealthy man who is a committed pro-life Christian. He is the premier customer of the bank that sponsors Komen. He graciously returned our phone call and promised to use his influence to convince the bank to allocate some of the funding to Care Net, so they could take care of the women instead of Planned Parenthood. Several months passed, and, lo and behold, on Tuesday, September 23rd, in the year of our Lord 2003, Care Net, our local CPC, held their annual banquet. It was the most attended, and as far as I was concerned, the best one to date. At the end, a major announcement and press statement was issued for Central Texas. Gary Heavin made a five million dollar grant to Family Practice, Care Net, and McCap. These groups and ministries would receive one million dollars a year for the next five years. Granted, some shortcuts were taken by Jon Carroll in his heads-up about Heavin. If Heavin does support Operation Save America, his "support" is of a non-financial nature. The "article in Today's Christian" was actually published in Today's Christian (formerly Christian Reader), a magazine put out by Christianity Today. Also, the "donates 10 percent of Curves' profits" is a misleading way of saying Heavin gave away that much money in 2003; the wording implies he donates that percentage of Curves' profits on an ongoing basis, yet the source material this information was drawn from speaks only to one particular year (2003), not to any year before it, and not to any plans by Heavin to gift at a similar level in future years. Moreover, the Today's Christian article stated that Heavin donated an amount equal to 10 percent of Curves' profits to "charities," which Jon Carroll has represented solely as "anti-choice groups." Though Heavin does financially support pro-life organizations and might well give only to them, he might also donate to other charitable groups as well, with the 10 percent figure representing the total of what he doled out in charitable contributions in 2003 to various causes, both pro-life and otherwise. Ergo, either Carroll mischaracterized or misunderstood what he read, or he based his statement on information outside that Today's Christian article: Servanthood may not be today's normal model for business success, but that hasn't stopped the Heavins. In 2003, the couple gave away $10 million—10 percent of their company's gross revenues and 80 percent of Gary's net income—to charities. Heavin matches the first $1,000 that each franchise raises for community causes such as walkathons to benefit pro-life pregnancy-care centers. Such controversial stances have led to criticism, but Heavin is unfazed. "There's nothing healthy about abortion," he says. "I'm not afraid to tell the truth." In a correction published on May 4, 2004, The San Francisco Chronicle stated: "A Ruth Rosen column Thursday 'What's wrong with curves?' stated that three 'pregnancy crisis centers' that received $5 million from Curves owner Gary Heavin were 'supported by Operation Save America.' The column was referring to Operation Save America's verbal endorsement of the centers, not financial support." On May 13, 2004, The San Francisco Chronicle published a further correction to information contained in both the Rosen and Carroll pieces: Two recent columns contained errors involving contributions made by Gary Heavin, founder and CEO of Curves, the women's fitness chain. Ruth Rosen's April 29 opinion-page column stated that Heavin "has given at least $5 million of his profits to some of the most militant anti-abortion groups in the country." That characterization is not accurate. The column specified that the money went to "three Texas organizations to fund 'pregnancy crisis centers.'" Only one of the recipients, Care Net, operates pregnancy crisis centers that are designed to dissuade pregnant women from having abortions while offering other support services to encourage adoption. Heavin has pledged to give Care Net $1 million over the next five years, according to a Curves spokeswoman. The largest of the pledges—$3.75 million over five years—goes to the Family Practice Center of McLennan County, which provides a variety of health-care services to Central Texas residents, many of whom are uninsured, according to the Curves spokeswoman. The Catholic-run center does not provide abortions but is not actively involved in the anti-abortion movement, the center's CEO said. The other recipient of Heavin's pledge, $250,000 over five years, was the McLennan County Collaborative Abstinence Project, which promotes sexual abstinence among teens. Its director said that, as a matter of policy, its staff would not discuss abortion when making presentations. The column presented the contributions as a percentage of the company's annual gross revenues. But the Curves spokeswoman said that those pledges, as well as millions of dollars in donations to a wide range of charities, came from Heavin's personal wealth. The column also referred to Heavin's comments in a "recent Christianity Today" article that he "is proud to support these organizations." In fact, the interview was published in the January-February issue of Today's Christian, a magazine affiliated with Christianity Today. In it, Heavin expressed his anti-abortion views but did not talk about his support for any specific organization. In addition, Jon Carroll, in his April 20 Datebook column, erred in referring to Heavin's comments as appearing in "Christianity Today" and by stating that Heavin "donates 10 percent of Curves profits" to "anti-choice groups." He also wrote that Heavin's recipients were allied with Operation Save America, a radical anti-abortion group. As stated in a May 4 clarification on Rosen's column, Operation Save America has praised those recipients on its website but does not provide financial support, nor does it have a formal alliance with them. The Chronicle regrets the errors. Gary Heavin is far from the first successful businessman to underwrite reproductive causes—Tom Monaghan of Domino's Pizza and Carl Karcher, founder of the California-based hamburger chain Carl's Jr., have been very open and public regarding their support of the pro-life philosophy, just as Warren Buffett, ranked by Forbes magazine as the second-richest man in the world, has been forthcoming about his backing of pro-choice programs. In each instance, these men are acting as private citizens who choose to bestow parts of their fortunes on the causes they believe in, not as officers of their corporations. The money is theirs to do with as they please, just as anyone's paycheck belongs to the person who earns it and stops being the employer's money at the moment it is paid out. That a spendthrift employee might choose to gamble away his earnings doesn't mean the company he works for supports gambling; likewise, that a wealthy man financially supports particular causes doesn't mean the corporation that paid him the money favors those movements. All this is by way of saying that while it's correct to identify Gary Heavin as a patron of pro-life endeavors, it would not be right to point to Curves as a supporter of those same causes. Barbara "cause and effect" Mikkelson Additional information: Curves International website Last updated: November 19, 2006 Sources: Carroll, Jon. "Jon Carroll." The San Francisco Chronicle. April 20, 2004 (p. E12). Chan, Vera H-C. "Gary Heavin Creates Sanctuaries for Women." San Jose Mercury News. April 16, 2004. Kennedy, John W. "Rolling with the Curves." Today's Christian. January 2004 (p. 30). Lawrence, Elana. "Curves, Without Frills." The Washington Post. May 27, 2003 (p. F1). Reimer, Susan. "The Mature Are Ready to Go Around These Curves." The Baltimore Sun. February 8, 2004 (p. N1). Rosen, Ruth. "What's Wrong With Curves?" The San Francisco Chronicle. April 29, 2004 (p. B9). The San Francisco Chronicle. "Corrections." May 4, 2004 (p. A2). The San Francisco Chronicle. "Corrections." May 13, 2004 (p. A2).

['income']

NEI

The statements made by Carroll in those three short paragraphs about Gary Heavin, the founder and CEO of Curves, hold water for the most part. Heavin (pronounced "Haven"), is a born-again Christian who is strongly pro-life and, according to an Operation Save America's web site (a pro-life group of a more radical orientation than Operation Rescue, and one that asserts there is a connection between abortion and increased risk of breast cancer), is one of their supporters:Gary Heavin is far from the first successful businessman to underwrite reproductive causes Tom Monaghan of Domino's Pizza and Carl Karcher, founder of the California-based hamburger chain Carl's Jr., have been very open and public regarding their support of the pro-life philosophy, just as Warren Buffett, ranked by Forbes magazine as the second-richest man in the world, has been forthcoming about his backing of pro-choice programs. In each instance, these men are acting as private citizens who choose to bestow parts of their fortunes on the causes they believe in, not as officers of their corporations. The money is theirs to do with as they please, just as anyone's paycheck belongs to the person who earns it and stops being the employer's money at the moment it is paid out. That a spendthrift employee might choose to gamble away his earnings doesn't mean the company he works for supports gambling; likewise, that a wealthy man financially supports particular causes doesn't mean the corporation that paid him the money favors those movements. Curves International web site

Hillary Clinton: Supreme Court Exists to 'Change and Shape the Law'

['A quote purportedly from Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton about the role of the Supreme Court is a hoax.']

On 10 October 2016, an meme appeared featuring a photograph of Hillary Clinton accompanied by text of a purported quote from her during from the second presidential debate the night before: The quote was not uttered by Clinton during the any presidential debate. It does not appear in the transcript of the event, nor can Clinton be heard speaking this phrase during the broadcast. transcript broadcast It seems to have originated with a social media user named Rocky Raczkowski, who (according to his post) was not directly quoting Clinton, but was giving his interpretation of what he thought Clinton had said in response to a question about Supreme Court justices: Rocky Raczkowski Raczkowski's interpretation was later shared by Mike Hewitt, a politician and radio show host, who posted the message as if it were a direct quote from Clinton, while darkly hinting at a media so corrupt that they refused to cover the what she had really said: message Of course, the reason that most media sources did not report on this quote is that it is not a quote, but a highly subjective (and inaccurate) interpretation of her words. Here's Clinton's actual response to a question about how she would select a Supreme Court justice, which is nothing like the questionable paraphrase offered by Raczkowski and shared by Hewitt: QUESTION: Good evening. Perhaps the most important aspect of this election is the Supreme Court justice. What would you prioritize as the most important aspect of selecting a Supreme Court justice? RADDATZ: We begin with your two minutes, Secretary Clinton. Thank you. Well, youre right. This is one of the most important issues in this election. I want to appoint Supreme Court justices who understand the way the world really works, who have real-life experience, who have not just been in a big law firm and maybe clerked for a judge and then gotten on the bench, but, you know, maybe they tried some more cases, they actually understand what people are up against. Because I think the current court has gone in the wrong direction. And so I would want to see the Supreme Court reverse Citizens United and get dark, unaccountable money out of our politics. Donald doesnt agree with that. I would like the Supreme Court to understand that voting rights are still a big problem in many parts of our country, that we dont always do everything we can to make it possible for people of color and older people and young people to be able to exercise their franchise. I want a Supreme Court that will stick with Roe v. Wade and a womans right to choose, and I want a Supreme Court that will stick with marriage equality. Now, Donald has put forth the names of some people that he would consider. And among the ones that he has suggested are people who would reverse Roe v. Wade and reverse marriage equality. I think that would be a terrible mistake and would take us backwards. I want a Supreme Court that doesnt always side with corporate interests. I want a Supreme Court that understands because youre wealthy and you can give more money to something doesnt mean you have any more rights or should have any more rights than anybody else. So I have very clear views about what I want to see to kind of change the balance on the Supreme Court. And I regret deeply that the Senate has not done its job and they have not permitted a vote on the person that President Obama, a highly qualified person, theyve not given him a vote to be able to be have the full complement of nine Supreme Court justices. I think that was a dereliction of duty. I hope that they will see their way to doing it, but if I am so fortunate enough as to be president, I will immediately move to make sure that we fill that, we have nine justices that get to work on behalf of our people.

['share']

False

The quote was not uttered by Clinton during the any presidential debate. It does not appear in the transcript of the event, nor can Clinton be heard speaking this phrase during the broadcast. It seems to have originated with a social media user named Rocky Raczkowski, who (according to his post) was not directly quoting Clinton, but was giving his interpretation of what he thought Clinton had said in response to a question about Supreme Court justices:Raczkowski's interpretation was later shared by Mike Hewitt, a politician and radio show host, who posted the message as if it were a direct quote from Clinton, while darkly hinting at a media so corrupt that they refused to cover the what she had really said:

'Cadbury Easter Egg Hunt' Scam Circulates on WhatsApp

['Cadbury said in a statement that the viral post was "not been generated by us" and that consumers should not "interact or share personal information through the post."']

At the end of March 2022, social media users reported that a message was circulating on WhatsApp offering a free chocolate Easter basket from Cadbury. This was not a genuine offer from the famous chocolate company. This message was part of a phishing scam that used promises of free chocolate to lure users and trick them into giving away their personal information. On WhatsApp, many people encountered the following message: There are a few red flags here. First, social media users should be wary of any message offering something for free. Second, social media users should be wary of unfamiliar URLs. While companies may truly offer giveaways on occasion, these promotional offers will come from official company sources. The above-displayed message, however, was not posted by Cadbury, and the above-displayed link is not a link to Cadbury's official website. The Dorset Police Cyber Crime Unit wrote on Facebook: Dorset Police Cyber Crime Unit wrote on Facebook Keep your eyes peeled for this fairly convincing Cadbury themed phish! It's clearly designed to mirror the current Cadbury Easter Egg Hunt campaign, with the chance to win one of 5000 possible free gifts. The only thing more wrong than this is the act of biting the top off of a Creme Egg to lick the filling out. First thing to pay attention to is that short URL. There's a good reason why we don't like short URLs in the Cyber Crime Unit... They make it much harder to tell where you're actually heading. Also, that .ru domain. There's no good reason for Cadbury to have a Russian address. Then there's the website itself. DON'T CLICK THE LINK. Our Cyber Protect Officer has done it for you. The site looks fairly convincing, however the only buttons that actually work are the ones to answer the questions. The search icon and the three little lines do nothing at all. Once you answer those question, you're taken to a little game where you have to "find your prize". Conveniently, your first and second tries won't be successful, but you'll "win" on your third go! At that point, to claim your "prize", you'll be asked to hand over all sorts of personal information. That's where the scam comes in! Far too high a price to pay for some free chocolate. Especially when Creme Eggs are two for a quid! The 2022 Cadbury Easter Egg Hunt scam follows the same formula as other social media scams. The fraudsters use an enticing offer (free chocolate) to lure consumers and get them to click on a link. Then, the fraudsters use various tactics (in this case a brief game to "find your prize") to trick users into giving away personal information (such as a credit card number). same formula as other social media scams These scams often target consumers of well-known brands, such as Cadbury, and include media or logos that imitate the visual design of those companies. In fact, Cadbury has been repeatedly used in such scams. In 2020, for example, a scam claimed that Cadbury was giving away chocolate hampers for Christmas. scam claimed that Cadbury was giving away chocolate hampers for Christmas In March 2022, the Cadbury UK Facebook page posted a message warning its fans about the current scam: Cadbury UK Facebook page Weve been made aware of circulating posts on social media, claiming to offer consumers a free Easter Chocolate basket. We can confirm that this has not been generated by us and would urge consumers not to interact or share personal information through the post. Customer security is our priority and were working with the relevant organisations to ensure this is resolved.

['credit']

False

The Dorset Police Cyber Crime Unit wrote on Facebook:The 2022 Cadbury Easter Egg Hunt scam follows the same formula as other social media scams. The fraudsters use an enticing offer (free chocolate) to lure consumers and get them to click on a link. Then, the fraudsters use various tactics (in this case a brief game to "find your prize") to trick users into giving away personal information (such as a credit card number). These scams often target consumers of well-known brands, such as Cadbury, and include media or logos that imitate the visual design of those companies. In fact, Cadbury has been repeatedly used in such scams. In 2020, for example, a scam claimed that Cadbury was giving away chocolate hampers for Christmas.In March 2022, the Cadbury UK Facebook page posted a message warning its fans about the current scam:

Did a Michigan State Senate Candidate Defend Men Having Sex with Underage Girls?

['A Michigan state senate candidate said his Facebook account was hacked and a series of troubling posts were the result of an attempt to sabotage his political career.']

A Michigan businessman abandoned his State Senate campaign in early February 2018 after making derogatory Facebook comments about the judge who sentenced osteopath Larry Nassar in a case involving the sexual abuse of hundreds of American gymnasts. Michael Saari of Walled Lake, Michigan, faced backlash for comments posted days after Judge Rosemarie Aquilina sentenced Nassar to a cumulative 175-year prison sentence on multiple counts of sexually abusing young girls in his care. As part of a Facebook discussion in response to the sentencing, Saari wrote: "The judge was wrong for her personal vocal opinions on record... That should be a crime against jurisprudence itself... Lastly, what do you think this feminazi judge would say if her husband asked for a BJ?" Saari deleted his Facebook account, but several observers managed to keep a record of this exchange by taking screenshots of his controversial posts. Saari originally told WWJ that he could not recall writing the comments, saying, "I post a lot." However, he later admitted that he posted the remarks in an interview with local ABC affiliate WXYZ, saying, "Yes, absolutely." Saari doubled down on his criticism of Aquilina but said he should have chosen a different way to articulate his views: "If I were to do it all over again, I probably would not have used such derogatory terminology." Facebook users also uncovered several troubling earlier posts he appears to have published, including one from 2016 in which he seems to defend adult men marrying and having sex with pre-pubescent girls. According to several screenshots, the posts included the following comments: "Women [sic] don't seem to understand that from the very beginning of time, men have taken young girls (prior to periods) as wives and concubines. Even the Bible talks of this, so don't make it sound like men that are attracted to 12-year-old girls are sick... It's you women [sic] that can't get a grip on reality that's what's sick... It's only normal, and you can't change normal or a person's DNA..." In a 1 February interview with a Michigan-based Patch site, Saari denied having written those words. According to Patch, Saari said he believed someone had fabricated the screenshots and added, "I've never made those comments. It's not my character." On 5 February, however, Saari told us by phone that although the post was authentic and was published by his Facebook account, it was the result of a hack and that he personally did not write it: "When I ran for Congress as a Democrat in 2014, my Facebook was hacked... The biblical thing [the post about young girls] did not come from me." However, the post in question was published in 2016. When we asked Saari whether his Facebook account had remained hacked for two years, he replied, "From what I can understand, yes," adding, "I'm not a computer guy." Ian Bancroft, a financial advisor and, like Saari, a fishing enthusiast, took part in the 2016 Facebook exchange and told local Fox News affiliate WJBK, "It was definitely him," adding, "It was a weekly occurrence for him to comment obscenities on news articles or in a lot of the fly fishing groups that were racist comments, things like that." For his part, Saari told us he does not defend or support the practice of adult men marrying or having sex with pre-pubescent girls: "Absolutely not. If I had a daughter, I think I'd go berserk if anyone was even looking at my daughter." Saari said he believed the post was designed by hackers to portray him as a "child molester" and thereby inflict the maximum possible damage on his political career: "The Democrat party or whoever it was who sabotaged my campaign knew there could be nothing heavier than that." It didn't end there. Facebook users have also condemned a series of posts from Saari's account that contained racially charged, derogatory language and appeared to support racial segregation. In one 2016 post, Saari appeared to speculate that an African-American U.S. Navy veteran who runs a Michigan fishing non-profit was a "butler," and in another, he sent the same man a diatribe in which he castigated black people for "struggling to imitate and shadow" what Saari called "white people activities." Saari denied writing either of these posts and attributed them to the alleged hacking of his account. He told us the "butler" post "was the first time I suspected my computer had been hacked," after he received messages from Facebook friends asking whether he had really written the derogatory post himself. When asked, the former candidate told us he supported racial equality, saying, "I'm a Christian. I'm no better than a Filipino or a black person or an Indian." When asked if he supported racial mixing, Saari said, "I don't advocate racial mixing; I'm not advocating it. I've never given it a whole lot of thought." On the right to marry a person from a different race, Saari told us his position was, "If they're in love, it doesn't matter. I don't care if they're gay, lesbian, black, or white. I don't care. People have the freedom to do what they want to do. This is America." When asked, Saari said he had not notified Facebook that he believed his account had been hacked and told us the damage to his reputation was so extreme that such efforts would be a waste of time. He added, "There's nothing I can do to redeem my name in politics." Three months later, Saari seemingly admitted he had made the Facebook post about sex with pre-pubescent girls that he had previously denied (his comments on the matter were far from clear) and maintained that he had not, in fact, dropped out of the state senate race. In the end, Saari lost the August 2018 Republican primary by an overwhelming 90-10 margin.

['profit']

NEI

A Michigan businessman abandoned his State Senate campaign in early February 2018, after making derogatory Facebook comments about the judge who sentenced osteopath Larry Nassar in a case involving the sexual abuse of hundreds of American gymnasts.Saari deleted his Facebook account, but several observers managed to keep a record of this exchange by taking screen shots of his controversial posts.Saari originally told WWJ that he could not recall writing the comments, saying "I post a lot." However, he later admitted that he posted the remarks, in an interview with local ABC affiliate WXYZ, saying: "Yes, absolutely."According to several screen shots, the posts included the following comments:In a 1 February interview with a Michigan-based Patch site, Saari denied having written those words. According to Patch, Saari said he believed someone had fabricated the screen shots, and added: "Ive never made those comments. Its not my character."Ian Bancroft, a financial advisor and, like Saari, a fishing enthusiast, took part in the 2016 Facebook exchange and told local Fox News affiliate WJBK "It was definitely him," adding "It was a weekly occurrence for him to comment obscenities on news articles or in a lot of the fly fishing groups that were racist comments, things like that."Facebook users have also condemned a series of posts from Saari's account which contained racially charged, derogatory language and appeared to support racial segregation.In one 2016 post, Saari appeared to speculate that an African-American U.S. navy veteran who runs a Michigan fishing non-profit was a "butler" and in another, he sent the same man a diatribe in which he castigated black people for 'struggling to imitate and shadow' what Saari called "white people activities."Three months later, Saari seemingly admitted he had made the Facebook post about sex with pre-pubescent girls that he had previously denied (his comments on the matter were far from clear) and maintained that he had not, in fact, dropped out of the state senate race:In the end, Saari lost the August 2018 Republican primary by an overwhelming 90-10 margin:

Did Deutsche Bank provide funding for 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."

['funds']

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."

California has robust job growth that outpaces the rest of the nation.

[]

Top California Democrats like State Senate leader Kevin de Len often claim that the states economy is humming right along and not weighed down by theirambitiousnew clean energy requirements. Critics, particularly the oil industry, consider the states clean energy push detrimental to Californias economy and job outlook. So, its not a surprise that De Len, author of the states most recentclean energy law, touted Californias strong job growth during a recent speech abroad about climate change. De Len, D-Los Angeles, spoke about Californias role as a leader in the fight against climate change to members of Parliament in the United Kingdom. He told them California has robust job growth that outpaces the rest of the nation,all while reducing carbon emissions and cleaning up the air we breathe, according to a Novemberpress releasefrom the senators office. Californias employment picture has certainly improved from the Great Recession, when it lostmore than a million jobsfrom 2007 to 2009. Economists credit a rebound in housing and construction jobs plus strong tech sector growth for the states healthier employment figures. But, we wondered, is the state seeing job growth that truly outpaces the rest of the nation, as the senator claimed? Or did his statement exaggerate the states good job news? We set out on a fact check limited to this question. We did not evaluate the additional question of how the states clean energy rules have affected Californias job growth. Photo by Andrew Nixon/Capital Public Radio Our research Economists we spoke with said De Lens statement, on its face, is correct. They said they took his statement to mean Californias job growth rate was higher than the countrys overall job growth rate. And it is. In 2014, California added jobs at a 3 percent clip compared with the previous year. That was more than a percentage point higher than the countrys overall rate of 1.9 percent during the same period, according to data from Chapman UniversitysCenter for Economic Research. Overall, the statement is accurate, said Professor Esmael Adibi, the centers director. We are outperforming the U.S. And thats not a new trend, said Lynn Reaser, chief economist at Point Loma Nazarene University. The state has actually outperformed the country as a whole for 44 consecutive months, which amounts to almost four years, Reaser said. Still, theres more to the nations job picture. Fourteen other states in 2014 had a higher job growth rate than the country overall, according to data provided by the economists. Californias accomplishment was hardly unique. Another interpretation of De Lens claim is that Californias job growth rate outpaced all other individual states in the rest of the nation. Asked to clarify the senators statement, De Lens office pointed to recentnews articlesthat describe California adding more total jobs than any other state, and adding jobs at a faster pace than the nation overall. Still, the phrase rest of the nation is open to different readings, Abibi said. Is he talking about the U.S. as a whole or is he talking about Texas or North Dakota or Michigan? the professor asked. Thats significant because five other states had a faster job growth rate than Californias 3 percent last year. They were North Dakota at 3.8 percent; Nevada at 3.5 percent; Colorado at 3.3 percent; Florida at 3.2 percent and Texas with 3.1 percent, according to state and federal data. Senator Kevin De Len addresses members of the U.K. Parliament in London. Photo courtesy De Len's office. Our ruling State Senator Kevin de Len said earlier this month that California has robust job growth that outpaces the rest of the nation, all while reducing carbon emissions and cleaning up the air we breathe. We limited our fact check to whether California has grown jobs faster than the rest of the nation. We did not evaluate the impact the states clean energy policies have had on job growth, a question raised by the second part of De Lens statement. Economists we spoke with agree that Californias job growth rate has been higher than the nations overall average for several years. Last year, the states job growth rate was more than a percentage point higher than the countrys. But a clarification is needed: California is far from the only state thats added jobs at a faster pace than the national average. Fourteen others accomplished the same feat. And there is another way to read the senators statement. One could assume the senator meant Californias job growth rate outpaced all other individual states. Yet, five other states had higher job growth rates in 2014. Those states are part of the rest of the nation, and would likely balk at the idea of California outpacing their job growth success. In the end, we rate the claim Mostly True. MOSTLY TRUEThe statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information. Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check.

['Climate Change', 'Economy', 'Energy', 'Jobs', 'California']

True

Top California Democrats like State Senate leader Kevin de Len often claim that the states economy is humming right along and not weighed down by theirambitiousnew clean energy requirements.So, its not a surprise that De Len, author of the states most recentclean energy law, touted Californias strong job growth during a recent speech abroad about climate change. De Len, D-Los Angeles, spoke about Californias role as a leader in the fight against climate change to members of Parliament in the United Kingdom.He told them California has robust job growth that outpaces the rest of the nation,all while reducing carbon emissions and cleaning up the air we breathe, according to a Novemberpress releasefrom the senators office.Californias employment picture has certainly improved from the Great Recession, when it lostmore than a million jobsfrom 2007 to 2009. Economists credit a rebound in housing and construction jobs plus strong tech sector growth for the states healthier employment figures.In 2014, California added jobs at a 3 percent clip compared with the previous year. That was more than a percentage point higher than the countrys overall rate of 1.9 percent during the same period, according to data from Chapman UniversitysCenter for Economic Research.Asked to clarify the senators statement, De Lens office pointed to recentnews articlesthat describe California adding more total jobs than any other state, and adding jobs at a faster pace than the nation overall.Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check.

Did Travis Kelce Post Expletive About Trump on X?

["The Kansas City Chiefs football player allegedly criticized the former president's comments on NATO."]

On Feb. 12, 2024, a screenshot claimed to show a post from Travis Kelce's official X account that said, "How about this: I'll keep playing American football and Donald Trump can keep sucking Russian d***." The screenshotted post was an apparent response to former U.S. President Donald Trump suggesting that he had once threatened to encourage Russia to attack "delinquent" NATO allies. screenshot suggesting Shared by X account @FaithRubPol, the screenshot had the caption, "Travis Kelce SLAMS Trump over his NATO comments." (Screenshot via X) The above screenshot is fake and was shared by an account that describes itself as satirical in nature. As such, we rate it as "Labeled Satire." describes The X account @FaithRubPol's description states: "Most of the images we share are parodies." The screenshot also has the label "Parody by Back Rub." description We also found no evidence on Kelce's official account that he ever made such a statement. Furthermore, the account handle in the screenshot does not belong to Kelce. Kelce's real X account is @tkelce, while the screenshot shows the handle @tkelpe. @tkelce During a campaign rally on Feb. 10, 2024, Trump generated controversy when he said he would "encourage" Russia to attack "delinquent" NATO member states. He suggested he would not abide by the alliance's collective-defense clause which states that if an ally is attacked it is considered an attack on all members if that ally was not meeting defense spending obligations. said He cited a conversation from his time as president with an unnamed world leader: cited One of the presidents of a big country stood up and said, "Well, sir, if we don't pay and we're attacked by Russia, will you protect us?" I said, "You didn't pay, you're delinquent?" He said, "Yes, let's say that happened." "No, I would not protect you. In fact, I would encourage them to do whatever the hell they want. You gotta pay. You gotta pay your bills." In sum, the above post is satirical in nature and completely fake. For background, here iswhywe sometimes write about satire/humor. why Haberman, Maggie, and Jonathan Swan. "G.O.P. Officials, Once Critical, Stand by Trump After NATO Comments." The New York Times, 12 Feb. 2024. NYTimes.com, https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/12/us/politics/trump-nato-republicans.html.Accessed 13 Feb. 2024. Knutson, Jacob. "How Trump's NATO Comments Escalate His Disdain for America's Allies." Axios, 12 Feb. 2024, https://www.axios.com/2024/02/12/trump-nato-history. Accessed 13 Feb. 2024.

['share']

False

On Feb. 12, 2024, a screenshot claimed to show a post from Travis Kelce's official X account that said, "How about this: I'll keep playing American football and Donald Trump can keep sucking Russian d***." The screenshotted post was an apparent response to former U.S. President Donald Trump suggesting that he had once threatened to encourage Russia to attack "delinquent" NATO allies.The above screenshot is fake and was shared by an account that describes itself as satirical in nature. As such, we rate it as "Labeled Satire."The X account @FaithRubPol's description states: "Most of the images we share are parodies." The screenshot also has the label "Parody by Back Rub."We also found no evidence on Kelce's official account that he ever made such a statement. Furthermore, the account handle in the screenshot does not belong to Kelce. Kelce's real X account is @tkelce, while the screenshot shows the handle @tkelpe.During a campaign rally on Feb. 10, 2024, Trump generated controversy when he said he would "encourage" Russia to attack "delinquent" NATO member states. He suggested he would not abide by the alliance's collective-defense clause which states that if an ally is attacked it is considered an attack on all members if that ally was not meeting defense spending obligations.He cited a conversation from his time as president with an unnamed world leader:For background, here iswhywe sometimes write about satire/humor.

Is the NRA a Tax-Exempt Nonprofit Organization?

["A Facebook meme gets the basic facts right about the gun lobby's status as a social welfare organization."]

The February 2018 shooting deaths of seventeen people at a high school in Parkland, Florida, and a subsequent, charged town hall meeting about gun safety with some of the mass shooting's survivors and their families have put the National Rifle Association under intense scrutiny for its opposition to gun control. Against this background, many were surprised to discover that the NRA, despite being well known for its political lobbying and ties to the gun industry, is, in fact, a tax-exempt nonprofit organization. On February 22, 2018, the "Really American" Facebook page posted a meme that showed President Donald Trump holding a replica flintlock rifle, along with the message: "The NRA has non-profit, tax-exempt status." Even though it has transformed from an organization for gun owners to one for gun manufacturers, it donates millions of dollars to politicians to ensure they vote the "right way." Corruption in action. The National Rifle Association is indeed a tax-exempt nonprofit organization. To be specific, it has 501(c)(4) status, meaning it is regarded as a "social welfare organization" by the Internal Revenue Service. To operate exclusively to promote social welfare, an organization must primarily further the common good and general welfare of the community (such as by bringing about civic betterment and social improvements). A 501(c)(4) organization like the NRA is allowed to engage in political lobbying and advocacy, but this cannot be its main activity, and it must be related to the group's primary mission and the issue upon which its tax exemption is based, according to the IRS. Social welfare organizations may also get involved in political campaigns and elections, provided their involvement is related to the group's mission and does not constitute their primary activity. Critics of the NRA have claimed that the organization's tax exemption should be revoked because, roughly speaking, the NRA spends less time and money providing a genuine service to the public at large than it does on political lobbying, and because the NRA's activities benefit the private gun industry. In its 2015 tax return, the NRA described its mission as "firearms safety education and training and advocacy on behalf of safe and responsible gun owners." In April 2016, the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence published a report on this very issue, labeling the NRA "a tax-exempt organization loaded with private interest." The authors, attorney Alexandra O'Neill and financial analyst Daniel O'Neill, wrote: "...The majority of the NRA's lobbying, education, training, and publication activities operate to benefit a private interest: the firearms and ammunition industry. As a result, under the cases and rulings interpreting section 501(c)(4), the NRA does not primarily serve the community interest and should not qualify as a tax-exempt social welfare organization. Instead, the NRA should operate as a political lobbying organization to be accountable for its key interests: the firearms and ammunition industry." A spokesperson for the NRA rejected this, telling us in an email that the group's legislative lobbying was "textbook social welfare activity," and that any benefits that accrued to gun manufacturers from the NRA's activities were "incidental." The assertion that the NRA is not operated for tax-exempt purposes is false because legislative lobbying to protect the Second Amendment freedoms of Americans is social welfare activity. The defense of civil rights secured by law is textbook social welfare activity, regardless of the size and extent of such activity. It was established in case law, the spokesperson argued, that "occasional" private financial benefits resulting incidentally from a nonprofit group's activities are allowed: Just as newspapers and other information sources incidentally benefit from the ACLU's advocacy about the First Amendment, gun manufacturers incidentally benefit from the NRA's advocacy about the Second.

['interest']

True

The February 2018 shooting deaths of seventeen people at a high school in Parkland, Florida and a subsequent, charged town hall meeting about gun safety with some of the mass shooting's survivors and their families has put the National Rifle Association under intense scrutiny for its opposition to gun control.Against this background, many were surprised to discover that the NRA, despite being well known for its political lobbying and ties to the gun industry, is in fact a tax-exempt nonprofit organization. On 22 February 2018, the "Really American" Facebook page posted a meme that showed President Donald Trump holding a replica flintlock rifle, along with this message:The National Rifle Association is indeed a tax-exempt nonprofit organization. To be specific, it has 501(c)(4) status, meaning it is regarded as a "social welfare organization" by the Internal Revenue Service:A 501(c)(4) organization like the NRA is allowed to engage in political lobbying and advocacy, but this cannot be its main activity, and it must be related to the group's primary mission and the issue upon which its tax exemption is based, according to the IRS. Social welfare organizations may also get involved in political campaigns and elections, provided their involvement is related to the group's mission, and again, only if this does not constitute their primary activity. In its 2015 tax return, the NRA described its mission as "Firearms safety education and training and advocacy on behalf of safe and responsible gun owners." In April 2016, the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence published a report on this very issue, labelling the NRA "a tax-exempt [organization] loaded with private interest." The authors attorney Alexandra O'Neill and financial analyst Daniel O'Neill wrote:

Organ Trail

['']

FACT CHECK: Does a photograph depict Mexican immigrants who were coerced into "donating" kidneys to enter the United States? Claim: A photograph shows several Mexican immigrants who were forced to surrender kidneys in order to enter the United States. Example: [Collected via Facebook, July 2015] Take notice, the scar on the side of each Central American immigrant going through Mexico to get to the USA, they are forced by local authorities in the state of Coahuila which borders with Texas to "volunteer" a kidney, of course the government of such state sells the kidneys to US agencies for hundreds of thousands of dollars, this is the price they pay to be allowed to cross through the Mexican territory...The cost of wanting a better life and freedom must be worth it for these people...I am originally from Mexico, however at this time I'm not proud of it.......Please shere with all your friends in the US, these is only made public in digital newspapers in Mexico, PLEASE SHARE!!!! Origins: On 12 July 2015, a Facebook user published a status update consisting of the photograph seen above along with the claim that it depicted Mexican immigrants who each had to "donate" a kidney to local Mexican authorities in order to be allowed to cross through into the United States. published However, the photograph in question was at least two years old by July 2015, and it does not match the claim now appended to it. The picture was published in April 2013 as part of an article about the 2013 documentary Tales from the Organ Trade. While the photograph was originally taken to illustrate the impact of a coercive black market for organs, the individuals depicted were identified as Filipino (not as Mexican or Central American), and the circumstances under which their organs were taken did not involve immigration to the United States from Mexico (or any other country): article Steering well clear of sensationalist tales of men and women waylaid by bio-buccaneers who snatch people's chloroformed kidneys while they sleep, the director tells the stories of those who "willingly" exchange their bodily integrity for another year's worth of food and shelter for their families. [The filmmaker] takes us to a village in the Philippines where nearly every adult male sports a nephrectomy (kidney removal operation) scar. Through candid interviews, we learn how badly these people (in places around the globe) are counting on continued demand for the only moderately valuable assets they possess pieces of their own bodies. Both the above-quoted excerpt and an HBO page about the film reference a classic urban legend in which an unwitting individual is incapacitated and robbed of a kidney by black market organ traders. HBO urban legend Although individuals attempting to cross the U.S.-Mexico border illegally often face genuine and serious dangers, coerced organ donation is not documented among those risks. dangers Last updated: 13July 2015 Originally published: 13July 2015

['asset']

False

Origins: On 12 July 2015, a Facebook user published a status update consisting of the photograph seen above along with the claim that it depicted Mexican immigrants who each had to "donate" a kidney to local Mexican authorities in order to be allowed to cross through into the United States.The picture was published in April 2013 as part of an article about the 2013 documentary Tales from the Organ Trade. While the photograph was originally taken to illustrate the impact of a coercive black market for organs, the individuals depicted were identified as Filipino (not as Mexican or Central American), and the circumstances under which their organs were taken did not involve immigration to the United States from Mexico (or any other country):Both the above-quoted excerpt and an HBO page about the film reference a classic urban legend in which an unwitting individual is incapacitated and robbed of a kidney by black market organ traders.Although individuals attempting to cross the U.S.-Mexico border illegally often face genuine and serious dangers, coerced organ donation is not documented among those risks.

Did Hillary Clinton Give 20% of United States' Uranium to Russia in Exchange for Clinton Foundation Donations?

['Allegations of a "quid pro quo" deal giving Russia ownership of one-fifth of U.S. uranium deposits in exchange for $145 million in donations to the Clinton Foundation are unsubstantiated.']

In the months leading up to the 2016 United States presidential election, stories abounded about the relationships between the Clinton Foundation and various foreign entities. May 2015 saw the publication of a book called Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich, an expos of alleged Clinton Foundation corruption written by Peter Schweizer, a former Hoover Institution fellow and editor-at-large at the right-wing media company Breitbart. A chapter in the book suggests that the Clinton family and Russia each may have benefited from a "pay-for-play" scheme while Hillary Clinton was secretary of state, involving the transfer of U.S. uranium reserves to the new Russian owners of an international mining operation in exchange for $145 million in donations to the Clinton Foundation. Clinton Foundation The mining company, Uranium One, was originally based in South Africa, but merged in 2007 with Canada-based UrAsia Energy. Shareholders there retained a controlling interest until 2010, when Russia's nuclear agency, Rosatom, completed purchase of a 51% stake. Hillary Clinton played a part in the transaction insofar as it involved the transfer of ownership of a material deemed important to national security uranium, amounting to one-fifth of U.S. reserves (a fraction re-estimated by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) at closer to one-tenth of the United States' uranium production capacity in 2017) thus requiring the approval of the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), on which the U.S. Secretary of State sits. one-tenth During the same time frame that the acquisition took place, the Clinton Foundation accepted contributions from nine individuals associated with Uranium One totaling more than $100 million, Schweizer claimed in Clinton Cash. Among those who followed Schweizer in citing the transaction as an instance of alleged Clinton corruption was GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump, who said during a June 2016 speech in New York City: speech Hillary Clintons State Department approved the transfer of 20% of Americas uranium holdings to Russia, while nine investors in the deal funneled $145 million to the Clinton Foundation. Trump's campaign repeated the allegation in a September 2016 press release, and again in an October 2016 television ad stating that Clinton "gave American uranium rights to the Russians": press release ad An image circulating via social media during the final months of the presidential campaign asked the question, "So Hillary, if Russia is such a threat, why did you sell them 20% of our uranium? Are you a liar, or a traitor, or both?" The Uranium One Deal Was Not Clinton's to Veto or ApproveAmong the ways these accusations stray from the facts is in attributing a power of veto or approval to Secretary Clinton that she simply did not have. Clinton was one of nine cabinet members and department heads that sit on the CFIUS, and the secretary of the treasury is its chairperson. CFIUS members are collectively charged with evaluating proposed foreign acquisitions for potential national security issues, then turning their findings over to the president. By law, the committee can't veto a transaction; only the president can. nine law All nine federal agencies were required to approve the Uranium One transaction before it could go forward. According to The New York Times, Clinton may not have even directly participated in the decision. Then-Assistant Secretary of State Jose Fernandez, whose job it was to represent the State Dept. on CFIUS, said Clinton "never intervened" in committee matters. Clinton herself has said she wasn't personally involved. said said There Is No Evidence That Uranium Went to Russia That a change of company ownership occurred doesn't mean that 10 to 20 percent of America's uranium literally went to Russia. Neither Uranium One nor ARMZ (Rosatom's mining subsidiary) is licensed to export uranium from the U.S. to other countries. Some exports did occur, however. A 2015 letter from NRC official Mark Satorius to a member of Congress revealed that an unspecified amount of yellowcake (semi-processed) uranium was shipped from a Uranium One facility in Wyoming to Canada between 2012 and 2014 for conversion (additional processing to prepare it for enrichment). A portion of that uranium was subsequently shipped to enrichment plants in Europe. letter The transfers to Canada were legal despite Uranium One's not holding an export license because the NRC granted such a license to the company that transported it. The transfers to Europe were legal because they were approved by another agency, the U.S. Dept. of Energy. Satorius stressed that the transfers were subject to NRC oversight and all applicable safety and national security regulations: Before issuing this license amendment to RSB Logistics Services or any other export license or license amendment the NRC must determine that the proposed export is not inimical to the common defense and security of the United States. Under existing NRC regulations, this means that any uranium proposed to be exported to any country for use in nuclear fuel would be subject to the Atomic Energy Act Section 123 agreement for peaceful nuclear cooperation between the U.S. and that other country and confirmed in case-specific, government-to government assurances for each export license. The receiving country is required to commit to use the material only for peaceful purposes (not for development of any nuclear explosive device), to maintain adequate physical protection, and not to retransfer the material to a third country or alter it in form or content without the prior consent of the U.S. The transfer of the U.S.-supplied uranium from Canada to Europe noted above also was subject to applicable Section 123 agreements. Additionally, a small amount of that exported uranium was, in fact, sold to other countries. According to a 2 November 2017 article in The Hill, Uranium One officials acknowledged that approximately 25 percent of the yellowcake exported for conversion was subsequently sold via "book transfer" to customers in Western Europe and Asia (yellowcake being a fungible commodity, that doesn't necessarily translate to a physical transfer of the product, however). article To date, there is no evidence that any of this uranium made its way to Russia. An NRC spokesman cited by FactCheck.org in October 2017 reaffirmed Satorius's assurances that "the U.S. government has not authorized any country to re-transfer U.S. uranium to Russia." NRC officials also say they're unaware of any Uranium One exports from the U.S. to foreign countries since 2014. cited The Timing of Most of the Clinton Foundation Donations Does Not MatchOf the $145 million allegedly contributed to the Clinton Foundation by Uranium One investors, the lion's share $131.3 million came from a single donor, Frank Giustra, the company's Canadian founder. But Giustra sold off his entire stake in the company in 2007, three years before the Russia deal and at least 18 months before Clinton became secretary of state. came sold off Of the remaining individuals connected with Uranium One who donated to the Clinton Foundation, only one was found to have contributed during the same time frame that the deal was taking place, according to The New York Times Ian Telfer (also a Canadian), the company's chairman: according His donations through the Fernwood Foundation included $1 million reported in 2009, the year his company appealed to the American Embassy to help it keep its mines in Kazakhstan; $250,000 in 2010, the year the Russians sought majority control; as well as $600,000 in 2011 and $500,000 in 2012. Mr. Telfer said that his donations had nothing to do with his business dealings, and that he had never discussed Uranium One with Mr. or Mrs. Clinton. He said he had given the money because he wanted to support Mr. Giustra's charitable endeavors with Mr. Clinton. "Frank and I have been friends and business partners for almost 20 years," he said. In addition to the Clinton Foundation donations, the New York Times also cited a $500,000 speaking fee paid to former president Bill Clinton by a Russian investment bank in June 2010, before the Uranium One deal was approved: The $500,000 fee among Mr. Clinton's highest was paid by Renaissance Capital, a Russian investment bank with ties to the Kremlin that has invited world leaders, including Tony Blair, the former British prime minister, to speak at its investor conferences. Renaissance Capital analysts talked up Uranium One's stock, assigning it a "buy" rating and saying in a July 2010 research report that it was "the best play" in the uranium markets. The timing of Telfers Clinton Foundation donations and Bill Clinton's Renaissance Capital speaking fee might be questionable if there was reason to believe that Hillary Clinton was instrumental in the approval of the deal with Russia, but all the evidence points to the contrary that Clinton did not play a pivotal role, and, in fact, may not have played any role at all. Moreover, neither Clinton nor her department possessed sole power of approval over said transaction. Foundation Admits to Disclosure MistakesOne fault investigations into the Clinton Foundation's practices did find was that not all of the donations were properly disclosed specifically, those of Uranium One Chairman Ian Telfer between 2009 and 2012. The foundation admitted this shortcoming and pledged to correct it, but as the Guardian pointed out in its May 2015 discussion of Clinton Cash, the fact that it happened is reason enough to sound alarm bells: pledged discussion It is also true that large donations to the foundation from the chairman of Uranium One, Ian Telfer, at around the time of the Russian purchase of the company and while Hillary Clinton was secretary of state, were never disclosed to the public. The multimillion sums were channeled through a subsidiary of the Clinton Foundation, CGSCI, which did not reveal its individual donors. Such awkward collisions between Bills fundraising activities and Hillarys public service have raised concerns not just among those who might be dismissed as part of a vast right-wing conspiracy. An enormous volume of interest and speculation surrounds the workings of the Clinton Foundation, which is to be expected. Given the enormous sums of money it controls and the fact that it is run by a former U.S. president who is married to a former U.S. secretary of state and presidential candidate, the foundation deserves all the scrutiny it gets, and more. At the same time, for the sake of accuracy it's crucial to differentiate between partisan accusations and what we actually know about it however little that may be. Update On 17 October 2017, The Hill reported obtaining evidence that Vadim Mikerin, a Russian official who oversaw the American operations of the Russian nuclear agency Rosatom, was being investigated for corruption by multiple U.S. agencies while the Uranium One deal was up for approval information that apparently was not shared with U.S. officials involved in approving the transaction. The Hill also reported receiving documents and eyewitness testimony "indicating Russian nuclear officials had routed millions of dollars to the U.S. designed to benefit former President Bill Clintons charitable foundation during the time Secretary of State Hillary Clinton served on a government body that provided a favorable decision to Moscow," although no specifics about who those Russian nuclear officials were or how the money was allegedly routed to the Clinton Foundation were given. In any case, none of these revelations prove that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton participated in a quid pro quo agreement to accept payment for approval of the Uranium One deal. reported On 24 October 2017, the U.S. House intelligence and oversight committees announced the launch of a joint investigation into the circumstances surrounding the Russian purchase of Uranium One. announced Becker, Jo and McIntire, Mike."Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal." The New York Times.23 April 2015. Becker, Jo and Van Natta Jr., Don."After Mining Deal, Financier Donated to Clinton." The New York Times.31 January 2008. Diamond, Jeremy and Collinson, Stephen."Trump: Clinton Is a 'World-Class Liar.'" CNN.22 June 2016. Giustra, Frank."Statement of Frank Giustra." Geo.ca.25 April 2015. Grimaldi, James V., Ballhaus, Rebecca, and Nicholas, Peter."Gifts to Hillary Clintons Family Charity Are Scrutinized in Wake of Book." The Wall Street Journal.22 April 2015. Herb, Jeremy. "House Republicans Investigating Obama-Era Uranium Deal." CNN. 24 October 2017. Hirsh, Michael."Bill and Hillary's Excellent Adventure." Politico.25 April 2015. Kessler, Glenn. "The Repeated, Incorrect Claim that Russia Obtained '20 Percent' of Our Uranium." The Washington Post. 31 October 2017. Kiely, Eugene. "The Facts on Uranium One." FactCheck.org. 1 November 2017. McElveen, Josh. "CloseUP Rewind: Hillary Clinton's First 1-on-1 Interview Since Declaring." WMUR. 27 July 2016. Pilkington, Ed."Clinton Cash: Errors Dog Bill and Hillary Expos but Is There any 'There' There?" The Guardian.5 May 2015. Qiu, Linda. "Donald Trump Inaccurately Suggests Clinton Got Paid to Approve Russia Uranium Deal." PolitiFact.30 June 2016. Robertson, Lori."Fact Check: Trump's False 'Corruption' Claim." NBC News.25 October 2015. Solomon, John and Spann, Alison. "FBI Uncovered Russian Bribery Plot Before Obama Administration Approved Controversial Nuclear Deal with Moscow." The Hill. 17 October 2017. Solomon, John and Spann, Alison. "Uranium One Deal Led to Some Exports to Europe, Memos Show." The Hill. 2 November 2017. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. "NRC Approves Transfer of Control of Uranium Recovery Licenses to Russian Firm." 24 November 2010. U.S. Dept. of Treasury."The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS)." 20 December 2012. Updated [17 October 2017]: Added synopsis of new reportage by The Hill. Updated [1 November 2017]: Added clarifications, more sources, and the announcement of a congressional investigation. Correction [16 November 2017]: Previous versions of this article incorrectly stated that no Uranium One-produced uranium had been exported to foreign countries.

['investment']

False

A chapter in the book suggests that the Clinton family and Russia each may have benefited from a "pay-for-play" scheme while Hillary Clinton was secretary of state, involving the transfer of U.S. uranium reserves to the new Russian owners of an international mining operation in exchange for $145 million in donations to the Clinton Foundation.The mining company, Uranium One, was originally based in South Africa, but merged in 2007 with Canada-based UrAsia Energy. Shareholders there retained a controlling interest until 2010, when Russia's nuclear agency, Rosatom, completed purchase of a 51% stake. Hillary Clinton played a part in the transaction insofar as it involved the transfer of ownership of a material deemed important to national security uranium, amounting to one-fifth of U.S. reserves (a fraction re-estimated by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) at closer to one-tenth of the United States' uranium production capacity in 2017) thus requiring the approval of the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), on which the U.S. Secretary of State sits.During the same time frame that the acquisition took place, the Clinton Foundation accepted contributions from nine individuals associated with Uranium One totaling more than $100 million, Schweizer claimed in Clinton Cash. Among those who followed Schweizer in citing the transaction as an instance of alleged Clinton corruption was GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump, who said during a June 2016 speech in New York City:Trump's campaign repeated the allegation in a September 2016 press release, and again in an October 2016 television ad stating that Clinton "gave American uranium rights to the Russians":The Uranium One Deal Was Not Clinton's to Veto or ApproveAmong the ways these accusations stray from the facts is in attributing a power of veto or approval to Secretary Clinton that she simply did not have. Clinton was one of nine cabinet members and department heads that sit on the CFIUS, and the secretary of the treasury is its chairperson. CFIUS members are collectively charged with evaluating proposed foreign acquisitions for potential national security issues, then turning their findings over to the president. By law, the committee can't veto a transaction; only the president can. All nine federal agencies were required to approve the Uranium One transaction before it could go forward. According to The New York Times, Clinton may not have even directly participated in the decision. Then-Assistant Secretary of State Jose Fernandez, whose job it was to represent the State Dept. on CFIUS, said Clinton "never intervened" in committee matters. Clinton herself has said she wasn't personally involved.A 2015 letter from NRC official Mark Satorius to a member of Congress revealed that an unspecified amount of yellowcake (semi-processed) uranium was shipped from a Uranium One facility in Wyoming to Canada between 2012 and 2014 for conversion (additional processing to prepare it for enrichment). A portion of that uranium was subsequently shipped to enrichment plants in Europe.Additionally, a small amount of that exported uranium was, in fact, sold to other countries. According to a 2 November 2017 article in The Hill, Uranium One officials acknowledged that approximately 25 percent of the yellowcake exported for conversion was subsequently sold via "book transfer" to customers in Western Europe and Asia (yellowcake being a fungible commodity, that doesn't necessarily translate to a physical transfer of the product, however).To date, there is no evidence that any of this uranium made its way to Russia. An NRC spokesman cited by FactCheck.org in October 2017 reaffirmed Satorius's assurances that "the U.S. government has not authorized any country to re-transfer U.S. uranium to Russia." NRC officials also say they're unaware of any Uranium One exports from the U.S. to foreign countries since 2014.The Timing of Most of the Clinton Foundation Donations Does Not MatchOf the $145 million allegedly contributed to the Clinton Foundation by Uranium One investors, the lion's share $131.3 million came from a single donor, Frank Giustra, the company's Canadian founder. But Giustra sold off his entire stake in the company in 2007, three years before the Russia deal and at least 18 months before Clinton became secretary of state. Of the remaining individuals connected with Uranium One who donated to the Clinton Foundation, only one was found to have contributed during the same time frame that the deal was taking place, according to The New York Times Ian Telfer (also a Canadian), the company's chairman:Foundation Admits to Disclosure MistakesOne fault investigations into the Clinton Foundation's practices did find was that not all of the donations were properly disclosed specifically, those of Uranium One Chairman Ian Telfer between 2009 and 2012. The foundation admitted this shortcoming and pledged to correct it, but as the Guardian pointed out in its May 2015 discussion of Clinton Cash, the fact that it happened is reason enough to sound alarm bells:On 17 October 2017, The Hill reported obtaining evidence that Vadim Mikerin, a Russian official who oversaw the American operations of the Russian nuclear agency Rosatom, was being investigated for corruption by multiple U.S. agencies while the Uranium One deal was up for approval information that apparently was not shared with U.S. officials involved in approving the transaction. The Hill also reported receiving documents and eyewitness testimony "indicating Russian nuclear officials had routed millions of dollars to the U.S. designed to benefit former President Bill Clintons charitable foundation during the time Secretary of State Hillary Clinton served on a government body that provided a favorable decision to Moscow," although no specifics about who those Russian nuclear officials were or how the money was allegedly routed to the Clinton Foundation were given. In any case, none of these revelations prove that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton participated in a quid pro quo agreement to accept payment for approval of the Uranium One deal.On 24 October 2017, the U.S. House intelligence and oversight committees announced the launch of a joint investigation into the circumstances surrounding the Russian purchase of Uranium One.

Does George Soros Own a Lab That 'Developed' COVID-19?

[' Somehow, some way, business magnate George Soros gets accused of being involved in almost every politically contentious event.']

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 As the COVID-19 coronavirus disease pandemic spread across the globe in March 2020, conspiracy buffs shared memes and videos featuring variations on a common theme the SARS-CoV-2 virus was a human-made creation developed in a Chinese lab owned by all-purpose boogeyman George Soros for the purpose of causing economic disruption that would unseat Donald Trump from the U.S. presidency: We've extensively covered the false notion that the SARS-CoV-2 virus was bioengineered in a lab in Wuhan, China, in a separate article and concluded that: separate article The theory that SARS-CoV-2 was manufactured in, and escaped from, a lab in Wuhan is based solely on the proximity of infectious-disease labs near a potential source of the COVID-19 outbreak. Several scientific claims have been made or manufactured to further bolster the notion that something nefarious is going on with COVID-19 and these labs, but this information comes from non-peer-reviewed papers misconstrued to be actual additions to the scientific record, or from disreputable websites such as Mercola.com. The actual scientific facts known about the novel coronavirus leave little room for it to be a virus of human creation, however. Regardless, the idea of a Soros connection to the COVID-19 pandemic stems from the fact that Wuhan, China, was the apparent origin point of the novel coronavirus, and WuXi AppTec, a Shanghai-based pharmaceutical, biopharmaceutical, and medical device company, operates a "small molecule drug discovery and research services" facility there. And according to the conspiracy theory, Soros "owns WuXi AppTec." QED. origin point WuXi AppTec facility However, Soros holds no executive position at WuXi AppTec, and a list of the company's major shareholders shows that none owns more than 10% of the shares, and all of the largest shareholders are Chinese entities with no discernible connection to Soros himself. shareholders A May 2011 quarterly report filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) shows that Soros Fund Management, a private American investment management firm, does (or did) have a holding in a related company (Wuxi PharmaTech (Cayman)). However, such institutional investment is common in the business world and does not make the head of any given investment firm the "owner" of all the businesses in which the firm holds a stake. Wuxi PharmaTech (Cayman) When pulled, the thread of Soros to Soros Fund Management, to Wuxi PharmaTech (Cayman), to WuXi AppTec, to a biotech research facility in Wuhan, leads to nothing. All credible scientific evidence indicates the SARS-CoV-2 virus evolved or mutated and was not bioengineered, and the addition of Soros to any far-fetched conspiracy theory indicates nothing so much as a lack of imagination. Marriage, Madison. "Hedge Funds Move to Become Family Offices Is Not Entirely Popular." Financial Times. 22 October 2015. Kasprak, Alex. "The Origins and Scientific Failings of the COVID-19 Bioweapon Conspiracy Theory." Snopes.com. 1 April 2020. Secon, Holly et al. "A Comprehensive Timeline of the New Coronavirus Pandemic, From China's First COVID-19 Case to the Present." Business Insider. 1 April 2020.

['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. We've extensively covered the false notion that the SARS-CoV-2 virus was bioengineered in a lab in Wuhan, China, in a separate article and concluded that:Regardless, the idea of a Soros connection to the COVID-19 pandemic stems from the fact that Wuhan, China, was the apparent origin point of the novel coronavirus, and WuXi AppTec, a Shanghai-based pharmaceutical, biopharmaceutical, and medical device company, operates a "small molecule drug discovery and research services" facility there. And according to the conspiracy theory, Soros "owns WuXi AppTec." QED.However, Soros holds no executive position at WuXi AppTec, and a list of the company's major shareholders shows that none owns more than 10% of the shares, and all of the largest shareholders are Chinese entities with no discernible connection to Soros himself.A May 2011 quarterly report filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) shows that Soros Fund Management, a private American investment management firm, does (or did) have a holding in a related company (Wuxi PharmaTech (Cayman)). However, such institutional investment is common in the business world and does not make the head of any given investment firm the "owner" of all the businesses in which the firm holds a stake.

Freezing of military wages

['President Obama plans to freeze the pay of active duty military personnel?']

Claim: President Obama plans to implement a pay freeze for active duty military personnel in 2011. Example: [Collected via e-mail, November 2010] On Facebook, there is the following message "reposted" by a friend, and who knows how far it has circulated: "Dear Mr. President, I hear you would like to freeze pay rates for active duty starting next year. Would you also consider cutting your own pay to save more money for our country? While you're at it, let's cut congressmen's pay too. If the people who risk their lives don't get an increase in pay, why would we continue raising pay for those who take no risks and reap the benefits? Repost if you agree!" Origins: At the time this item was circulating via Facebook postings in November 2010, it was not true that President Obama had announced an intention to freeze the pay of active duty military personnel starting in 2011. (In fact, President Obama's fiscal 2011 budget proposal, submitted in February 2010, called for a 1.4% military pay increase for the following year.) The November 2010 circulation of this item was prompted by a draft report prepared by the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform (NCFRR), a bipartisan body created by President Obama "to address our nation's fiscal challenges." Among the 58 recommendations included in that draft report, released in November 2010, was a recommendation for a three-year freeze on basic non-combat military pay and allowances. Regular Military Compensation (excluding combat pay) for military personnel, which includes basic pay, basic allowances for housing and subsistence, and federal income tax advantages that accompany the allowances, is expected to grow by $9.2 billion from 2011 to 2015. A three-year freeze at 2011 levels for these compensation categories would save the federal government $7.6 billion in compensation and tax expenditures, as well as another $1.6 billion in reduced retirement accrual, totaling $9.2 billion in discretionary savings by 2015. However, as noted above, the NCFRR's report was merely a draft, and a military pay freeze was just one of several dozen potential items offered to achieve the goal of saving $200 billion in federal expenditures through 2015. Any such proposal, even if considered, would still have to overcome several hurdles before being enacted, including approval by 14 of the 18 commissioners who comprise the NCFRR and subsequent approval by both the Senate and the House of Representatives. In December 2010, Congress approved President Obama's recommended 1.4% pay increase for military personnel, while President Obama announced that he would freeze for two years the salaries of all other federal government workers. As for presidential compensation (which is currently set at $400,000 per year, with a $50,000 expense allowance), the salary of the President of the United States is established by Congress, so a president cannot technically "cut his own pay" (although he might opt to decline some or all of his salary or donate it to charity). Members of Congress could vote to decrease their salaries (which are currently set at $174,000 per year), although they have already voted to decline their cost-of-living pay increases in 2009 and again in 2010. Last updated: 13 January 2011 Pincus, Walter. "House Approves Defense Bill with Lower Pay Raise for Military." The Washington Post. 18 December 2010. Vinch, Chuck. "Panel Calls for 3-Year Freeze on Military Pay." Army Times. 11 November 2010.

['budget']

NEI

Origins: As of the time this item was circulating via Facebook postings in November 2010, it was not true that President Obama had announced an intention to freeze the pay of active duty military personnel starting in 2011. (In fact, President Obama's fiscal 2011 budget proposal, submitted in February 2010, called for a 1.4% military pay bump for the following year.)The November 2010 circulation of this item was prompted by a draft report prepared by the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform (NCFRR), a bipartisan body created by President Obama "to address our nation's fiscal challenges." Among the 58 recommendations included in that draft report, released in November 2010, was a recommendation for a three-year freeze on basic non-combat military pay and allowances:As for presidential compensation (which is currently set at $400,000 per year, with a $50,000 expense allowance), the salary of the President of the United States is established by Congress, so a president cannot technically "cut his own pay" (although he might opt to decline some or all of his salary, or donate it to charity). Members of Congress could vote to decrease their salaries (which are currently set at $174,000 per year), although they have already voted to decline their cost-of-living pay increases in 2009 and again in 2010.

Do Abortion Rates Fall During Democratic Administrations, Rise During Republican Ones?

['Abortion rates have risen and fallen throughout presidencies of both parties, making drawing a direct correlation between the two untenable.']

In 1969, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) began collecting nationwide data on the numbers of abortions, the abortion ratio (abortions versus live births), and the abortion rate (abortions versus the US population of women aged 15-44 years old). collecting While these data are not perfect due to inconsistent (and sometimes non-existent) reporting from different states, they can be used to analyze relative changes in abortion rates during the presidencies of different presidential parties, as we will do here using numbers from the CDCs annual abortion surveillance study. Red portions of the lines show the ratio and rates of abortions occurring under Republican administrations, and blue under Democratic administrations: not perfect numbers Before delving into the specific relationship between abortions and the political party affiliation of the President, the complete data set should be analyzed as a whole to provide context. This is how the CDC describes the overall trend in their data: describes Following nationwide legalization of abortion in 1973, the total number, rate (number of abortions per 1,000 women aged 1544 years), and ratio (number of abortions per 1,000 live births) of reported abortions increased rapidly, reaching the highest levels in the 1980s before decreasing at a slow yet steady pace. However, the incidence of abortion has varied considerably across demographic subpopulations. Moreover, during 20062008, a break occurred in the previously sustained pattern of decrease, but in all subsequent years has been followed by even greater decreases. The large uptick in legal abortions though the 70s is related to the the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, in which the United States Supreme Court ruled that a womans right to an abortion is protected under the right to privacy of the Due Process Clause of the 14th amendment. Roe v. Wade It is plain to see that abortion rates have risen (prior to their peaking in the mid-1980s) and fallen under both Democratic and Republican administration, suggesting little to no correlation with whichever political party controls the White House. The overall trend since the 1980s has been a fairly consistent decline across through administrations of both parties. It would be easy to demonstrate that abortion rates have not risen under Democratic administrations in the last several decades, but it would be false to argue that declines in abortion rates are an exclusive feature of Democratic presidencies. The claim that abortion rates fall under Democrats, while true, ignores the fact that rates have also continued to decline through Republican administrations as well. The claim, then, that abortion rates (at least since their mid-1980s peak) have risen when Republicans have held the White House is therefore equally false. At most, one can argue that the rate of decline appeared to slow during the presidency of George W. Bush before increasing under President Barack Obama's administration, but such an observation would be based on a comparison between only two administrations and would do nothing to demonstrate causation. In fact, causation between the presidency and abortion rates would be difficult to demonstrate in any case because it is hard to draw a straight line between federal government policy (let alone presidential policy) and abortion procurement. Nearly all challenges to open access to abortion have come at the state, and not the federal, level. According to a 2013 report by the pro-choice Guttmacher Institute: report Twenty-two states enacted 70 abortion restrictions during 2013. This makes 2013 second only to 2011 in the number of new abortion restrictions enacted in a single year. To put recent trends in even sharper relief, 205 abortion restrictions were enacted over the past three years (20112013), but just 189 were enacted during the entire previous decade (20012010). At the federal level, legislators have had more trouble passing abortion restrictions into law, making it difficult to argue that any presidential policy, specifically, has had an effect on abortion rates. The only relevant federal legislation that has been signed into law are the 1976 Hyde Amendment, which prohibited federal money from funding (most) abortions, and the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003, which criminalized abortions in the second trimester of pregnancy and was upheld as constitutional by the Supreme Court in 2007. 1976 Hyde Amendment Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003 What one can say, though, is that federal or myriad state-level regulations put in place do not appear to produce much of a change in abortion rates, according to a 2014 study by the Guttmacher Institute: study Forty-four laws intended to restrict access to abortion were implemented in 18 states between 2008 and 2010; an additional 62 were implemented in 2011 in 21 states. Some of these laws, such as those that added information to existing counseling requirements, would not necessarily be expected to have a measurable impact. In turn, we found no indication that they affected state-specific trends in abortion incidence. [...] Finally, a number of states that did not enact any new abortion restrictions and that are generally supportive of abortion rightsfor example, by allowing state Medicaid funds to pay for abortions for eligible womenexperienced declines in their abortion rates comparable to, and sometimes greater than, the national decline (e.g., California, New Jersey and New York). That these states also experienced a slight drop in the number of clinics offering abortion services may reflect a decline in demand as opposed to the imposition of legal barriers. According to the CDC, multiple factors can affect abortion rates, including those such as contraception and demographic changes that have an effect on the demand for (as opposed to availability of) abortions: CDC Multiple factors influence the incidence of abortion including the availability of abortion providers; state regulations, such as mandatory waiting periods, parental involvement laws, and legal restrictions on abortion providers; increasing acceptance of nonmarital childbearing; shifts in the racial/ethnic composition of the U.S. population; and changes in the economy and the resulting impact on fertility preferences and access to health care services, including contraception.

['economy']

False

In 1969, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) began collecting nationwide data on the numbers of abortions, the abortion ratio (abortions versus live births), and the abortion rate (abortions versus the US population of women aged 15-44 years old).While these data are not perfect due to inconsistent (and sometimes non-existent) reporting from different states, they can be used to analyze relative changes in abortion rates during the presidencies of different presidential parties, as we will do here using numbers from the CDCs annual abortion surveillance study. Red portions of the lines show the ratio and rates of abortions occurring under Republican administrations, and blue under Democratic administrations:Before delving into the specific relationship between abortions and the political party affiliation of the President, the complete data set should be analyzed as a whole to provide context. This is how the CDC describes the overall trend in their data:The large uptick in legal abortions though the 70s is related to the the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, in which the United States Supreme Court ruled that a womans right to an abortion is protected under the right to privacy of the Due Process Clause of the 14th amendment.In fact, causation between the presidency and abortion rates would be difficult to demonstrate in any case because it is hard to draw a straight line between federal government policy (let alone presidential policy) and abortion procurement. Nearly all challenges to open access to abortion have come at the state, and not the federal, level. According to a 2013 report by the pro-choice Guttmacher Institute:At the federal level, legislators have had more trouble passing abortion restrictions into law, making it difficult to argue that any presidential policy, specifically, has had an effect on abortion rates. The only relevant federal legislation that has been signed into law are the 1976 Hyde Amendment, which prohibited federal money from funding (most) abortions, and the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003, which criminalized abortions in the second trimester of pregnancy and was upheld as constitutional by the Supreme Court in 2007.What one can say, though, is that federal or myriad state-level regulations put in place do not appear to produce much of a change in abortion rates, according to a 2014 study by the Guttmacher Institute:According to the CDC, multiple factors can affect abortion rates, including those such as contraception and demographic changes that have an effect on the demand for (as opposed to availability of) abortions:

Is the 'Purse-in-the-Grocery-Cart' Scam Real?

["Some forms of crime aren't as easy to pull off as they used to be."]

Evaluations of crime and fraud warnings always generate several related questions. Is this form of scam possible? Is it plausible? Is it common? Has it ever occurred at all? Those are the questions we applied to the following social media meme, which posits a "scam" involving the theft of wallets from purses sitting in grocery carts and related residential burglaries: The meme contains no detail that would allow tracking its narrative to a particular crime, and we've turned up no verified reports of a similar occurrence. What we can say is that although the theft of purses effected while their owners' attention is focused elsewhere is not uncommon, the burglary aspect of this warning seems to be based on long-outmoded premises about how Americans live and work that would render it extremely unlikely today. purses For starters, you're a prospective burglar. You've lifted a woman's wallet from her purse. Now you need to call her to lure her out of her house, but ... what phone number do you call? This "scam" seemingly hearkens back to the days of landlines, when one could often tie information gleaned from a driver's license (i.e., full name and address) to a phone number through the use of a phone directory or directory assistance. But no similar mechanism exists for now-ubiquitous cellphones. (Possibly one could use the internet to quickly match up a name and address with a phone number, but the odds aren't good.) Moreover, this scheme relies on the out-of-date notion that if a woman is away from home in the middle of the day, her residence will then necessarily be unoccupied (because, of course, the man of the house will be out working somewhere, and the kids will be in school). But a variety of different domestic scenarios are common these days that would place other people at home in the middle of the day: a woman might be living with roommates or parents or adult children; some 40 per cent of Americans work mostly during nonstandard times and are therefore home during the daytime; working at home is becoming increasingly common, etc. 40 per cent at home As well, just because a residence is unoccupied by human beings doesn't preclude the possibility that a security system, barking dog, attentive neighbors, or some other impediment to a broad-daylight burglary isn't present. And in fact, as police routinely point out, most residential burglaries are crimes of opportunity and involve very little planning on the part of the thief (like the type posited here). police All in all, a crook who has successfully lifted a woman's wallet is much more likely going to be content with the bounty found within (e.g., cash, debit cards, credit cards) than with trying to parlay that score into a risky residential burglary. And your residence is far more likely to be the target of an opportunistic, spur-of-the-moment burglary than of one involving an elaborate scheme to lure you away from home. The best advice to be gleaned from this warning is to be sure not to leave purses (or other valuable items) unwatched even for the briefest of moments in shopping carts, in restrooms, and in automobiles. And engage in some simple security precautions to make your home less of an inviting target for theft. shopping carts restrooms automobiles precautions Consumer Reports. "14 Ways to Make Your Home More Secure." 21 June 2014. Population Reference Bureau. "A Demographic Profile of U.S. Workers Around the Clock." 18 September 2008. Kopf, Dan. "Slowly But Surely, Working at Home Is Becoming More Common." Quartz. 17 September 2018.

['credit']

False

The meme contains no detail that would allow tracking its narrative to a particular crime, and we've turned up no verified reports of a similar occurrence. What we can say is that although the theft of purses effected while their owners' attention is focused elsewhere is not uncommon, the burglary aspect of this warning seems to be based on long-outmoded premises about how Americans live and work that would render it extremely unlikely today.Moreover, this scheme relies on the out-of-date notion that if a woman is away from home in the middle of the day, her residence will then necessarily be unoccupied (because, of course, the man of the house will be out working somewhere, and the kids will be in school). But a variety of different domestic scenarios are common these days that would place other people at home in the middle of the day: a woman might be living with roommates or parents or adult children; some 40 per cent of Americans work mostly during nonstandard times and are therefore home during the daytime; working at home is becoming increasingly common, etc.As well, just because a residence is unoccupied by human beings doesn't preclude the possibility that a security system, barking dog, attentive neighbors, or some other impediment to a broad-daylight burglary isn't present. And in fact, as police routinely point out, most residential burglaries are crimes of opportunity and involve very little planning on the part of the thief (like the type posited here).The best advice to be gleaned from this warning is to be sure not to leave purses (or other valuable items) unwatched even for the briefest of moments in shopping carts, in restrooms, and in automobiles. And engage in some simple security precautions to make your home less of an inviting target for theft.

Will the name of Trump be printed on COVID-19 stimulus checks?

['While the unprecedented move could potentially delay these payments, U.S. Treasury officials insist the checks "are scheduled to go out on time and exactly as planned."']

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, millions of Americans who lost income due to circumstances related to the COVID-19 pandemic were waiting for promised relief payments from the United States government. So when news broke that U.S. President Donald Trump was making the "unprecedented" move of having his name added to these stimulus checks—a decision that could potentially delay their arrival by several days—many citizens took to social media to voice their displeasure. Trump's name is indeed being added to the COVID-19 stimulus checks, otherwise known as Economic Impact Payments. As of this writing, however, officials at the U.S. Treasury Department insist this will not result in any delays. The Washington Post first reported on Trump's decision on April 14, 2020. According to the news outlet, Trump's name is expected to appear in the memo line of the check, not as the payment's official signatory, and this will be the "first time that a president's name appears on an IRS disbursement." The Treasury Department has ordered President

['income']

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. In April 2020, millions of Americans who lost income due to circumstances related to the COVID-19 pandemic were waiting on promised relief payments from the United States government. So when news broke that U.S. President Donald Trump was making the "unprecedented" move of having his name added to these stimulus checks, a decision that could potentially delay the arrival of these checks by several days, many citizens took to social media to voice their displeasure, as in the example below:The Washington Post first reported on Trump's decision on April 14, 2020. According to the news outlet, Trump's name is expected to appear in the memo line of the check, not as the payment's official signatory, and that this will be the "first time that a president's name appears on an IRS disbursement":While Trump's name will appear on these stimulus checks, we can't predict whether these payments will be delayed or go out on time. A Treasury Department official said in a statement that "absolutely no delay whatsoever" would occur: An IRS official told Fox News that the number of people who will receive paper checks was subject to a "number of variables, including how much info the IRS obtains through the Non-Filers Enter Payment Info web portal and the Get My Payment portal launching [April 15] at IRS.gov.These Economic Impact Payments were included in the $2.2 trillion stimulus package that Trump signed in late March 2020. According to the IRS, direct-deposit payments had already started going out as of the second week in April. Those waiting on a paper check, however, may not see their payments for several weeks. (If you're waiting on a payment, you can check the status of your check on a recently launched web app from the IRS.)

Genpets

["Pets that are genetically engineered and manufactured to order may be a dream (or nightmare) of the future, but they aren't here quite yet."]

Pets that are genetically engineered and manufactured to order may be a dream (or nightmare) of the future, but they aren't here quite yet: There is a website, www.genpets.com, that claims to have made genetically engineered "pets" that are part-human and part-animal and are "living, breathing" creatures. Although the web site Genpets.com puts on a good show of spoofing an outlet for the sale of "pre-packaged, bio-engineered pets," no such product exists. One common giveaway: prospective buyers couldn't actually order anything through the (since-removed) Genpets store, with the excuse given that "Bio-Genica is still developing its connections and relations with resellers while we get the various approvals needed to sell Genpets worldwide." store Like similar items we've been asked about, Genpets are actually artworks in this case plastic and latex sculptures (including circuitry and robotics) created in 2005 by then 24-year-old Canadian commercial artist Adam Brandejs. As the artist explained in conjunction with an exhibition of his work, the point of Genpets is to get the public thinking about the concept of bioengineering and how they feel about where that science might lead us: items artworks I'm not against bioengineering, I'm simply hesitant towards where and how and by whom the technology will be used. That's what this art sums up. I don't ever want to be confused for as a crazy activist, nor do I want to appear as endorsing this technology. Bioengineering could lead to medical breakthroughs that save lives, but will it? This is more a critique of corporate ethics than of technological ethics. If you're still caught up on whether they're real or not, that's ok, a lot of people are, but that's not the point of the work. Slow down, stop, and think. Think about why it is that you probably, like most people seeing the work, find it highly disturbing on some level, and yet, still want to buy one. Why is it that you're so inclined to buy things, no matter what? And what is it that makes this concept so disturbing, or not disturbing to you? Consider both sides of the issue, and consider how we treat animals in farms, and pet stores today. How does that relate? This sculpture is the physical representation of a question. Bioengineering, like any new technology promises a great deal of positive effects. We as a race however tend to put a great deal more faith into technology as a saviour than it necessarily has earned. Through Genpets I question the negative effect that bioengineering can have, for we all know that when it all comes down to it, profit is the bottom line.The question surrounding bioengineering is not in its positive or negative ramifications, or where it can take us; it is whether or not we are responsible enough to go there. When Genpets were exhibited in a Toronto storefront, they created a reaction much like the one now being prompted by the Genpets.com web site: Genpets seems to create a reaction wherever they go. While in the store window of Iodine Toronto, the shop owner began sleeping in the store as many nights, people would bang at the windows furiously. Some in protest of the small Bio-genetically engineered creatures trapped in plastic, some wanting to wake them up or buy them. Hordes of teens wanting a bioengineered pet met confused, baffled, or even shocked looks from parents. For an upcoming generation, through our own marketing techniques, life and the idea of life are quickly becoming viewed as disposable commodities. Adam Brandejs' other works include the animatronic flesh shoe and a prosthetic zipper. flesh shoe prosthetic zipper

['profit']

False

Although the web site Genpets.com puts on a good show of spoofing an outlet for the sale of "pre-packaged, bio-engineered pets," no such product exists. One common giveaway: prospective buyers couldn't actually order anything through the (since-removed) Genpets store, with the excuse given that "Bio-Genica is still developing its connections and relations with resellers while we get the various approvals needed to sell Genpets worldwide." Like similar items we've been asked about, Genpets are actually artworks in this case plastic and latex sculptures (including circuitry and robotics) created in 2005 by then 24-year-old Canadian commercial artist Adam Brandejs. As the artist explained in conjunction with an exhibition of his work, the point of Genpets is to get the public thinking about the concept of bioengineering and how they feel about where that science might lead us:Adam Brandejs' other works include the animatronic flesh shoe and a prosthetic zipper.

Was there a tweet by O.J. Simpson stating that he intended to participate in the SAG-AFTRA strike?

['The former football player has acted and produced professionally in the past.']

In mid-July 2023, the Screen Actors Guild and American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (SAG-AFTRA), the union representing Hollywood actors and performers, voted to go on strike against major studios after negotiations broke down. A tweet by @KeatonPatti went viral on July 13, 2023, purporting to show a screenshot of a tweet and video in which O.J. Simpson appeared to show his support for the strike. The screenshot shows Simpson wearing a green shirt while standing in front of flowers. An overlaid caption quotes him as saying, "As a proud SAG member, I can't wait to join you all on the picket line." The screenshot also indicates that Simpson tweeted from his official Twitter account, adding the words, "Union strong. #SAGStrike." However, the screenshot is fake. There is no evidence that Simpson issued such a tweet, nor that he made a video in which he expressed support for the guild strike. The writer Keaton Patti, who has previously written stories for humor sites like The Onion, likely shared this screenshot as a joke. Indeed, the replies to the tweet are largely joking about the impact the spectacle of the controversial figure joining the strikes would have. We went to Simpson's Twitter account, which primarily consists of videos of him sharing his views on a range of topics, but found no tweets in which he expressed support for the strike. The screenshot was likely created by editing a real screenshot from a July 11, 2023, tweet from Simpson titled, "Sports should be equal and fair," in which he shared his views on the inclusion of transgender athletes in sports. In that video, Simpson was shown sitting in front of the same flowers, wearing the same shirt, with the camera at the same angle as the one in the manipulated screenshot, and the same reflection in his glasses. Simpson, a former professional football player, gained notoriety in the 1990s after a sensational trial in which he was acquitted of the murder of his estranged wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend, Ronald Goldman. In 2008, he was found guilty in a botched robbery and sentenced to more than three decades in prison, of which he served nine years. Simpson also produced and acted professionally, appearing in "The Naked Gun" movie series, among others. His finances fell under scrutiny upon his 2017 release from prison. Tom Scotto, his friend, told USA Today that Simpson received money from a SAG pension, in addition to his National Football League pension and his personal investments in a retirement fund. According to the Hollywood Reporter, Simpson's SAG pension was protected from the millions of dollars he owed to the families of Brown Simpson and Goldman after they won a wrongful death lawsuit against him in 1997. Simpson's acting and producing credits entitled him to SAG membership, and he appears to have a SAG pension as well, but the extent of his active participation in union activities and current status is unknown. Regardless, the above screenshot clearly does not show Simpson supporting the actor's strike; rather, it was manufactured by altering a separate video and adding a fictional caption.

['finance']

False

In mid-July 2023, the Screen Actors Guild and American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (SAG-AFTRA), the union representing Hollywood actors and performers, voted to go on strike against major studios after negotiations broke down.A tweet by @KeatonPatti went viral on July 13, 2023, purporting to show a screenshot of a tweet and video in which O.J. Simpson appeared to show his support for the strike. The screenshot shows Simpson wearing a green shirt while standing in front of flowers. An overlaid caption quotes him as saying, "As a proud SAG member, I can't wait to join you all on the picket line."Oh no. pic.twitter.com/Cbx0lXJ8w5 Keaton Patti (@KeatonPatti) July 13, 2023However, the screenshot is fake. There is no evidence that Simpson issued such a tweet, nor that he made a video in which he expressed support for the guild strike. The writer Keaton Patti, who has previously written stories for humor sites like The Onion, likely shared this screenshot as a joke. Indeed, the replies to the tweet are largely joking about the impact the spectacle of the controversial figure joining the strikes would have.We went to Simpson's Twitter account, which primarily consists of videos of him sharing his views on a range of topics, but found no tweets in which he expressed support for the strike. The screenshot was likely created by editing a real screenshot from a July 11, 2023, tweet from Simpson titled, "Sports should be equal and fair," in which he shared his views on the inclusion of transgender athletes in sports. In that video, Simpson was shown sitting in front of the same flowers, with the same shirt on, with the camera at the same angle as the one in the manipulated screenshot, and the same reflection in his glasses.Sports should be equal and fair. pic.twitter.com/efsqiDpd7k O.J. Simpson (@TheRealOJ32) July 11, 2023Simpson, a former professional football player, gained notoriety in the 1990s after a sensational trial in which he was acquitted of the murder of his estranged wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend, Ronald Goldman. In 2008, he was found guilty in a botched robbery and sentenced to more than three decades in prison, of which he served nine years.Simpson also produced andactedprofessionally, appearing in "The Naked Gun" movie series, among others. His finances fell under scrutiny upon his 2017 release from prison. Tom Scotto, his friend, told USA Today that Simpson received money from a SAG pension, in addition to his National Football League pension and his personal investments in a retirement fund. According to the Hollywood Reporter, Simpson's SAG pension was protected from the millions of dollars he owed to the families of Brown Simpson and Goldman, after they won a wrongful death lawsuit against him in 1997.