Datasets:

lzw1008

/

COLING25-FMD

like 2

FMD_test_900

Was federal income tax paid by Amazon in 2017?

09/26/2018

Amid national debates about income inequality and tax cuts for the ultra-rich, one talking point is frequently highlighted in online memes and by political figures such as Bernie Sanders is that online retailing giant Amazon.com, despite taking in $5.6 billion in profit in 2017, paid no federal corporate income taxes for that year: Bernie Sanders (With respect to the claim about Amazon employees on welfare, see our fact check on that topic here.) here In regards to U.S. federal income taxes, the claim that Amazon paid none in 2017 is almost certainly factual. While Amazons tax filings are not public, their SEC filing for the year 2017 illustrates that the company used the tax code expertly (and legally) to their advantage, so well that the company anticipated a $137 million tax refund from the federal government (numbers are in millions of dollars): SEC filing Amazon did pay taxes to individual U.S. states ($211 million) and to international jurisdictions ($724 million), but their federal income tax burden was (less than) zero. The filings indicate that two factors provided the lion share of Amazons reduced federal tax liability: $220 million worth of tax credits, and $917 million in tax-deductible executive pay derived from the sale of stocks: The third negative item in the SEC filing, $789 million in reduced tax burden as a result of the 2017 Tax Act, will be applied to future tax years, according to a report from the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy. report SEC filings do not require a company to list the specific credits they utilize, but there are several avenues Amazon would likely have pursued. Annette Nellen, a professor and director of the Master of Science in Taxation program at San Jose University, said that Amazons write-offs likely include credits for research and development, domestic production, and equipment depreciation. And according to a report from the Economic Policy Institute, Amazon receives myriad tax incentives from state and local governments as well: said report The expansion of Amazons physical distribution network has coincided with a strategic business plan of negotiating millions in tax abatements, credits, exemptions, and infrastructure assistance from state and local governments in the name of regional economic development. By the end of 2016, Amazon had likely received over $1 billion in state and local subsidies for its facilities, which would include not only fulfillment centers but sortation centers that only sort packages, mailing centers, and other facilities. Publicly-traded corporations can list the stock options they grant to employees as a business cost in their accounting, and if an option-receiving employee makes over $1 million a year in salary, the profits from the sale of those stocks can be then counted as a federal income tax deduction for the corporation (primarily due to a Clinton-era compromise over how to cap executive pay). Stock options allow an employee to purchase stock in their employers company at a set price, regardless of its current market value: list Options give executives and investors the right to buy shares of a company at a later date and at specific prices. For example, if a chief executive joins a media company when its stock is trading at $55 a share, but years later, the share price has skyrocketed to $100, that chief executive can still buy the shares at $55, pocketing the massive difference. In the cases of their highest paid employees, Amazon and other companies are able to deduct the massive difference employees make when they sell that stock at a profit. According to the Center for Tax Justice, because companies typically low-ball the estimated values, they usually end up with much bigger tax write-offs than the amounts they deduct as a 'cost' in computing the profits they report to shareholders. The $917 million in stock-based compensation listed in Amazon's SEC filing likely stems from their top employees' cashing in on their stock options for a large profit. deduct While it is impossible to know the exact amount of money Amazon did or did not pay to the federal government in 2017, their own accounting suggests that they expected their federal corporate income tax burden to be negative that year. U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Amazon.com Inc. Form 10-K" 2 February 2018. Gardner, Mathew. "Amazon Inc. Paid Zero in Federal Taxes in 2017, Gets $789 Million Windfall from New Tax Law." Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy. 13 February 2018. Tobias, Manuela. "Bernie Sanders Says Amazon Paid No Federal Income Tax in 2017. He's Right." Politifact. 3 May 2018. Jones, Janell and Ben Zipperer. "Unfulfilled Promises." Economic Policy Institute. 1 February 2018. Gunjan, Banerji. "Potential Loser in Tax Overhaul: Executive Stock Options." The Wall Street Journal. 19 December 2017. Citizens for Tax Justice. Fortune 500 Corporations Used Stock Option Loophole to Avoid $64.6 Billion in Taxes Over the Past Five Years." 9 June 2016.

FMD_test_901

Jill Stein Caught Embezzling Recount Funds for Marijuana Dinner Party

11/28/2016

On 27 November 2016, the web site The American Tribune published an article reporting that Green Party candidate Jill Stein had been arrested for "embezzling" money donated to her to fund a recount of 2016 general election votes: article In yet another crazy turn of events this election season, Green Party's Jill Stein was arrested following a speech in Los Angeles this Saturday. Investigators received a tip from an anonymous source that Stein had hosted a "marijuana dinner party for ... some of the richest liberals in Los Angeles." When asked for comment, representatives for Jill Stein refused to respond. A spokesperson for the LAPD only said that they are "taking the case very seriously, and will update the public with any major announcements." President-Elect Donald Trump was quick to call out "two-face Stein" for her "rude scheme" to "gyp the whiny liberals!" As of now, the guest list for the dinner party, which purportedly cost Stein $75,000, has not been released. It is unclear whether Stein obtained the marijuana legally or not -- chances are some legal shortcuts were taken to supply a large amount of cannabis for an event where medical licenses were not verified. If found guilty, Stein faces fines of up to $5 Million (ironically, the amount raised for the recount), and a sentence of up to 2 years in prison. An "About" page linked in The American Tribune's footer disclaimed: page The American Tribune provides a satirical view of current events. Our articles should be taken with a grain of salt. Our articles are a parody of the terrible news coverage in 2016 and beyond. A reverse image search led to a page (which has since been disabled) on the official Green Party web site, bearing the caption: page Photos from arrest [of Jill Stein] at the Conestoga Bank next to Fannie Mae August 1, 2012. The clothing worn by Jill Stein and the image's August 2012 date matched a separate photograph documenting her arrest while protesting banking practices in Philadelphia: documenting

FMD_test_902

Did the Grateful Dead Fund Lithuania's Olympic Basketball Team?

07/07/2021

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.

FMD_test_903

Endorsement Enforcement

12/07/2015

[featured-image] Claim:USAF General Chuck Yeager wrote an essay endorsing Donald Trump for President. Example: [Collected via e-mail, December2015] I've been repeatedly seeing a post that Chuck Yeager is endorsing Donald Trump for President.But on Yeager's website there is no mention of it and he seems to shy away from politics, in general. Origins: On 5 November 2015, the web site GaryForbes.wix.com published an article purportedly written by retiredUnited States Air Force General Chuck Yeager, endorsing Donald Trump for President of the United States: article The criticisms of Trump are amazingly missing something. They are lacking in negative stories from those who work for him or have had business dealings with him. After all the employees he's had and all the business deals he's made there is a void of criticism. In fact, long term employees call him a strong and merciful leader and say he is far more righteous and of high integrity than people may think. And while it may surprise many, hes actually humble when it comes to his generosity and kindness. A good example is a story that tells of his limo breaking down on a deserted highway outside of New York City. A middle-aged couple stopped to help him and as a thank you he paid off their mortgage, but he didnt brag about that. Generous and good people rarely talk of charity they bestow on others. But as much as all this is interesting, the real thing that people want to know is what Donald Trumps plan is for America. Its funny how so many people say they dont know what it is, or they act like Trump is hiding it. The information is readily available if people would just do a little homework. But, since most Americans won't do their own research, here, in no particular order, is an overview of many of Trumps positions and plans: This article, titled "Donald Trump Who He REALLY Is by Chuck Yeager," was not written bythe retired USAF General, nor was it first published on theGary Forbes web site. The article has been posted on a variety of blogs and web sites, with the earliest iteration being published to Doug Johnson's Horse Sense blog on 4 July 2015. variety blogs published Johnson's article wasn't particularly popular, but the majority of its content soon started circulating via e-mail and online forums, where it was cmommonly attributed to an "unknown author."Chuck Yeager's name was eventually tacked on to the essay, first by Catholic.org in August, and later by Gary Forbes, but this form of credit was undertaken without the USAF General's knowledge or approval. attributed August In fact, General Yeager has asked some Twitter users to delete links tothe purported endorsement,maintaining that he does not endorse political candidates (although he has apparently done so before): delete apparently Last updated: 7 December 2015 Originally published: 7 December 2015

FMD_test_904

Real Photo of a 'Spiraling Village' in Iran?

01/29/2024

On Dec. 10, 2023, the Instagram account @hamidreza.edalatnia posted a series of eight images. Each image featured a spiral pattern, taking shape in either the architecture, greenery, or surrounding landscapes. The images, particularly the first one, went viral, with multiple accounts across Instagram, Twitter, and Facebook sharing them, with or without credit to the original account. One such viral post, which garnered 110,836 likes as of this writing, was published by the Instagram account @national_archeology and was flooded with comments from users who claimed the images were AI-generated. "Please stop posting AI images; we want to learn about history here," one user wrote. The original account that posted the images captioned them: "'Re-envisioning Iranian urban landscape through spiral pattern' | AI, Stable diffusion, Controlnet." When we reached out to the account for comment, the owner responded, "Yes, the series of images called 'Re-envisioning Iranian urban landscape through spiral pattern' was originally generated by me using AI stable diffusion." According to the biography section of this account, its owner graduated from the Danish university Det Kongelige Akademi and is currently based in Hamburg, Germany. The account features many such AI-generated images, some depicting the geographic shape of Iran in different forms, as well as various renderings of Iran's famous Azadi Tower. Lastly, when the first image was run through AI-detection software Hive, the result indicated a 99.6% likelihood of being AI-generated. We've previously reported on other AI-generated imagery, such as R. Kelly performing shows in prison and U.S. President Joe Biden wrapped in a bubble suit.

FMD_test_905

Snowden was declared deceased by his girlfriend in Russia.

08/10/2016

On 10 August 2016, the unreliable website Disclose.tv published an article reporting that former National Security Agency (NSA) employee and whistleblower Edward Snowden was "pronounced dead by his girlfriend" in Russia. Days after Snowden's rumored death was debunked by journalist Glenn Greenwald and a Russian lawyer, a report emerged claiming that his mistress and girlfriend had confirmed the leaker's demise. Quoting MKRU News of Russia, a conservative site called Get Off the BS stated that Snowden's mistress said he was killed Saturday by a drunken, knife-wielding Buryat man in the Republic of Buryatia. The article from which the claim was aggregated was presented in the style of fiction rather than reporting and was interspersed with salacious fabrications. Late Monday afternoon, the mistress of the infamous Edward Snowden announced his death, alleging that he was killed this past Saturday by a drunken, knife-wielding Buryat man in the Republic of Buryatia. MKRU News reported that a drunken man, who for some reason took exception to a man, presumably Snowden, saving his wife from drowning, attacked a woman by slicing her neck and stabbed her male companion in the thigh, who later died from severe blood loss in a local hospital. The injured were taken to a nearby hospital, where one of them died as a result of extensive blood loss. The unidentified man was allegedly 27 years old. (Snowden, who was born on June 21, 1983, would be 33 now.) That outlet connected the purported death of Snowden to a cryptic, since-deleted tweet issued by the exiled contractor on 5 August 2016. While it was true that the disappearing tweet was interpreted by many as an ominous signal, an insurance key, or a dead man's switch, journalist Glenn Greenwald, who works closely with Snowden to publish leaked material, quickly confirmed that Snowden is alive and well. Disclose.tv and Get Off the BS are sites known for publishing outlandish fabrications and fake news in order to attract readers. On 15 August 2016, Snowden reappeared on Twitter, putting concerns for his safety to rest.

FMD_test_906

Was Target's stock negatively affected by their transgender bathroom policy?

03/01/2017

On 28 February 2017, Breitbart.com reported that big box retailer Target's stock had "crashed," losing a combined total of $15 billion in investor wealth due to the chain's announcement in 2016 that it would allow transgender customers and employees to use bathrooms corresponding to their gender identity. Reported Target's stock value is now down by 30 percent since it sparked a consumer boycott by embracing the transgender political agenda. That 30 percent drop has slashed investors' wealth by roughly $15 billion. On Tuesday, the stock fell to $58.78, down from its April 19 high of $83.98. In contrast, Walmart is up 3 percent since April, and Kohl's is down less than one percent. Company officials indirectly acknowledged the consumer boycott. "Our fourth-quarter results reflect the impact of rapidly changing consumer behavior, which drove very strong digital growth but unexpected softness in our stores," Target CEO Brian Cornell said in a company statement. The company also admitted that it would likely continue to experience losses throughout the year. On 19 April 2016, Target announced that transgender customers and employees were free to use the restroom that corresponded to their gender identity amid a national debate on the subject during the 2016 election cycle. The announcement came after North Carolina enacted the controversial HB 2 in March 2016, a law that became colloquially known as the "bathroom bill," which required public single-sex restrooms to be used only by people of the corresponding biological sex. The controversy and Target's definitive stance prompted conservative groups like the American Family Association (AFA) to launch a boycott. Nearly 1.5 million people had signed the AFA's petition as of 1 March 2017. Target shares did plunge on 28 February 2017, but it wasn't due to its nearly year-old bathroom policy. The drop was due to 2017 guidance announced during an investor day event. Projections were far lower than expected by Wall Street analysts (the term "guidance" refers to projected earnings). The drop in Target's stock corresponds to the announcement made at their investor event. According to Edward Jones analyst Brian Yarbough, Wall Street was expecting Target to project earnings of $5.30 per share, but the company instead provided guidance of $3.80 to $4.20 per share, which was "well below" expectations, prompting the drop in share value. According to Reuters, Target's decline dragged others down with it: Target's plunge prompted declines across the retail sector. Walmart Stores Inc was down 2.0 percent, with Kroger Co down 1.2 percent and Macy's Inc off 1.7 percent. Dollar General Corp fell 4.2 percent. What is affecting Target and other retailers has been competition with all-online retailers like Amazon, which do not have the overhead costs of brick-and-mortar locations. Target, for example, has 1,803 stores. "Online players don't have a huge network of stores, and since they don't have that cost, they can offer lower prices," Yarbough said. Customers also have the immediate ability to do price comparisons with smartphones. These changing patterns are reflected in a statement given by Target CEO Brian Cornell: "Our fourth-quarter results reflect the impact of rapidly changing consumer behavior, which drove very strong digital growth but unexpected softness in our stores. At our meeting with the financial community this morning, we will provide details on the meaningful investments we're making in our business and financial model, which will position Target for long-term, sustainable growth in this new era of retail. We will accelerate our investments in a smart network of physical and digital assets as well as our exclusive and differentiated assortment, including the launch of more than 12 new brands, representing more than $10 billion of our sales over the next two years. In addition, we will invest in lower gross margins to ensure we are clearly and competitively priced every day. While the transition to this new model will present headwinds to our sales and profit performance in the short term, we are confident that these changes will best position Target for continued success over the long term." Although Target offers online shopping, profits there tend to be lower due to associated costs like shipping and price competition from the likes of Amazon. Retailers are struggling to survive, with more profitable in-store sales lagging and lower profit margins due to a growing number of online shoppers. Although its e-commerce operation is growing quickly, Target reported its third straight quarter of lower sales from existing stores, citing "unexpected softness" and raising new questions about the health of large national retailers in the United States. Target also forecast first-quarter profit well below Wall Street estimates. Shares sank 13 percent, on track for their biggest one-day percentage drop in more than 18 years. Target's stock has lost a quarter of its value since the 2016 holiday season started in November and is now trading at its lowest level since August 2014. Target maintains that the bathroom policy has had no effects on its business, with company spokeswoman Erika Winkels telling us in an email, "We have made it clear over time that we've seen no material impact on the business based on the bathroom policy. We don't have anything new or different to share." A poor performance in the 2016 holiday season was also attributed to online sales outpacing foot traffic, but Target is, again, not the only chain feeling the effects: Department stores across the country are paying the price for underestimating Amazon this holiday season. Macy's and Kohl's both reported lower-than-expected sales during the all-important end-of-year retail period and announced a spate of store closures that will lead to thousands of lost jobs. Sears has even been reduced to selling off one of its iconic brands after a double-digit sales slide. Industry observers blame online competition, as well as department store brands' own shortfalls in adapting to a fundamental shift in consumer behavior. Nevertheless, Neil Saunders, managing director of GlobalData Retail, told us that Target could be worse off than it is: "It's in a much better position than some retailers because its balance sheet is still robust, whereas Sears and Macy's are in a very difficult position. With Target, it's much more about tweaking and reinvention at the edges. [The guidance] wasn't great, but not as bad as other people." Saunders told Reuters that while Walmart has been buoyed by successfully offering groceries, Target has not been able to keep up on that front, calling its grocery offerings "confusing." "Target is neither a full-line grocer nor a player with lots of niche specialty products; it is neither a high-end player nor a price-focused discounter," he said. It is difficult to say with certainty whether Target's commerce overall has been negatively affected by its policy on transgender people. Although company representatives have maintained it has not, shortly after Cornell made the announcement, USA Today reported a study that showed the percentage of people who would consider shopping there the next time they needed something dropped from 42 to 38 percent. But the retail industry as a whole is facing a dramatic shift in consumer behavior, and retailers have struggled to keep pace with it. Target's late February 2017 stock drop, however, was the result of announcements made during an investor day event and cannot be attributed to their policy on bathroom use.

FMD_test_907

Did Zelensky Say Trump 'Did Nothing Wrong' In Relation to Ukraine?

12/03/2019

In December 2019, U.S. President Donald Trump, beset by a mounting, Democrat-led impeachment process, tried to dismiss allegations of wrongdoing in relation to his July 2019 phone conversation with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, and Trump's broader actions and policies toward Ukraine. That phone call has been the focus of intense scrutiny, amid allegations that Trump used U.S. aid to Ukraine (a U.S. ally) as leverage in attempting to force Zelensky to launch an investigation into former U.S. Vice President and leading 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden and Biden's son, Hunter. On Dec. 2, Trump tweeted: tweeted "Breaking News: The President of Ukraine has just again announced that President Trump has done nothing wrong with respect to Ukraine and our interactions or calls. If the Radical Left Democrats were sane, which they are not, it would be case over!" We asked the White House to explain what the president was referring to and how those purported remarks amounted to an announcement by Zelensky that Trump had "done nothing wrong." We did not receive a response of any kind. However, Trump appeared to be alluding to a major interview Zelensky gave to four international news outlets: TIME in the U.S., Le Monde in France, Der Spiegel in Germany and Gazeta Wyborcza in Poland. Those news organizations published their respective transcripts of the interview on or around Dec. 2, with the exception of Der Spiegel, which had not yet released its own transcript at the time this fact check was published. Zelensky answered one question that was directly and specifically relevant to his July 2019 phone call with Trump. The following is a breakdown of how three of the four outlets reported that section of the interview. TIME TIME Q: When did you first sense that there was a connection between Trumps decision to block military aid to Ukraine this summer and the two investigations that Trump and his allies were asking for? Can you clarify this issue of the quid pro quo? Zelensky: Look, I never talked to the President from the position of a quid pro quo. Thats not my thing...I dont want us to look like beggars. But you have to understand. Were at war. If youre our strategic partner, then you cant go blocking anything for us. I think thats just about fairness. Its not about a quid pro quo. It just goes without saying. Le Monde Le Monde Q: Lors de cette conversation tlphonique, quand avez-vous senti le lien entre laide militaire amricaine et la demande denqute formule par M. Trump sur Hunter Biden, le fils de son rival dmocrate Joe Biden pour llection de 2020 ? Zelensky: Nous navons pas parl dun change du genre Je te donne ci et tu me donnes a . Ce type de conversation, je lai eu avec le prsident russe lorsque nous avons chang les prisonniers. Et je peux lavoir avec lEurope pour quils nous disent : Remplissez telle ou telle condition pour rejoindre lUnion europenne [UE]. LUkraine se trouve en Europe et peut faire partie de lUE. Et nous le voulons. L je comprendrais quil puisse y avoir un donnant-donnant... (Translated) Q: During that phone conversation, at what point did you sense the connection between American military aid and Mr. Trump's request for an inquiry into Hunter Biden, the son of his Democrat rival in the 2020 election, Joe Biden? Zelensky: We didn't talk about an exchange in terms of "You give my this and I give you that." I did have that type of conversation with the Russian president, when we conducted a prisoner exchange. And I could have [that type of conversation] with Europe if they say to us "Satisfy this or that condition in order to join the European Union." Ukraine is in Europe and could become part of the EU. And we want that. In that case I could understand having a give-and-take... Gazeta Wyborcza Gazeta Wyborcza Q: Jest wiele spekulacji na temat tego, kiedy pan zrozumia, e jest zwizek midzy amerykask wojenn pomoc i ledztwami, o ktre prosi Trump [w sprawie Huntera Bidena i firmy Burisma]? Zelensky: Ja nie rozmawiaem z Trumpem z pozycji "co za co". W taki sposb rozmawiaem z prezydentem Rosji oddaj mi tych, a my oddamy tych [winiw]. Czego potrzebujemy od USA? Nie chcemy wyglda dzisiaj jak klient. Ale trzeba rozumie, e u nas toczy si wojna. Jeli jestemy strategicznymi partnerami, to nie mona nam czego blokowa. U nas byy posiedzenia z UE. Powiedziaem im otwarcie: zobaczcie, tak by nie moe, albo nas widzicie w UE, albo nie. My podkrelamy: Ukraina znajduje si w Europie i zakadamy, e moemy by czci UE, podzielamy te same wartoci. Tutaj wymiana co za co jest dla mnie zrozumia... (Translated) Q: There has been a lot of speculation about when you understood that there was a link between American aid and the investigations Trump was asking for [regarding Hunter Biden and Burisma]. Zelensky: I didn't talk to Trump in terms of "this for that." I did talk like that with Putin -- give them [prisoners] to me and I'll give them to you. What do we want from the U.S.? We don't want to look like a client. But you have to understand that we have a war zone going on here. If we're strategic partners, we can't block each other's business. We had meetings with the EU. I told them explicitly: this is unacceptable. Either you see Ukraine as part of the EU or you don't. We emphasize: Ukraine is in Europe and we believe we can become part of the EU, we have the same core values. In that situation, a quid pro quo makes sense. Clearly, Zelensky did not say, word-for-word, that Trump had "done nothing wrong with respect to Ukraine and [the two men's] interactions or calls." However, Trump's tweet did not attribute that to Zelensky as a direct quotation, so it should not be evaluated as such. Rather, Trump was giving his own description or summary of what Zelensky had said. As we've seen, Zelensky did say that, in their July phone conversation, he and Trump did not discuss a quid pro quo agreement or arrangement in which Trump would release military aid to Ukraine in exchange for Ukrainian authorities opening an investigation into the alleged (and unproven) activities of the Bidens in and with regard to Ukraine. Without presenting supportive evidence, Trump and others have claimed that Joe Biden acted corruptly while he was vice president, because he pressured Ukrainian authorities to fire the country's top prosecutor in order to end an investigation into the owner of Burisma, a natural gas company whose board of directors included Biden's son, Hunter. However, former U.S. officials have rejected that theory, saying that Joe Biden pushed Ukraine to remove the prosecutor as part of a broader Obama administration drive against corruption in Ukraine. rejected The allegation that Trump used military aid to Ukraine as a bargaining chip, in exchange for an investigation that would prove damaging to one of his likely main rivals in the 2020 election, has so far undeniably been one of the principle allegations against the president. Therefore, when Zelensky said he and Trump did not discuss matters in terms of a "quid pro quo," he was undeniably exculpating Trump to a certain extent (whether or not Zelensky's description of the conversation actually measures up to what the White House call summary shows). As such, there is a measure of truth in Trump's claim that Zelensky said his American counterpart had done nothing wrong, but only as it relates specifically to that phone call. call summary The allegations of wrongdoing against Trump extend beyond the contents of one particular phone call in July. For example, Gordon Sondland, U.S. ambassador to the EU, has testified before Congress that Trump directed a months-long campaign of lobbying and persuading Ukrainian authorities to investigate the Bidens, as well as discredited claims that Ukraine (rather than Russia) was responsible for online efforts to intervene in the 2016 presidential election. campaign According to Sondland, that broader policy involved Trump's personal attorney Rudy Giuliani, acting at the president's direction, as well as other administration officials, and involved Trump directing his officials to freeze U.S. military aid to Ukraine. In his December 2019 interview, Zelensky did not address those wider allegations about Trump's Ukraine policy he spoke only about one particular phone call. Therefore, Trump was only partly accurate in summarizing and describing what Zelensky said as "President Trump has done nothing wrong with respect to Ukraine and our interactions or calls." Shuster, Simon. "'I Don't Trust Anyone at All.' Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky Speaks Out on Trump, Putin and a Divided Europe." TIME. 2 December 2019. Gatinois, Claire. "Volodymyr Zelensky: 'Nous Voulons un Vritable Cessez-le-Feu.'" Le Monde. 2 December 2019. Andrusieczko, Piotr. "Woodymyr Zeenski: Nie pjd na Donbas, zginyby setki tysicy ludzi." Gazeta Wyborcza. 2 December 2019. Riechmann, Deb. "Anatomy of the Phone Call Now Imperiling Trump's Presidency." The Associated Press. 12 October 2019. Levine, Mike. "Testimony and Texts: How the Trump-Ukraine Allegations Fit Together in a Timeline." ABC News. 20 November 2019.

FMD_test_908

Obama loans $2 billion to a Brazilian oil company.

02/10/2010

Claim: President Obama signed an executive order to lend $2 billion to a Brazilian oil company, with no financial gain for the U.S. false Example: [Collected via e-mail, November 2009] This is a perfect example why many refrain from watching the news on ABC, NBC, CBS, or MSNBC. Today on a segment of the "Glen Beck Show" on FOX (Fox Cable News) was the following: "Today, even though President Obama is against off shore drilling for our country, he signed an executive order to loan 2 Billion of our taxpayers dollars to a Brazilian Oil Exploration Company (which is the 8th largest company in the entire world) to drill for oil off the coast of Brazil! The oil that comes from this operation is for the sole purpose and use of China and NOT THE USA! Now here's the real clincher... the Chinese government is under contract to purchase all the oil that this oil field will produce, which is hundreds of millions of barrels of oil". We have absolutely no gain from this transaction whatsoever! Wait, it gets more interesting. Guess who is the largest individual stockholder of this Brazilian Oil Company and who would benefit most from this? It is American BILLIONAIRE, George Soros, who was one of President Obama's most generous financial supporter during his campaign. If you are able to connect the dots and follow the money, you are probably as upset as I am. Not a word of this transaction was broadcast on any of the other news networks! Forward this factual e-mail to others who care about this country and where it is going. Also, let all of your Government representatives know how you feel about this. Is this the kind of "transparency" you want from your government? Below is the Wall street Journal article to confirm this. Wall Street Journal editorial Wall Street Journal editorial Origins: The above-quoted article references a segment attributed to Fox News Channel host Glenn Beck criticizing President Obama for signing an executive order to lend $2 billion to a Brazilian oil company to finance offshore drilling, all without securing reciprocal oil exports from Brazil or any other benefit to the U.S. Nearly all of the substantive claims made in that article are false, as detailed below: [President Obama] signed an executive order to loan 2 Billion of our taxpayers dollars to a Brazilian Oil Exploration Company This statement is false: President Obama signed no such executive order. On 14 April 2009, the Export-Import Bank of the United States (Ex-Im), an agency whose mission "is to assist in financing the export of U.S. goods and services to international markets," issued a preliminary approval for a $2 billion loan to Brazil's national oil company, Petroleo Brasileiro S.A. (Petrobras), to help fund offshore oil exploration and development. Ex-Im preliminary approval The approval of the loan was an action undertaken not by officials who had been appointed by President Obama, but by his predecessor, President George W. Bush, as Ex-Im itself stated: The Bank's bipartisan Board unanimously approved the preliminary commitment to Petrobras on April 14, 2009, before any Obama appointees joined the Bank. In fact, at the time the Bank's Board consisted of three Republicans and two Democrats, all of whom were appointed by George W. Bush. Despite the claim that the money committed to Petrobras is "taxpayer dollars," Ex-Im notes that "the vast majority of our financing consists of guarantees of loans made by commercial lenders," that "the bank is self-sustaining and does not receive any appropriated funds from Congress," and that "the Bank's activities do not cost the American taxpayer a dime." We have absolutely no gain from this transaction whatsoever! This statement is also false, one predicated on the mistaken assumption that the only tangible financial benefit of lending money to Petrobras was to guarantee a supply of Brazilian oil for the United States. The Ex-Im's mission statement declares: mission statement The Export-Import Bank of the United States (Ex-Im Bank) is the official export credit agency of the United States. Ex-Im Bank's mission is to assist in financing the export of U.S. goods and services to international markets. Ex-Im Bank enables U.S. companies large and small to turn export opportunities into real sales that help to maintain and create U.S. jobs and contribute to a stronger national economy. Accordingly, as set forth in a 29 July 2009 press release, Ex-Im's chairman and president, Fred P. Hochberg, declared that the bank approved the $2 billion preliminary commitment not as a downpayment to ensure future oil purchases from Brazil by the U.S., but "to encourage purchases of U.S. goods and services by Petrobras": press release I chose Brazil as my first international destination for good reason: Brazil is a powerhouse among South American economies and offers tremendous opportunities for U.S. exporters in many sectors. I want Brazilians to know that Ex-Im Bank has the will and the capacity to finance their purchases of U.S. equipment, products and services. (Although Fred P. Hochberg is an Obama appointee, the President did not nominate Hochberg for the position of Ex-Im president until 20 April 2009, a week after the board approved the loan to Petrobras.) nominate The Chinese government is under contract to purchase all the oil that this oil field will produce, which is hundreds of millions of barrels of oil. China does have an agreement to buy Brazilian oil from Petrobras, but not literally to purchase the entire output of Brazilian offshore oil fields. In May 2009, the China Development Bank (CDB) agreed to lend Petrobras $10 billion (five times the amount of the Ex-Im loan); in exchange, "the two sides agreed to increase actual crude oil exports from Brazil to China." At the same time, Petrobras and Sinopec (the China Petroleum and Chemical Corporation) signed a separate long-term export agreement providing for Petrobras to export 200,000 barrels of oil to China per day from 2010 to 2019. agreed Guess who is the largest individual stockholder of this Brazilian Oil Company and who would benefit most from this? It is American BILLIONAIRE, George Soros, who was one of President Obama's most generous financial supporter during his campaign. Billionaire financier George Soros has donated large sums of money to groups that support the goals of the Democratic Party (including an estimated $23.5 million towards defeating the re-election effort of President George W. Bush in 2004), and his hedge fund (Soros Fund Management LLC) does hold stock in Petrobras. However, the implication that President Obama unilaterally directed the issuance of a loan to Petrobras as quid pro quo repayment to George Soros is erroneous since, as noted above, the loan was approved and made by a Republican-majority board of Ex-Im officials who had been appointed by George W. Bush. Soros' hedge-fund firm sold off 5 million of its 37 million Petrobras shares in May 2009, and the firm sold off another 22 million shares in August 2009, before Petrobras received any loan funds from Ex-Im. sold sold In a letter published by the Wall Street Journal on 21 August 2009, Ex-Im president Fred P. Hochberg refuted the criticisms expressed in that newspapers' editorial of three days earlier: Your editorial "Obama Underwrites Offshore Drilling" (Aug. 18) more correctly should have read, "Obama Underwrites U.S. Jobs." That's because the mandate of the Export-Import Bank of the U.S. (Ex-Im Bank) is to help create and sustain U.S. jobs by financing U.S. exports. Our offer to provide financing to Brazil's state-owned oil company Petrobras does exactly that. That's what is behind our decision to offer at least $2 billion in loans or loan guarantees to help finance purchases of U.S. goods and services by Petrobras. This increases the likelihood that American not foreign workers will be employed to satisfy part of the company's planned $175 billion investment during the next five years. Ex-Im Bank does not make U.S. policy. In fact, our charter prohibits us from turning down financing for either nonfinancial or noncommercial reasons, except in rare circumstances including failure to meet our environmental standards. We make no grants. The vast majority of our financing consists of guarantees of loans made by commercial lenders, not Ex-Im Bank direct loans. The foreign buyers that use Ex-Im Bank products pay us in full. Over the past 16 years the fees that we collect have netted American taxpayers more than $4.9 billion plus the jobs those exports have created. Thanks to the fees we charge, the bank is self-sustaining and does not receive any appropriated funds from Congress. At a time when jobs, and exports, are more important than ever in helping our economy recover, Ex-Im Bank is achieving its mission to keep Americans working, and we're doing it without burdening the U.S. taxpayer. Additional information: Facts About the Proposed Ex-Im Bank Loans Last updated: 10 February 2010

FMD_test_909

Facebook Appeal for Lylah Rose

04/04/2012

A 2-month-old girl was badly burned on the hand by emergency room staff at a Merced hospital. This is a friend of mine's 2-month-old niece, Lylah Rose! We took her to the Merced ER because she was having diarrhea. They told me she was dehydrated and needed an IV. They were trying to find a vein and put a light on her palm to see through her hand, where they attempted 14 times to get an IV in and blew 3 veins! They held her hand under the light for over 8 minutes while my niece was screaming the whole time! When my sister finally demanded that they stop and send her to Valley Children's, the doctor or nurse noticed the burn when they lifted her hand and wrapped it up with gauze, failing to inform my sister that they had burned her! We realized when we got to Valley Children's that she had a huge bubble on the palm of her hand that had popped from the tape being placed on it! My sister took her to the doctor today to get it checked out, and the doctor said these are second-degree burns and is sending my sister to a burn specialist, where they will have to remove the dead and dying skin from her hand! I have contacted the local newspaper and the local news station, both of which are denying to write a story about what happened! I can't let this slide! Please help share our story! We can be her voice! I don't want them to be able to do this to anyone else! Will you help us, KMPH FOX 26, and get justice for Lylah and expose the truth? This is news that matters. Merced Hospital is trying to cover this up. If this isn't newsworthy, I don't know what is! This item, which began circulating in April 2012, maintains that a 2-month-old girl named Lylah Rose was taken to a hospital in Merced, California, for treatment of diarrhea; and when she was diagnosed as being dehydrated, emergency room staff engaged in multiple attempts to insert an IV, which resulted in second-degree burns to her hand. Furthermore, the item asserts that attempts to interest local media in the story have failed, as those news outlets are "denying to write a story about what happened!" In response to a query, Fresno television station KMPH said they had attempted to look into the story but were so far unable to obtain information from either party involved in the alleged incident: "In order for us to do this story, we must be able to speak with the family and the hospital. We have contacted both. The family referred us to an attorney who will not discuss the case, and the hospital will not comment due to patient protection laws." On a Facebook site established as the "voice" for Lylah Rose, a post made on April 3, 2012, stated: "We talked to our lawyer today who told us not to talk to the media just yet until he is finished gathering all the information he needs. But I assure you, as soon as he says, we will talk to the media and share Lylah's story so this never happens again. Until then, we are just going to focus on getting Lylah better and out of pain." Last updated: April 3, 2012.

FMD_test_910

Kathryn Starkey only attended half of those meetings.

08/13/2010

A new political mailer from the Committee to Protect Florida attacks State House District 45 candidate Kathryn Starkey of New Port Richey for her record on taxes, citing her role on a water district board and her support of the Penny for Pasco, a 2004 increase in the county sales tax. The committee is headed by Rockie Pennington, a political consultant for Richard Corcoran, one of Starkey's two opponents in the Aug. 24 Republican primary. (Fabian Calvo is also on the ballot.) "Taxing Kathryn," says the mailer sent in early August 2010. "With Kathryn Starkey's record on taxes here at home, how can we trust her—or afford her—in Tallahassee?" We wondered, can you trust the mailer's claims? We looked at three claims, and this Truth-O-Meter item tackles her attendance at meetings. Other items are here on her voting record for river board tax rates and here on her actions involving the Pasco sales tax. We examined the claim that as a member of the Pinellas-Anclote River Basin Board, Kathryn Starkey had the opportunity to fight for lower taxes in 14 separate budget meetings between 2002 and 2008. However, she only attended half of those meetings! Pennington said he based that claim on minutes from the basin board's meetings. We took a look, too. We reviewed two budget meetings each year: June, when the basin board typically sets its preliminary tax rate, and August, when it takes a final vote. (In 2007, the final vote was taken in July.) Starkey served on the board from June 2002 through April 2008, so we looked only at the 12 budget-related meetings that fell within that period. (Pennington, who put together his mailer a month ago, said he wasn't sure why we came up with different counts for the meetings.) Of the 12 budget meetings she could have attended, Starkey attended seven (five of those seven were the final votes). That attendance record is just over half. We rate this claim Mostly True.

FMD_test_911

Did Pelosi Tell Seniors, 'You Are Not Entitled to Social Security! It's Gone!'?

05/13/2020

In early May 2020, Facebook users reported seeing a headline circulating on the social platform stating, "Pelosi To Seniors: 'You Are Not Entitled to Social Security! It's Gone!'" The story was published on the website BIZ News. website The story contained a number of sensational and false statements such as, "Socialist politicians in the Democratic Party have tried for years to eliminate Social Security, a source of income relied upon by millions in this country just to get by in their old age." While the story didn't actually contain the quote in the headline above, the copy did include an Ebenezer Scrooge-like statement falsely attributed to U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi:To be clear, no record exists that Pelosi made this remark or the quoted remark in the BIZ News headline. However, a similar, also-fake quote about Social Security that was attributed to Pelosi circulated in April 2020. similar, This item is nothing more than an example of junk news. We therefore rate this claim Speaker.gov."Pelosi Statement on 84th Anniversary of Social Security." 14 August 2019.

FMD_test_912

Lowe's $150 Anniversary Coupon Scam

05/21/2015

In late 2019, social media users began seeing posts touting that "LOWES has announced that everyone who shares this link will be sent a $150 coupon for its anniversary TODAY ONLY": This coupon offer was fake, just another iteration of similar scams that have made the online rounds several times before. In May 2015, a fraudulent offer for $100 Lowe's coupons started circulating on Facebook. The message linked Facebook users to a fraudulent web site adorned with the Lowe's logo, and instructed them to follow a simple set of instructions: Scams like these require users to pass the fake coupon on to their Facebook friends, which widens the pool of potential victims. Next, they direct people to fill out a simple survey, which seems like a harmless task but is used to coax sensitive information such as email addresses, telephone numbers, dates of birth and credit card numbers out of victims. Finally, users who complete the survey will never receive a free Lowe's gift card but instead will likely sign up for difficult-to-cancel "Reward Offers" or have their personal information used for nefarious purposes. The Better Business Bureau provides these three tips to identify scams on Facebook: Facebook 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. 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. Lowe's also posted a warning about this scam on their Facebook page: Facebook In April 2017, two years after we first debunked the initial coupon scam, a new version of it appeared, taking in unsuspecting Facebookers yet again: Those who clicked on this image on Facebook were taken to a page with a dubious URL& (in this case, https://www.lowes.com-holdit.us/?sfpzbJt) and asked to take a simple survey and then to "like" and "share" the page: Needless to say, anyone who attempted to redeem these coupons at Lowe's will be unsuccessful (and probably a little embarrassed), and if they have followed the online instructions, they have set themselves and their friends on social media up for, at best, a like-farming scam. A simple racket, certainly, but an effective one. scam

FMD_test_913

Under Donald Trump's tax plan, 51 percent of single parents would see their taxes go up.

11/06/2016

Campaigning in the final stretch of the presidential election, Hillary Clinton took a brief break from criticizing Donald Trump's character to focus on his tax plan. "He's taking care of himself, he's taking care of his family, he's taking care of the super wealthy and corporations," Clinton said at a rally in Pittsburgh on Nov. 4, 2016, adding that under Trump, 51 percent of single parents would see their taxes go up. Briefly, Trump's tax plan would collapse the seven federal income tax brackets into three (12 percent, 25 percent, and 33 percent). He would also raise the standard deduction (the amount everyone can deduct from taxable income) but repeal personal exemptions and head of household filing status. Tax analysts have found that Trump's plan would deliver, on average, tax cuts across all income brackets. So how is it possible that single parents would pay more? The Clinton campaign referred us to an analysis of Trump's tax plan from the Tax Policy Center, which is affiliated with the left-leaning Urban Institute. According to the report, authored by New York University professor Lily Batchelder, about 20 percent of households and more than half of single parents would wind up paying more in federal taxes. How? First, Trump's proposal to increase the standard deduction wouldn't be enough to offset the amount many single parents could have deducted with personal exemptions (which Trump would eliminate). For example, a single mother with one child can take a $9,350 standard deduction and two $4,050 exemptions, one for herself and one for her child in 2017 under the current system, totaling $17,450 in exemptions. Under Trump's plan, she would be able to take just a $15,000 standard deduction. The end result? That mother would have to pay income tax on an additional $2,450 under Trump's plan. Second, the head of household filing status currently applies to unmarried filers with dependents, and their standard deduction and tax rates are between those of married filers and single filers. Repealing this provision, as Trump proposes, would require single parents to file as individuals with higher tax rates. Third, Trump's three brackets would increase taxes for many head of household filers. For example, the current lowest bracket is 10 percent, but Trump's lowest bracket is 12 percent. In 2017, a single parent with one child who claims the standard deduction would face a 25 percent tax rate on adjusted gross income between $53,050 and $68,550, compared with just a 15 percent rate under current law, Roberton Williams, an analyst at the Tax Policy Center, wrote in Forbes. Put together, 51 percent of single parents, or about 5.8 million households, would see a tax increase under Trump's plan, Batchelder calculated. As our colleagues at FactCheck.org noted, single parents tend to fare worse under Trump's plan than under current law. For example, a single parent with an income of $75,000 and two school-age children would see his or her taxes increase by $2,440, or by $1,640 if the family had child care costs that could be deducted under Trump's plan, according to Batchelder. Similarly, a single parent making $50,000 with three children would face an increase of $1,188. The Tax Foundation, a free market-oriented think tank, has not released a similar analysis. However, its director of federal projects, Kyle Pomerleau, found no faults with Batchelder's report. "@lilybatch We were able to replicate many of the numbers in the report. The results seem reasonable to me." The Trump campaign did not respond to a request for comment. Our ruling: Clinton said that under Trump's tax plan, 51 percent of single parents would see their taxes go up. Trump's proposal would simplify the federal tax code and provide tax cuts for many. But analysts say Trump's plan would make changes that would negatively affect some people. Trump's proposal to eliminate the head of household filing status and personal exemptions would raise federal income taxes for many single parents. We rate Clinton's claim as True.

FMD_test_914

Did the final three years of Obama's presidency witness a greater number of jobs being generated compared to the initial three years of Trump's administration?

02/19/2020

In February 2020, we received multiple inquiries from readers about the veracity of social media posts and news articles claiming that the U.S. economy had added 1.5 million more jobs during former President Barack Obama's final three years in office than it did during President Donald Trump's first three years. On Feb. 17, Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-New York, tweeted that Obama had "created 1.5 million more jobs in his last 3 years than Donald Trump has in his first 3 years." Earlier, the left-leaning Democratic Coalition group posted a link to a Yahoo! News article with the headline "Trump's First 3 Years Created 1.5 Million Fewer Jobs Than Obama's Last 3," adding, "FACT: New figures from Trump's own Department of Labor show that 6.6 million new jobs were created in the first 36 months of Trump's tenure, compared with 8.1 million in the final 36 months of Obama's—a decline of 19% under Trump." That article was itself a republication of a Feb. 10 report published by HuffPost, which read as follows: "As President Donald Trump takes the stage at his reelection rally here [Manchester, New Hampshire] Monday and boasts of his economic record, there is one statistic he is likely to omit: He created 1.5 million fewer jobs in his first three years in office than predecessor Barack Obama did in his final three. Newly revised figures from Trump's own Department of Labor show that 6.6 million new jobs were created in the first 36 months of Trump's tenure, compared with 8.1 million in the final 36 months of Obama's—a decline of 19% under Trump, according to a HuffPost analysis." The HuffPost article didn't specify the exact metric it used to arrive at those numbers, but the standard figure used to gauge job growth in the United States is total, seasonally adjusted non-farm payroll employment, which is released every month as part of the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) establishment survey, in which BLS collects data from a sample of around 145,000 businesses and government agencies throughout the country. When a news headline states that, for example, the economy "added 225,000 jobs in January," that's typically a reference to seasonally adjusted non-farm payroll employment, meaning there were 225,000 more jobs in the United States in January 2020 than there were in December 2019. Once a year, the BLS revises its employment data after consulting more official figures collected from each state's unemployment insurance agency. This "benchmark" revision process enhances the accuracy of job figures and typically results in retrospective adjustments to employment statistics from every month over the preceding 10 years. That's what happened on Feb. 7, when the BLS released both the preliminary employment figures for January and revised job numbers from 2010 through 2019. Those revisions meant that job growth in 2018 turned out to be slower than originally recorded, prompting Slate to report that: "On Friday, the Bureau of Labor Statistics released its latest batch of employment numbers, along with its annual benchmark revisions adjusting its estimates from prior months. Before, the government believed that the U.S. had added 223,000 jobs per month in 2018, the year that the GOP's tax cuts and new, higher spending levels took effect. It has now lowered that estimate to 193,000 per month, a significant drop." For its part, MSNBC wrote that: "The revisions for 2019 showed that the economy generated nearly 2.1 million jobs last year, which is a pretty good number. The trouble, however, is that the job totals from last year were down from the year before and were actually the lowest since 2011. Or put another way, while Trump spent the year boasting that the U.S. job market was the strongest it's ever been, 2019 saw job growth slow to an eight-year low. What's more, the best year for jobs during Trump's presidency—2.31 million in 2018—fails to reach the job growth in any of the three final years of Barack Obama's presidency. It adds a degree of irony to his rhetorical record: Trump ran for president in 2015 and 2016, telling the nation that the economy was horrible and he'd make it vastly better. But annual job growth totals from both 2015 and 2016 were better than any year of the Republican's tenure, at least so far. Taking this one step further, Trump has now been in office for 36 full months—February 2017 through January 2020—and in that time, the economy has created 6.56 million jobs. In the 36 months preceding Trump's presidency—February 2014 to January 2017—the economy created 8.08 million jobs. Before we present the figures at the heart of this fact check, it should be noted that, as a rule, politicians overstate their influence over the economy when indicators are healthy and downplay their influence when things are bad. As Neil Irwin wrote for The New York Times before Trump's inauguration in January 2017: "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. Even in areas where the president really does have the power to shape the economy—appointing Federal Reserve governors, steering fiscal and regulatory policy, responding to crises and external shocks—the relationship between presidential action and economic outcome is often uncertain and hard to prove." However, Trump himself has repeatedly insisted on tying positive economic indicators like employment growth to his own presidency. So even if we might dispute the premise that presidents should receive unqualified praise or blame when the economy grows or tanks, it's worth checking the numbers involved. After all, if Trump proposes that he is to be thanked for employment growth, his own logic dictates that he should be blamed if that rate of growth is slowing down. In order to measure and compare job growth during Obama's final three years in office and job growth during Trump's first three, we obtained a data set containing 10 years' worth of monthly non-farm payroll employment figures, which BLS confirmed for Snopes was the most reliable and up-to-date data set available, and took into account the February 2020 benchmark revisions. The spreadsheet can be downloaded here, and the table is shown below: It's important to note that the monthly employment figures for December 2019 and January 2020 are both still preliminary. The January 2020 figure will be revised in March, and all the monthly figures shown in the table are liable to be further revised in 2021, when BLS conducts its annual benchmark revisions again. There are several potential ways to compare job growth under Obama and Trump, depending on where you place the transition between the two administrations. Since Trump was inaugurated on Jan. 20, 2017, there is a case for "starting the clock" in January 2017, but also for starting it in February 2017, since that was his first full month in office. If the purpose of the comparison is to gauge the possible influence of a presidency on employment trends, one could also measure job growth starting in November 2016, since that's when Trump was actually elected, or in December 2016, since that was the first full month of what could be described as the "Trump era." Finally, if one wished to use only the most reliable figures available and exclude the preliminary data from December 2019 and January 2020, one could track job growth for just the first 34 months of Trump's presidency (from February 2017 to November 2019) and compare that to the final 34 months of Obama's tenure (from April 2014 to January 2017). The following table takes into account all five methods. Each of them demonstrates that the final three years of Obama's presidency saw significantly superior job growth than the first three years of Trump's presidency. As the table shows, Obama's final three years in office saw significantly greater job growth than Trump's first three years did, no matter where the transition between presidencies is placed. Across the first four different methods, the gap averages out at around 1.5 million jobs—meaning the claim at the center of this fact check was accurate. Employment has grown during the first three years of Trump's presidency, but at a significantly slower rate than it did towards the end of Obama's tenure. Across the first four methods used here, job growth under Trump has averaged out at around 19% slower than the rate of growth experienced during his predecessor's final three years in office. When we exclude the two months of preliminary data (December 2019 and January 2020) and compare blocks of 34 months each (as opposed to blocks of 36 months), the job growth gap is naturally slightly smaller (because the time periods in question are slightly shorter), but the gap in the rate of growth is still significant, with Trump's presidency seeing employment grow 18.2% more slowly than it did during the final 34 months of Obama's time in office.

FMD_test_915

Did Trump's 2020 Campaign Publish a Heavily Slanted 'Trump vs Democrat' Poll?

07/03/2019

Readers responded with bemusement and skepticism in June 2019 after an "Official 2020 Trump vs Democrat Poll" emerged online and on social media, appearing to pose questions framed in a heavily anti-Democrat way. For example, one survey question asked, "Who would you rather see fix our Nation's shattered immigration policies? President Trump // A MS-13 loving Democrat," while another somewhat tautological question asked: "Who would you trust to NOT raise your taxes? President Trump // A High Tax Democrat." Such bias in the questions, as well as some clear nods to Trump's go-to insults against his political opponents (the poll referenced "a Lyin' Democrat" and "a Low IQ Democrat"), prompted inquiries from Snopes readers who were uncertain whether they were reading a parody or hoax or an official Trump 2020 campaign poll. One reader asked, "Oh my gosh, is this really from the Trump campaign? Or some satire site?" while another wrote, "Is this for real? It sounds too crazy ..." The survey was indeed published by Trump's official re-election campaign committee, on that campaign's official website. An archived version can be read here. The site on which it appeared, donaldjtrump.com, is run by two formally registered, pro-Trump committees and the Republican National Committee (RNC). The website contains the following disclaimer, which makes clear the official nature of the June 2019 survey and all other content featured on the site: here "Paid for by the Trump Make America Great Again Committee, a joint fundraising committee authorized by and composed of Donald J. Trump for President, Inc. and the Republican National Committee." Committee Inc Committee The poll's true purpose may not have been to create a set of results that reflected in a misleadingly positive way on the president but rather to harvest contact information respondents were required to enter their name, zip code and email address in order to submit their answers. The full list of questions was as follows: The "Trump vs Democrat" poll bore similarities to another survey on the subject of "mainstream media accountability," which Trump's website published in February 2017, and that included heavily slanted questions such as. "Do you feel that the media is too eager to slur conservatives with baseless accusations of racism and sexism?" accountability DonaldJTrump.com. "Official 2020 Trump vs Democrat Poll." June 2019. DonaldJTrump.com. "Mainstream Media Accountability Survey." February 2017.

FMD_test_916

Windshield Washer Robbers

02/05/2005

Joke: Naked woman distracts drivers by washing their windshields while her partner robs the cars. LEGEND Examples: [Collected via e-mail, February 2005] WARNING A scam is being pulled, mainly on older men. What happens is that when you stop for a red light, a young nude woman comes up and pretends to be washing your windshield. While she is doing this, another person opens your back door and steals anything in the car. They are very good at this: They got me 7 times Friday and 5 times Saturday. I wasn't able to find them on Sunday. Origins: This howler began its Internet life in January 2005. No, it is not a valid warning about an actual crime being perpetrated by gangs of naked women and their accomplices; it is merely a joke that is presented as an alert solely as the set-up for its final line, "I wasn't able to find them on Sunday." The crime victim's wistfulness is key to the jest, transforming the supposed account of repeated thefts into one of a lustful man so entranced by the sight of the woman's nudity that not only didn't he mind being repeatedly stolen from, he would actively go looking for it. In May 2005 we encountered a distaff version of the joke: Scam on Women of a Certain Age...Watch out this weekend, ladies... Be careful of this scam This new scam is being pulled mainly on older women who are apparently passed the age of giving a running pursuit. What happens is that when the intended victim stops for a red light, a completely nude and good looking, nicely tanned, unbelievably well enhanced young man comes up with muscles flexing, and body stretched to its full potential, he pretends to wash your windshield. While he is doing this, another person opens the back door of your car, taking anything you have in the car. They are very good at this. They got me seven times Friday and five times Saturday I couldn't find them on Sunday. In August 2006 we began receiving inquiries about a more elaborate, "purse snatching" variation of the latter version: WARNING! I want ALL of my friends and family to be aware of this potential danger! I don't know how many of you shop at Sam's Club or Costco, but this may be useful to know. I became a victim of a clever scam while out shopping. This happened to me and it could happen to you!! Here's how the scam works: Two seriously good-looking 23-year-old, well-built guys come over to your car as you are packing your shopping in the trunk. They both are shirtless and start wiping your windshield with a rag and Windex, with their highly-defined chest muscles and rock-hard abs exposed. It's impossible not to look. When you thank them and offer them a tip, they say 'No' and instead ask you for a ride to another Sam's Club or Costco. You agree and they get in the back seat. On the way, they start talking dirty about what they want to do to you. Then one of them climbs over into the front seat and begins kissing your neck and begs you to pull over so he can make love to you! BEWARE! While this is going on the other guy steals your purse! I had my purse stolen last Tuesday, Wednesday, twice on Thursday, again on Saturday, and also yesterday and most likely tomorrow. I'm running out of purses ... PLEASE SEND ME ANY PURSES YOU ARE NO LONGER USING! You know I'm living on a fixed income and doing without food trying to keep the purses stocked! Thank you in advance ... PLEASE HELP! March 2009 brought an even more exaggerated version involving young female wallet thieves victimizing men who shop at Home Depot: SHOPPING AT HOME DEPOT A 'heads up' for those men who may be regular Home Depot customers. This one caught me by surprise. Over the last month I became a victim of a clever scam while out shopping. Simply going out to get supplies has turned out to be quite traumatic. Don't be naive enough to think it couldn't happen to you or your friends. Here's how the scam works: Two seriously good-looking 20-21 year-old girls come over to your car as you are packing your shopping into the trunk. They both start wiping your windshield with a rag and Windex, with their breasts almost falling out of their skimpy T-shirts. It is impossible not to look. When you thank them and offer them a tip, they say 'No' and instead ask you for a ride to McDonalds. You agree and they get into the back seat. On the way, they start undressing. Then one of them climbs over into the front seat and starts crawling all over you, while the other one steals your wallet. I had my wallet stolen January 4th, 9th, 10th, twice on the 15th, 17th, 20th, 24th & 29th. Also February 1st & 4th, Twice on the 8th, 16th, 23rd, 26th & 30th, three times last Monday and very likely again this upcomingweekend. So tell your friends to be careful. P.S. Wal-Mart has wallets on sale for 2.99 each. I found cheaper ones for $1.99 at K-Mart and bought them out. Also, you never will get to eat at McDonalds. I've already lost 11 pounds just running back and forth to Home Depot. In September 2010, we spotted this adendum to the version quoted above: So please, send this on to all the older men that you know and warn them to be on the lookout for this scam. (The best times are just before lunch and around 4:30 in the afternoon.) An instance of ostension was reported in December 2005 by Houston station KPRC-TV, who broadcast that a pair of Hispanic women between 17 and 22 years of age robbed a local man in somewhat similar fashion. According to the victim's statement, a woman approached him as he was getting into his pickup truck and exposed herself, then pulled out a hammer and broke his window. A second woman produced a gun and robbed him. It is believed the same women stole another man's van not far from the apartment complex where the pickup owner was robbed. ostension Barbara "wash and beware" Mikkelson Last updated: 1 September 2010

FMD_test_917

Did Police in NC 'Escort' Proud Boys to LGBTQ Library Event?

06/23/2022

In June 2022, viral social media posts claimed that police in Wilmington, North Carolina, had "escorted" protesters from the far-right Proud Boys group towards an LGBTQ reading event for children, at a local public library. For example, on June 22, trans rights activist Erin Reed posted several photographs to Twitter, along with the following description: posted Proud Boys stormed the Pine Valley Public Library in Wilmington, North Carolina. I did some research from people who witnessed things on the ground and took pictures, and it would seem that not only was the Sheriff's office ineffective - they ESCORTED the proud boys to the room! Also on Twitter, @wapplehouse shared similar photos and wrote: shared similar photos the fucking Proud Boys showed up to a local Pride story time event today for 7 year olds and to the surprise of absolutely no one were escorted into the building and right to the room it was being held in by the [New Hanover Sheriff's Office]. A spokesperson for the New Hanover Sheriff's Office (NHSO) firmly denied to Snopes that any officer had "escorted" the Proud Boys towards the event. The spokesperson told Snopes the agency had video footage which corroborated that assertion, but its public release was unlikely because of the demands of North Carolina state law. demands of North Carolina state law Either way, no one has so far made public any evidence that definitively establishes the truth of that law enforcement agency's role in the June 21 incident. As a result, we are issuing a rating of "Unproven." If relevant evidence becomes available, we will update this fact check accordingly. The event in question was an LGBTQ "Pride reading time" for children, and took place at Pine Valley public library in Wilmington, North Carolina, on June 21. It was protested by local members of the Proud Boys, a far-right group. Earlier in June, several of that movement's leaders were charged with seditious conspiracy over their alleged role in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol. far-right group charged with seditious conspiracy More broadly, the summer of 2022 had seen a rising tide of homophobia and transphobia in the U.S., with a particular rhetorical focus on purportedly protecting children from "groomers" a homophobic slur with a long and odious ancestry. long and odious ancestry The photographs and descriptions that formed the basis of viral "police escort" claims were originally published by Angie Smith Kahney, who was present at the library at the time of the protest. In a series of Facebook and Instagram posts, she shared pictures of NHSO deputies talking with protesters, as well as walking and standing near them. In one, she wrote that the sheriff's deputies had "led the Proud Boys and their entourage right through the library TO THE ROOM FULL OF CHILDREN..." talking with protesters walking she wrote Snopes put those allegations that police had "escorted" the Proud Boys into the library and/or towards the room where the event was taking place to Lt. JJ Brewer, a spokesperson for the NHSO. Brewer firmly denied them, saying "That's 100 percent incorrect." Rather, he said, an NHSO supervisor had endeavored to walk ahead of the crowd of protesters and make sure they could not enter the room where the Pride reading time event was taking place. According to Brewer, while the protesters were legally permited to enter the main library building, they would have needed to be properly registered, and accompanied by children, in order to attend the event itself. He added that none of the protesters ever entered that room, nor did they attempt to enter it, and "at no time did they cause a disturbance in the library." We asked Smith Kahney for her response to those assertions, but we did not receive a response in time for publication. However, in an earlier Facebook post, she insisted that the Proud Boys were indeed disruptive and intimidating inside the library, and shouted obscenities at children and their parents, and said it was library staff rather than sheriff's deputies who ensured the protesters did not have access to the room. earlier Facebook post Snopes also asked New Hanover County officials for their account of the events that took place at the Pine Valley library which is operated by the county on June 21. In a statement provided to Snopes, Linda Thompson, the county's chief diversity and equity officer, said the protesters only entered the library building after the reading event had concluded, although some attendees still remained inside the room: ...After the Storytime program had ended, several members of the protesting group wanted to come inside. Anyone from the public is permitted inside the building as long as they are not actively protesting or disturbing other patrons, based on the library's code of conduct. The library director came inside with them and deputies quickly made their way to the door of Storytime, to ensure safety for library patrons and staff who were still in the room. The members of the protesting group were not allowed in the closed room where the event had been held and families were still in, and there was no disturbance inside the building. Sheriffs deputies and library staff also provided help to parents and kids who were still in attendance (some had left already) on where to exit the library following the event. Parents and children were not in danger at any time. Video footage will likely be required in order to definitively answer questions about the NHSO's role in the incidents, and whether or not they "escorted" Proud Boys towards the event. So far, such footage has not been published, and it is not clear what actions and events are shown in the still images posted online by Smith Kahney. Brewer told Snopes that the sheriff's office did have such footage, and that it clearly demonstrated that deputies did not "escort" the protesters towards the room, so that they might intimidate or harass attendees at the Pride event. However, as Brewer himself pointed out, North Carolina has unusually strict rules around the publication of police bodyworn camera footage. Police, for example, cannot unilaterally release such footage, but a judge can authorize its release. Brewer told Snopes it was therefore not likely that the bodycam footage would imminently be made public. unusually strict rules Until or unless relevant evidence does become available, our rating remains "Unproven." Groomers Rhetoric Targeting LGBTQ People Nothing New. Snopes.Com, https://www.snopes.com/news/2022/06/23/lgbtq-groomers-smear-campaign/. Accessed 23 June 2022. Leader of Proud Boys and Four Other Members Indicted in Federal Court For Seditious Conspiracy and Other Offenses Related to U.S. Capitol Breach. 6 June 2022, https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/leader-proud-boys-and-four-other-members-indicted-federal-court-seditious-conspiracy-and. Who Are the Proud Boys Trump Told To Stand Back and Stand By? Snopes.Com, https://www.snopes.com/news/2020/10/07/proud-boys-explained/. Accessed 23 June 2022.

FMD_test_918

Did Ohio Man Who Called COVID-19 a 'Political Ploy' Die from the Disease?

04/22/2020

Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease. In April 2020, a set of screenshots supposedly showing comments from a "John McDaniels," in which he called COVID-19 a "political ploy" and social-distancing measures "bullshit," started to circulate on social media. Along with the posts were articles claiming he died from complications of the coronavirus disease. McDaniel truly died from complications related to COVID-19 in April 2020 after he downplayed the seriousness of the disease on social media. The New York Daily News wrote: An Ohio man has tragically died from COVID-19 after criticizing his state's coronavirus lockdown. John W. McDaniel, 60, died Wednesday in Columbus, exactly one month after reportedly calling Gov. Mike DeWine's stay-at-home order madness. "If what I'm hearing is true, that DeWine has ordered all bars and restaurants to be closed, I say bullshit! He doesn't have the authority," McDaniel reportedly wrote in a since-deleted social media post that circulated widely. As screenshots of McDaniel's posts went viral, many social media users took the opportunity to criticize him, saying he had received his comeuppance for calling the virus a political ploy. McDaniel's wife, Lisa, acknowledged that her husband had made some "early assumptions" about the virus on social media but added that social media users were also making unfair assumptions about him. In a statement posted to the Snyder Funeral Homes Facebook page, which announced that services for McDaniel would not be live-streamed due to concerns about unwanted, negative social media reactions, she explained that McDaniel, like many others, was initially not fully aware of the severity of the pandemic. However, she wrote that he ordered the employees at his company, O&M, to work from home on March 16 (the day after the above-displayed Facebook post). Furthermore, according to her Facebook message, he self-isolated as soon as he was made aware that he had been in contact with someone who tested positive for COVID-19. Lastly, she wrote that if he were still alive, he would have abided by the state's stay-at-home order and would have encouraged others to do the same. Here's her statement from April 22, 2020 (emphasis ours): "Words do not describe all of the emotions we, John W. McDaniel's family, are experiencing right now. We are overwhelmed with grief for the loss of our beloved husband, father, soon-to-be father-in-law, son, brother, uncle, and dear friend to many. Similar to thousands of people, we are suffering from an unexpected and untimely loss due to the effects of COVID-19, the likes of which we never could have imagined. During this time of mourning, John's story, along with early assumptions that he stated on Twitter and Facebook, have turned into national news. The news has opened the floodgates for people to share their own misguided anger and unfounded assumptions about a man they don't know. Wanting to protect my family and John's legacy, we have decided not to live stream his funeral services via Facebook today. We will be privately recording his services today, and we will be sharing it directly with his family and friends. We have not come to this decision lightly, and we hope everyone will honor and respect this decision. As each day passes, we all are learning more about this "invisible enemy." We have all learned that the early actions taken by our national and state government were indeed the right actions to take. Quarantine and social distancing have been effective in flattening the curve. John, President of O&M, ordered the company to work from home on March 16. In addition, it is important to note that John immediately self-isolated as soon as he learned he had been in contact with someone who had tested positive. Many, like John, made statements early on not fully aware of the severity of COVID-19; many have retracted their statements knowing now the effects of this pandemic. We know if John were still here with us, he would acknowledge the national crisis we're in, abide by the stay-at-home order, and encourage family and friends to do the same. But sadly, he is not with us, and we will forever have to live and cope with how his life ended far too soon. Further, we will never be able to erase from our hearts and minds the negative posts that have been made and shared about John this past week. To all of our family and friends, my sons and I will never be able to appropriately say "thank you" for all the love and support you have given us throughout this entire process. From the bottom of our hearts, we will forever be grateful for you and the special relationship we share. While some may cast aspersions on McDaniel for not treating COVID-19 with the seriousness it deserved in March 2020, it should be noted that misinformation has been rampant during this pandemic. We've debunked scores of rumors over several months that have touted bad medical advice and promoted conspiracy theories. U.S. President Donald Trump, too, has been criticized for downplaying the seriousness of COVID-19 and has repeatedly called the news outlets covering this pandemic "fake news." On Feb. 28, just two weeks before McDaniel posted on social media that COVID-19 was a "political ploy," Trump said during a rally that "Democrats are politicizing the coronavirus" as their "new hoax."

FMD_test_919

Off Target

11/24/2015

Claim: A Facebook coupon offering 50% off at Target stores is real. Example: [Collected via Facebook, November2015]I saw this on Facebook this afternoon. Similar to the Kohl's hoax coupon going around in the last week or so. Origins: InNovember 2015, a survey scam began circulating on Facebook which promised users 50% off at Target stores in exchange for liking, commenting, and sharing the scam with their friends: The scam circulated via a variety of images and directed people toseveral different URLs (such as holidayschristmas.com and Coupon-Christmas.com), none of which were associated with Target stores: Once users commented, shared and liked the coupon ensuring that the scam reached a wider audience they were directed to a survey site where they were required to provide personal information, fill out surveys, and make a purchase before they could retrieve their coupons. Even then, however, a 50% off Target coupon was unlikely to materialize, as this promotion wasnotconnected with the store: not These survey scams are quite popular on Facebook. The customers of Target (previously)Costco,Home Depot, Lowe's, Kroger, Best Buy, Macy's, Olive Garden, Publix, and Walmarthave all been targeted by similar scams. Costco Home Depot Lowe's Kroger Best Buy Macy's Olive Garden Publix Walmart These ruses are so prevalent that theBetter Business Bureauissued a warning about them in 2014: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. Better Business Bureau 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. Last updated: 25 November 2015 Originally published: 25 November 2015

FMD_test_920

Is Bernie Sanders: The Story of a Defeated Life?

02/04/2016

In February 2016, a meme about the lack of business acumen and experience exhibited by Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, a Democratic presidential candidate, began circulating online. The criticisms offered in the meme were a mixture of true, false, irrelevant, and misleading statements. To wit: Never owned a business. Right off, this meme begins with a rather nebulous criticism. Although having owned a business is an experience many voters would like to see on the résumé of a potential chief executive, a literal application of that term isn't of much relevance. Technically, a person who once operated a roadside lemonade stand has "owned a business," while a person who has spent his career serving as the CEO of a public multinational, multibillion-dollar corporation has not—even though everyone would agree the latter has vastly more business experience than the former. Certainly, a number of highly regarded U.S. presidents in the modern era (e.g., Franklin Roosevelt, Dwight Eisenhower, John Kennedy, Ronald Reagan) never owned their own businesses. Moreover, one might validly say that Sanders started and operated his own business (whether he "owned" it is somewhat arguable, as it was a non-profit), the American People's Historical Society, which was created in 1978 to produce educational film strips about the history of Vermont. The University of Vermont has archived several of the brochures produced by the American People's Historical Society, one of which includes a statement from Sanders outlining the purpose of his film strips: Director Bernard Sanders explained, "It is our belief that state and regional history has too long been neglected by the audio-visual industry, and we are happy to begin the process of rectifying that situation. We believe that students have the right to learn about the state and region in which they are living." While the financials of the American People's Historical Society are not available, Sanders wrote in his memoir, Outsider in the House, that the business was reasonably successful and "a lot of fun." A friend of Sanders told Politico that the film strip business "wasn't just a way to make money ... He made film strips about people he admired and believed in. He just thought kids should know the truth of how things really were." Never invented anything. Once again, this is a rather nebulous criticism. The concept of "inventing" something could range from simply thinking up a novel idea (but doing nothing more about it) to creating and building a device for personal use (but not marketing it) to actually obtaining a patent for a new product. Bernie Sanders is certainly no inventor and holds no patents, but it's hard to see how that fact is of any relevance, as the same is true of nearly every U.S. president. Thomas Jefferson might legitimately be considered an inventor for having conceptualized various devices (including a macaroni machine, a swivel chair, a spherical sundial, a moldboard plow, and a cipher wheel), although he held no patents because he believed them to be a form of monopoly. Abraham Lincoln was the only U.S. president who ever held a patent, having been issued Patent #6,469 for "A Device for Buoying Vessels Over Shoals" on May 22, 1849. Beyond that, "inventing" has historically had nothing to do with the qualifications or success of candidates for the White House. Never had a 9 to 5 job. This criticism is too vaguely worded to allow for much cogent analysis. What does holding a "9 to 5 job" mean? That one literally works from 9 AM to 5 PM (and not some other period of the day)? That one holds full-time employment? That one is paid on an hourly basis? That one toils at what is commonly referred to as a "blue-collar" job? That one works for someone else rather than being self-employed? If we assume the most seemingly relevant application of the term—that it refers to holding steady, full-time employment—then one might fairly say it applies to Bernie Sanders. After receiving a Bachelor of Arts degree in political science from the University of Chicago in 1964, Sanders primarily worked a series of odd jobs while attempting to get his political career off the ground, and a Politico article observed that he "didn't collect his first steady paycheck until he was an elected official pushing 40 years old." However, that same article did list a variety of jobs Sanders held (even if they weren't steady or didn't provide a livable wage) before he finally reached public office upon being elected mayor of Burlington, Vermont, at age 39—working as an aide at a psychiatric hospital, as a Head Start preschool teacher, as a carpenter, and as a freelance writer for local publications. Sanders rented a small brick duplex at 295 1/2 Maple Street that was filled with not much furniture and not much food in the fridge but stacks of checked-out library books and scribbled-on legal pads. "Pretty sparse," Gene Bergman, an old friend, said about the apartment. "Stark and dark," said Darcy Troville, a fellow Liberty Unionite who lived around the corner and shared with Sanders homemade jellies and jams. "The electricity was turned off a lot," Barnett said. "I remember him running an extension cord down to the basement. He couldn't pay his bills." He worked some as a carpenter, although "he was a shitty carpenter," [Liberty Union party member John] Bloch told me. "His carpentry," [Liberty Union member Danny] Morrisseau said, "was not going to support him, and didn't." He worked as a freelance writer, putting intermittent pieces in the low-budget Vermont Freeman, a Burlington alternative weekly called the Vanguard Press, and a glossy, state-supported magazine called Vermont Life. His writing wasn't a living. The Vanguard paid as little as the rest. "It would've been not more than 50 bucks," said Greg Guma, a former editor. Vermont Life? "Our rate was 10 cents a word," said Brian Vachon, a former editor. "He was always poor," Sandy Baird, another old friend, told me in Burlington. "Virtually unemployed," said Nelson, the political science professor at the University of Vermont. "Just one step above hand to mouth," said Terry Bouricius, who was involved with Liberty Union, served at times as a de facto campaign manager for Sanders, and at one point crashed for a couple of months on his couch. Liberty Union "people found it difficult to support themselves while engaging in full-time political work," Michael Parenti, one of those people, wrote in the Massachusetts Review in the summer of 1975. "Some held jobs that allowed free time for campaign activities, while others lived off unemployment insurance." "His work was to be a politician," Guma said. "He put everything into what he was doing." We would also note that by the standard used here, holding elective office (as Sanders has done for most of the last 35 years as a mayor, a U.S. representative, and a U.S. senator) is as much a "9 to 5" job as any other. Never proposed a bill that has passed. This statement is not literally true, as during his tenure in Congress, Sanders has sponsored three bills that were enacted, two of which were rather slight matters involving the naming of USPS facilities, and one of which was the Veterans' Compensation Cost-of-Living Adjustment Act of 2013 (which provided "for an increase in the rates of compensation for veterans with service-connected disabilities and the rates of dependency and indemnity compensation for the survivors of certain disabled veterans"). Although that might seem like a slight achievement for someone who has spent 25 years as both a U.S. representative and a U.S. senator, we would note that only a scant handful of bills submitted in Congress (about 4 to 6 percent) are ever brought to a vote, and even fewer (about 2 to 4 percent) end up being enacted. We would also note that sponsoring original legislation is but one small part of Congress members' duties: they also co-sponsor legislation submitted by colleagues (which Sanders has done for more than 200 successful bills), muster support (or opposition) among colleagues and the public for proposed legislation, review and vote on proposed bills, serve on various committees (Sanders holds six Senate committee appointments), meet with constituents, and participate in oversight and investigation of governmental affairs. First and foremost, the Member is a decision-maker. Members are faced with hundreds of decisions in both recorded and unrecorded votes on matters major and minor. Many decisions must be made quickly. Each decision, whether spontaneous or studied, balances the conflicting perspectives received from private citizens, public officials, and party leaders. Decisions are often second-guessed by constituents, campaign opponents, colleagues, lobbyists, and media critics. Meetings are continual, in committee rooms, in private offices, in corridors, and in gatherings on the floor. Daily, sacks of mail are delivered. Faxes flow in a steady stream. Electronic mail jams congressional computers. Correspondence must be written and press releases issued. Highly visible issues are debated on the House or Senate floor, fully televised, and the absence or presence of a Member is duly noted. Scandals require investigation. Programs require oversight. Requests for information, both basic and complex, are received daily. Journalists seek comment. Constituents seek assistance obtaining federal grants, government jobs, and help in overcoming bureaucratic obstacles. Over time, these daily tasks and the always-changing expectations of the electorate have come together to establish a multi-faceted job. Lived off welfare before elected to public office. As noted above, various acquaintances who knew Sanders in the years before he achieved public office have reported that he was "always poor," and he likely received public assistance at some point during that time, although what form of (and how much) assistance he received is difficult to determine at this remove. A contemporaneous newspaper account from the Bennington Banner reported that in 1974, when Sanders ran for the U.S. Senate on the Liberty Union Party ticket, he was collecting unemployment benefits: Sanders, 32, cares little what 'image' he conveys—and that's part of his image of being a bit rumpled and unshorn. He's on unemployment compensation right now, having worked for the Bread & Law Task Force, as a freelance writer, and as a carpenter in the Burlington area. But the thing he likes best, and excels at, is 'talking the issues,' and he doesn't mind repeating himself sometimes." 74-year-old personal net worth of $300,000. As 247 Wall St. reported, determining the precise net worth of candidates is difficult for a number of reasons: net worth reporting exact values is not required. Instead, candidates may disclose their assets and income in a range. Further, candidates do not necessarily report all their assets. For instance, candidates do not need to disclose their personal real estate and property values. Jeb Bush opted to omit assets generated by several holding companies, for example. In addition, while some candidates choose to include their spouses in their disclosures, some do not. Carly Fiorina's net worth of $59 million, for example, includes that of her husband, Frank. Hillary Clinton's reported net worth, on the other hand, does not include assets jointly owned by her and former President Bill Clinton, who is worth by some estimates more than $50 million. 247 Wall St. attempted to determine each presidential candidate's net worth in an article published on August 24, 2015. They estimated that Sanders was one of the "poorest presidential candidates" running for office in 2016, with a likely net worth somewhere around $330,000: estimated Bernie Sanders' net worth: $194,026-$741,030. In 2013, Bernie Sanders had an average estimated net worth of $330,507, well below other prospective presidential nominees and among the lowest compared with other members of Congress. As of late 2019, Open Secrets, the website of the Center for Responsive Politics, estimated Sanders' net worth at between $729,000 and $1.8 million, making him neither the richest nor the poorest presidential hopeful in the 2020 field. In any case, the meme's characterization of Sanders as a "loser" based on his net worth evinces a rather skewed perspective. Although many people view financial rewards as a tangible measure of one's success, it is far from the only factor by which accomplishment can be measured. (In fact, highly regarded President Harry S. Truman had virtually no net worth even after leaving the White House in 1953 and afterwards was largely dependent upon Congress finally establishing a pension for former presidents.) Bernie Sanders might equally be considered a "winner" for persevering at his goal of achieving a political career long after others might have given up, and for succeeding at that effort despite prolonged financial hardship. Unlike many others, Sanders might also be lauded for maintaining a rather plain life and not having enriched himself in public service (especially since candidates at the other end of the financial spectrum are frequently criticized for being "out of touch with the common man"). As 247 Wall St. wrote of Sanders: The Vermont senator, who is the longest-serving independent in U.S. history, is a self-identified socialist. He is seeking the Democratic nomination and is the most popular Democratic candidate after Hillary Clinton. In keeping with Sanders' stated intention of starting a grassroots movement, more than 90% of his campaign contributions have come from individual donors. Sanders' campaign speeches have drawn record numbers of attendees. Most recently, 19,000 people watched Sanders speak at an NBA arena in Portland, Oregon, the largest political event compared with all other candidates so far this election season. All in all, that sounds like quite an impressive career achievement for anyone—regardless of net worth.

FMD_test_921

I've cut taxes for ... middle-class families, small businesses.

09/07/2012

In his speech at the Democratic National Committee in Charlotte, N.C., President Barack Obama mocked Republicans for turning to tax cuts as the solution to every problem.Have a surplus? Try a tax cut. Deficit too high? Try another. Feel a cold coming on? Take two tax cuts, roll back some regulations, and call us in the morning! Obama said.Now, Ive cut taxes for those who need it middle-class families and small businesses. But I dont believe that another round of tax breaks for millionaires will bring good jobs to our shores, or pay down our deficit, Obama said.Obama is often accused by Republicans of raising taxes, and he has raised some taxes during his presidency. Hes also said that he intends to raise income tax rates for couples who make more than $250,000 a year or single people who make more than $200,000 a year.Here, were going to look at his claim to cut taxes for middle-class families and small businesses. (Weve been tracking all of Obamas campaign promises about taxes on our Obameter. )Obama has signed off on two major tax cuts for middle-class families: the Making Work Pay tax credit that was part of the economic stimulus of 2009 and a temporary reduction in Social Security payroll taxes that went into effect in 2011.As part of the stimulus, formally known as the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, single workers collected a $400 tax credit, and working couples got $800. The credit didnt come in the form of a check; it worked out so that most workers had about $400 less in federal income taxes withheld from their paychecks spread out over the entire year.Most workers received a tax cut under that plan, with the exception of some high earners. The tax cuts phased out for couples who make more than $250,000 or a single person making over $200,000, according to an analysis from thenonpartisan Tax Policy Center.The result mirrored what Obama promised he would do on the campaign. Obama pledged tax cuts of $500 for each worker and $1,000 for working couples. We rated the promisea Compromiseon ourObameterbecause the resulting tax cut was a little lower than what Obama wanted.That tax cut expired at the end of 2011. But Obama won another round of tax cuts for most workers in a December 2010 tax deal with Republicans in Congress. Those tax cuts -- a temporary reduction in workers payroll taxes, worth about 2 percent of total earnings -- expire in 2013. Again, the tax cut didnt come as a check, but gives workers a little more in their paychecks than they would have otherwise.Obama also has passed an array of tax cuts for small businesses.Eight of them were included in the stimulus, the Affordable Care Act (also known as the health care law), and the Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment Act (also known as the HIRE Act). Among the cuts were the exclusion of up to 75 percent of capital gains on key small business investments; a tax credit for the cost of health insurance for small business employees and new tax credits for hiring Americans out of work for at least two months.Another eight cuts came via the Small Business Jobs Act, signed by Obama in September of 2010. These included: adding deductions for business cell phone use; creating a new deduction for health care costs for the self-employed; allowing greater deductions for business start-up expenses; eliminating taxes on all capital gains from key small business investments, and raising the small business expense limit to $500,000.Three months later, the president signed a tax bill that raised the expense limit to 100 percent of small business new investments until the end of 2011. It also extended the elimination of capital gains taxes for small business investments through the end of 2012. (For more details, see our previous fact-check that provided at least 16 tax cuts to small businesses; we rated itMostly True. )To be clear, this doesnt mean the middle-class and small businesses havent seen any tax increases under the Obama administration. We rated his campaign promise that no family making less than $250,000 will see any form of tax increase asPromise Broken. Obama has signed off on new taxes on cigarettes and indoor tanning. His health care law includes a tax penalty for people who dont buy health insurance; that starts in 2014. (It includes hardship exemptions for people who cant find affordable policies. )Also, under the health care law, small businesses that have more than 50 employees that dont offer their employees health insurance could face fines.Our rulingObama has raised some taxes during his presidency, but hes also pursued broad-based tax cuts for the middle class and small businesses. We particularly give weight here to the tax cuts that were part of the stimulus and the payroll tax holiday, which reduced taxes for broad swaths of the workforce. Some small businesses may have been hit by new taxes that were part of Obamas health law, but these would depend on the particular circumstances of each business. Also, there were new taxes on cigarettes and indoor tanning.Obama said he has cut taxes for those who need it middle-class families, small businesses. He has, but he also has raised some taxes. So while his statement is accurate, it lacks that additional context. We rate his claim Mostly True.

FMD_test_922

IRS Notification: Federal Tax Return/Payment Rejection or Refund Notification

08/28/2007

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

FMD_test_923

Is the majority of farmland in the United States owned by Bill Gates?

04/28/2022

In April 2022, researchers warned about the potential risk of a global food shortage, spurred on in part by Russia's ongoing attacks on Ukraine. While there are currently no nationwide food shortages in the United States, nor widespread disruptions in the supply chain, the potential of such shortages caused many people to feel that their food security was suddenly uncertain. researchers warned about the potential risk of a global food shortage currently no nationwide food shortages in the United States In the wake of this uncertainty, unfounded rumors began to spread that attempted to lay the blame for any coming food shortages on nefarious forces. One such rumor claimed that there had been an unusual number of fires at food processing facilities in 2022. The explanation offered by conspiracy theorists for this untrue claim was that these fires were being intentionally set in order to create a food crisis. In reality, the number of fires was not extraordinary, the causes of the fires were not unusual, and the damage caused by the fires was minimal. the number of fires was not extraordinary, the causes of the fires were not unusual, and the damage caused by the fires was minimal As unfounded rumors related to the cause of a yet-to-happen food crisis circulated online, many people started to point fingers at a favorite target of conspiracy theorists, former Microsoft CEO Bill Gates. One of the most prevalent claims related to Gates and the potential for food shortages is that the billionaire owns a suspicious amount of farmland in the United States. On social media, we found people claiming, for example, that Gates owns the "majority" of U.S. farmland -- 80%, they claimed -- and that Gates is trying to buy up "all" of the farmland. These claims are not true. Gates does not own anywhere close to the majority of America's farmland. Gates does own a lot of farmland. In fact, he reportedly owns more farmland than any other individual in America. According to 2021 article from the Land Report, a magazine about land ownership, Gates owns approximately 242,000 acres of farmland. While this is certainly a lot of acreage, it represents less than 1% of all the farmland in the United States. reportedly owns more farmland According to a 2021 report from the United States Department of Agriculture and the National Agriculture Statistics Service, there are 895,300,000 acres of farmland in the United States. Gates' 242,000 acres amounts to about 0.03% of the total. 2021 report from the United States Department of Agriculture and the National Agriculture Statistics Service To put that into perspective, if you put all of the land that Gates owns into one place (his holdings are spread throughout the country), you'd cover an area about a quarter the size of Rhode Island. you'd cover an area about a quarter the size of Rhode Island While viral conspiracy theories baselessly conjecture that Gates is buying up farmland in order to starve Americans for some unknown reason, there's likely a simpler explanation: Gates makes money off this land. Gates started purchasing farmland circa 2013 through his investment group, Cascade Investments. Agfundernews.com, a website about agricultural investments, reported in 2021 that Gates' investments were part of a broader trend that started after the financial crisis of 2008, as investors looked for reliable returns. Agfundernews.com For many years, farmland was not a common asset class among financial investors ... The tide began to shift in the early 2000s, when institutional investors began to give farmland a closer look. Momentum accelerated during the 2008-2009 Great Financial Crisis, when investors grew desperate for alternatives to traditional safe haven investments like bonds and gold. In this short period of time, there was a proliferation in funds that were specifically focused on farmland investing. In 2020, there were 166 such funds globally, nearly a 9x increase from only 19 in 2005. [...] Bill Gates investments in farmland can be seen as part of this trend. The Gates have been quietly acquiring farmland through their investment manager, Cascade Investment, for over 10 years. While many have also speculated that Gates' land purchases were in some way related to his efforts to curb climate change, Gates has said that the two are unrelated. Gates said during a Reddit AMA: Reddit AMA My investment group chose to do this. It is not connected to climate. The agriculture sector is important. With more productive seeds we can avoid deforestation and help Africa deal with the climate difficulty they already face. It is unclear how cheap biofuels can be but if they are cheap it can solve the aviation and truck emissions. During times of uncertainty, people often look for someone to blame, and peddlers of misinformation are quick to tell others at whom they should be pointing their fingers. Oftentimes, those fingers get pointed at Gates. During the COVID-19 pandemic, vaccine-hesitant Americans were inundated with false rumors claiming that Gates was putting microchips into vaccines, that he was working on a mind-altering vaccine, that Gates had input tracking devices into vaccines, and that he once called for vaccinations as a way to depopulate the planet. These rumors, like the present rumor about Gates buying up the majority of farmland in the United States for nefarious purposes, are all false. Gates was putting microchips into vaccines working on a mind-altering vaccine Gates had input tracking devices into vaccines vaccinations as a way to depopulate the planet Sources: Bill Gates: Americas Top Farmland Owner | The Land Report. 11 Jan. 2021, https://landreport.com/2021/01/bill-gates-americas-top-farmland-owner/. Bill Gates Uses Farmland as an Investment Outlet Buying up Potato, Carrot and Onion Farms. NBC News, https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/mcdonald-s-french-fries-carrots-onions-all-foods-come-bill-n1270033. Accessed 28 Apr. 2022. Bill Gates Uses Farmland as Investment Vehicle, Owning 269,000 Acres of Land. NBC News, https://www.nbcnews.com/now/video/bill-gates-is-nation-s-largest-farmland-owner-114566213692. Accessed 28 Apr. 2022. Estes, Nick. Bill Gates Is the Biggest Private Owner of Farmland in the United States. Why? The Guardian, 5 Apr. 2021. The Guardian, https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/apr/05/bill-gates-climate-crisis-farmland. If Not for Climate, Then Why Is Bill Gates Buying so Much Farmland? AFN, 27 Aug. 2021, https://agfundernews.com/gates-if-not-for-climate-then-why-is-bill-buying-up-so-much-farmland.

FMD_test_924

Did Hillary Clinton Say 'I Would Like to See People Like Donald Trump Run for Office'?

10/28/2016

On 17 October 2016, the now-defunct website The Rightists published an article positing that Hillary Clinton said during a 2013 speech she wanted to see someone like Donald Trump to run for President: The Rightest was a "hybrid" website that published a mixture of real and fake news: TheRightists.com is independent News platform That allow People and independent Journalist to bring the news directly to the readers. Readers come to us as a source of independent news that not effected from the big channels. This is HYBRID site of news and satire. part of our stories already happens, part, not yet. NOT all of our stories are true! In this case, the "news" portion of the article was a speech Clinton purportedly delivered to Goldman Sachs in 2013. While an excerpt of the speech was published by Wikileaks, the Clinton campaign has refused to verify the documents: excerpt MALE ATTENDEE: My question is, as entrepreneurs, we risk a lot. And Mike Bloomberg had 30 billion other reasons than to take office. Do we need a wholesale change in Washington that has more to do with people that don't need the job than have the job? SECRETARY CLINTON: That's a really interesting question. You know, I would like to see more successful business people run for office. I really would like to see that because I do think, you know, you don't have to have 30 billion, but you have a certain level of freedom. And there's that memorable phrase from a former member of the Senate: You can be maybe rented but never bought. And I think it's important to have people with those experiences. And especially now, because many of you in this room are on the cutting edge of technology or health care or some other segment of the economy, so you are people who look over the horizon. And coming into public life and bringing that perspective as well as the success and the insulation that success gives you could really help in a lot of our political situations right now. The Rightists used the above-quoted speech as the basis of their article, but then they added several fake quotes in relation to Donald Trump: And then she just had to go on. In fact, when you say businessmen and women, I cant help but think of a particular one that I would just love to see running for the presidency at some point in the future, Clinton added. I dont know what it is exactly about him, I cant quite put my finger on it, but my instinct is almost never wrong. And its telling me that Donald Trump would be very successful if he were to venture into politics in the future. Asked to elaborate on her statement, the former Secretary of State argued that she thinks that businessmen cant be bought and that theyre very honest. And I think that goes especially for Donald Trump, whose successful projects and business ventures have made him synonymous with big business and, more importantly, creating thousands of jobs. I also think he understands the philanthropic and charitable side of things quite well, which is a crucial skill for any politician, she praised her current counter-candidate. The above-displayed quotes, however, do not appear in the transcript of Clinton's alleged 2013 Goldman Sachs speech. These are fictional quotes created by a "hybrid" web site that publishes a mixture of fake news and satire. In summation, WikiLeaks published an excerpt allegedly from a speech Hillary Clinton delivered to Goldman Sachs in 2013 in which the former secretary of state said that more businessmen should run for office. Clinton did not, however, specifically mention Donald Trump in that speech. Keith, Tamara. "WikiLeaks Claims to Release Hillary Clinton's Goldman Sachs Transcripts." NPR. 15 October 2016.

FMD_test_925

Colorado Pot Shop Accepting Food Stamps - Taxpayer Funded Marijuana for Welfare Recipients

01/05/2014

Claim: A store in Colorado accepts food stamps towards the purchase of food items containing marijuana. Example: [Collected via e-mail, January 2014] Is there a pot shop in Colorado that is taking food stamps for food items containing marijuana? Origins: On January 3, 2014, the National Report published an article positing that in Colorado (where marijuana use had just been legalized), a store had begun accepting food stamps towards the purchase of food items made with marijuana. As of January 1, 2014, Colorado became the first state in the nation to allow adults aged 21 or older to purchase and use marijuana for recreational purposes. This decision led to excessively long lines at pot shops across the state, and store owners reportedly surpassed $1 million in sales statewide on just the first day, according to Denver's 9News. In total, 136 licenses have been approved by the state of Colorado for retail operations aimed at selling marijuana. A majority of those licenses were issued to businesses in Denver, with just eighteen city stores completing the process in time for opening day. One of those shops, Rite Greens, located on E. Colfax Ave in Denver, has taken the necessary steps to accept food stamps (now called EBT cards) for the purchase of marijuana, effectively leading to taxpayer-funded marijuana for welfare recipients. Electronic Benefit Transfer cards, part of the Department of Agriculture's Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, typically fall into two general categories: food and cash benefits. [Store owner] JC Franco was able to take advantage of a loophole in the SNAP program, as his shop sells a wide array of "edible" marijuana, ranging from cookies and brownies to barbecue sauce and homemade butter. By the end of the day, links and excerpts referencing this article were being circulated via social media, with many who encountered it mistaking it for a genuine news item. However, the article was merely a piece of political humor from the National Report, spoofing the controversy over legalized recreational marijuana use and stereotypes about recipients of government assistance. The National Report is a satirical 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." The National Report's (since removed) disclaimer page states: "National Report is a news and political satire web publication, which may or may not use real names, often in semi-real or mostly fictitious ways. All news articles contained within National Report are fiction, and presumably fake news. Any resemblance to the truth is purely coincidental." (NOTE: A good deal of misunderstanding about the use of EBT funds to purchase marijuana has led many readers to maintain that the article referenced above, though satirical in nature, is true in concept. We address those misconceptions in a separate article.) Last updated: September 13, 2014.

FMD_test_926

Did Joe Biden Have a Horse Thief Ancestor?

10/15/2000

What are the odds that two prominent Democrats would both have distant relatives with funny names who were hanged for train robbery and horse stealing? Hillary, an amateur genealogical researcher, discovered that her great-great uncle, Remus Rodham, a fellow lacking in character, was hanged for horse stealing and train robbery in Montana in 1889. The only known photograph of Remus shows him standing on the gallows. On the back of the picture is this inscription: "Remus Rodham; horse thief, sent to Montana Territorial Prison 1885, escaped 1887, robbed the Montana Flyer six times. Caught by Pinkerton detectives, convicted and hanged in 1889." In Hillary's Family History, her staff of professional image consultants cropped Remus's picture, scanned it, enlarged the image, and edited it with image processing software so that all that's seen is a head shot. The accompanying biographical sketch is as follows: "Remus Rodham was a famous cowboy in the Montana Territory. His business empire grew to include acquisition of valuable equestrian assets and intimate dealings with the Montana railroad. Beginning in 1883, he devoted several years of his life to service at a government facility, finally taking leave to resume his dealings with the railroad. In 1887, he was a key player in a vital investigation run by the renowned Pinkerton Detective Agency. In 1889, Remus passed away during an important civic function held in his honor when the platform upon which he was standing collapsed." Not as long as you might think, apparently, because the same day in 2000 we received the example quoted above, we also received the following version: Tipper Gore, an amateur genealogical researcher, discovered that her husband's great-great uncle, Gunther Gore, a fellow lacking in character, was hanged for horse stealing and train robbery in Tennessee in 1889. The only known photograph of Gunther shows him standing on the gallows. On the back of the picture is this inscription:"Gunther Gore; horse thief, sent to Tennessee Prison 1885, escaped 1887, robbed the Tennessee Flyer six times. Caught by Pinkerton detectives, convicted and hanged in 1889." After letting Al Gore and his staff of professional image consultants peruse the findings, they decided to crop Gunther's picture, scan it in as an enlarged image, and edited it with image processing software so that all that's seen is a head shot. The accompanying biographical sketch was sent to the Associated Press as follows: "Gunther Gore was a famous rancher in early Tennessee history. His business empire grew to include acquisition of valuable equestrian assets and intimate dealings with the Tennessee railroad. Beginning in 1883, he devoted several years of his life to service at a government facility, finally taking leave to resume his dealings with the railroad. In 1887, he was a key player in a vital investigation run by the renowned Pinkerton Detective Agency. In 1889, Gunther passed away during an important civic function held in his honor when the platform upon which he was standing collapsed." This item is merely a very old bit of humor (dressed up with an accompanying photograph of train-robbing outlaw Tom "Black Jack" Ketchum) which has been adapted into a "one-size-fits-all" political jibe all one need do is simply alter the text by changing the surname to match that of the disfavored politician du jour, then send it winging around the Internet yet again. In May 2001, for example, another version featured George W. Bush: Ketchum George W. Bush A LITTLE KNOWN FACT OF TEXAS HISTORY Not very many of you folks out there know all about Texas history. Here's some of the more "colorful" moments in the archives of this great state, and some of her true characters.Laura Bush, an amateur genealogical researcher, discovered that her husband's great-great uncle, Chadsworth Bush, a fellow lacking in character, was hanged for horse stealing and train robbery in Texas in 1889. The only known photograph of Chadsworth Bush shows him standing on the gallows. On the back of the picture is this inscription: "Chadsworth Bush; horse thief, sent to Texas Prison 1885, escaped 1887, robbed the Texas Flyer six times. Caught by Pinkerton detectives, convicted and hanged in 1889." After letting George W Bush and his staff of professional image onsultants peruse the findings, they decided to crop Chadsworth's picture, scan it in as an enlarged image, and edit it with image processing software so that the biographical sketch was sent to the Associated Press as follows: "Chadsworth Bush was a famous rancher in early Texas history. His business empire grew to include acquisition of valuable equestrian assets and intimate dealings with the Texas railroad.. Beginning in 1883, he devoted several years to service at a government facility, finally taking leave to resume his dealings with the railroad. "In 1887, he was a key player in a vital investigation run by the renowned Pinkerton Detective Agency. In 1889, Chadsworth Bush passed away during an important civic function held in his honor when the platform upon which he was standing collapsed." And thus passed the very first "hanging Chad." In December 2008 a version aimed at a Canadian politician appeared online: Judy Wallman, a professional genealogical researcher, discovered that Robert Dion, the great-great uncle of Stephane Dion, the leader of Canada's Liberal Party, was hanged for horse stealing and train robbery in Quebec in 1889. The only known photograph of Dion shows him standing on the gallows. On the back of the picture is this inscription:"Robert Dion; horse thief, sent to Quebec Provincial Prison 1883, escaped 1887, robbed the Canadian Pacific Railway six times. Caught by Pinkerton detectives, convicted, and hanged in 1889." Judy e-mailed Stephane Dion for comments. Dion's staff sent back the following biographical sketch: "Robert Dion was a famous horseman in Quebec. His business empire grew to include acquisition of valuable equestrian assets and intimate dealings with the Canadian Pacific Railroad. Beginning in 1883, he devoted several years of his life to service at a government facility, finally taking leave in 1887 to resume his dealings with the railroad. Subsequently, he was a key player in a vital investigation run by the renowned Pinkerton Detective Agency. In 1889, Dion passed away during an important civic function held in his honour, when the platform on which he was standing collapsed." Shortly after Republican senator Ted Stevens of Alaska was convicted in October 2008 on seven felony counts of violating federal ethics laws, this joke was updated again in versions that featured both his name and that of Democratic Senate majority leader Harry Reid: Jane Stevens, a professional genealogy researcher here in Alaska, was doing some personal work on her own family tree. She discovered that Ted Stevens' great-great uncle, Remus Stevens, was hanged for horse stealing and train robbery in Montana in 1889. Both Jane and Ted Stevens share this common ancestor.The only known photograph of Remus shows him standing on the gallows in Montana territory. On the back of the picture Jane obtained during her research is this inscription: 'Remus Stevens, horse thief, sent to Montana Territorial Prison 1885, escaped 1887, robbed the Montana Flyer six times. Caught by Pinkerton detectives, convicted and hanged in 1889.' So Jane recently e-mailed Senator Ted Stevens for information about their great-great uncle. Believe it or not, Ted Stevens' staff sent back the following biographical sketch for her genealogy research: 'Remus Stevens was a famous cowboy in the Montana Territory. His business empire grew to include acquisition of valuable equestrian assets and intimate dealings with the Montana railroad. Beginning in 1883, he devoted several years of his life to government service, finally taking leave to resume his dealings with the railroad. In 1887, he was a key player in a vital investigation run by the renowned Pinkerton Detective Agency. In 1889, Remus passed away during an important civic function held in his honor when the platform upon which he was standing collapsed.' Judy Wallman, a professional genealogy researcher here in southern California, was doing some personal work on her own family tree. She discovered that Harry Reid's great-great uncle, Remus Reid, was hanged for horse stealing and train robbery in Montana in 1889. Both Judy and Harry Reid share this common ancestor. The only known photograph of Remus shows him standing on the gallows in Montana territory. On the back of the picture Judy obtained during her research is this inscription: 'Remus Reid, horse thief, sent to Montana Territorial Prison 1885, escaped 1887, robbed the Montana Flyer six times. Caught by Pinkerton detectives, convicted and hanged in 1889.' So Judy recently e-mailed Congressman Harry Reid for information about their great-great uncle. Believe it or not, Harry Reid's staff sent back the following biographical sketch for her genealogy research: 'Remus Reid was a famous cowboy in the Montana Territory. His business empire grew to include acquisition of valuable equestrian assets and intimate dealings with the Montana railroad. Beginning in 1883, he devoted several years of his life to government service, finally taking leave to resume his dealings with the railroad. In 1887, he was a key player in a vital investigation run by the renowned Pinkerton Detective Agency. In 1889, Remus passed away during an important civic function held in his honor when the platform upon which he was standing collapsed.' In 2009 this joke was circulated in a version that featured Vice President Joe Biden doing his own genealogical research: Vice-President Joe Biden, an amateur genealogical researcher, discovered that his great-great uncle, Robert Biden, a fellow lacking in character, was hanged for horse theft and train robbery in Texas in 1889. The only known photograph of Robert shows him standing on the gallows, waiting to be hanged. On the back of the picture someone has scrawled: 'Robert Biden; horse thief, sent to Texas Prison 1883, escaped 1887, robbed the Texas Flyer six times. Caught by Pinkerton detectives, convicted and hanged in 1889.' After perusing the findings with his staff of professional image consultants, they decided to crop the picture, scan it, enlarge it, and edit it in an image processing software so that all you can see is a head shot. The accompanying biographical sketch was sent to the Associated Press as follows: "Robert Biden was a famous Texas cowboy in the late 1800s. His business empire grew to include acquisition of valuable equestrian assets and intimate dealings with the Texas railroad. Beginning in 1883, he devoted several years of his life to service at a government facility, finally taking leave to resume his dealings with the railroad. In 1887, he was a key player in a vital investigation run the famous Pinkerton Detective Agency. Robert passed away in 1889 during an important civil function held his honor, when the platform he was standing on collapsed." And this is the man you elected to be Vice-President?! The jape was still going strong in 2017, with a version circulating on Facebook about then-U.S. President Donald Trump: Judy Wallman Trump, a professional genealogy researcher in southern California, was doing some personal work on her own family tree. She discovered that President Donald Trump's great, great uncle, Remus Trump, was hanged for horse stealing and train robbery in Montana in 1889. Both Judy and President Trump share this common ancestor. The only known photograph of Remus shows him standing on the gallows in Montana territory. On the back of the picture Judy obtained during her research is this inscription: "Remus Trump, horse thief, sent to Montana Territorial Prison 1885, escaped 1887, robbed the Montana Flyer six times. Caught by Pinkerton detectives, convicted and hanged in 1889." So Judy recently e-mailed the President for information about their great, great uncle, Remus. Believe it or not, President Trump's staff sent back the following biographical sketch for her genealogy research: "Remus Trump was a famous cowboy in the Montana Territory. His business empire grew to include acquisition of valuable equestrian assets and intimate dealings with the Montana railroad. Beginning in 1883, he devoted several years of his life to government service, finally taking leave to resume his dealings with the railroad. In 1887, he was a key player in a vital investigation run by the renowned Pinkerton Detective Agency. In 1889, Remus passed away during an important civic function held in his honor when the platform upon which he was standing collapsed." Predictably, another Joe Biden variation turned up on Facebook during the first year of Biden's presidency, 2021: another Joe Biden variation Judy Wallman Biden, a professional genealogy researcher in South Dakota, was doing some personal work on her own family tree. She discovered that President Joe Biden's great, great uncle, Remus Biden was hanged for horse stealing and train robbery in Texas in 1889. Both Judy and President Biden share this common ancestor. The only known photograph of Remus shows him standing on the gallows in Galveston, Texas. On the back of the picture, Judy obtained during her research is this inscription: "Remus Biden horse thief sent to Galveston State Prison 1885, escaped 1887, robbed the Galveston & Southern Flyer six times. Caught by Texas Ranger's detectives, convicted and hanged in 1889." So Judy recently e-mailed the President for information about their great, great uncle, Remus, and a few days ago President Biden's staff sent this response: "Remus Biden was a famous cowboy in Texas in the 1880s. His business empire grew to include the acquisition of valuable equestrian assets and intimate dealings with the Galveston & Southern railroad. Beginning in 1885, he devoted several years of his life to government service, finally taking leave to resume his dealings with the railroad. In1887, he was a key player in a vital investigation run by the renowned Texas Rangers. In 1889, Remus passed away suddenly during an important civic function held in his honor when the platform upon which he was standing collapsed." Now THAT, folks, is how Democrats spin things! Meakes, Daryl. Drunkcow Landmines. Infinity Publishing, 2004. 0-741-42257-3 (p. 175). Robertson, Ken. "Sen. Reid's Swinging Family Tree a Mere Web Spoof." [Kennewick] Tri-City Herald 9 January 2009. [Update 11/17/21]: Added new "Remus Biden" variant.

FMD_test_927

Is Ruby Tuesday Closing Permanently?

12/29/2020

In 2020, the Pinterest post displayed below alleged Ruby Tuesday was going out of business before the end of the year. The post linked to a 50-page article on the website Money Pop with the headline, "These Restaurant Chains Are Turning Off Their Burners And Closing Up Shop." 50-page article The social media post and article headline were misleading. The COVID-19 pandemic had indeed forced Ruby Tuesday to file for bankruptcy protection and close 185 branches nationwide as of fall 2020, according to court records obtained by Snopes and news reports. file 185 branches court records news reports This announcement does not mean Goodbye, Ruby Tuesday," CEO Shawn Lederman said in an Oct. 7 statement at the time. an Oct. 7 statement Another statement from the business at the time of the bankruptcy filing said it was "pursuing a comprehensive financial and operational restructuring" to reduce debt and that it intended to overcome bankruptcy status "as quickly as possible." statement Despite the site closures, more than 230 company-owned locations remained open in addition to an undisclosed amount of branches run by 10 franchise groups, according to USA Today. No evidence showed a significant change in those numbers between the date of Ruby Tuesday's filing with the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware and the publication of this report. USA Today In addition to Ruby Tuesday, the Money Pop listicle erroneously made it seem as if Taco Bell was closing in 2020 (see our fact check here), along with numerous other food businesses that were still serving customers as of this report. see our fact check here other food businesses We should note here that, although the headline on the Money Pop was false, the text on the article appeared rooted in truth, reading: Like Friendlys, Ruby Tuesday is an East Coast chain, but this restaurant has some branches on the Pacific Coast, too. The restaurant was founded in 1972 in Knoxville, Tennessee, and has seen some major dips in revenue over the past few years. Which, unfortunately, has resulted in many of the restaurants closing. At last count, the chain has around 491 stores around the world. But according to Restaurant Business, that number is due to nearly 50% of the stores closing over the past ten years. They said it was because customers were enjoying the convenience of take-out instead of actually sitting down in a restaurant. In sum, while the pandemic had negatively impacted Ruby Tuesday, and it was true that the chain had closed numerous sites in 2020, the Money Pop headline was inaccurate to claim all locations were "turning off their burners and closing up shop" or that the restaurant chain was going out of business.

FMD_test_928

Big Oil

07/14/2008

Claim: E-mail criticizes U.S. environmental regulations on the oil industry. OF AND INFORMATION Examples: [Collected via e-mail, June 2008] Bill Phillips spent nearly 50 years in the US oil and gas industry; most of his career was with the Phillips Petroleum Company. Bill is a descendant of Frank Phillips. Frank Phillips, along with his brother Lee Eldas (L.E.) Phillips, Sr., founded the original Phillips Petroleum Company in 1917 in Bartlesville, OK. Do you remember Phillips 66 gas stations? Phillips Petroleum Company merged with Conoco, Inc. in 2002 to form the current ConocoPhillips oil company. So, when Bill talks about oil and gas issues, I tend to listen - very closely. I think that you will find Bill's thoughts and facts very revealing, very compelling and very difficult to argue with. As you prepare to cast your crucial ballots this Fall, please think long and hard about the far-reaching, cumulative effects of the US political philosophies, policies and legislation that have contributed to the current and future US oil supply situation. Did you know that the United States does NOT have any big oil companies. It's true: the largest American oil company, Exxon Mobil, is only the 14th largest in the world, and is dwarfed by the really big oil companies all owned by foreign governments or government-sponsored monopolies that dominate the world's oil supply. With 94% of the world's oil supply locked up by foreign governments, most of which are hostile to the United States, the relatively puny American oil companies do not have access to enough crude oil to significantly affect the market and help bring prices down. Thus, ExxonMobil, a "small" oil company, buys 90% of the crude oil that it refines for the U.S. market from the big players, i.e., mostly-hostile foreign governments. The price at the U.S. pump is rising because the price the big oil companies charge ExxonMobil and the other small American companies for crude oil is going up as the value of the American dollar goes down. They will eventually bleed this country into printing even more money and we will go into runway inflation once again as we did under the Carter Democratic reign. This is obviously a tough situation for the American consumer. The irony is that it doesn't have to be that way. The United States unlike, say, France actually has vast petroleum reserves. It would be possible for American oil companies to develop those reserves, play a far bigger role in international markets, and deliver gas at the pump to American consumers at a much lower price, while creating many thousands of jobs for Americans. This would be infinitely preferable to shipping endlessbillions of dollars to Saudi Arabia, Russia and Venezuela to be used in propping up their economies. So, why doesn't it happen? Because the Democrat Party aided, sadly, by a handful of Republicans deliberately keeps gas prices high and our domestic oil companies small by putting most of our reserves off limits to development. China is now drilling in the Caribbean, off Cuba but our own companies are barred by law from developing large oil fields off the coasts of Florida and California. Enormous oil-shale deposits in the Rocky Mountain states could go a long way toward supplying American consumers' needs, but the Democratic Congress won't allow those resources to be developed. ANWR contains vast petroleum reserves, but we don't know how vast, because Congress, not wanting the American people to know how badly its policies are hurting our economy, has made it illegal to explore and map those reserves, let alone develop them. In short, all Americans are paying a terrible price for the Democratic Party's perverse energy policies. I own some small interests in tiny, 4 barrel-per-day oil wells in Wyoming. We have 14 agencies that have iron-hand jurisdiction over us. If we drop any oil on the ground when the refinery truck comes to pick up oil from our holding tanks, we are fined. Yet down the road the state will spray thousands of gallons of used oil on a dirt road to control dirt. When it rains that oil runs into rivers and creeks. Yet a cup of oil on the ground at our wellhead is a $50,000 EPA fine plus additional fines from state regulating agencies. They treat oil as if it were plutonium that has the potential to leak into the environment. We are fined if our dirt burms are not high enough around a holding tank, yet the truck that picks up our oil runs down the road at 60 mph with no burm around it. People wonder why there is no more exploration in this country. It's because of the regulators; people who have lived their whole lives doing nothing but imposing fines on small operators like us for doing mostly nothing. So, America enjoy your $4.00 per gallon gasoline. Your dollar is now worth 0.62 Euro-Cents. The lack of American production of GNP, the massive trade deficit (as labor markets have moved overseas to fight insanely high union imposed labor costs in America) and the run away printing of money (backed by nothing of value here in America) has caused the dollar to become more worthless on the international market. And that's where our oil comes from. It's paid for with dollars that become more worthless everyday. If we had just kept par with the Euro we'd be paying $62 dollars per barrel for oil (42 gallons) or about $1.50 instead of $2.50 a gallon for crude oil. What the US government also does not tell you is that it is the leaseholder and royalty recipient of most oil production and receives 25% of the gross oil sales before we pay for electricity to lift the oil, propane to keep the oil-water separators from freezing in the winters. We pay a pumper to visit each well everyday plus we have equipment failures all the time. We pay for that out of our 75% of gross sales. The government does not share in any expenses to run any production well. So, if the Big Oil Companies are making record profits, then so is the federal government from it's 25% tax on every molecule of oil sold to a refinery in this country. Why isn't the government on the stand for "Record" profits? What you don't see is this 25% of the sales price of crude oil being siphoned away by the government. That money plus the road taxes, state taxes, etc. amounts to over $1 per gallon of gasoline you are buying while the governments only admit to about 50 cents per gallon. To all you Democrats, when you go vote for your candidate, a blazing liberal like Barrack Hussein Obama just keep in mind that their liberal spending habits will further decrease the value of the American dollar on the world market and your gasoline costs will hike even higher. As they introduce more give-away programs, raise taxes on everyone to pay people not to produce or work, your dollar will continue to dwindle on the world market and you will be paying $10.00 per gallon at the next election. Cheap hydrocarbon fuel is all over. Enjoy! Enjoy the fruits of your decision to elect these folks when you are there in that voting booth and you stab your pin through a Democrat's name. William "Bill" Phillips Origins: Several readers (including members of the Phillips family) have maintained to us that there is no descendant of Frank Phillips matching the description of the putative author of this piece, which itself appears to be a rewritten/expanded version of an earlier article (one not originally attributed to William "Bill" Phillips). Given the uncertain provenance of the "Phillips" authorship version, we'll address our analysis primarily to the wording of the (presumed) original: article I hadn't realized, until the hearings on energy that were held this week in House and Senate committees, that the United States doesn't have any big oil companies. It's true: the largest American oil company, Exxon Mobil, is only the 14th largest in the world, and is dwarfed by the really big oil companies all owned by foreign governments or government-sponsored monopolies that dominate the world's oil supply. With 94% of the world's oil supply locked up by foreign governments, most of which are hostile to the United States, the relatively puny American oil companies do not have access to enough crude oil to significantly affect the market and help bring prices down. Thus, Exxon Mobil, a small oil company, buys 90% of the crude oil that it refines for the U.S. market from the big players, i.e., mostly-hostile foreign governments. The price at the U.S. pump is rising because the price the big oil companies charge Exxon Mobil and the other small American companies for crude oil is going up. Ranking businesses according to "bigness" can be based on a variety of different metrics: geographic reach, scale of operations, market value, gross revenues, net profits, etc. Exxon Mobil is certainly one of the world's largest (in terms of gross revenues) and most profitable public companies. (Many of the world's largest non-public companies are also in the oil business.) The statement here about Exxon Mobil's being "only the 14th largest [oil company] in the world" refers to the amount of oil and gas reserves that company controls, and it is generally true that the major (public) oil companies have much less access to oil and gas resources than they did a few decades ago, most of which are now controlled by national oil companies: largest profitable non-public reserves Despite record crude prices, the major oil companies are struggling to access resources that are being jealously guarded by national companies with whom they are forced to establish partnerships. As paradoxical as it may seem, high oil prices do not mean a golden age for the likes of ExxonMobil, Chevron, Totalor BP. Of course, with a barrel of oil at more than 140 dollars, they are seeing major profits, but the future has never seemed so uncertain. The problem is access to reserves. The oil majors now control less than 10 percent of world resources of gas and oil, against 70 percent in the 1970s, according to figures released by the office of Ernst and Young at the World Petroleum Congress in Madrid. As a result they are being forced to explore in increasingly extreme conditions. The statement that "94% of the world's oil supply [is] locked up by foreign governments, most of which are hostile to the United States" might be a considered a bit misleading since many of those "hostile" countries have relatively small oil reserves, while the country with the second-largest oil reserves, Canada, is U.S.-friendly (and both Mexico and the United States are also among the countries with the largest oil reserves). reserves This is obviously a tough situation for the American consumer. The irony is that it doesn't have to be that way. The United States unlike, say, France actually has vast petroleum reserves. It would be possible for American oil companies to develop those reserves, play a far bigger role in international markets, and deliver gas at the pump to American consumers at a much lower price, while creating many thousands of jobs for Americans. This would be infinitely preferable to shipping endless billions of dollars to Saudi Arabia, Russia and Venezuela. So, why doesn't it happen? Because the Democratic Party aided, sadly, by a handful of Republicans deliberately keeps gas prices high and our domestic oil companies small by putting most of our reserves off limits to development. China is now drilling in the Caribbean, but our own companies are barred by law from developing large oil fields off the coasts of Florida and California. Enormous shale oil deposits in the Rocky Mountain states could go a long way toward supplying American consumers' needs, but the Democratic Congress won't allow those resources to be developed. ANWR contains vast petroleum reserves, but we don't know how vast, because Congress, not wanting the American people to know how badly its policies are hurting our economy, has made it illegal to explore and map those reserves, let alone develop them. Drilling for oil off of most of the Pacific and Atlantic coasts has largely been barred due to a moratorium imposed by Congress in the early 1980s and by an executive order signed by President George H.W. Bush (a Republican) in 1990. The congressional moratorium has to be renewed every year, and it has remained in place for nearly three decades through a succession of administrations and Congresses, both Democratic and Republican alike. (On 14 July 2008, President George W. Bush lifted the executive order barring offshore drilling that had been signed by his father eighteen years earlier.) The congressional moratorium is due to expire on 1 October 2008 unless Congress votes to extend it. Some analysts have claimed that if the oil industry could extract oil and gas from oil shale in a cost-effective manner, oil shale deposits in the U.S. (particularly on the western slope of the Rocky Mountains, site of the world's largest such deposit) could produce viable oil reserves of about 800 billion barrels (three times the current proven reserves of Saudi Arabia). However, the cost and effectiveness of oil shale development (and the resource use and environmental effects attendant to accomplishing it) remain a subject of considerable debate, and oil companies remain barred from undertaking commercial oil shale projects on federal land: At best production is years away, while unpredictable oil markets, growing water demand, sizable electricity needs and climate change all pose potentially huge hurdles. Democrats have barred the Bureau of Land Management from leasing any federal land for commercial-scale oil shale projects. Skeptic Randy Udall of nearby Carbondale, Colo., argues that oil shale is but a poor cousin to other fossil fuels, with an energy content per ton less than one-third that of cattle manure and only slightly better than the potato. Any oil shale project in this region would mean new water demands on the Colorado River and its tributaries, vital waterways for much of the western U.S. and northern Mexico. That potential demand for water worries rancher David Smith of nearby Meeker, Colo., who relies on water from the White River that he fears will be diverted to the oil shale operations. The oil companies, Smith said, could help ease concerns by sharing in the cost of a water storage project. "They have not offered to do that," Smith said. Besides water, Shell's oil shale project would require far more electricity than the existing power grid could supply. That likely means construction of a new power plant. In this part of the country, the most economical way to fire a power plant would be with coal. But in the next Congress, lawmakers are likely to pass legislation to limit greenhouse emissions, and coal-fired plants are huge emitters of carbon dioxide. That would add to cost, ever oil shale's nemesis. The subject of opening the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge to oil exploration and development is another issue that has been pursued across the years through a succession of administrations and Congresses, both Democratic and Republican alike. The issue has been complicated by the uncertainty of many factors involved in the opening of ANWR to U.S. oil production, such as the total amount of oil underlying the area, the size of the oil fields that might be found in ANWR, the quality of the oil that might be found in ANWR, the potential production capacity of ANWR drilling operations, how long it would take before ANWR operations began providing significant amounts of oil for the U.S. market, what effects the oil extracted from ANWR would have on world oil supply and prices, and the environmental impacts of oil exploration and development in ANWR. As of now, both major-party presidential candidates, Senators John McCain and Barack Obama, are opposed to opening ANWR to oil exploration. pursued factors Last updated: 14 July 2008 Dechaux, Delphine. "Despite Rocketing Prices, Outlook Is Bleak for Oil Majors." Agence France Presse. 6 July 2008. Feller Ben. "Bush Trumps Congress; Moves First on Drilling." Associated Press. 14 July 2008. Forbes, Steve. "Will We Rid Ourselves of This Pollution?" Forbes. 16 April 2007. Guerrera, Francesco and Carola Hoyos. "Hidden Value: How Unlisted Companies Are Eclipsing the Public Equity Market." Financial Times. 15 December 2006. Ivanovich, David. "Despite 800 Billion Barrel Potential, Oil Shale a Hard Sell." The Houston Chronicle. 12 July 2008. Simon, Richard. "Bush Lifts Presidential Ban on Offshore Drilling." Los Angeles Times. 14 July 2008.

FMD_test_929

Is the CDC categorized as a 'Private Nonprofit Corporation'?

05/05/2021

Since November 2020, an identically worded piece of text alleging that the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) "is a private nonprofit corporation" has been shared across multiple social media platforms. The claim originated on the website Armstrong Economics, which sells a variety of self-published conspiracy books by the titular Martin Armstrong, and has become a widely shared piece of "copypasta," reproduced in part below: "Did you know the CDC is a private nonprofit corporation? [...] The CDC is quasi-government under the Department of Health and Human Services, which strangely has sources of funding that are predicated on the fact that it also has a private 501(c)(3) public charity, like the Clinton Foundation." The CDC Foundation receives charitable contributions and philanthropic grants from individuals, foundations, corporations, universities, NGOs, and other organizations to advance the work of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. This is NOT a government-funded organization. It is not exclusively government-funded, which is very curious. Natural News, which boasts a massive audience of conspiracy theorists, republished it in December 2020. At the time of this writing, versions of this copypasta still appear on various social media platforms. On May 3, 2021, a Facebook account named The Daily Callout published it along with a picture of purported CDC funding sources. Commenters on that post were evidently confused. The allegations leveled against the CDC are not all that coherent in these posts. The copypasta suggests the CDC is both a non-profit and a "quasi-government" agency. Further, those issues are tangled up in the separate issue of corporate donations to the CDC. The title of the post, however, provides Snopes with a clearly stated contention: "Did you know the CDC is a private nonprofit corporation?" You most likely did not know this because it is, in fact, not true. The CDC is a federal agency housed in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). The confusion stems from the fact that, in 1992, Congress mandated the creation of a non-profit foundation—the CDC Foundation—that would "not be an agency or instrumentality of the Federal Government" and whose purpose would be "to support and carry out activities for the prevention and control of diseases, disorders, injuries, and disabilities, and for the promotion of public health." As part of that goal, the foundation has an endowment and accepts charitable gifts from a variety of entities, including corporations, which are forwarded to the CDC to support specific initiatives. "The government has unique capacities as well as limitations. The same is true for the private and philanthropic sectors," the CDC Foundation argues on its website. "We believe that people, groups, and organizations have greater positive impact and can accomplish more collectively than individually." Funds raised by the CDC Foundation are donated to various programs and initiatives within the CDC. The CDC Foundation is one of two ways corporations can legally provide funds to the CDC. Donations to the CDC Foundation are an indirect route, as, by law, "officers, employees, and members of the board of the Foundation shall not be officers or employees of the Federal Government." Direct gifts by corporations to the CDC are also allowed under a portion of the U.S. Code that authorizes the secretary of HHS "to accept on behalf of the United States gifts made ... for the benefit of the Service or for the carrying out of any of its functions." For both direct gifts to the CDC and gifts made via the CDC Foundation, conditional funding is allowed as long as those requirements are not, as outlined in CDC policy documents. The acceptance of corporate donations earmarked for specific causes—both to the CDC Foundation and to the CDC itself—has caused apparent conflicts of interest. In 2015, the medical journal BMJ published an editorial outlining several examples of potential conflicts, including these examples: In 2010, the CDC, in conjunction with the CDC Foundation, formed the Viral Hepatitis Action Coalition, which supports research and promotes expanded testing and treatment of hepatitis C in the United States and globally. Industry has donated over $26 million to the coalition through the CDC Foundation since 2010. Corporate members of the coalition include Abbott Laboratories, AbbVie, Gilead, Janssen, Merck, OraSure Technologies, Quest Diagnostics, and Siemens—each of which produces products to test for or treat hepatitis C infection. In 2012, [a company named] Genentech earmarked $600,000 in donations to the CDC Foundation for the CDC's efforts to promote expanded testing and treatment of viral hepatitis. Genentech and its parent company, Roche, manufacture test kits and treatments for hepatitis C. The CDC argues that it has policies in place to prevent such conflicts. Its website states that "when we engage with the private sector, we maintain our scientific integrity by participating in a gift review process that is rigorous and transparent. The CDC's gift acceptance policy requires a comprehensive gift review prior to accepting a gift. This includes CDC Foundation (CDCF) gifts and gifts given directly to [the] CDC, whether they are monetary or non-monetary." These processes have been refined and standardized several times since 2014. While the issue of potential corporate influence over public health policy merits scrutiny, it is also important to consider the scale of private funding compared to the overall congressionally appropriated budget of the CDC. In the 2020 fiscal year, the CDC received $13 million in conditional gifts from the CDC Foundation and $10 million in conditional and unconditional direct contributions from the private sector. This is a drop in the bucket compared to the nearly $8 billion in funding the CDC receives from Congress. Even from a rhetorical standpoint, it would be a stretch to argue that the CDC is proportionally awash in corporate funding. Narrowly speaking, however, the assertion that the CDC is a non-profit, non-government organization is incorrect because that claim conflates the CDC (a federal agency) and the CDC Foundation (a 501(c)(3) charity).

FMD_test_930

Whittier Carjacking Warning

02/06/2009

Claim: E-mail warns about a carjacking attempt in Whittier, California. PARTLY Example: [Collected via e-mail, February 2009] 01/21/09 - I am sending this to all of you, per the advice of the Whittier Police. Last night on my way home from work, I was followed off the freeway without realizing it. A lot of people take the Telegraph off ramp to go home. Then I turned left on Norwalk going north. This Van pulled up on my right side and told me that my right rear tire was going flat and that I should pull over and let him put my spare on. I was only 2 miles from home and in an industrial area where no gas stations, etc. so told him NO THANKS, and kept going slow the rest of 20 the way home. When I got home I told Richard what had happened and he checked my tire. The tire was perfectly OK. That's when I realized what had happened and it scared me to death. According to the Police there are allot of car jacking going on, then they rob you of everything (money, jewelry, etc) due to the economy. The best thing I could do was to let the gals at work know to be more than careful of their surroundings. It's happening all over So Cal, not just LA or Orange Counties. Please my friends, be very careful out there. Origins: This January 2009 e-mailed warning about a carjacking attempt in Whittier (a California city about 12 miles southeast of Los Angeles) is distinct from most Internet-forwarded crime warnings in that it's a first-person account rather than a third- or -fourth-hand retelling produced by someone with no direct connection to the events described. Its accuracy appears to be better than most such warnings, but like most such warnings it also evidently proclaims an exaggerated level of danger not warranted by the facts. Certainly criminals' attempting to fool motorists into believing their cars are evidencing symptoms of potentially serious malfunctions (e.g., flat tire, excessive smoke, fire) as a means of getting those motorists to pull over and stop so that crimes (e.g., robbery, car theft, assault, rape) can be effected on them is a ruse that has been successfully used many times before. And the Whittier Police have acknowledged that "The originator of this email did in fact contact the Whittier Police Department to report the above facts and a report was taken." However, the Whittier Police also noted that no link to criminal intent has yet been established for the reported incident, and that they did not (as stated in the e-mail) tell the person who filed the report that carjackings have been taking place "all over Southern California" in the manner described: Whittier Police For clarification purposes, the Whittier Police Department did not advise the caller that "there are a lot of car jackings going on". The Department has not received any other reports that involve these sets of circumstances, which led to a car jacking. While there is no definite way at this time to determine the true intent of the van driver, motorists are encouraged to report any suspicious activity to the Whittier Police Department. Last updated: 6 February 2009

FMD_test_931

Do Dogs Watch You Go to the Bathroom To Protect You?

12/14/2020

For dog owners who have noticed their furry friends regularly following them into the bathroom or pawing beneath the door and wondered why, social media posts offer this answer: Your dog is trying to protect you. The claim has made the internet rounds for decades and again came to the forefront when TikTok user mavandmel posted a video in December 2020 that showed her golden retriever following her into the bathroom. mavandmel You know when you keep trying to go to the bathroom and [the dog] keeps trying to nose their way in or theyre always standing at the door, said the golden retriever's owner, whose video had been shared more than 48,000 times as of this writing. Wolves and wild dogs, they protect one another while one goes to the bathroom because when youre going to the bathroom, youre vulnerable. So, they stand guard! Snopes readers asked our team to verify whether this TikTok explanation accurately accounts for the affectionate toilet behavior of our furry companions. We found that though there is some level of truth to the claim, generally speaking, this type of behavior is one learned more from nurture than nature. For millennia, humans and dogs have grown alongside one another to form very special evolutionary bonds. In fact, research suggests that the domestication of dogs occurred at least 20,000 years ago, but likely closer to 40,000 years ago. It may come as no surprise, then, that the two species are capable of reading one another from the dogs ability to understand both the words and tone of human speech to being able to communicate with its owner through facial expressions. research suggests understand both the words and tone of human speech facial expressions But do dogs carefully watch their toilet-seated owners in order to protect them? That remains to be scientifically proven. In the wild, wolves have been shown to mark their territorial boundaries using the scent of their urine a trait that pet dogs have brought with them into their neighborhood environments. This same behavior suggests that both wild and domesticated canines use olfactory cues to communicate with other members of their species. And when it comes to protection, canines are known to defend members of their pack from predators and perceived threats, contributing to the strong societal and familial bonds that both wolves and pet dogs share with their families. mark their territorial boundaries protection Members of the Yellowstone Druid wolf pack chase down an elk. NPS/Doug Smith NPS/Doug Smith That loving connection extends to the human-canine relationship as well. Research published in the journal Science found that shared eye contact between humans and their furry companions increases concentrations of oxytocin the so-called happy hormone in much the same way humans may bond emotionally when they gaze into another persons eyes. That loving connection extends to the human-canine relationship as well. Research published in the journal Science found that shared eye contact between humans and their furry companions increases concentrations of oxytocin the so-called happy hormone in much the same way humans may bond emotionally when they gaze into another persons eyes. Human-like modes of communication, including mutual gaze, in dogs, may have been acquired during domestication with humans, wrote the study authors at the time, adding that wolves rarely engage in eye contact with their human handlers. We show that gazing behavior from dogs, but not wolves, increased urinary oxytocin concentrations in owners, which consequently facilitated owners affiliation and increased oxytocin concentration in dogs. While the scientific literature has shown strong evidence for communication and bonding through the act of urinating and other bonding behavior in both canine and human-canine relationships, it does not prove that dogs go into the bathroom with their owner to protect them. Rather, it more than likely simply reflects a desire to be closer to their humans. Snopes spoke with Paul Mundell, executive director of the American Service Dog Access Coalition, who said that although he has not systematically studied the question, he is skeptical of the claim that dogs who look intently at their owners while defecating are seeking assurance that either the owner will protect the dog or vice versa. I think its more plausible to consider the habit established during puppyhood if the puppy was picked up and moved while defecating in an inappropriate area, or if it was scolded or punished for defecating in a particular area, its reasonable that the puppy got in the habit of watching the owner to ensure all was okay while defecating, Mundell said. Conversely, if the pup was rewarded for defecating in the right areas, it may have set up the expectation that defecating may be followed by a reward even if the owner hasnt maintained the practice. Mundell remained equally as skeptical when it came to describing the behavior of a pup following a person into the bathroom for protection, particularly as the bathroom is not likely to be considered an unsafe space. During thunderstorms or fireworks, for example, dogs will often turn to the confined, isolated space of a bathroom or bathtub for security. For some dogs, following a person into the bathroom is the same behavior they display whenever their person goes anywhere they follow them in order to remain near them. This is most pronounced in dogs displaying hyper-attachment to their owners, said Mundell, comparing the bond to that of children with their parents. Going to the bathroom provides an opportunity for our furry friends to interact with their uninterrupted owners, who may otherwise be occupied with chores, the computer, or other things that distract from petting and attention. Finally, dogs live in an olfactory world, and Mundell says that the urine and feces humans produce contain uniquely personal mixtures of volatile organic compounds due to each persons individual metabolisms, diets, and microbiomes all of which may be interesting and even rewarding information to the dog.

FMD_test_932

F-15 Crash

05/05/2008

Photographs show an F-15 fighter jet breaking up in mid-air. Example: [Collected via e-mail, March 2008] What a ride!!!! Just flying along, enjoying the experience... Oh my, this is so much fun... it's so great being a pilot. Hmmm, something feels different... Hey, why am I looking up? Oops, my controls aren't working? Where's my F-15? Oh, there it is... I think I'm having separation anxiety. OK, I'm out here, but first the canopy has to go. Glad that worked! That's it... now I'm gone. Can you imagine what was going through this poor pilot's mind? AND, just what caused the mid-air breakup? The U.S. Air Force announced on Thursday that a Missouri National Guard F-15 jet broke apart in midair on Nov. 2, 2007; the pilot evacuated the plane safely. The breakup in midair was blamed on parts that didn't meet specifications, which raises issues ranging from national security to potential legal action and even foreign sales. Origins: It's a common phenomenon that when a spectacular disaster strikes, "real" photographs of it begin to circulate via e-mail that are actually recycled images from earlier, similar events (such as this set of storm photos) or images that aren't actually photographs (such as these movie stills passed off as photographs of the Space Shuttle Columbia exploding). The images displayed above fit that latter category: The underlying incident they depict is real, but the images shown here aren't photographs of that incident, nor are they photographs at all. On 2 November 2007, a Boeing Co. F-15C Eagle fighter jet flown by the Missouri Air National Guard crashed during a training exercise. The following day, the U.S. Air Force grounded the country's global fleet of 676 F-15s out of "airworthiness concerns" while they conducted inspections to investigate a possible structural failure in the aircraft. An animated video simulation of the Missouri F-15's mid-air breakup was prepared during the course of the investigation, and the images displayed above are frames taken from that simulation. The Air Force ultimately determined that the cause of the accident was a defective metal support beam: A failure of the upper right longeron, a critical support structure in the F-15C Eagle, caused the crash of a Missouri Air National Guard F-15C, four miles south-southeast of Boss, Missouri, on Nov 2. According to the Air Combat Command Accident Investigation Board report released on Jan. 10, a technical analysis of the recovered F-15C wreckage determined that the longeron didn't meet blueprint specifications. This defect led to a series of fatigue cracks in the right upper longeron. These cracks expanded under life cycle stress, causing the longeron to fail, which initiated a catastrophic failure of the remaining support structures and led to the aircraft breaking apart in flight. At the time this report was issued in January 2008, about 60 percent of the Air Force's F-15 fleet had cleared inspection and been returned to service; approximately 40 percent of the inspected aircraft were found to have at least one longeron that did not meet blueprint specifications, and nine of them were discovered to have longeron fatigue cracks. The Air Force's 224 newer F-15E fighter jets do not have the same flaws and have been returned to service. This week, the Air Force returned 261 F-15 A-Ds to service after they were cleared for flight. Although some of the flawed beams, known as longerons, have been deemed just millimeters off of their blueprint specifications, Air Force officials said they are not taking chances with aircraft that could be susceptible to the same cracks that led to the dramatic crash last year. Nine of the F-15 A-D models have been grounded because of actual cracks in the aircraft; Air Force officials said yesterday that they are weighing the possibility of replacing the longerons on the other defective planes or giving up on the aircraft in favor of $132 million F-22s, a cutting-edge fighter that the Air Force prefers. Lt. Gen. Donald J. Hoffman, a military deputy in the Air Force acquisition office, said the Air Force is beginning to investigate potential liability on the part of the manufacturer, but Air Force officials also said they are having difficulty locating the original contracting paperwork and are unsure whether McDonnell Douglas made the specific part that is failing or whether it was made by another vendor for inclusion in the airplanes. Boeing officials said they have been working with the Air Force to determine the extent of the problem, and the Air Force said Boeing tests led to the discovery of the manufacturing defect after the November crash. By failing to conform to blueprint specifications, the metal beams in some cases weakened and cracked after years of experiencing high speeds and G-forces, according to the accident investigation. [Boeing spokesman Paul] Guse said Boeing is gathering data from its F-15 inspections and expects it to take about four weeks to determine a course for fixing the aircraft. Despite the spectacular nature of the accident, the pilot was able to eject safely and suffered only the (relatively) minor injuries of a dislocated shoulder, a broken arm, and some cuts and bruises. Last updated: 6 May 2008. Sources: Borak, Donna. "Air Force Grounds F-15s in Wake of Training Crash." The [Cleveland] Plain Dealer. 6 November 2007. Buzanowski, J.G. "Air Force Leaders Discuss F-15 Accident, Future." Air Force Link. 10 January 2008. Lardner, Richard. "Defective Part Cited in F-15 Jet Crash." ABC News. 10 January 2008. White, Josh. "Air Force Indefinitely Grounds Many F-15 Jets." The Washington Post. 11 January 2008 (p. A3). Air Force Link. "Air Combat Command Clears Selected F-15s for Flight." 9 January 2008. Air Force Link. "F-15 Eagle Accident Report Released." 10 January 2008. KSPR-TV [Springfield, MO]. "Air Force Releases F-15 Crash Animation." 10 January 2008.

FMD_test_933

Was it reported by Fox News that Trump's Mar-a-Lago Club received a foreclosure notice from Deutsche Bank?

11/15/2023

On Nov. 15, 2023, a user on X with the handle @PatMaguire10 published a post (archived) claiming that Fox News had reported that former U.S. President Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago Club in Palm Beach, Florida, had received a foreclosure notice from Deutsche Bank. We received reader mail asking if this was true. The post read, "BREAKING FOX NEWS: Deutsche Bank has filed a notice to foreclose on Mar A Lago. The Trump property is part of a larger estate lien that is $190 million delinquent. Court documents show a $3.4 billion loan that's in default. Trump hasn't responded to repeated attempts for comment. Developing story." However, a quick check of @PatMaguire10's X bio revealed that the account posts "parody" content. In other words, Fox News did not report on any such foreclosure notice, nor was there any public record of a foreclosure of Mar-a-Lago taking place or scheduled to happen in the future. For a little more background on the subject referenced, on the same day that the post was created, Trump's legal team reportedly asked for a mistrial to be declared in the civil fraud trial brought against him in New York. Weeks earlier, the same trial featured testimony from retired Deutsche Bank executive Nicholas Haigh. Haigh provided information to the court about the bank's decision to loan Trump roughly $125 million for the purchase of the Trump National Doral property in Miami in 2011, according to ABC News. As for Mar-a-Lago, the Miami Herald reported in August 2022 that Trump had received a loan from Chase Manhattan Bank, not Deutsche Bank, for his 1985 purchase of the property. Mar-a-Lago itself cost Trump $8 million, which he financed with an $8.5 million loan from Chase Manhattan Bank. The other parcel—oceanfront land next to the manor—cost $2 million. Trump was able to use $500,000 from the estate loan and a $1.5 million mortgage from the seller, Jack C. Massey, to cover the bill. For further reading, we previously published a report titled, "Media Literacy: How Can You Tell if a Post Is Satire/Parody?"

FMD_test_934

Did Tyrone Woodfork Beat an Elderly Oklahoma Couple?

04/03/2012

In July 2020, social media users began circulating a meme about a "black kid named Tyrone Woodfork" who "severely beat an elderly couple, Mr. and Mrs. Strait, who had been married for 65 years," along with the claim that "no national media carried the story" of the crime. Tyrone RAPED Mrs. Strait, and she died from injuries sustained at his hands. Mr. Strait served in the 101st Airborne during WWII. I suppose that if Mr. Strait had shot Tyrone, the whole country would know about the story. As it is, only Mrs. Strait died, so it's not of interest to Brian Williams and the rest of the mainstream media. Think about it. After 65 years of marriage, after serving our country, and after 90 years of life, Mr. Strait has lost his wife to a rapist/murderer. NO ONE in the national media cares, and neither does Facebook. The meme was based on a real incident, but it included no information informing readers that the events it described had taken place eight years earlier and were not a recent occurrence. Bob and Nancy Strait (90 and 85 years old, respectively) were a North Tulsa, Oklahoma, couple whom family members described to local television station KOTV as follows: The couple had been married for more than 65 years, had six children, and 18 grandchildren. They were great, great, great-grandparents. Bob Strait was a paratrooper in World War II. He was with the 101st Airborne and was part of the D-Day invasion. He was awarded the Bronze Star. Nancy grew up in a log cabin in Kenwood, Oklahoma, with no running water. She moved to Tulsa to work during the war. Nancy was a homemaker who made quilts and homemade jellies. Bob was a welder by trade and did woodworking as a hobby. The two did everything together: grocery shopping, doctor's visits, you name it. "Mama was the kind, if you came in, she would say, 'Go to the kitchen and help yourself with the groceries or let me get you something.' She fed everybody," said their daughter, Andra. "[Bob] is the kind of guy, if your car breaks down on the highway, he could fix it. He'd stop and fix your car," said the Straits' son, Bob. In April 2012, a message was widely circulated online claiming that the Straits had been "beaten to a pulp in [a] home invasion by colored offenders," and only press outside the U.S. covered the story: 90-Year-Old White Couple Beaten to a Pulp in Home Invasion by Colored Offenders. Hey Bobby Rush, going to wear anything for this white couple? UPDATE: Once again, it takes an overseas newspaper to report the truth because American newspapers are too afraid to post the truth... They might get boycotted by the Negroes! The couple met and married within a month and stayed together for 65 years, only to be parted after a home invader beat the wife to death. Nancy Strait, 85, was sexually assaulted and battered to death by a burglar. Her husband Bob, 90, suffered a broken jaw and broken ribs in the attack. Police arrested 20-year-old Tyrone Dale David Woodfork. On 14 March 2012, Nancy and Bob Strait were indeed robbed and beaten at their home. Nancy Strait was sexually assaulted and died from her injuries the following day; Bob Strait was shot in the face with his own BB gun, suffered a broken jaw and cracked ribs, and died a few months later, on 4 May 2012. Their assailants reportedly made off with the Straits' television, $200, a BB gun, and the couple's Dodge Neon. Tulsa police made an arrest the afternoon following the robbery after being tipped off to the location of the couple's stolen car: Tulsa police located the couple's stolen car in the 5700 block of East Easton Street. An alert driver at 4th and Yale called police when he saw the Plymouth Neon. He followed it to the neighborhood, and that's when more than a dozen police cars stopped the driver. Investigators took three men and a woman in for questioning. Police reported that there was a child inside the car with the woman. After interviewing the four, police arrested Tyrone Woodfork, 20. Police said they had enough evidence to arrest Woodfork for this murder. Woodfork was on a suspended sentence for burglary. A police report states he sold the Straits' 42-inch flatscreen TV for $250 at a gas station shortly after the break-in and was in possession of other items from the house. He is being held without bond. Tyrone Woodfork was charged with first-degree murder in the death of Nancy Strait, as well as burglary, assault with a dangerous weapon, and two counts of armed robbery. The 22-year-old was convicted in May 2014 and sentenced to consecutive life sentences on separate counts of felony murder, assault and battery with a dangerous weapon, and two counts of first-degree rape in the March 2012 attack on Bob and Nancy Strait. Although the robbery and beating of the Straits was reported in the Daily Mail, U.S. coverage of the crime was primarily limited to local (i.e., Tulsa area) news media. This is not evidence of some type of bias or cover-up on the part of the U.S. news media, however, because violent crimes are unfortunately an all too common occurrence in the United States, and nothing about this particular incident was comparatively unusual or shocking enough to propel it out of local coverage and into the national news.

FMD_test_935

Rick Perry Speech

07/11/2011

Claim: Transcript reproduces a speech given by Texas governor Rick Perry. CORRECTLY ATTRIBUTED Example: [Collected via e-mail, July 2011] Thought this was interesting. It is food for thought..... It would be nice if Rick Perry really is that strong of a Christian. From TEXAS TO THE WHITEHOUSE! Below are his remarks in Longview. Be sure and readwhere he stands and where his heart is. In 1977, I had left the Air Force and moved home. I'll be real honest with you I was a bit lost spiritually, and I really didnt know what I wanted to do with my life. So I moved in with my mother and father. Now that's a real trip! I had been an aircraft commander, traveling all around the world, seeing amazing places that a boy from Paint Creek, Texas, had never even dreamed were out there before. I had this great epiphany during my mid twenties. As I had lived in Europe and South America and the Middle East, I saw all these different countries with different forms of government. I was actually paying attention to the dictatorships, theocracies, monarchies, democratic states, etc. I started making the connection between how those people lived and the form of government they had. It was most interesting for me, as I'd never really given that much attention to our form of government in America . I'd taken for granted this extraordinary country we live in, but I came to realize that America is really a special place. I also made the calculation that inside that really cool place was this incredible place called Texas! At twenty-five, twenty-six years old, it dawned on me what an incredible country we live in, and that the vast majority of the people take it for granted. They abuse the privilege of living in a free country. They don't realize how so many other people live around the world. But with that knowledge, I went home and lived with my mom and dad. I moved back into my old room. At eighteen years old, I left to go to my beloved Texas A&M University. Nine years later, I came back into my old room. I swear to God, I know mother cleaned it, but it looked exactly like it did the day I left. It had my football number on the door, and it had the all-star football game program still stuck on the bulletin board. It was an eerie moment for me to move back home. My dad was pretty sure I was the same stupid eighteen-year-old that had left. I was pretty sure he hadn't gotten any smarter either. So we went through this really brutal period of time of finding our comfort zone. But God was dealing with me. At twenty-seven years old, I knew that I'd been called to the ministry. I've just always been really stunned by how big a pulpit I was gonna have! I still am. I truly believe with all my heart that God has put me in this place at this time to do His will. On Aug. 6 of this year, 2011, we are going to have a day of prayer and fasting. And it's going to be the real deal. It's not going to be some program where we line up a dozen political figures to come in and talk. It's going to be people standing on that stage, projecting and proclaiming Jesus Christ as our Lord and Savior at Reliant Stadium in Houston. Let me tell you, that's a big stadium and there will be a lot of people. But it's going to send a powerful message across this country! Our country's broke. Well, actually, Washington's broke; our country's going to be just fine. But we've got to have men and women who are willing to stand up to proclaim the values that this country was based upon. In 1774, at the Continental Congress when they got together and penned that first document, they talked about "life" and "liberty." Interestingly, the third thing they talked about was "property." A couple of years later, when they actually wrote the Declaration, they changed that "property" to "the pursuit of happiness." I just signed a piece of legislation today, the eminent domain legislation. I tell people, that "personal property" and the ownership of that personal property is crucial to our way of life. Our founding fathers understood that it was a very important part of the pursuit of happiness. Being able to own things that are your own is one of the things that makes America unique. But I happen to think that it's in jeopardy. It's in jeopardy because of taxes; it's in jeopardy because of regulation; it's in jeopardy because of a legal system thats run amok.And I think it's time for us to just hand it over to God and say, "God, Youre going to have to fix this." (I think it was Herman Cain who stood up the other day and said, "How's that 'Hope and Change' thing working out for you?") I think it's time for us to use our wisdom and our influence and really put it in God's hands. That's what I'm going to do, and I hope you'll join me.I hope you'll join us in Houston on the 6th day of August and really start a revival across this country. Here's what I want to leave you with. I know from time to time, people will say something like, "There goes Perry. He wants to secede." But I love this country. We're a special place. We were created by God-fearing individuals who understood those biblical values and how powerful they could be and would be in the future. And I suggest that for our country, our best days are ahead if we'll get on our knees and ask God to take over and give us wisdom. I may wear the Lord out every day in prayer. I pray for this country. I pray for restoration for this country. I pray for our president every day. I pray that God turns buckets of wisdom out on his head, that God will open his eyes. We can change this country, but it requires our giving it to Him and letting Him guide us. Origins: The above is an accurate transcript of a speech given by Texas governor Rick Perry at Longview, Texas, on 23 May 2011. The event referred to therein is The Response, a "solemn gathering of prayer and fasting for our country" to be held at Reliant Stadium in Houston, Texas, on 6 August 2011. The Response Last updated: 11 July 2011

FMD_test_936

Was the record low in US unemployment attributed to Trump?

10/13/2020

During the U.S. vice presidential debate on Oct. 7, 2020, Republican candidate Mike Pence claimed he and U.S. President Donald Trump worked "from day one" in the White House to drive down American unemployment to "record" low levels evidence, he alleged, that voters should re-elect Trump on Nov. 3 to try and reshape the economy after unprecedented job losses during the COVID-19 pandemic. Oct. 7, 2020 COVID-19 pandemic The statement echoed previous comments by the president. In October 2019, the White House issued a news release suggesting the Trump administration's "pro-growth agenda" was the reason for new jobs and a declining unemployment rate, reaching a level not seen in 50 years. news release Then, on Jan. 29, 2020, roughly one week after the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) confirmed the first COVID-19 case in the U.S., Trump reiterated on Twitter: reiterated About six weeks later as the deadly virus spread nationwide, Trump doubled down on that "50 year" claim and said his administration is responsible for the "best unemployment numbers in the history of our Country." He tweeted: tweeted The claim took on another layer as the pandemic worsened: Trump alleged without evidence that his administration was responsible for helping Black Americans, specifically, get jobs. For instance, on June 2, he claimed he "has done more for the Black Community than any President since Abraham Lincoln," and that the country's unemployment figure among Black Americans was evidence of that work. claimed After that, Trump supporters went a step further by circulating the below-displayed meme online, alleging that Trump not only drove down unemployment rates for people who identify as Black or African American but also women and Hispanic workers. This was true: U.S. Unemployment Reached 50-year Low Under Trump But no evidence showed Trump was responsible for causing the dip. First, to determine the validity of the underlying claim that Trump shaped the economy so that U.S. unemployment dipped to the lowest rate ever we considered the data available. The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) began calculating the country's unemployment rate the number of people seeking work divided by the sum of that amount and total people employed in March 1940, when demographers first launched a monthly survey of households nationwide called the "Current Population Survey." Before that, more subjective and less comprehensive data existed. So to ensure accuracy in this report, we only considered the country's unemployment figure post-1940, as compiled by BLS and the U.S. Census Bureau and to which government officials refer. Bureau of Labor Statistics According to our analysis of the labor statistics before Trump's inauguration on Jan. 20, 2017 (see below for our analysis of the jobless rate during his presidency), the country recorded the lowest unemployment rate in 1944, near the end of World War II. At that time, just 1.2% of Americans were unemployed and seeking jobs, per BLS data, which included workers over the age of 14. (Note: The survey in modern years only counted adults and teenagers over the age of 16, not 14.) The survey Next, we considered BLS unemployment data over the course of 50 years before Trump's inauguration to determine whether the country's jobless rate indeed fell to the "the lowest level in more than 50 years" under his leadership. We learned 1969's annual unemployment rate was about 3.6%, in part, because millions of men were drafted for the Vietnam War and left the American workforce, making the sum of all those seeking or maintaining employment significantly lower. In May 1969, for instance, the unemployment rate was 3.4%. After that, we obtained statistics to gauge the country's monthly unemployment rate from the beginning of Trump's term Jan. 20, 2017 to January 2020, when the U.S. COVID-19 outbreak began and businesses on a grand scale prepared to temporarily close or furloughed workers to prevent the spread of the deadly virus. (We did not consider U.S. unemployment during the outbreak since the claim was framed by the Trump campaign that he was more suited than Democratic rival Joe Biden to revive the pandemic-stricken economy.) Per the BLS' Current Population Survey, the country's unemployment rate in February 2017, which was compiled including survey responses in the weeks before and after Trump took office in January, was 4.6%. From that point, the proportion of Americans seeking work compared to the total number of people in the country's workforce slightly decreased under the Trump administration. By September 2019, the percentage reached 3.5% the lowest rate since December 1969. That meant Trump was correct in saying that unemployment dropped to the lowest point in about 50 years under his watch. However, his second tweet that that metric was the lowest in U.S. history (or since the comprehensive unemployment data existed) was false. The World War II-era 1.2% unemployment rate was lower. Trump was correct According to BBC economists' analysis of the recent employment figure, the change was a result of 490,000 Americans leaving the workforce. Jerome Powell, whom President Barack Obama appointed to the Federal Reserve System's board of governors and Trump promoted to the agency's chairman in 2018, told CBS News at the time that "an unusually large number of people in their prime working years" were not seeking employment or maintaining jobs for a variety of reasons, such as the U.S. opioid crisis, and that the U.S. workforce participation rate was lower than almost every other advanced country. BBC economists' analysis Federal Reserve System's board of governors CBS News We also obtained data showing the country's unemployment rate by race and gender to determine the accuracy of the above-displayed meme that alleged the percentage of unemployed female workers, as well as people who identify as Black, African Americans or Hispanic, was higher in 2009 than in 2019, among other things. According to the monthly data, these facts were true at face value: were true technically ended But that statistical snapshot is missing necessary context to consider the claim that Trump's fiscal and regulatory policies led to millions of workers finding jobs accurate: In February 2009, roughly one month after Obama was sworn into office, he signed a $787 billion stimulus package to save jobs and reverse the economic downturn. The increased public spending on everything from roads to science programs to unemployment benefits, as well as other market trends, created new jobs on a mass scale. And, in turn, labor statistics showed a steady increase in job growth and a gradual decrease in the country's jobless rate over the course of a decade until the pandemic hit. Looking at the graph above, we determined no significant disruptions or changes in the country's unemployment rate when Trump took office the steady decrease is essentially indistinguishable from the Obama years after the recession. "At best, you would say it's been a continuation of a steady trend," economist Austan Goolsbee told MSNBC. told MSNBC In other words, it was false to claim that Trump moved into the White House and jumpstarted a failing economy. Rather, conditions were improving for American workers years before voters elected the real estate billionaire as president. NBC News reported in August 2020: NBC News The president rightly takes credit for having low unemployment during his presidency. In December of 2019, the unemployment rate was a scant 3.5 percent, the lowest it had been in 50 years. However, as good as that number was, when Trump took office the rate was already at 4.7 percent. That figure is quite low by historical standards (lower than all of the 1980s as well as most of the 1990s and 2000s). In December of 2017, it was the lowest the number had been since the Great Recession. In fact, Obama saw a much steeper drop in unemployment in his second term, a 3.3 drop in the rate, than Trump did in his first three years, a decline of 1.2 points. Thats not to besmirch the remarkably low unemployment under Trump, but its hard to ignore that the unemployment track under Obama had been downward. Again, the numbers look like the continuation of a trend, not something new. Another analysis of labor statistics by NPR came to the same conclusion: that job growth remained consistent since the end of the recession in 2010 and 2018, while the unemployment rate steadily decreased. NPR reported: labor statistics by NPR So while the White House can certainly point to some yardsticks that indicate a meaningful turnaround on Trump's watch including small business sentiment, business investment and goods-producing job growth broader measures of the overall job market and wages show the economy continues to follow the steady, upward glide path that began under Obama. In sum, considering no evidence showed policies enacted by the Trump administration drove down the country's unemployment rate but rather the roughly 50-year low in fall 2019 was essentially a continuation from the Great Recession's recovery, per economists' analysis of BLS data we rate this claim "false." per economists BBC News. "US Jobless Rate At Lowest Since 1969." 3 May 2019. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. "BLS Data Viewer." Accessed 13 October 2020. Wingfield, Brian. "The End of the Great Recession? Hardly." Forbes. 20 September 2010. Jones, Chuck. "Trump's Economic Scorecard: 3 Years In Office." Forbes. 10 February 2020. Horsley, Scott. "FACT CHECK: Who Gets Credit For The Booming U.S. Economy." NPR. 12 September 2018. Ruhle, Stephanie. "Which President Gets The Credit For The Booming Economy?" MSNBC. 10 September 2018.

FMD_test_937

Facebook Car Giveaway

12/12/2014

In December 2014, several Facebook pages using car brand names such as Audi, Range Rover, Mercedes, and Camaro (among others) posted directives similar to the messages quoted above. The pages claimed that Facebook was giving away cars. Among the cars offered in the giveaways were Audi R8s, Range Rovers, Mercedes-Benz E63 AMGs, and Chevrolet Camaro SS models. Almost all the scams followed the same format: they instructed users to like a separate page, like the original post, and share the post on their own Timeline (thereby validating its legitimacy and enticing others to do the same). Users were eligible to win one of two available vehicles in the winner's choice of color simply by liking a separate Facebook page, liking and sharing a post, and waiting for an inbox message confirming the winners. In April 2016, the scam reappeared, this time with a Range Rover as the car offered in the giveaway. The first clue that the giveaways following this format were not legitimate was the pages to which Facebook users were directed, pages that had been created just days before the giveaway posts began to appear. Not only were the secondary Facebook pages involved always new, but they were also not linked with car companies or other interests one might reasonably expect to offer a car in exchange for social media advertising (such as automobile dealerships, insurance companies, or large retailers). Were a legitimate company to engage in such a high-ticket contest giveaway, the incentive would be exposure; however, no corresponding promotional return on advertising investment was discernible in these Facebook giveaway claims. The tactics were similar to recent scams involving Costco, Kroger, and Amazon gift cards, but the six-figure price tag attached to some of the vehicles involved in the Facebook car giveaway posts proved to be a far more difficult-to-resist enticement for some users, not all of whom questioned whether sharing a page presented any negative consequences should it later turn out to be a prank, hoax, or other false promise. The pages to which users were directed carried all the hallmarks of "like farming" operations intended to quickly build and sell popular Facebook pages. Even if the page creators' intent were only to build an audience, users participating in the scam created a larger incentive for employing future fakery of the same description to crowd Facebook feeds. Scammers could also exploit a large audience by mining varying levels of personal data from those who have liked a page of dubious origin. Thus, Facebook users who participate in such fake giveaways not only unwittingly help spammers pollute the social network with scams, but they may also risk being exposed to malware, clickjacking, or other unpleasantries (such as finding their names and identities endorsing a scam, hate page, or other undesirable activity). Giveaways, particularly of high-value merchandise, are generally rare and almost always conducted through brands' official channels or the social media accounts of related large companies.

FMD_test_938

No, This Illinois High School Isn't Set To Implement Race-Based Grading

06/01/2022

In May 2022, a website purporting to be a local news site for the western portion of Illinois' Cook County, the state's most populous county that covers the Chicago metro, published an article falsely claiming that Oak Park and River Forest High School (OPRF) officials were set to implement a "race-based grading system." The article alleged that administrators would make it mandatory for "teachers next school year to adjust their classroom grading scales to account for the skin color or ethnicity of its students." published an article The website was called "West Cook News," and the article featured a cropped version of OPRF Administrator Laurie Fiorenza's Twitter profile photo. The contents of the article stemmed from a presentation that she gave during a recent school board meeting (a video of it posted on May 26 and is displayed below). In the presentation, she discussed research around grading students more fairly, known as "equitable grading," and shared findings with school board members for their consideration. Neither she nor any other member of the board announced policy changes that would require teachers to change how they grade students, much less make it mandatory for them to assess students based on their race or ethnicity. For these reasons, we're marking this claim Twitter profile photo The school said in a statement published to its website: said in a statement The article contains a variety of misleading and inaccurate statements. The articles mischaracterization of the Board meeting is unfortunate and has caused unnecessary confusion [...] At no time were any statements made recommending that OPRF implement a race-based grading approach. At the above-mentioned school board meeting, Fiorenza gave a brief presentation about the progress of a board committee that researches professional development strategies for teachers, called the Transformative Education Leadership Team (TELT). Fiorenza noted that during the school year, teachers had read several books about "equitable grading," or strategies to assess students on a non-biased basis. That said, Fiorenza did not say that teachers were required to implement equitable grading (which is not "race-based grading"). Here's a video of the meeting: We reached out to Karin Sullivan, the executive director of communications at OPRF, who told us that "there are no changes being proposed. This was a report on the committees research of best practices." The rumor that OPRF was implementing a race-based grading system appeared to largely stem from a misunderstanding of the term "equitable grading." Ralph Matire, secretary of the OPRF School Board, said during the meeting: OPRF School OK, equitable grading. People are going to hear that, and they are not going to understand that. So I want to be very clear that equitable grading practice [is] the objective assessment of academic mastery. It is not a dumbing down. It is not making concessions for this, that, or the third thing. It's finding a way to be objective about determining whether a student has mastered the academic content, because too often, subjective evaluation can be off and that's where inequity comes in. So it's getting to an objective measurement of student mastery of academic content. The community needs to hear that. It's an important thing. Margaret Sullivan, an associate director at EAB, a consulting firm specializing in education institutions, wrote about equitable grading in November 2021: wrote Course failure rates more than doubled during the pandemic, reducing student confidence in school and their chances of pursuing postsecondary education. But lack of learning isnt the only driver of course failures. Up to 40% of traditional student grades include non-academic criteria that do not reflect student learning gains including participation and on-time homework submission. As a result, traditional grading may inadvertently penalize underprivileged students who struggle to meet non-academic expectations. One of the goals of equable grading is to focus on whether students understand course material, no matter their timeline for doing so, as opposed to testing them for points on specific dates. For example, supporters say, to achieve more equitable grades, teachers should drop zeroes on assignments from grade books when students demonstrate that they know the material from those assignments. During the presentation, Matire talked about how the latter change could give teachers a better assessment of a student's performance, saying: So, a kid scores zero points on a quiz, then three weeks later demonstrates complete mastery of the material that was in that quiz, why should that zero points hold down that kid's grade when the kid has demonstrated mastery of the academic content? That's what moving to an equitable grading system is. It's understanding that students grow at different paces. And it's teachers interacting with and assessing their students in a manner that allows them to objectively determine that the student has inf act mastered the content. Karin Sullivan told us that there had been "no school-wide recommendation or implementation" of equitable grading at OPRF, and that this presentation was just a "discussion of research-based best practices." If a teacher does implement equitable grading into their instruction plan, Sullivan said, "any teachers using such practices would have to use them across the board for all students, regardless of race." West Cook News' article carried the sensational and false title "OPRF to implement race-based grading system in 2022-23 school year." As noted above, the school simply was not implementing a new grading system, and the grading strategies that officials discussed at a recent school board meeting (equitable grading) had nothing to do with students' race or ethnicity. Despite (or perhaps because of) the inaccuracy of this headline, screenshots of West Cook News' article spread widely on social media. When Libs of Tiktok, a social media account that has gained a massive following thanks to its ability to stir up conservative outrage with claims that are often misleading, false, or stripped of context (no, litter boxes haven't been installed at schools because kids "identify" as cats), spread this rumor, they added screenshots from the presentation that highlighted specific passages: Libs of Tiktok litter boxes haven't been installed at schools Neither of these highlighted passages stated that OPRF officials were implementing a race-based grading system. What these passages refer to, again, is equitable grading, or an attempt to remove bias from the classroom so that teachers can grade students purely on their mastery of a given subject. The school explained in their statement: explained in their statement As part of the Board of Educations strategic plan, the OPRFHS Grading and Assessment Committee was formed to examine national research on objective, unbiased practices for determining whether students have mastered academic content. Again, the presentation slides do not state that teachers at OPRF will implement a race-based grading system. Rather, the slides note that teachers had read books about how take non-academic factors (such as attendance) out of the equation could give them a more objective view of a student's mastery of a subject. West Cook News is part of a so-called "pink slime news" network, a network of websites purporting to be local news outlets (despite having few or no local reporters) that publish politically biased content. The website is run by Local Government Information Services (LGIS), which is part of the Metric Media Foundation, a pink slime network that operates more than 1,200 "local news" outlets. A 2019 investigation by the New York Times found that these networks received "at least $1.7 million from Republican political campaigns and conservative groups." "pink slime news" network pink slime network that operates more than 1,200 "local news" outlets 2019 investigation by the New York Times A disclaimer on the site about its funding read: "Funding for this news site is provided, in part, by advocacy groups who share our beliefs in limited government." While West Cook News presented itself as a local news outlet covering the suburban area west of Chicago, the majority of the stories published by this website were written with an algorithm, according to co-founder Brian Timpone. The Columbia Journalism Review reported in 2018: Columbia Journalism Review reported Most of the stories published on LGIS news sites are written by algorithm, co-founder Brian Timpone says in an interview with CJR, using software that analyzes data (school test scores, for instance) and splices it by region to deliver to local publications around the state. [...] When stories are written, their authors are usually freelancers, many of whom report their stories from well beyond the Illinois state line. The story about "race-based grading" carried no author byline. Instead, the article stated it came from the "LGIS News Service." The Times reported that this network also publishes "pay-for-play" content. Or, in other words, clients can pay to have stories written and published on this network of sites. While reputable news websites would either label this type of content as "paid content" (or, more likely, simply avoid it altogether), these paid advertisements were published by the Metric Media Foundation as if they were regular news stories. The New York Times reported: New York Times reported Internal documents show how much influence the clients have. "The clients pay us to produce a certain amount of copy each day for their websites," said one tool kit for new writers. "In some cases, the clients will provide their own copy." No. This rumor can be traced back to an article published on a pink slime news network in May 2022 that mischaracterized a presentation slide about equitable grading. School officials did not say they were preparing to implement any changes to their grading system, much less adjustments that would force teachers to account for a student's race or ethnicity. Furthermore, any potential future changes to how students are graded would apply to all students, not just students of a specific race. OPRF said in a statement: "OPRFHS does not, nor has it ever had a plan to, grade any students differently based on race." OPRF said in a statement We reached out to West Cook News with questions about the article, but did not receive a reply by publication time. [From the Snopes archives: Did Oregon Officials Say Showing Work in Math Class Is White Supremacism?] Did Oregon Officials Say Showing Work in Math Class Is White Supremacism Advocacy Groups and Metric Media Collaborate on Local Community News. Columbia Journalism Review, https://www.cjr.org/tow_center_reports/community-newsmaker-metric-media-local-news.php/. Accessed 1 June 2022. Alba, Davey, and Jack Nicas. As Local News Dies, a Pay-for-Play Network Rises in Its Place. The New York Times, 18 Oct. 2020. NYTimes.com, https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/18/technology/timpone-local-news-metric-media.html. Editor, Henry Scott |. for and Publisher. Exploiting the Local News Desert: Are Political and Foreign Interests Profiting from the Locals Loss? Editor and Publisher, https://www.editorandpublisher.com/stories/exploiting-the-local-news-desert,207894. Accessed 1 June 2022. Follow The Money: Right-Wing Funding Of Pink Slime Websites Tracked In New Study. News, 4 Nov. 2021, https://www.wgbh.org/news/commentary/2021/11/03/follow-the-money-right-wing-funding-of-pink-slime-websites-tracked-in-new-study. Gabbatt, Adam. The Fake News Sites Pushing Republicans Critical Race Theory Scare. The Guardian, 17 Nov. 2021. The Guardian, https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/nov/17/fake-news-sites-republicans-critical-race-theory-scare. Hundreds of Pink Slime Local News Outlets Are Distributing Algorithmic Stories and Conservative Talking Points. Columbia Journalism Review, https://www.cjr.org/tow_center_reports/hundreds-of-pink-slime-local-news-outlets-are-distributing-algorithmic-stories-conservative-talking-points.php/. Accessed 1 June 2022. Press, Associated. Republican Retracts False Claim Schools Placing Litter Boxes for Furry Students. The Guardian, 29 Mar. 2022. The Guardian, https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/mar/29/nebraska-lawmaker-litter-boxes-claim-debunked. Romain, Michael. Conservative Site Seeking to Fill News Void Invites Suspicion. Oak Park, 27 Apr. 2021, https://www.oakpark.com/2021/04/27/conservative-site-seeking-to-fill-news-void-invites-suspicion/. D97 Updates Board on Racial Equity Analysis Tool. Oak Park, 20 May 2020, https://www.oakpark.com/2020/05/20/d97-updates-board-on-racial-equity-analysis-tool/. Statement Regarding Grading Practices. https://www.oprfhs.org/news/1742090/statement-regarding-grading-practices. Accessed 1 June 2022. The Metric Media Network Runs More than 1,200 Local News Sites. Here Are Some of the Non-Profits Funding Them. Columbia Journalism Review, https://www.cjr.org/tow_center_reports/metric-media-lobbyists-funding.php/. Accessed 1 June 2022. Tugade, F. Amanda. Building out Equity Projects Goal of OPRFs Equity Chief. Oak Park, 1 Feb. 2022, https://www.oakpark.com/2022/02/01/building-out-equity-projects-goal-of-oprfs-equity-chief/. Why Equitable Grading Policies Matter. 15 Nov. 2021, https://eab.com/insights/expert-insight/district-leadership/why-equitable-grading-policies-matter/.

FMD_test_939

Scientists in Japan Clone 98% Pure Saber-Tooth Tiger

04/20/2014

Claim: Japanese scientists have successfully cloned a saber-tooth tiger. Example: [Collected via e-mail, April 2014] Cloning of a Sabre-tooth tiger, real or not? There are not enough credible sources for this story. Origins: In April 2014, the NewsHound web site published an article positing that scientists had, in a procedure similar to the one employed by characters in the fictional Jurassic Park novel and film, successfully cloned a "98% pure" saber-tooth tiger from a frozen specimen of that long-extinct species: article Japanese scientists have successfully cloned a 98 percent pure Saber-Tooth Tiger at the Japanese government-funded laboratory, Riken Center for Development Biology. The baby, named "Ryu" is said to be in good health and is currently being monitored 24 hours a day by a team of 6 specialists. Tests are ongoing, but it has been confirmed that the baby is 98% pure Saber-Tooth. The team hope to begin work on the second cloned Saber-Tooth Tiger within the next 2 months and when the two reach maturity, they will be breed naturally. This will create a second generation with 98.4% pure Saber-Tooth DNA. The story was easily spotted as nothing more than a hoax for a variety of reasons, chief among them that the NewsHound web site is not a news site at all, and it has, in place of reporting on actual events, reproduced a number of other hoaxes and spoofs as if they were real news, such as long-debunked stories about a Chinese man suing his wife over giving birth to an ugly baby, Apple paying Microsoft [sic] a $1 billion debt all in nickels, a planetary alignment causing gravity on Earth to be negated for five minutes, and Google Earth helping to locate a woman who had been stranded on a desert island for seven years. ugly baby nickels gravity Google Earth Moreover, NewsHound's saber-tooth tiger clone article is itself just a thinly-altered retread of another fabricated story the site published a month earlier, the latter about British scientists' supposedly having cloned a dinosaur from preserved fossils. dinosaur Last updated: 20 April 2014

FMD_test_940

Big Lame Hunting

04/14/2015

Claim: Photographs show female hunters posing with the bodies of giraffes they've killed. Example: [Collected via e-mail, April 2015] Facebook has recently been inundated with pictures of women hunters posed with dead giraffes. Are they fake or real? Origins: Earlier this year as we were trekking through Africa, we passed through Tanzania to investigate some animal-related legends and visit a place that has loomed large in our imaginations ever since we were children: the Serengeti. It was everything we imagined it to be, and more: endless herds of zebra and buffalo stretching across the plains as far as the eye could see, prides of lions snoozing under trees, elephants with their calves parading across our path, rhinoceros slowly lumbering along the landscape, huge pools in which hundreds of hippos lazed to escape the midday sun, as well aswarthogs, mongooses, hyenas, impala, gazelles, dik-diks, hyrax, and baboons. Tour operators in that part of the world typically tout that their clients will have an opportunity to view the "Big Five" of African wildlife: the African lion, the African elephant, the Cape buffalo, the African leopard, and the rhinoceros (black or white). We were fortunate enough to see all of these creatures (and more), and to be able to shoot them from up close with cameras only includingthe one animal that's hardest to miss: We were somewhat surprised to learn during our trip that the term "Big Five" derives not from the world of tourism (which has co-opted it), but from the world of big-game hunting: it is said to encompass the five African animals most difficult to hunt on foot. We were more surprised to learn that, despite widespread public perception that the "Big Five" (and most other large African wildlife) are all endangered and/or protected by law, there are very few African animals that cannot be legally hunted somewhere on that continent. We were reminded of our experience in April 2015, when comedian Ricky Gervais posted to his Facebook page a photograph purportedly showing a female hunter posing in recline alongside the carcass of a giraffe she had just killed, along with his rumination about why someone would "want to kill a beautiful animal and then lie next to it smiling": The comedian didn't provide much background information in his Facebook post, which led many viewers to speculate about the authenticity of the photo. Was the scene staged with a giraffe that died from other causes? Was the giraffe put down for humane reasons? Was the image Photoshopped? The photograph that Gervais shared has originally appeared on the website RebeccaFrancis.com in August 2010. Although that site did not provide any specific information about that particular image, the site is full of pictures of animals killed in African big game hunts, including lions, zebras, and giraffes. Francis addressed the controversy of being a "big game hunter" in a blog entitled "The True Circle of Hunting": RebeccaFrancis.com pictures As a hunter, I am constantly under fire and constantly being labeled a "trophy hunter". What is a trophy hunter? I have put a great deal of thought into the meaning of this. In the dictionary the literal meaning is simply put: "Trophy hunting is the selective hunting of wild game animals". In that case, I AM A TROPHY HUNTER. There is no question that I am extremely selective about the animals I hunt. I feel it is absolutely necessary to hunt older and more mature animals. In a lot of cases, that puts that animal past it's breeding prime and the animal can actually be kicked out of the herd and replaced with a younger, stronger male to introduce new genetics into the gene pool. Consequently, that animal can not only be bullied by the new male, but also be left all alone to suffer until its inevitable death. I have no desire to shoot an animal, just to shoot it. I admire, respect, and love watching these beautiful creatures. Ricky Gervais subsequently posted a second photograph on his Facebook page of a female hunter posing with a dead giraffe : While the specific origins of this photograph are unknown to us, the earliest incarnation we've found appears to have originated with the now-defunct Facebook page of one "Ivy Swanepol": A similar photograph of a grinning woman posing astride a dead giraffe while holding a high-powered rifle in her hands generated online controversy in March 2014 when it was posted to the Facebook page of Koeshall's World Hunting Adventures taxidermy shop in Wisconsin along with a caption "We took Shelley out this morning with the thoughts of maybe getting a giraffe. We found this big bull feeding in the trees, and Shelley put 2 good shots in him before he went down. Big mature bull. We have it all here, and we want to share it with YOU": posted Regardless of who is pictured in these photographs, there is no good reason to believe that they are not genuine or do not represent what they appear to depict, as giraffes are indeed one of the trophy animals frequently targeted in African big game hunts. Big Game Hunting Adventures of South Africa, for instance, offers safaris on which hunters can bag (among other animals)baboons, hyenas, buffalo, elephants, giraffe, hippos, impala, leopards, lions, warthogs, wildebeest, and zebras. safaris Although many animal lovers and wildlife protection groups may decry African big game hunts, they are perfectly legal in places such as South Africa. Moreover, some conservationists have argued that this form of tourism actually helps their cause by providing much-needed revenue for the preservation of more endangered species in the region: South Africa has a tourism industry that permits people to hunt big game animals such as the elephant, rhinoceros and lion. Many people object to this blood sport. But some argue that hunting big game animals creates income needed to save the country's population of big animals. It is legal in some African countries to hunt big game. The business brings in a lot of money. A ten-day 'elephant package' could cost U.S. $36,000. Hunting a rhinoceros can cost U.S. $100,000. The International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW) has strong words against what it calls the "needless killing of endangered species for trophies." The organization says big game hunting is not sustainable, meaning it cannot be supported over a long period of time. The group also says it provides only short-term economic gains, hurts the area's environmental balance and is morally wrong. But not all conservationists agree. Some argue trophy hunting may be helping Africa's wildlife. Professor John Hanks is the former head of the World Wide Fund for Nature in South Africa. He says tourism and donations do not provide the billions of dollar needed. "I think trophy hunting in South Africa is really absolutely essential if we are going to look for long-term future for rhinos in the whole of Africa ... there's hardly a single country anywhere that can afford to run its national parks as they should be run ... Here we are in South Africa, one of the richest countries in the continent, Kruger Park has a million visitors a year and they still cannot afford to defend the rhinos." The hunting industry in South Africa brings in more than $744 million each year. The industry employs about 70,000 people. And about 9,000 trophy hunters travel to South Africa every year. Ninety percent of them come from the United States. In 2012, foreign hunters spent $115 million in South Africa. Trophy hunting is the most profitable form of commercial land use in the country. Herman Meyeridricks is the president of the Professional Hunters' Association of South Africa. He argues that legal hunting is important to wildlife protection. "The only way there will be incentive for those landowners to protect and keep on investing in rhino is if they have an economic value. They can only have an economic value if there is an end-user that is willing to pay for that, and that is the trophy hunter." One can find plenty of photographs of male big game hunters posing with taken giraffes online, but those images apparently don't stir up as much widespread outrage as similar pictures showing female hunters. photographs Last updated: 14 April 2015 Parker, Gilliam. "Trophy Hunting Is Big Business in South Africa." VOA. 16 August 2014.

FMD_test_941

Joanna Gaines Never Endorsed Keto Gummies for Weight Loss

05/26/2023

Despite what scammers would like to have you think, "Fixer Upper" star andNew York Times bestselling author Joanna Gaines never endorsed an "intermittent keto routine," keto gummies, or any kind of "bedtime routine" involving weight loss gummies, pills, or supplements. Her husband, Chip, also had nothing to do with any of these products. In May 2023, paid ads circulated on Facebook and Instagram that showed pictures of Gaines. Those ads led to a fake CNN article that showed a picture of the married couple. That "article" was never hosted on cnn.com. The headline of the scammy and fictional article read, "How Millions Of Women Are Melting Body Fat & Getting Ripped Thanks To Joanna Gaines And Her Intermittent Keto Routine!" According to the article, Gaines spoke about weight loss and keto gummies on a "recent segment" of "The Ellen DeGeneres Show." However, in reality, Gaines never said anything about these subjects on DeGeneres' show, which ended in 2022. Gaines The article also falsely claimed that Kelly Osbourne, Rachael Ray, and Wendy Lopez all took the alleged "amazing miracle pill" pushed by Gaines. Osbourne and Ray have been targets of similar scams in the past, including one that featured afake People article about Rebel Wilson. fake People article about Rebel Wilson Dr. Mehmet Oz, the celebrity surgeon best known as "Dr. Oz," was also named on the order pages for these scammy products. Such pages falsely claimed he said of apple cider vinegar (ACV) keto gummies, "it works," and that they were the "holy grail of weight loss." However, like Gaines and others, he had nothing to do with the products. We advise readers to stay away from strange medicinal products that are referred to as weight loss "miracles." If an online offer seems too good to be true, it probably is. Scam offers for weight loss keto gummies often enroll customers in monthly subscription charges, a stipulation that can only be found in the fine print of a page where people input their personal information. We recommend readers who have been the victims of these scams call their credit card company to ensure they don't receive future charges. For more information on the inner workings of these weight loss keto gummies scams, we recommend our past stories on the subject. our past stories As we previously reported, this was in no way the first time that Gaines' image and likeness was used without permission to promote these sorts of products and it likely won't be the last. reported

FMD_test_942

Judge David Kithil on Obamacare

12/02/2009

Claim: Letter from Judge David Kithil provides accurate line item criticisms of "Obamacare" health care reform legislation. Examples: [Collected via e-mail, November 2009] I have reviewed selected sections of the bill and find it unbelievable that our Congress, led by Speaker Nancy Pelosi, could come up with a bill loaded with so many wrong-headed elements. We do need to reform the health insurance system in America in order to make coverage affordable and available to everyone. But, how many of us believe our federal government can manage a new program any better than the bankrupt Medicare program or the underfunded Social Security program? Both Republicans and Democrats are equally responsible for the financial mess of those two programs. I am opposed to HB 3200 for a number of reasons. To start with, it is estimated that a federal bureaucracy of more than 150,000 new employees will be required to administer HB3200. That is an unacceptable expansion of a government that is already too intrusive in our lives. If we are going to hire 150,000 new employees, let's put them to work protecting our borders, fighting the massive drug problem and putting more law enforcement/firefighters out there." Other problems I have with this bill include: Page 50/section 152: The bill will provide insurance to all non-U.S. residents, even if they are here illegally. Page 58 and 59: The government will have real-time access to an individual's bank account and will have the authority to make electronic fund transfers from those accounts. Page 65/section 164: The plan will be subsidized (by the government) for all union members, union retirees and for community organizations (such as the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now - ACORN). Page 203/line 14-15: The tax imposed under this section will not be treated as a tax. (How could anybody in their right mind come up with that?) Page 241 and 253: Doctors will all be paid the same regardless of specialty, and the government will set all doctors' fees. Page 272. section 1145: Cancer hospital will ration care according to the patient's age. Page 317 and 321: The government will impose a prohibition on hospital expansion; however, communities may petition for an exception. Page 425, line 4-12: The government mandates advance-care planning consultations. Those on Social Security will be required to attend an "end-of-life planning" seminar every five years. Page 429, line 13-25: The government will specify which doctors can write an end-of-life order. Finally, it is specifically stated this bill will not apply to members of Congress. Members of Congress are already exempt from the Social Security system and have a well-funded private plan that covers their retirement needs. If they were on our Social Security plan, I believe they would find a very quick "fix" to make the plan financially sound for the future." Honorable David Kithil Marble Falls, Texas. Origins: A number of similar pieces presenting lists of line item criticisms of a pending health care reform bill (H.R. 3200) began circulating on the Internet in mid-2009, and they continue to circulate widely three years later as arguments to oppose the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), commonly known as "Obamacare." The versions of this item that continue to be spread via e-mail forwards and online postings are wrong in nearly every particular, however: Although this list is commonly attributed as originating with a letter sent to Senator Evan Bayh of Indiana by Dr. Stephen E. Fraser, an Indianapolis anesthesiologist, or as a letter sent to the River Cities Tribune by David Kithil, a former county judge in Marble Falls, Texas, it is actually the work of Peter Fleckenstein, who issued Peter Fleckenstein the list as a series of Tweets and posted it to his blog in July 2009. The bill referenced in this list, America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 (H.R. 3200), was never passed by Congress. A completely different bill, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (H.R. 3590), became the basis for what is now known as "Obamacare." Many of the entries in the list are therefore irrelevant and outdated, as they address aspects of health care reform legislation that were never enacted by Congress (particularly the "public option" for a government insurance plan). H.R. 3200 H.R. 3590 Virtually every statement included in this list is exaggerated, misleading, inaccurate, or outright erroneous, as detailed below: The bill will provide insurance to all non-U.S. residents, even if they are here illegally. This is false. The PPACA, as enacted, doesn't "provide insurance" to anyone it institutes some regulations on the insurance industry to make medical insurance more broadly available and affordable to Americans, and it requires that Americans enroll in PPACA-qualified medical plans or pay a penalty, but everyone is still responsible for obtaining (and paying for) their own insurance coverage. Moreover, the section of the unpassed HB 3200 bill referenced in the above statement is 152. PROHIBITING DISCRIMINATION IN HEALTH CARE, which simply states that "[e]xcept as otherwise explicitly permitted by this Act and by subsequent regulations consistent with this Act, all health care and related services (including insurance coverage and public health activities) covered by this Act shall be provided without regard to personal characteristics extraneous to the provision of high quality health care or related services." It doesn't explicity grant or authorize government funds for providing illegal immigrants with health care or health insurance, and another section of the bill specifically states that "Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States." The government will have real-time access to an individual's bank account and will have the authority to make electronic fund transfers from those accounts. This is false. The section of HB 3200 referenced here does nothing more than attempt to provide a framework for simplifying the use of electronic payments for health services, emulating the way that many consumers currently use to make a variety of other payments (e.g., utilities, mortgages, credit card balances). The bill simply calls for the secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to set standards for electronic administrative transactions that would "enable electronic funds transfers, in order to allow automated reconciliation with the related health care payment and remittance advice." Nothing in this section grants the government "real-time access to an individual's bank account" or the "authority to make electronic fund transfers from those accounts." The bill doesn't even require that consumers use an electronic payment system it simply seeks to make that an option for those who want to use it. The plan will be subsidized (by the government) for all union members, union retirees and for community organizations (such as the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now - ACORN). This statement is misleading, as the section of HB 3200 referenced here is SEC. 164. REINSURANCE PROGRAM FOR RETIREES, which addresses "retirees and ... spouses, surviving spouses and dependents of such retirees" who are covered by "employment-based [health benefit] plans." It does not specifically provide for subsidizing health insurance for "all union members, union retirees and community organizations"; it sets up a new federal reinsurance plan for any retirees and their spouses who are covered by any employer plan, not just those who are covered under plans run by unions or community groups. The reinsurance would be available to any "group health benefits plan that ... is maintained by one or more employers, former employers or employee associations." The tax imposed under this section will not be treated as a tax. (How could anybody in their right mind come up with that?) This statement misleadingly tries to make HB 3200 sound ridiculous by deliberately eliding the end of the statement it quotes. What the bill actually says is that"The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax imposed by this chapter for purposes of determining the amount of any credit under this chapter or for purposes of section 55." Section 55 is a reference to the Alternative Minimum Tax, and the purpose of this portion of the bill is to mitigate the effects that new health care-related taxes would have on persons making over $350,000 a year. Doctors will all be paid the same regardless of specialty, and the government will set all doctors' fees. This is false. The section of the bill referenced here is an updating of the physician fee schedule for Medicare services, which neither states that "all doctors will be paid the same regardless of specialty" nor that the "government will set all doctors' fees." All this section does is slightly revise the formula used for determining how much doctors are reimbursed for providing Medicare services, depending upon which of two categories those services fall under. Cancer hospital will ration care according to the patient's age. This is false. The section referenced here is one which does nothing more than call for a study to determine whether certain classes of hospitals incur higher costs than other hospitals for the cancer-related care they deliver, with the aim of providing "an appropriate adjustment [in payments] "to reflect those higher costs." This section in no way "rations care" provided by "cancer hospitals" based on a patient's age (or any other factor); it simply seeks to pay some hospitals more to compensate for their higher costs in treating cancer patients. The government will impose a prohibition on hospital expansion; however, communities may petition for an exception. This is false. As noted by FactCheck, forbids hospital expansion "only for rural, doctor-owned hospitals that have been given a waiver from the general prohibition on self-referral. It does not apply to hospitals in general. The bill provides for exceptions to even this limited expansion ban." The government mandates advance-care planning consultations. Those on Social Security will be required to attend an "end-of-life planning" seminar every five years. This is false. This statement references a much-distorted portion of the bill that would allow for Medicare to cover voluntary counseling sessions for seniors with their doctors to discuss aspects of end-of-life care such as hospice care, DNR orders, life-sustaining treatments, living wills, and the like (a form of counseling not previously covered by Medicare). Nothing about such counseling sessions would be mandatory, for Social Security recipients or anyone else. The government will specify which doctors can write an end-of-life order. This is false. The bill does not "specify which doctors can write an end-of-life order." It merely defines an "end-of-life order" (i.e., an order for life-sustaining treatment) as a document "signed and dated by a physician [that] effectively communicates the individual's preferences regarding life sustaining treatment." It is specifically stated this bill will not apply to members of Congress. This is false. HB 3200 did not contain a provision stating that it would "not apply to members of Congress." The bill likely would have had little or no effect on members of Congress because they belong to a class of federal worker who have the benefit of choosing from a variety of subsidized insurance plans offered through the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, but the same requirements for obtaining and having health insurance would have applied to them just as much to other citizens. The version of the PPACA that was actually passed did indeed require lawmakers to give up the insurance coverage previously provided to them through the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program and instead purchase health insurance through the online exchanges that the law created. Variations: A later version of this piece was prefaced with the false claim that the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act limits the amount of Medicare coverage provided to those over the age of 75 or 76. This claim is covered in a separate article on this site: separate PLEASE PASS THIS OUTRAGE TO EVERYONE ON YOUR LIST!!! THIS should be readby everyone, especially important to those over 75.......If you areyounger, then it applies to your parents. Your hospital Medicare admittance has just change under Obama Care. Youmust be admitted by your primary Physician in order for Medicare to payfor it! If you are admitted by an emergency room doctor it is treated asoutpatient care where hospital costs are not covered. This is only the tipof the iceberg for Obama Care. Just wait to see what happens in 2013 &2014! Age 76 Today, I went to the Dr. for my monthly B12 shot that I have beengetting for a number of years. The nurse came and got me, got out theneedle filled and ready to go then looked at the computer and got veryquiet and asked if I was prepared to pay for it. I said no that myinsurance takes care of it. She said, that Medicare had turned it down and went to talk to my Dr.about it. 15 minutes later she came back and said, she was sorry but theyhad tried everything they could but Medicare is beginning to turn manythings away for seniors because of the projected Obama Care coming in. Shewas brushing at tears and said, "Someday they too will get old", I am sovery sorry!! Please for the sake of many good people ... be informed please.YOU ARE NOT GOING TO LIKE THIS. Last updated: 11 March 2014

FMD_test_943

Did Donald Trump Appoint Sarah Palin as a Science Advisor?

01/02/2017

On 5 December 2016, the World News Daily Report web site published an article reporting that President-elect Donald Trump had officially announced former Alaska governor (and 2008 vice presidential candidate) Sarah Palin was in line to become his new Science and Technology Adviser: World News Daily Report article Critics of the administration have already voiced their concerns over the choice of the former Alaska governor, known to be a fierce climate change denier, to lead the White House Office of Science and Technology of the United States. Far too long has the Chinese narrative over climate change kept our economy in a rut. Its time to open the pumps and as I like to say: Drill, baby, drill! Sarah Palin, former Alaska governor This tweet did not appear in Twitter's history of Trump's account, and no other news outlet reported what would have been an undoubtedly highly newsworthy appointment. history That lack of additional coverage is because this report originated with World News Daily Report, a fake news site. The site used an old and unrelated image of Donald Trump and Sarah Palin together (which dated to 2011) to suggest that the pair had met during the President-elect's transition period in late 2016. image 2011

FMD_test_944

We already have $23 billion worth of debt.

06/13/2011

Florida Gov. Rick Scott vetoed a record $615 million from the 2011-12 state budget on May 26, 2011, targeting an array of money for projects such as university buildings, arainwater studyand$4.8 million for public broadcasting.The latter cut causedstation managers across the stateto worry about possible layoffs, station closings and an increased reliance on private donations.In a June 2 interview, ABC 27 reporter Jerry Hume in Tallahassee asked Scott if vetoing public broadcasting dollars was a hard choice compared to other line items. Here is Scott's full response (available byvideo):I don't think the state ought to be paying for that. But the easy ones are things like studying how to collect rainwater, stuff like that, and a new barn and things like that. But there's a lot of tough ones. But the way I thought about it was, what should state government be doing? I mean, there's a lot of good things in there, but they were local issues, or charity should be doing it, or there's a better way of doing it, or we're already doing it a different way.And on top of that, I don't want to increase the debt in the state. We already have $23 billion worth of debt, so those are things I thought about. But really, it was how do we get jobs going?Scott mentions the state debt as support for his big cuts, even though the state wasn't going to issue new debt just for public broadcasting. But it got us thinking: How big is the state debt, anyway?Turns out, this isn't the first time Scott has bemoaned the state's debt. In late May,Scott warned he was thinking about vetoingPublic Education Capital Outlay projects, which pay for college and university construction projects and represent the state's largest bond program. He said the added debt of $134 million could jeopardize the state's credit rating and increase costs of future borrowing.I'm clearly focused on the amount of debt the state has, Scott said then. I'm clearly focused on the debt rating.Where does he get that number?Our search for the state debt level starts with Scott spokesman Lane Wright. He directed us to aDecember 2010 report on Florida's debt affordability, written by the State Board of Administration's Division of Bond Finance.The division is responsible for executing bonds authorized by the Legislature and administers financing programs for educational facilities and transportation projects, among other programs.As of June 30, 2010, the state's total overall debt outstanding stood at $28.2 billion.Now, this doesn't mean Scott's figure is off from the get-go. That $28.2 billion figure includes $23.6 billion for net tax-supported debt and $4.6 billion for self-supporting debt.These are important differences to understand (page 7of the document is helpful).Net tax-supported debt, which Scott seems to reference in his TV interview, is debt accrued when the state issues bonds to raise money for spending on projects such as PECO, Everglades restoration, right-of-way acquisition for roads and bridge construction.Self-supporting debt is made up of bonds that include a source of revenue, and is excluded when calculating the state's benchmark debt ratio. Examples of this are bonds to build toll roads, covered by the tolls, or university dorm maintenance, covered by student fees.Net tax-supported debt is paid off through the state's ability to tax all residents and tourists, while self-supporting debt is paid off by the people who pay to use the facilities.The benchmark debt ratio is important SBA jargon for measuring the state's annual payment on borrowed money, said Ben Watkins, the division's director. The annual payment, called debt service, works kind of like a mortgage, in which you pay off a chunk each year over a certain span of years. Debt service is based on tax-supported debt.To calculate the benchmark debt ratio, the division divides the annual debt service -- for tax-supported debt only -- by available state revenues.Florida Statutes say the ratio should not exceed a target of 6 percent and a cap of 7 percent. But in 2010, it was over the cap at 7.91 percent. That did not happen as a result of outstanding debt, Watkins said, but declining state revenues (the denominator of the benchmark ratio equation). The Legislature authorized more borrowing in 2010 due to a critical state emergency, pursuant to state law.The law on benchmark debt ratios is really a soft policy limit to give lawmakers perspective on how much debt the state can afford, Watkins said. The cap is seen as a planning tool and not an absolute ceiling, though other states have hard limits. Still, exceeding the soft cap should signal the state has borrowed all it should, and more borrowing should happen for absolutely essential projects, Watkins said.Anyway, Florida pays about $2.1 billion a year for debt service on the state's tax-supported debt.There's another type of debt to consider, called indirect debt. Unlike tax-supported and self-supported debt, this category does not get as much attention because the debt obligation lies with a separate legal entity such as Citizens Property Insurance, Florida Hurricane Catastrophe Fund Finance Corporation, water management districts or the Florida Housing Finance Corporation -- not the state. As of June 30, 2010, the indirect debt total was $16.4 billion. It is a whopping figure, but it is not included in the state's debt ratios or debt burden, according to the report.We mention all of this to explain that Scott is essentially short-handing the state's debt by describing it as $23 billion. But that's not necessarily a bad thing.This is the debt (figure) that matters to the state from a financial management perspective, Watkins said.Putting Florida debt in contextNow that we've considered the 2010 financial report, we looked for another opinion to make sure we understood all the context. Florida TaxWatch, a group that analyzes state spending and taxes, uses the same data supplied by the Division of Bond Finance to track the debt.Kurt Wenner, TaxWatch vice president of tax research, echoed much of Watkins' analysis and agreed that $23 billion is probably the most accurate figure to use to describe the state debt.That is the amount of debt that is backed by Florida taxpayers, Wenner said.Florida's debt doesn't get as many people talking as the country's $14 trillion-plus national debt. One explanation is that Florida has a balanced budget requirement, Wenner said. So it cannot spend money it simply doesn't have, like Washington does.Florida's borrowed money goes toward bricks and sticks projects, Watkins said, and not for normal government operations.Florida's total outstanding debt last year grew $1.8 billion, exceeding the $1 billion average for the past decade, according to the report. Still, the debt is considered moderate and manageable at its current level.Our rulingScott said he thought about the state's $23 billion debt as he weighed whether to veto certain programs. We verified that figure with the Division of Bond Finance's most recent estimate, and experts consider the figure a street convention to describe the debt. We rate his claim True.

FMD_test_945

Did Target's Stock 'Crash' Due to Their Transgender Bathroom Policy?

03/01/2017

On 28 February 2017, Breitbart.com reported that big box retailer Target's stock had "crashed," losing a combined total of $15 billion in investor wealth due to the chain's announcement in 2016 that it would allow transgender customers and employees to use bathrooms corresponding to their gender identity. Reported Target's stock value is now down by 30 percent since it sparked a consumer boycott by embracing the transgender political agenda. That 30 percent drop has slashed investors' wealth by roughly $15 billion. On Tuesday, the stock fell to $58.78, down from its April 19 high of $83.98. In contrast, Walmart is up 3 percent since April, and Kohl's is down less than one percent. Company officials indirectly acknowledged the consumer boycott. "Our fourth-quarter results reflect the impact of rapidly changing consumer behavior, which drove very strong digital growth but unexpected softness in our stores," Target CEO Brian Cornell said in a company statement. The company also admitted that it would likely continue to experience losses throughout the year. On 19 April 2016, Target announced that transgender customers and employees were free to use the restroom that corresponded to their gender identity amid a national debate on the subject during the 2016 election cycle. The announcement came after North Carolina enacted the controversial HB 2 in March 2016, a law that became colloquially known as the "bathroom bill," requiring public single-sex restrooms to be used only by people of the corresponding biological sex. The controversy and Target's definitive stance prompted conservative groups like the American Family Association (AFA) to launch a boycott. Nearly 1.5 million people had signed the AFA's petition as of 1 March 2017. Target shares did plunge on 28 February 2017, but it wasn't due to its nearly year-old bathroom policy. The drop was due to 2017 guidance announced during an investor day event. Projections were far lower than expected by Wall Street analysts (the term "guidance" refers to projected earnings). The drop in Target's stock corresponds to the announcement made at their investor event. According to Edward Jones analyst Brian Yarbough, Wall Street was expecting Target to project earnings of $5.30 per share, but the company instead provided guidance of $3.80 to $4.20 per share, which was "well below" expectations, prompting the drop in share value. According to Reuters, Target's decline dragged others down with it: Target's plunge prompted declines across the retail sector. Walmart Stores Inc was down 2.0 percent, with Kroger Co down 1.2 percent and Macy's Inc off 1.7 percent. Dollar General Corp fell 4.2 percent. What is affecting Target and other retailers has been competition with all-online retailers like Amazon, which do not have the overhead costs of brick-and-mortar locations. Target, for example, has 1,803 stores. "Online players don't have a huge network of stores, and since they don't have that cost, they can offer lower prices," Yarbough said. Customers also have the immediate ability to do price comparisons with smartphones. These changing patterns are reflected in a statement given by Target CEO Brian Cornell: "Our fourth-quarter results reflect the impact of rapidly changing consumer behavior, which drove very strong digital growth but unexpected softness in our stores. At our meeting with the financial community this morning, we will provide details on the meaningful investments we're making in our business and financial model, which will position Target for long-term, sustainable growth in this new era of retail. We will accelerate our investments in a smart network of physical and digital assets as well as our exclusive and differentiated assortment, including the launch of more than 12 new brands, representing more than $10 billion of our sales over the next two years. In addition, we will invest in lower gross margins to ensure we are clearly and competitively priced every day. While the transition to this new model will present headwinds to our sales and profit performance in the short term, we are confident that these changes will best position Target for continued success over the long term." Although Target offers online shopping, profits there tend to be lower due to associated costs like shipping and price competition from the likes of Amazon. Retailers are struggling to survive, with more profitable in-store sales lagging and lower profit margins due to a growing number of online shoppers. Although its e-commerce operation is growing quickly, Target reported its third straight quarter of lower sales from existing stores, citing "unexpected softness" and raising new questions about the health of large national retailers in the United States. Target also forecast first-quarter profit well below Wall Street estimates. Shares sank 13 percent, on track for their biggest one-day percentage drop in more than 18 years. Target's stock has lost a quarter of its value since the 2016 holiday season started in November and is now trading at its lowest level since August 2014. Target maintains that the bathroom policy has had no effects on its business, with company spokeswoman Erika Winkels telling us in an email, "We have made it clear over time that we've seen no material impact on the business based on the bathroom policy. We don't have anything new or different to share." A poor performance in the 2016 holiday season was also attributed to online sales outpacing foot traffic, but Target is, again, not the only chain feeling the effects: Department stores across the country are paying the price for underestimating Amazon this holiday season. Macy's and Kohl's both reported lower-than-expected sales during the all-important end-of-year retail period and announced a spate of store closures that will lead to thousands of lost jobs. Sears has even been reduced to selling off one of its iconic brands after a double-digit sales slide. Industry observers blame online competition, as well as department store brands' own shortfalls in adapting to a fundamental shift in consumer behavior. Nevertheless, Neil Saunders, managing director of GlobalData Retail, told us that Target could be worse off than it is: "It's in a much better position than some retailers because its balance sheet is still robust, whereas Sears and Macy's are in a very difficult position. With Target, it's much more about tweaking and reinvention at the edges. [The guidance] wasn't great, but not as bad as other people." Saunders told Reuters that while Walmart has been buoyed by successfully offering groceries, Target has not been able to keep up on that front, calling its grocery offerings "confusing." "Target is neither a full-line grocer nor a player with lots of niche specialty products; it is neither a high-end player nor a price-focused discounter," he said. It is difficult to say with certainty whether Target's commerce overall has been negatively affected by its policy on transgender people. Although company representatives have maintained it has not, shortly after Cornell made the announcement, USA Today reported a study that showed the percentage of people who would consider shopping there the next time they needed something dropped from 42 to 38 percent. But the retail industry as a whole is facing a dramatic shift in consumer behavior, and retailers have struggled to keep pace with it. Target's late February 2017 stock drop, however, was the result of announcements made during an investor day event and cannot be attributed to their policy on bathroom use.

FMD_test_946

Did Ronald Reagan Pave the Way for Fox News?

01/26/2018

Political polarization in the news media is a growing concern for Americans, one that liberals often blame on the conservative movement, particularly with the rise of right-wing talk radio and Fox News over recent decades. For instance, the Christian Left Facebook page posted an interesting set of claims about Ronald Reagan in January 2017, in the form of a meme that has been widely shared over the past couple of years. The meme reads: "The Father of Fake News: Ronald Reagan's FCC abolished the Fairness Doctrine, which, since 1949, required media to present both sides' opinions in the rare event they weren't just reporting straight news. A Democrat-controlled Congress passed a bill to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine in 1987. Reagan vetoed the bill. Fox News followed in the 1990s. America is now more polarized and misinformed than ever." The meme was originally created by K. Scott Schaeffer, a self-described "moderate Democrat" and "theologically moderate Christian" who runs the Rescuing Religion from Republicans Facebook page. Much of the content in the meme is accurate, but it leaves out important distinctions between broadcast and cable television and is ultimately misleading in claiming that the demise of the Fairness Doctrine cleared a path for the creation of Fox News. In 1949, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) published a report that recommended what came to be known as the "Fairness Doctrine." As explained by the Congressional Research Service, the doctrine "consisted of two basic requirements" for anyone given a TV or radio broadcast license: (1) that every licensee devote a reasonable portion of broadcast time to the discussion and consideration of controversial issues of public importance; and (2) that in doing so, [the broadcaster must be] fair—that is, [the broadcaster] must affirmatively endeavor to make facilities available for the expression of contrasting viewpoints held by responsible elements with respect to the controversial issues presented. There were additional requirements under the Fairness Doctrine: The personal attack rule stated that when personal attacks were made on individuals involved in public issues, the broadcaster had to, within one week of the broadcast, notify the person attacked, provide him with a copy of the broadcast (either script or tape), and allow him an opportunity to respond over the broadcaster's facilities. The political editorial rule required that when a broadcaster endorsed a particular political candidate, the broadcaster was required to provide the other qualified candidates for the same office (or their representatives) the opportunity to respond over the broadcaster's facilities. Part of the rationale behind the doctrine was the scarcity of television and radio frequencies available, especially in the middle of the 20th century. The government had a duty to regulate the operation of scarce frequencies, the argument went, and therefore had a right to use the public interest as the main criterion in granting and renewing broadcast licenses. Because so few companies licensed a frequency, it was important to ensure that the viewing and listening public were exposed to a wide variety of viewpoints on important issues. However, the rise of cable and satellite television channels like CNN and HBO, especially in the 1980s, changed the American broadcasting landscape. Traditionally, broadcast (or "terrestrial") television involved the distribution of content between broadcast towers and household antennas or tuners on particular frequencies. For several decades up to the 1980s, television was dominated by the "big three" networks—ABC, CBS, and NBC—which were free to watch. By contrast, cable television programming was distributed via cables, and satellite television via satellites orbiting the earth. Unlike watching broadcast television, viewers had to pay for cable and satellite subscriptions. These new methods of distribution undermined the "scarcity" principle that underpinned the Fairness Doctrine. Cable and satellite television offered a new, wider range of programming and viewpoints, and later, so did the internet. However, they did not ensure heterogeneity or a universally open "marketplace of ideas." Exposure to cable and satellite television was confined to those who could afford to pay for it, while those who could not were still limited to the broadcast networks. By 1987, amid growing criticism, Reagan's FCC came to believe the Fairness Doctrine should be abandoned because it believed that "the doctrine chilled the speech of broadcasters and inhibited free and open debate on the public airwaves," as the Congressional Research Service put it. In an effort to preempt such a repeal, Democratic Senator Fritz Hollings introduced the Fairness in Broadcasting Act in March 1987, which would have fully enshrined the Fairness Doctrine in law. The Senate was split 55-45 in favor of the Democrats at the time, and the bill passed the Senate by 59-31. A similar bill was passed by 302 votes to 102 in the Democrat-controlled House in June, but President Reagan vetoed it. The Facebook meme is somewhat muddled when it comes to the sequence of events here. The vote in Congress was not an attempt to "reinstate" the Fairness Doctrine; it was a preemptive effort to fully codify the existing doctrine before the FCC could abolish it later in 1987 (which it duly did). Likewise, Reagan's veto did not prevent the reinstatement of the doctrine; it prevented the doctrine from being fully codified. In August 1987, the FCC put an end to the Fairness Doctrine by a unanimous vote. But did the abandonment of the Fairness Doctrine clear the way for Fox News, as the meme implies? Not really. As we've outlined, the Fairness Doctrine applied to broadcast licensees. Fox News is a cable TV channel that launched in 1996. The distinction between broadcast and cable TV is crucial here. As the Congressional Research Service wrote: "It does not appear that the Fairness Doctrine may be applied constitutionally to cable or satellite service providers." The Supreme Court has held that content-based restrictions on the speech of cable and satellite providers are subject to strict scrutiny. Strict scrutiny requires that the restriction at issue advance a compelling government interest and that the restriction be the least restrictive means of achieving that interest. Content-based regulations of speech in the print media are accorded strict scrutiny. The Supreme Court has recognized that regulations similar to the Fairness Doctrine, when applied to the print media, are not constitutional. If regulations similar to the Fairness Doctrine could not withstand strict scrutiny when applied to the print media, it appears unlikely that similar regulations would withstand such scrutiny when applied to cable or satellite providers. So even if the Fairness Doctrine had persisted until the era of Fox News, the FCC would, in all likelihood, have been restricted to regulating the content of public broadcasters, leaving Fox News to its own devices, like hundreds of other cable and satellite channels.

FMD_test_947

Was Marvin Gaye intentionally producing a subpar album to deceive his ex-wife and avoid paying royalties?

09/16/2004

Divorce can be anything from an amicable parting of spouses who realize their partnership just isn't working, to a vicious, protracted fight between two embittered people determined to wreak as much physical, emotional, and economic damage on the other as possible. Unfortunately, the end of singer Marvin Gaye's first marriage came closer to the latter than the former. Marvin Gaye's Divorce In 1962, a 22-year-old Marvin Gaye wed Anna Ruby Gordy, a woman seventeen years his senior and the sister of Motown Record Corporation founder Berry Gordy, Jr. (a marriage, some cynics suggested, calculated to further the fledgling career of Gaye, who recorded for Motown). By the time Anna filed for divorce thirteen years later, the couple had been separated for over two years, and each had accused the other of infidelities. (Marvin's infidelity was hardly a matter of debate, as he was living with a teenage girl seventeen years his junior who was pregnant with his child. Moreover, the son Marvin and Anna Gaye had claimed as their own was actually a child Marvin Gaye had fathered by his wife's fifteen-year-old niece.) The divorce proceedings dragged out over two years as Marvin continually failed to show up for court dates, refused to pay court-ordered support for Anna and their son, and claimed his expenses exceeded his income even as he continued to spend money recklessly, purchasing luxury automobiles, boats, and beachfront properties. By the time Marvin's day of financial reckoning arrived, he had little cash and was well in arrears for a large amount of back taxes, so his attorney worked out a settlement under which Anna would be paid off from the royalties earned by Gaye's next album. Here, My Dear That next album turned out to be Here, My Dear, a harrowing "concept album of divorce" which chronicled the turmoil of Anna and Marvin's relationship. The record's symbolism was hardly subtle: Featuring songs with titles such as "You Can Leave, But It's Going to Cost You," the album bore an inner sleeve which depicted a Monopoly-like board game emblazoned with the word JUDGMENT, across which a male hand passed a broken record to a female hand. On the man's side of the board were only a piano and some recording equipment, while the female's side of the board included money, a house, a Mercedes, and a diamond ring: Although Marvin and Anna's divorce settlement was indeed tied to the royalties generated by Here, My Dear, the common legend surrounding the record -- that Marvin Gaye was ordered by a judge to hand over all his royalties from the album to Anna, and that Marvin was in a position to spitefully deprive Anna of those royalties by intentionally recording an album so bad it would not sell -- is largely untrue. Debunking the Legend First off, the payment-through-royalties scheme was a settlement worked out through mutual agreement, not one devised and mandated by a judge. Second, rarely does a competent attorney accept (or a responsible judge impose) a dissolution of partnership settlement under which the amount of compensation received by one party is completely dependent upon a future endeavor of the other party, precisely because such a settlement could allow one side to cheat the other by deliberately underperforming. (A similar legend about producer Phil Spector is based on this premise.) Phil Spector The circumstances in Marvin Gaye's case were that he agreed to pay Anna a total of $600,000, the first $307,000 coming from the advance against royalties he was guaranteed for his next album, and the remaining $293,000 to be paid out of any royalties earned beyond the advance. But Anna would lose nothing if Gaye's next record sold poorly, because the agreement specified that if the album failed to earn $293,000 within two years, Gaye was obligated to pay Anna the difference himself, and thus he had nothing to gain by tanking the sessions and purposely turning out substandard product. In fact, Gaye was in a position to lose a great deal by deliberately turning out a substandard effort, both because he was entitled to keep any royalties earned after the first $600,000 and because he stood to earn additional monies through publishing rights (rather than record sales) that were not payable to Anna. It is true that Gaye initially considered giving the album less than his best effort, but he soon found that he was incapable of recording with anything less than a complete commitment to his art, and if he had any intent to "get" his ex-wife, it was through the album's lyrics and not its sales: At first, I figured I'd just do a quickie record nothing heavy, nothing even good. Why should I break my neck when Anna was going to wind up with the money anyway? But the more I lived with the notion, the more it fascinated me. Besides, I owed the public my best effort. I'll give her my next album but it'll be something she won't want to play and it'll be something she won't want the world to hear because I'm gonna tell the truth. Critical Reception Although the album was not a smashing commercial success, it was admired in many quarters for its artistic qualities: Despite Marvin's efforts, Here, My Dear was a commercial failure, not because it lacked ideas and sophisticated music, but, perhaps, because it possessed them in abundance. I think Here, My Dear was simply too sophisticated, too boldly honest, too remarkably insightful and too close to the emotional quick to succeed commercially. On "I Met a Little Girl," Gaye appeals to his past: musically, through sweet fifties harmonies, and personally as he narrates meeting Anna, falling in love with her, and the relationship's demise. On "When Did You Stop Loving Me, When Did I Stop Loving You," which appears again as an instrumental and a reprise, Marvin uses a Latin-tinged mellow groove to probe for more than six minutes the philosophical question of love's origin and its end, both passing imperceptibly into existence, and into each other, as Marvin's multiple falsettos lash at the song's rhythms, and Anna: "You said bad things and you lied." On "Anger," Marvin mounts a funky shuffle of percussion and bass to declare the defining vices of a fundamental human passion: "Anger ... can make you old ... can make you sick ... destroys your soul." The songs cross every genre "Anna's Song" is a rhythmically complex patterning of soul-jazz that conjures Coltrane's ballads, while "Funky Space Reincarnation" is disco-funk that dreams of a raceless musical universe. And "Here, My Dear" is a poignant doo-wop love fugue transposed to detail Marvin's sorrowful joys and sad nostalgia in the aftermath of their breakup. Anna Gaye didn't take lightly some of the revelations Marvin expressed through his music on Here, My Dear (especially accusations that she was preventing him from seeing their son and that she had lied to God by breaking their marriage vows), and upon its release she told People magazine that she was considering filing a $5 million invasion of privacy lawsuit, although nothing ever came of her threat. Critical reaction to Here, My Dear was mixed. As Gaye biographer Steve Turner wrote, "Reviewers didn't seem to know whether the double album was a huge joke at the expense of Anna Gaye and Motown, or a work of genius." The record was not a hit, failing to sell well enough to even recoup the advance against royalties paid by Motown, so Marvin Gaye (who was by then officially bankrupt) was obligated to begin making monthly payments to Anna to cover the shortfall. However, Gaye was killed in 1984 still owing Anna the additional $293,000 due her, and monies earned by his estate after his death went to paying off the IRS rather than benefiting his ex-wives and children -- thereby proving the maxim about life's only two certainties. Dyson, Michael Eric. Mercy, Mercy Me: The Art, Loves & Demons of Marvin Gaye. New York: Basic Civitas Books, 2004. ISBN 0-465-01769-X. Mercy, Mercy Me: The Art, Loves & Demons of Marvin Gaye Ritz, David. Divided Soul: The Life of Marvin Gaye. New York: Da Capo Press, 1985. ISBN 0-306-80443-2. Divided Soul: The Life of Marvin Gaye Turner, Steve. Trouble Man: The Life and Death of Marvin Gaye. New York: HarperCollins, 1998. ISBN 0-06-019821-4. Trouble Man: The Life and Death of Marvin Gaye

FMD_test_948

Did President Trump Kiss Bob Dole on the Forehead?

12/10/2018

A photograph purportedly showing President Trump kissing former U.S. Senator Bob Dole on the forehead was circulated on social media in the days following the funeral of former president George H.W. Bush in December 2018: social media The internet's interest in this image, and Bob Dole in general, spiked in December 2018 after the 95-year-old politician rose from his wheelchair in order to salute Bush's casket. (Dole was gravely wounded by an artillery shell during World War II that left him with permanent disabilities.) wheelchair wounded Although this photograph is genuine, some viewers may have been left with the inaccurate impression that it was taken during Bush's funeral. The picture of Trump's kissing Dole on the forehead was actually taken in January 2018 during a ceremony held in the Capitol Rotunda, upon which occasion the former senator was bestowed with a Congressional Gold Medal. The original is available via UPI, who display it with the following caption: UPI During a ceremony in the Capitol Rotunda, Dole was presented Congress' highest civilian honor by President Trump, Vice President Pence and Senate and House leaders. President Trump kisses World War II veteran and former Senate majority leader Bob Dole as he received the Congressional Gold Medal, the highest civilian honor, "in recognition of his service to the nation as a soldier, legislator, and statesman. Przybyla, Heidi. "Former Senator Bob Dole Receives Congressional Gold Medal in Capitol Ceremony USA Today. 17 January 2018. Cole, Devan. "Bob Dole Helped Out of His Wheelchair to Salute George H.W. Bush." CNN. 4 December 2018. Uria, Daniel. "'True American Hero' Bob Dole Receives Congressional Gold Medal." UPI. 18 January 2018.

FMD_test_949

Debunking Trump Tweets: Popular Vote Totals Indicative of 'Rigged Election'?

12/16/2020

Voting in the 2020 U.S. Election may be over, but the misinformation keeps on ticking. Never stop fact-checking. Follow our post-election coverage here. here One of the many claims U.S. President Donald Trump repeatedly made in his futile attempt to overturn his loss to Democratic rival Joe Biden in the 2020 general election was to assert that his own popular vote total was indicative of a "rigged election." How could he possibly have lost in 2020, Trump reasoned, when he received some 11 million votes more than he did in 2016, when he won? "Perhaps the biggest difference between 2016 and 2020 is @FoxNews, despite the fact that I went from 63,000,000 Votes to 75,000,000 Votes, a record 12,000,000 Vote increase. Obama went down 3,000,000 Votes, and won. Rigged Election!!!" The answer to this question is a simple one: Neither the voting-age population of the U.S., nor the percentage of that population that actually turns out to vote, is a constant. Those figures can -- and do -- vary widely from election to election. It is true that former U.S. President Barack Obama won reelection in 2012, despite garnering some 3.5 million fewer votes that year than he did when he was initially elected in 2008. Why? Largely because some 2.2 million fewer people turned out to vote in 2012 than in 2008. (Obama still received well over 50% of the popular vote in both years, nonetheless.) 2012 2008 And it is true that Trump was elected President in 2016 after receiving about 63 million votes, yet lost his reelection bid in 2020 despite receiving over 11 million more votes than he had in the previous election. How did this happen? For two very important (and obvious) reasons that Trump consistently overlooks or ignores: 2016 2020 1) Voter turnout skyrocketed between 2016 and 2020, rising from 55.7% of eligible voters in the former year to 66.7% in the latter -- a difference of some 22 million additional voters. So even though the increased turnout brought Trump an additional 11 million votes, it also brought another 11 million votes cast for someone other than him. 2) Popular vote doesn't determine the election winner; electoral votes do. Trump won the presidency in 2016 despite receiving some 3 million fewer votes than Hillary Clinton nationwide, because he managed to pull of narrow victories in three key states: Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin. In 2020, however, Trump's popular vote deficit was over twice as large as the previous election (he received some 7 million fewer votes than winner Joe Biden), and, more crucially, he lost all three of the key states he had managed to capture in 2016 as they flipped back to blue: The fact that far fewer voters cast their ballots for third-party candidates in 2020 than in 2016 also seems to have worked against Trump, as his Democratic opponent in 2020 (Biden) tallied over 15 million more votes than his Democratic opponent in 2016 (Clinton) had -- a figure constituting far more than half of the 22 million additional ballots cast in 2020 over 2016.

FMD_test_950

Was a propaganda video created by crisis actors in Ukraine?

02/28/2022

In February 2022, Russian propagandists went into overdrive in an attempt to justify their unprovoked attack on Ukraine. They claimed that Ukraine was run by Nazis (false), that Ukraine was committing genocide on its own people (false), and that Russia was attacking biolabs to prevent "COVID-2" (false). false false false Another line of disinformation attempted to downplay violence in Ukraine. This was largely done when people posted photographs and videos that supposedly showed "crisis actors," or people pretending to be in crisis there. A video of a camera crew filming people running through the street, for example, was posted to Bitchute (a video platform known for hosting far-right, conspiratorial, and hate content) along with the title "How to Make a Propaganda Video?" and the hashtags #UKRAINE #RUSSIA and #PROPAGANDA. posted photographs and videos that supposedly showed "crisis actors a video platform known for hosting far-right, conspiratorial, and hate content Rumble, another video platform known for hosting far-right content, posted this video under the caption "completely choreographed Fake News In Ukraine - Still Believe Mockingbird Media?" On "TheGreatAwakening," a conspiratorial website dedicated to the debunked QAnon conspiracy theory, this video was shared with the caption "Lights, Camera, Action!" and on Twitter it was shared as if it showed "crisis actors" filmed "in the middle of the 'massive and scary' Russian invasion." This video was not filmed in the Ukraine, and it was not filmed in 2022. This video was originally posted in 2013 and shows a behind-the-scenes look at the making of "Invasion Planet Earth" (originally titled "Kaleidoscope Man"), a sci-fi adventure movie about an alien invasion. The above-displayed scene was filmed in Birmingham, England, not Ukraine. Invasion Planet Earth Kaleidoscope Man Another version of this rumor hinged on the claim that the news media was sharing an abbreviated version of this video that only showed people running (with no hints of a camera crew) in order to exaggerate the state of affairs in Ukraine. By claiming that a miscaptioned version of this footage was being shared by the news media, social media users could claim that this was an example of "globalist propaganda." But we have not found a single post from a genuine news outlet that presented this footage as if it were real. The "news outlet" included the above-displayed screenshot is a weeks-old Twitter account, @mightyfarooz200, that has no apparent connections to any credible news outlet. This video was not filmed in Ukraine during Russia's invasion of the country. It does not show crisis actors and it was not shared as if it were genuine footage of Russia's invasion as reported by credible media news outlets. However, this is still a good example of propaganda, just not in the way that it's being presented online. This footage was widely circulated on social media with one of two claims: First, that it showed Ukrainian "crisis actors" filming a propaganda video, and second that the news media was using miscaptioned footage to misrepresent the situation in Ukraine. Neither of these claims were true. Our search for postings of this video turned up dozens of far-right accounts sharing this video as if it showed crisis actors, and practically zero postings of people sharing this video as if it showed a genuine attack. In other words, this video was widely shared by those attempting to downplay the violence by Russians in Ukraine, not by those attempting to exaggerate it. British Council Film: Kaleidoscope Man. https://film-directory.britishcouncil.org/kaleidoscope-man. Accessed 28 Feb. 2022. Hinton, Alexander. Putins Claims That Ukraine Is Committing Genocide Are Baseless, but Not Unprecedented. The Conversation, https://theconversation.com/putins-claims-that-ukraine-is-committing-genocide-are-baseless-but-not-unprecedented-177511. Accessed 28 Feb. 2022. Putin Using False Nazi Narrative to Justify Russias Attack on Ukraine, Experts Say. NBC News, https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/putin-claims-denazification-justify-russias-attack-ukraine-experts-say-rcna17537. Accessed 28 Feb. 2022. Ukraine Invasion: Misleading Claims Continue to Go Viral. BBC News, 28 Feb. 2022. www.bbc.com, https://www.bbc.com/news/60554910.

FMD_test_951

Was it stated by Hillary Clinton in a leaked email that 'We must obliterate Syria for the benefit of Israel'?

04/16/2018

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.

FMD_test_952

Does Search Engine Ecosia Use Profits to Plant Trees?

08/27/2019

If you browse Snopes.com, you'll likely come across the advice, "If it seems too good to be true, it it probably is" on pages about social media scams. While this platitude is certainly worth considering when browsing the internet, a few exceptions exist. social media scams The Germany-based search engine Ecosia claims to use its profits to plant trees around the world. Its home page even carries a tally of the number of trees that have reportedly been planted by Ecosia users: For many people, this business model may seem "too good to be true" and has led to some skepticism about the legitimacy of this company. A search on Google, for instance, results in several articles and blog posts questioning the legitimacy of the search engine and asking whether Ecosia is a scam. As far as we can tell, Ecosia is a legitimate search engine that truly uses a portion of its profits to help plant trees around the world. Ecosia was launched in 2009 by Christian Kroll. At the time, the search engine was partnered with the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) and promised to donate "at least 80 percent of its income from sponsored links to WWFs rainforest protection programme in Brazils Juruena-Apui region." WWF announced the partnership in a blog post: blog Those people unable to make it to the Copenhagen Climate Conference this month can still contribute to stopping climate change by using a new search engine from their own computers. The same day the conference begins on Dec. 7, web users can start using a new green search engine called Ecosia. The new application, powered by Yahoo! and Microsofts Bing search engines, will allow internet surfers to protect about 2 square meters of Amazon rainforest just by clicking on sponsored links. Although users do not donate any money themselves, the company behind Ecosia will donate at least 80 percent of its income from sponsored links to WWFs rainforest protection programme in Brazils Juruena-Apui region. The green search engine is a very modern and inventive method of saving the world climate without a huge effort, says WWF Germanys director Eberhard Brandes. Every year billions of dollars are being earned in the internet only from advertising revenue, says Christian Kroll, founder of Ecosia. There is a more eco-friendly way of using these huge profits: the money should better be used to fight global warming. Since 2009, Ecosia has partnered with a number of other environmental organizations. The company reports it uses a portion of its profits to fund these organizations, who in turn work to plant trees around the world. Ecosia makes money the way most other search engines and websites do: through advertising revenue. While this money covers various business expenses, such as advertising and operational costs, Ecosia claims that the majority of its revenue goes toward funding tree-planting projects. Ecosia releases monthly financial reports so users can see exactly how the company is spending its money. The most recent full report comes from July 2019. The following report shows that 52% of its total income (approximately 80% of its surplus revenue) was invested in tree-planting projects; 5% was spent on advertising; 30% was spent on operational costs; and 12% went into company "reserves," which are used to fund larger environmental investments: financial reports We have been unable to independently verify these numbers. However, we checked the websites of several of Ecosia's reported benefactors and found that many of these organizations list Ecosia as one of their partners. Dr. Simon Pfister, managing director of Green Ethiopia, an organization working to grow forests in Ethiopia that received approximately $150,000 from Ecosia in June 2019, told us that Ecosia accurately reported its donation in the company's financial report. Ecosia is also a Certified B Corporation. This means that Ecosia underwent a third-party evaluation that determined the company had an overall positive impact on its workers, community, and environment. According to the company: Ecosia Certified B Corporation. B Corp Certification doesnt just evaluate a product or service; it assesses the overall positive impact of the company that stands behind it. And increasingly thats what people care most about. Certified B Corporations achieve a minimum verified score on the B Impact Assessment a rigorous assessment of a companys impact on its workers, customers, community, and environment and make their B Impact Report transparent on bcorporation.net. Certified B Corporations also amend their legal governing documents to require their board of directors to balance profit and purpose. The combination of third-party validation, public transparency, and legal accountability help Certified B Corps build trust and value. B Corp Certification is administered by the non-profit B Lab. Ecosia lets users plant trees by searching the web. In donating 80 percent of its surplus ad revenue, the search engine has raised almost $3 million for reforestation projects since its founding in December 2009. Ecosia's mission to cultivate a world where the environment doesnt need protecting has it working to plant one billion new trees by the year 2020. By supporting high-impact reforestation efforts as well as neutralising all CO2 emissions related to its search Ecosia aims to achieve the highest positive environmental impact per dollar possible. By publishing its monthly donation receipts online, Ecosia aims to live up to its users demands for transparency. And by working to improve its charitable web service day after day, Ecosia aims to show the world that small changes can make a big difference. In its mission to plant one billion trees by 2020, Ecosia is working with experts and communities to reforest areas of the world that need it most. Sustainable, high-impact planting strategies mean improvements to the environment, local economies and social stability. Ecosia truly uses a large portion of its profits to fund tree planting projects. Of course, for anyone searching for an environmentally friendly search engine, planting trees isn't the only factor to consider. Ecosia is largely powered by Microsoft's Bing search engine. While Microsoft's global operations have been carbon neutral since 2012, the data centers powering Bing don't run entirely on renewable energy. Microsoft is working toward this goal, however, and expects to be driven by 100 percent renewable energy by 2023: Bing 2012 100 percent renewable energy In our data centers, we will continue to focus on R&D for efficiency and renewable energy. In 2016, we announced that we would power our data centers with more renewable energy, setting a 50 percent target by the end of 2018 and topping 60 percent early in the next decade while continuing to improve from there. We hit the first target nearly a year ahead of schedule, and today we are sharing the news that we will reach the 60 percent milestone before the end of this year. Were therefore setting our next milestone on the path to 100 percent renewable energy, aiming to surpass the 70 percent target by 2023. Well also launch a new data-driven circular cloud initiative using the Internet of Things (IoT), blockchain and artificial intelligence (AI) to monitor performance and streamline our reuse, resale and recycling of data center assets, including servers. For comparison's sake, Google announced in 2017 that its search engine was being powered by 100% renewable energy. announced While Microsoft may not be at quite at 100% renewable energy yet, Ecosia claims that its own servers run on clean power thanks to its new solar plant. Additionally, Ecosia's carbon footprint is lessened due to its involvement with various tree-planting projects around the world. The company says: carbon footprint Renewable energy: Did you know that the CO2 footprint of an average search is estimated at 0.2 grams? Not so with Ecosia. We recently built our own solar plant, so that we can run our servers on clean power. This is even better than buying renewable energy from existing plants, as the plant can deliver clean energy to the grid and replace electricity derived from fossil fuels. Carbon-negative: By planting trees and offsetting its energy use with renewables, each search with Ecosia actually removes 1 kg of CO2 from the air, which makes Ecosia a carbon-negative search engine. Heres the math: an average search generates around 0.005 of revenue. It costs roughly 0.25 to plant a tree, which means that Ecosia can plant one tree every 50 searches. On average, these trees will each remove 50 kg of CO2 during an expected 15 year lifetime. To sum up: Ecosia makes money through advertisements on its search engine. While a portion of that money is used to fund the operational costs of the business, about 80% of its surplus revenue is donated to environmental organizations and tree-planting projects around the world. Smith, Brad. "We're Increasing Our CarbonFee as We Double Down on Sustainability." Microsoft. 15 April 2019. Google. "100% Renewable is Just the Beginning." Retrieved 27 August 2019. Ecosia. "Financial Reports and Tree-Planting Receipts." 15 May 2019. World Wildlife Fund. "Clicks to Help Save Amazon." 3 December 2009.

FMD_test_953

Fukushima Radiation Causes 100% Infant Mortality Among Orca Whales

09/26/2016

Fear-mongering articles claiming that radiation from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster (triggered by the tsunami that followed the Tōhoku earthquake on 11 March 2011) caused a 100% infant mortality rate among orca whales born since then have circulated online for several years. The website Humans Are Free renewed interest in this rumor in September 2016 when it published an article with the clickbait title "Radiation from Fukushima Now Causes 100% Infant Mortality Rate in West Coast Orcas." This piece was sourced from an article by the disreputable Natural News website, which employed a similarly misleading title ("West Coast Orcas Experiencing 100% Infant Mortality Rate as Radiation from Fukushima Drifts Across Ocean"), even though the text of that article plainly admitted that there was no proven connection between the Fukushima disaster and the mortality of infant orcas. No one has yet proven a direct link between the 100% mortality rate seen among orca infants and the effects of radiation contamination in the Pacific Ocean from the Fukushima reactor leak in Japan, but it certainly can't be ruled out as a possibility. Natural News listed several sources about whale deaths at the bottom of its article, but none of those sources mentioned radiation from Fukushima as a likely or definitive cause. Quotes from Ken Balcomb, executive director of the Center for Whale Research in Friday Harbor, Washington, were also misleadingly reproduced out of context by Natural News to bolster a claim that Balcomb's statements did not support. The recent discovery of a carcass off the coast of British Columbia, that of a 19-year-old orca female believed to be in the late stages of pregnancy, is just one example of the recent orca deaths that have scientists and conservationists worried. Ken Balcomb stated, "Her death doesn't bode well for the southern resident population and certainly not for that matriline. Her mother died young. Her aunt had two sons, and she's probably post-reproductive. She hasn't had any babies in the last 12 years. So there's no future." Balcomb also remarked, "We haven't had any survivals in babies for a couple of years. We have had stillborns and newborns die and a number of whales that appear to be pregnant but didn't ultimately produce any calves. It's like zero survival in birth rate here." While Balcomb did say that "we haven't had any survivals in babies for a couple of years," he was referring only to the local Puget Sound orca whale population, and he did not connect a 100% infant orca mortality rate to radiation from Fukushima. His quotes originated from a story published by the Seattle Times in December 2014 about a baby orca whale that had died in Puget Sound. While the exact cause of that whale's death was unclear, Balcomb suggested that the whale likely died due to a diminished food supply (and not radiation). He noted that two of the whales' three biggest problems—the buildup of pollutants such as DDT and polychlorinated biphenyls in their blubber, and disturbance by marine traffic—appear to be worsened by a third issue: a reduction in available prey. These whales can eat sockeye and halibut but overwhelmingly prefer fatty chinook from Puget Sound and Canada's Fraser River, distinguishing them from other fish by using sonar to sense differences in the animals' swim bladders. However, Puget Sound chinook numbers have dropped to about 10% of their historic high, and they, too, are listed for protection under the ESA. For Balcomb, the loss of J32 suggests it's time to consider drastic measures, such as a ban or steep curtailment in chinook fishing, even though fishing is likely the least of the threats chinook face. "It's a wake-up call—we know what the problem is, whether it's dams or fishing or habitat destruction," he said. "It's just what happens when millions of people move into the watershed. (But) stopping fishing, at least for a while, is something we can do immediately." The reality is that the basic problem is food, Balcomb said. Although apparently no baby orcas survived long after birth in Puget Sound in 2013 or 2014, that wasn't the case in the immediately following years, as 2015 saw nine successful orca births in Puget Sound. In just over a year, Puget Sound welcomed nine baby Southern-resident orcas to the fold, as the pod continued to rebound from the 30-year-low numbers reported at the end of 2014. While radiation from the Fukushima disaster did have a major impact on marine life, the leak of radioactive material from the plant did not cause a proven "100% infant mortality" rate among orca whales. Moreover, the Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration do not list nuclear radiation (from any source) among the threats currently facing the world's whale population.

FMD_test_954

John Madden Death Hoax (2014)

04/27/2016

Editor's Note: The Associated Press reported that John Madden died at the age of 85 on Dec. 28, 2021. The fact check below pertains to a hoax that circulated online in 2014 and 2016. A rumor about Hall of Fame coach John Madden's alleged death started circulating online in April 2016. The rumor began after the website LockerDome posted a link to a fake news article published on April 29, 2014, by the entertainment website Empire Sports. The article claimed, "NFL fans cover your eyes, Super Bowl-winning head coach John Madden was found dead this morning at his Pleasanton, California home." Paramedics responded to a call made early that morning and found the 78-year-old Hall of Fame coach sitting upright on his couch with a microphone in his hand. The Pleasanton Medical Examiner has not released the cause of death, but no foul play is suspected. There was no truth to this story when it was initially published in 2014, and it remained false when it recirculated two years later, at a time when John Madden was still alive and well at 80 years old (not 78). Empire Sports, like the related Empire News, is one of many "satire and entertainment" websites that publish only hoax stories. Many of Empire Sports' articles use invented names, except in cases when public figures are being satirized. Any other use of real names is accidental and coincidental. LockerDome is an interest-based social network that started as a place for sports fans to gather online but later expanded to include other interests.

FMD_test_955

Premium Increase

07/16/2012

Claim: President Bush is responsible for a 17% increase in Medicare premiums. Example: [Collected on the Internet, 2004] Have you seen the John Kerry commercial in which George Bush pledges to help Seniors on Medicare and "the very next day imposes a 17% premium increase the biggest in history"? That ad is a stroke of genius on Kerry's part and will surely gain him many votes among the uninformed. It was found to be so amazing that someone did some homework on the issue. As it turns out the 17% increase was not imposed by President Bush but was mandated by the "balanced budget agreement" signed by President Clinton, voted into law by Senator John Kerry, and was scheduled to come into effect during the Bush administration. President Bush had no authority to reverse what had been voted into law by Senator Kerry during the Clinton administration. Once again Kerry is counting on the ignorance of the American people. Don't be duped by his misstatement of facts! Origins: The availability of health care and the associated costs of medical care, prescription drugs, and insurance are a major issue in every campaign, especially among older voters. With premiums for the government-funded Medicare program scheduled to rise from $66.60 to $78.20 per month in January 2005 (a 17.4% increase over current levels, and 56 percent higher than the premiums charged in 2001), both sides in the upcoming presidential election are seeking the upper hand on the issue. Medicare Democrats have maintained that the Bush administration bears much of the responsibility for the increase in premiums because it has done little to control health costs and had directed too much Medicare money to the managed health care industry, and Democratic nominee John Kerry's campaign aired a commercial that (incorrectly) implied that President Bush was responsible for the increase in Medicare premiums ("George Bush imposes the biggest Medicare premium increase in history ."). President Bush's campaign countered by running a TV spot that (incorrectly) stated Senator Kerry had "voted five times to raise Medicare premiums": Republicans had hoped to emphasize their support of Medicare in this campaign season, after making herculean efforts to pass legislation adding drug benefits to the health program for 41 million people who are elderly or disabled. But the new law, signed by Bush in December, has met mixed reviews. The drug benefits, representing the largest expansion of Medicare since its creation in 1965, do not become available until 2006, and the increase in premiums has nothing to do with the new drug coverage. Beneficiaries will have to pay an additional premium, expected to average $35 a month in 2006, for drug benefits. The Bush campaign advertisement, titled "Medicare Hypocrisy," says, "It was Mr. Kerry who voted five times to raise Medicare premiums." The votes, from 1985 to 1997, were not on premiums alone, but on comprehensive budget bills that included hundreds of provisions affecting Medicare and scores of other federal programs. Like most political issues, health care is a complex subject that has been shaped and affected by many different pieces of legislation, and no one person or political party is solely responsible for the rise in Medicare premiums. Those interested in trying to follow the bouncing ball and track the origins of the 17% increase in Medicare premiums may find this article helpful. article Last updated: 12 October 2004 Sources: Pear, Robert and Carl Hulse. "Medicare Costs Are New Focus for Candidates." The New York Times. 12 September 2004 (p. 1). The [Pottstown] Mercury. "Health Care a Passionate Issue for Candidates." 1 October 2004.

FMD_test_956

Seahawks Ban Ticket Sales to Californians?

01/12/2014

Claim: The Seattle Seahawks are not selling tickets to the NFC Championship Game to California residents. Examples: [Collected via e-mail, January 2014] Just read an article saying that Fearing 49er Fans, The Seahawks have banned NFC Championship Ticket Sales for Californians. Is this true, I don't see how it can be? I want to know if it is true that the Seattle Seahawks website page is closed to residents in California and Carolina from buying tickets to the January 19th 2014 playoff game to the Super Bowl. It is only reported on a California news page. Is it true??? Origins: When the NFL's Seattle Seahawks take the field on 19 January 2014 for the NFC Championship Game in the hopes of securing a berth in this year's Super Bowl, there likely will be a good many fans from California in the stands at Seattle's CenturyLink Field, because the Seahawks' opponents that day will be the San Francisco 49ers. Possibly there will be far fewer fans from the Bay Area in the stands than would like to be there, though, because the Seahawks announced announced on their web site on 11 January 2014 that tickets for the game would be available only to buyers in a specified geographic area and that area does not include any part of California. According to the notice posted on the Seahawks' official web site, tickets for the NFC Championship Game can be purchased only by buyers with credit card billing addresses in the states of Washington, Oregon, Montana, Idaho, Alaska, and Hawaii, and the Canadian provinces of British Columbia and Alberta. So a Canadian football fan from Edmonton, Alberta, has a shot a scoring some tickets to next Sunday's game (even though there are no NFL franchises anywhere in Canada), but not fans from Oakland, San Francisco, San Diego (all of which are home to NFL teams), or Los Angeles (the second-largest city in the U.S.). The Seahawks offered no explanation for this restriction on their web site, but theories for the reasons behind it have ranged from its being a (likely ineffective) attempt to cut down on ticket scalping to a (mean-spirited) move to protect the Seahawks' home-field advantage by making it more difficult for 49ers fans to pack the stands. As the San Francisco Chronicle noted, "Niner fans are known for traveling. This season, several road stadiums were packed with 49ers fans, and 49ers' play-by-play voice Ted Robinson said there were droves of 49ers fans in Charlotte for [last] Sunday's 23-10 road win over the Panthers." Somewhere in between is the notion that the team simply wants to try to ensure that their allotment of tickets for the championship game ends up, as much as possible, in the hands of Seahawks fans as a reward for their support throughout the season, rather than being bought up by others who simply want to attend a championship game (regardless of who's playing in it) or re-sell the tickets for profit. The Denver Broncos have similarly restricted sales of tickets to the AFC Championship Game to residents of the Rocky Mountain region (Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, Wyoming, Nebraska, Montana, South Dakota and Western Kansas), an area that does not include the home of their opponents for that game, the Boston-based New England Patriots (but Denver and Boston are much father apart than Seattle and San Francisco are). restricted Boosters of the 49ers and other California football fans can still acquire tickets to the game through the secondary market (i.e., ticket resellers), but it will cost them. According to Forbes, the NFC Championship Game will be the most expensive NFL game this season, with the cheapest ticket on the secondary market going for just under $400, and tickets selling for an average price of $740 each. Last updated: 12 January 2014 Lynch, Kevin. "Seahawks Block NFC Title Game Ticket Sales to California." San Francisco Chronicle. 12 January 2014.

FMD_test_957

Intuit Order Confirmation

03/01/2012

Phishing bait: Software order confirmation from Intuit. Example: [Collected via e-mail, October 2012] Origins: In October 2012, Internet users were spammed with phony e-mailed confirmation orders from Intuit, a financial and tax preparation software company, bearing subject lines such as "Intuit Order Status," "Intuit GoPayment Order Status update," "Intuit GoPayment Shipment Information," and "Intuit GoPayment Shipment Note." Intuit posted an alert on its web site about the fake e-mail, advising recipients to: alert Do not click on the link in the email. Send a copy of the email to spoof@intuit.com. Do not forward the email to anyone else. Delete the email. Intuit's alert also advises users that: On the Internet, "phishing" refers to criminal activity that attempts to fraudulently obtain sensitive information. Here's what you can do to protect yourself from a phishing attack: If you suspect you have received a phishing email from Intuit, please forward it immediately to spoof@intuit.com. We will look into each reported instance. Make sure you subscribe to an anti-virus software and keep it up-to-date. Make sure you have updated your web browser to one that includes anti-phishing security features, such as Internet Explorer 7 or Firefox version 3 or higher. Make sure that you keep up to date on the latest releases and patches for your operating systems and critical programs. These releases are frequently security related. Do not respond to emails asking for account, password, banking, or credit card information. Do not open up an attachment that claims to be a software update. We will not send any software updates via email. Do not respond to text messages or voicemails that ask you to call a number and enter your account number and pin. Make sure you have passwords on your computer and your payroll files. Last updated: 1 October 2012

FMD_test_958

Shoo Fly Awry

08/17/2015

FACT CHECK: Did Kentucky hire an Amish DMV clerk who refused to issue driver's licenses based on her religious beliefs? Claim: Kentucky hired an Amish DMV clerk who refused to issue driver's licenses based on her religious beliefs. Example: [Collected via Twitter and Facebook, August 2015] Why can't an Amish worker at a DMV refuse to give out driver's licenses? pic.twitter.com/fntubM4XGB pic.twitter.com/fntubM4XGB Hamybear (@hamybear) August 16, 2015 August 16, 2015 Origins: On 26 June 2015, the Supreme Court's decision in the case Obergefell vs. Hodges [PDF] held that same-sex couples were guaranteed the right to marry under both the Due Process Clause and Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. (Almost immediately, that decision led to a number of rumors and viral claims; that pedophiles would soon be granted similar rights, that Joe Biden had gone on a victory spree, and that Facebook had begun tracking the political beliefs of users via a celebratory rainbow filter for profile pictures.) PDF pedophiles Joe Biden rainbow filter Tangential rumors circulated pertaining to individuals and businesses who subsequently (or previously) went out on a limb for their religious opposition to marriage equality, which included a false claim involving a pastor purportedly jailed for refusing to marry a gay couple and the true case of an Oregon bakery ordered to pay damages stemming from a pre-decision refusal to serve a same-sex couple. The meme displayed above was inspired by Kentucky court clerk named Kim Davis, who unwittingly starred in a viral video during which she refused to issue a marriage license to a same-sex couple shortly after the June 2015 Supreme Court ruling. jailed bakery Kim Davis On 12 August 2015, U.S. District Judge David L. Bunning ordered Davis [PDF] to begin issuing licenses as requested. Bunning wrote in his ruling that by "openly adopting a policy that promotes her own religious convictions at the expenses of others," Davis had violated the law, adding: ordered PDF Davis remains free to practice her Apostolic Christian beliefs. She may continue to attend church twice a week, participate in Bible Study and minister to female inmates at the Rowan County Jail. She is even free to believe that marriage is a union between one man and one woman, as many Americans do. However, her religious convictions cannot excuse her from performing the duties that she took an oath to perform as Rowan County Clerk. The humorous image above was clearly created to poke fun at Davis over the legal dispute (and the general issue of allowing personal religious beliefs to trump the requirements of employment and public service), a subtlety lost on many social media users who hadn't heard of the marriage license controversy in Kentucky and consequently didn't get the joke. The jape partially relies outsider assumptions about Amish culture, one of which is the notion that Amish people are prohibited from driving due to their religion. That's not precisely accurate, as use of a horse-and-buggy over cars is primarily a cultural choice and not part of a specific anti-automobile religious edict applied to everyone: Amish anti-automobile Although the Amish are allowed to use automobiles for social and business functions, the church rules prohibit members from owning as well as driving a car. Amish businessmen are also not allowed to provide loans to non-Amish employees for the purpose of buying a vehicle. Ownership of an automobile is considered a taboo. It is important to the community to maintain the horse and buggy as a symbol of Amish identity. The joke also leans on a (fallacious) assumption that Amish citizens neither seek nor require state driver's licenses, part of a broad, inaccurate perception of the community as frightened of the outside world. The Amish often need state-issued ID for a variety of day-to-day purposes, including the operation of lucrative businesses (contrary to the belief Amish people reject wealth and/or financial success entirely or that they lack awareness of modern conventions). Photographic requirements have presented problems for Amish people seeking licenses, however, as their traditions generally favor the avoidance of photography. (Yet another misconception asserts the practice is due to a primitive, uneducated fear that the camera might "steal" a person's soul; in actuality, it's more due to intentional humility and not a fear of technology.) state-issued ID variety operation photography fear steal soul While the meme seen here satirizes the imposition of religious belief on outsiders by a presumably stricter sect, it should be noted that Amish communities are known for a marked disinclination to interact with the "English" world save for necessary circumstances. Although their religious beliefs are notoriously stringent, Amish folks are far likelier to be encroached upon by a conflict of law and faith than the other way around. disinclination Last updated: 17August 2015 Originally published: 17August 2015

FMD_test_959

Is State Farm Denying Insurance to Gun Owners?

05/31/2018

Though some gun owners have accused State Farm insurance online of not being a "good neighbor" toward them, two claims which appeared eighteen years apart have proven to be outliers and not indicative of any bias against firearm owners or manufacturers. The most recent iteration of the claim is connected to a photograph circulating online of a letter dated 18 March 2018 from the company concerning a Minnesota-based gunmaking business applying for coverage: State Farm Fire and Casualty Company is unable to provide the coverage you requested in your application because: - we don't provide coverage for businesses engaged in manufacturing firearms. The photograph was subsequently circulated in various disreputable blogs, claiming that State Farm had been, among other things, "cucked." A State Farm spokesperson, Sevag Sarkissian, would not comment on specific policies or applications. But he did tell us via e-mail: This is not a firearms focused issue State Farm generally does not insure manufacturing businesses. Insurance companies specialize in insuring different types of risks. Manufacturing businesses are not a type of risk that State Farm has selected to specialize in writing. Insurance companies as a whole each weigh the types of products they take on for their policies, said Michael Barry, a spokesperson for the Insurance Information Institute, a non-profit trade group. "I think it's fair to say that some products are riskier to ensure than others," he said: For instance, Tesla [self-driving] automobiles are in all likelihood going to be costlier to insure because there isn't a past performance chart on the risks inherent operating these vehicles in the same way that there are individual operated vehicles. However, he said, that inherent risk is not an indicator of any industry-wide embargo against firearm makers: There are some insurers who are willing to underwrite certain risks where others choose not to. If I'm a gun manufacturer and I need an insurer, I'm confident that with enough due diligence and research I can find a number of prospective insurers. Eighteen years earlier, a South Carolina man also accused State Farm of discriminating against gun owners, saying that the company cancelled his homeowner's insurance policy after he revealed to an agent that he engaged in recreational shooting in a gun range on his property. The agent, he said, cited a "factor of increased risk" in terminating the policy, while also giving him seven days to find another insurer. man Sarkissian told us: State Farm's homeowner policy provides limited coverage for personal items like firearms, jewelry and other valuables. State Farm's personal articles policy provides broader coverage for personal items like firearms, jewelry and other valuables. On a homeowner insurance policy application, State Farm does not ask if a homeowner owns any firearms. That would only come up if a customer specifically wanted additional coverage for firearms under their homeowner policy or if they chose to purchase a personal articles policy for broader coverage options. While not addressing the South Carolina man's case specifically, Michael Barry said that when insurance companies cancel coverage for policy holders, it is typically due to two reasons: non-payment on the policy, or a "material misrepresentation" on the part of the policy holder on their initial application. But he refuted the idea that State Farm or the insurance industry as a whole were "dropping" gun owners from their clienteles. "I haven't even heard that anecdotally," said Barry, whose group is based out of New York: There's a whole big country out there west of the Hudson. A lot of home insurers would have trouble staying in business if they took that stance when it comes to gun owners, an unwillingness to assume the risk. In February 2018, the National Rifle Association accused another company, Delta Airlines, of being biased against firearm owners after Delta announced that it would end a travel discount for the group's members. The airline responded by pointing out that a total of thirteen members had used the discount. responded Horton, Alex. "Only 13 NRA Members Used Delta's Discount. Ending it Cost the Airline a $40 Million Tax Break." Washington Post. 3 March 2018.

FMD_test_960

Are These the Final Words of the Challenger Crew?

02/22/2001

Seventy-three seconds into the 28 January 1986 flight of the space shuttle Challenger the craft broke apart, killing the seven astronauts aboard. Videotapes released by NASA afterwards showed that a few seconds before the disaster, an unusual plume of fire and smoke could be seen spewing from the lower section of the shuttle's right solid-fuel rocket. It was generally assumed (and NASA did little to disturb this opinion) that all aboard died the moment the external tank blew up. NASA later conceded it was likely that at least three of the crew members aboard remained conscious after the explosion, and perhaps even throughout the few minutes it took forthe crew compartment of the shuttle to fall back to Earth and slam into the Atlantic Ocean. The agency was highly secretive about matters relating to the Challenger tragedy, actively fighting in the courts media requests to be allowed access to photographs of the wreckage, the details of the settlements made with the crews' families, or the autopsy reports, and this reticence to share information likely convinced some that there was more to the story than was being told. Such an environment breeds its own rumors, and Miami Herald reporter Dennis E. Powell wrote that the crew were likely all alive and conscious until the shuttle's crew compartment plunged into the Atlantic Ocean: When the shuttle broke apart, the crew compartment did not lose pressure, at least not at once. There was an uncomfortable jolt "A pretty good kick in the pants" is the way one investigator describes it but it was not so severe as to cause injury. This probably accounted for the "uh oh" that was the last word heard on the flight deck tape recorder that would be recovered from the ocean floor two months later. As they were feeling the jolt, the four astronauts on the flight deck saw a bright flash and a cloud of steam. The lights went out. The intercom went dead. After a few breaths, the seven astronauts stopped getting oxygen into their helmets. Someone, apparently astronaut Ronald McNair, leaned forward and turned on the personal emergency air pack of shuttle pilot Michael Smith. The PEAP of Commander Francis Scobee was in a place where it was difficult to reach. It was not activated. Even so, if the crew compartment did not rapidly lose air pressure, Scobee would only have had to lift his mask to be able to breathe. Two other PEAPs were turned on. The three others were never found. Though the shuttle had broken to pieces, the crew compartment was intact. It stabilized in a nose-down attitude within 10 to 20 seconds, say the investigators. Even if the compartment was gradually losing pressure, those on the flight deck would certainly have remained conscious long enough to catch a glimpse of the green-brown Atlantic rushing toward them. If it lost its pressurization very slowly or remained intact until it hit the water, they were conscious and cognizant all the way down. In fact, no clear evidence was ever found that the crew cabin depressurized at all. There was certainly no sudden, catastrophic loss of air of the type that would have knocked the astronauts out within seconds. Such an event would have caused the mid-deck floor to buckle upward; that simply didn't happen. A purported transcript of the Challenger crew's final horrifying moments has circulated online for many years, supposedly taken from a "secret tape" leaked from NASA: A secret NASA tape reveals that the crew of the shuttle Challenger not only survived the explosion that ripped the vessel apart; they screamed, cried, cursed and prayed for three hellish minutes before they slammed into the Atlantic and perished on January 28, 1986. The tape is said to begin with a startled crewman screaming,"What happened? What happened? Oh God - No!" Screams and curses are heard - several crewmen begin to weep - and then others bid their families farewell. Two minutes forty-five seconds later the tape ends. That's when the shuttles crew compartment, which remained intact after the vessel exploded over the Atlantic, hit the ocean at over 2,000 miles per hour, instantly killing the crew. "Cover up? Of course there was a coverup," declared Robert Hotz, a member of the Presidential commission that investigated the disaster. "NASA can't face the fact that they put these astronauts in a situation where they didn't have adequate equipment to survive. NASA doesn't give a damn about anything but covering it's ass," he said. The official account released by NASA ends with shuttle pilot Michael Smith saying, "Uh-oh!" Some NASA employees have evidently heard more - much more. And they provided the rest of the account based on what they've discussed within NASA in the last five years. The astronauts had time and realized something was happening after the shuttle broke up. "All shuttle astronauts carry personal recorders and the tape in question apparently came from Christa's (McAuliffe), which was recovered after the shuttle disaster," said Hotz. Jarvis was sitting beside her, and when he figured out what was happening he said, "Give me your hand." "NASA insists there's nothing like that on tape but they're talking about the mission tape, not Christa's. So they're not lying, but they're not telling the truth, either." A journalist with close ties to NASA was even more emphatic, "There are persistent rumors, dating back to the disaster, that this tape is absolutely bone-chilling." The following transcript begins two seconds after NASA's official version ends, with pilot Michael Smith saying, "Uh-oh!" Times from the moment of takeoff are shown in minutes and seconds and are approximate. The sex of the speaker is indicated by M or F. T+1:15 (M) What happened? What happened? Oh God, no - no! T+1:17 (F) Oh dear God. T+1:18 (M) Turn on your air pack! Turn on your air... T+1:20 (M) Can't breathe... choking... T+1:21 (M) Lift up your visor! T+1:22 (M/F) (Screams.) It's hot. (Sobs.) I can't. Don't tell me... God! Do it...now... T+1:24 (M) I told them... I told them... Dammit! Resnik don't... T+1:27 (M) Take it easy! Move (unintelligible)... T+1:28 (F) Don't let me die like this. Not now. Not here... T+1:31 (M) Your arm... no... I (extended garble, static) T+1:36 (F) I'm... passing... out... T+1:37 (M) We're not dead yet. T+1:40 (M) If you ever wanted (unintelligible) me a miracle... (unintelligible)... (screams) T+1:41 (M) She's... she's... (garble) ... damn! T+1:50 (M) Can't breathe... T+1:51 (M/F) (screams) Jesus Christ! No! T+1:54 (M) She's out. T+1:55 (M) Lucky... (unintelligible). T+1:56 (M) God. The water... we're dead! (screams) T+2:00 (F) Goodbye (sobs)... I love you, I love you... T+2:03 (M) Loosen up... loosen up... T+2:07 (M) It'll just be like a ditch landing... T+2:09 (M) That's right, think positive. T+2:11 (M) Ditch procedure... T+2:14 (M) No way! T+2:17 (M) Give me your hand... T+2:19 (M) You awake in there? I... I... T+2:29 (M) Our Father... (unintelligible)... T+2:42 (M) ...hallowed be Thy name... (unintelligible). T+2:57 (M) You...over there? T+2:58 (M) The Lord is my shepherd, I shall... not want. He maketh me to lie down in green pastures... though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil... I will dwell in the house... T+3:15 to end. None. Static, silence. Rest in Peace However, this "transcript" originated with an article published in a February 1991 issue of Weekly World News, a tabloid famous for creating news stories out of whole cloth. There never was such a transcript, nor was the crew of the Challenger known to have been wearing personal recorders. Moreover, personal recorders would not have picked up the comments of crew members on different decks as the faked transcript would have us believe. Weekly World News Not everyone aboard died the exact second the external tank exploded; that much is known. A complete understanding of exactly what happened in that cabin after the explosion remains elusive because the impact of the crash, plus the six weeks the wreckage and bodies spent in the sea, made it impossible to determine precisely when and how everybody aboard died. (Six weeks in sea water would also have ruined any unshielded audio tapes that miraculously survived the explosion and the crash.) If the cabin depressurized immediately, the crew would have lived about 6 to 15 seconds after the blast; if not, they might have survived for the full two minutes and forty-five seconds it took the cabin to fall 65,000 feet back to Earth. They most certainly could not have lived through the crushing 207 mph impact with the waters off the Florida coast, which negates the wilder versions of "survived astronauts" rumors that had them still alive for hours (and even days) under the sea, waiting for rescuers who could not reach them in time. Possibly the best clue towards solving the mystery of how long the doomed crew survived lies in what NASA learned from examining the four emergency air packs recovered from the wreckage. Three had been manually activated, which demonstrated that at least some of the crew realized something had gone wrong and had taken steps to save themselves. However, the fourth unactivated pack speaks with an even stronger voice, indicating that most likely realization of the circumstances and loss of consciousness were occurring at roughly the same time. That was the conclusion of Dr. Joseph Kerwin, director of Life Sciences at the Johnson Space Center in Houston. His July 1986 report was based on an official examination of the debris of the crew compartment, audio tapes and other data recorded on the shuttle, the remains of the astronauts, and photographs of the capsule as it fell after the shuttle exploded. In the report, Dr. Kerwin said: "The cause of death of the Challenger astronauts cannot be positively determined, the forces to which the crew were exposed during the orbiter breakup were probably not sufficient to cause death or serious injury, and the crew possibly, but not certainly, lost consciousness in the seconds following orbiter breakup due to in-flight loss of crew module pressure." In other words, they might well have lived for the full spiral down and might even have been fully conscious for all of that hellish descent. But even if so, this fabricated "transcript" does not preserve their final words. Jones, Alex. "Withheld Shuttle Data: A Debate Over Privacy." The New York Times. 27 January 1987 (p. C1). Okie, Susan. "Astronaut Autopsies Will Be Difficult." The Washington Post. 16 March 1986 (p. A14). Wilford, John Noble. "A Grueling Autopsy for the Challenger." The New York Times. 9 February 1986 (p. D5). The Associated Press. "NASA Says Challenger Crew Survived Briefly After Blast." The San Diego Union-Tribune. 29 July 1986 (p. A8). The Associated Press. "Challenger Crew Made Bid for Life." The Record. 29 July 1986 (p. A1). "Tape Proves Doomed Shuttle Screamed, Cursed and Prayed." Weekly World News. 5 February 1991.

FMD_test_961

Did Trump Solicit Donations, Attack Liz Cheney to Mark His Birthday?

06/16/2022

In June 2022, internet users, especially those opposed to former Pres. Donald Trump, enthusiastically shared what appeared to be a statement in which he marked the occasion of his 76th birthday by attacking Republican Congresswoman Liz Cheney, making a lewd remark about his wife, Melania, and soliciting donations from his supporters. In reality, the statement was fabricated by a left-wing political action committee which routinely produces what it describes as political satire. We are issuing a rating of "Misattributed." On Twitter, @StandForBetter posted the statement on June 14, Trump's birthday, along with the caption: posted Happy #FlagDay everyone! Looks like Donald J. Trump is looking for people to send money. Instead, maybe we can say Happy Birthday President Trump by sending an arrest warrant instead. The 100 GOP that support his big lie can bail him out of this spoof. From #UKR The bogus statement was re-shared elsewhere on social media, without the name of its original source. This is important because Stand For Better is a left-wing political action committee that regularly publishes what its creators describe as "political films and satire supporting Dems." re-shared elsewhere social media political action committee publishes describe Without that contextual information, social media users were more likely to share the statement as authentic. When Trump does issue authentic statements, they appear on one or more of the following platforms: his website; his TruthSocial account; the Twitter feed of spokesperson Liz Harrington; or the Twitter feed of spokesperson Taylor Budowich. website TruthSocial account Liz Harrington Taylor Budowich The "birthday" statement never appeared on any of those platforms on or around June 14, and we could therefore conclude it was not authentic, even if we weren't aware of the overtly political and "satirical" motivations of Stand for Better. Did Trump Call Pence a Dog That Belongs on the Street? Snopes.Com, https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-pence-dog-pet/. Accessed 16 June 2022. Save America. https://www.donaldjtrump.com/news. Accessed 16 June 2022. STAND FOR BETTER PAC - Committee Overview. FEC.Gov, https://www.fec.gov/data/committee/C00758672/. Accessed 16 June 2022. Truth Social. https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/. Accessed 16 June 2022.

FMD_test_962

Is Ellen DeGeneres Holding a Facebook Giveaway?

11/02/2018

Several times over the last few years, Facebook posts have appeared proposing that users who followed instructions to "like" and "share" them could win myriad prizes in a purported giveaway sponsored by Ellen DeGeneres. The Ellen DeGeneres Show does run segments involving prize giveaways that may have online components, including ties to official social media accounts, but not ones involving randomly choosing viewers who "like" and "share" posts stemming from counterfeit Facebook accounts. Any legitimate promotional offer using Facebook should be tied to an account bearing a blue badge indicating that the account has been verified by Facebook as authentic. As we have noted on previous pages about similar hoaxes, these counterfeit promotional posts exhibit a number of red flags, primarily that the underlying pages are not endorsed by any official channel associated with Ellen DeGeneres. The first clue that the giveaways following this format are not legitimate is that the pages to which Facebook users are directed were created just days before the giveaway posts began to appear. Not only are the secondary Facebook pages involved new, but they are also not linked with automobile companies or other interests one might reasonably expect to offer a car in exchange for social media advertising (such as automobile dealerships, insurance companies, or large retailers). Were a legitimate company to engage in such a high-ticket contest giveaway, the incentive would be exposure, but no corresponding promotional return on advertising investment is discernible in these Facebook giveaway claims. The aim of schemes such as the celebrity giveaway hoaxes is typically to rapidly build a large Facebook following in order to sell pages with high "like" counts to third parties. While such hoaxes appear to present little risk to participants, liking and sharing the false information is not entirely safe. In addition to advancing the interests of and encouraging social media scammers, page likes potentially enable user data mining by scammers. In some cases, the giveaway hoaxes lure victims into downloading malware-bearing files.

FMD_test_963

Can American millionaires receive $1.7 million in COVID-19 stimulus funds?

04/21/2020

Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease. Responding to an unprecedented disruption to the U.S. economy caused by the COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic, U.S. President Donald Trump on March 27, 2020, approved a $2.2 trillion stimulus package called the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act. Aiming to provide direct payments to Americans, the relief package authorized the U.S. Treasury Department and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to send $1,200 checks to low- and middle-class workers. The legislation also boosted funding for unemployment benefits, set aside billions of dollars for loans to help small businesses, and increased health care spending by $100 billion, among other provisions. However, the bill included an additional benefit for wealthy Americans, as reported by national media in mid-April: "Over 43,000 U.S. millionaires will get stimulus averaging $1.6 million each" (New York Post) and "How Some Rich Americans Are Getting Checks Averaging $1.7 million" (Forbes). Snopes received numerous reader inquiries about the veracity of those reports. The claim is multi-pronged: that millionaires and other Americans received the same type of stimulus checks, termed "Economic Impact Payments"; that those payments were higher for millionaires than for other workers; and that the economic benefits for the country's wealthiest residents averaged $1.7 million each under the CARES Act. The coronavirus relief package authorized the federal government to send payments to single tax filers with adjusted gross income up to $75,000, and for married couples filing jointly, the threshold is $150,000. For those with higher annual salaries, the federal government reduces the stimulus checks by $5 for each $100 above the $75,000 threshold (similar calculations apply for payments to families). Yet, evidence from the IRS indicates that "Tax filers with adjusted gross income up to $75,000 for individuals and up to $150,000 for married couples filing joint returns will receive the full payment," which does not exceed the amounts of $1,200 for individuals, $2,400 for joint claims, and $500 per qualifying child. This means that only in a hypothetical situation where a family had 3,400 qualifying children could an American receive a stimulus check of $1.7 million. The latter part of the claim—that millionaires could reap an average of $1.7 million in financial gains under the CARES Act—is less definite. The answer begins with understanding the pre-CARES Act tax code. In 2017, the federal government established new limitations on how much money owners of so-called "pass-through" businesses can deduct as losses against their "nonbusiness" income to minimize their tax liability. Under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, owners of such businesses—entities where profits flow through to owners and are not subject to corporate income taxes—could deduct a maximum of $250,000 in losses individually ($500,000 for couples) to offset taxable income from other sources, such as capital gains. Two Democratic Congressmen, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island and Rep. Lloyd Doggett of Texas, have explained the rule like this: If one spouse owns a company that had a $5 million loss in 2018 and the other spouse made $5 million from stock market investments, this limitation meant that the couple's taxable income was $4.5 million (not zero, if the loss were allowed to fully cancel out the income). The other $4.5 million in losses, however, could be carried forward to use in future years. Provisions in the CARES Act temporarily suspended that limitation until the start of 2021, according to an analysis of legislative records by Snopes. In other words, the IRS is legally obligated to count excess losses from businesses that it otherwise wouldn't have and provide them with "the same treatment as if the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act had not been enacted," according to attorneys with the international law firm Foley and Lardner. Additionally, the provisions change the timeline of the 2017 law and allow for the new standard to retroactively apply, enabling businesses to report losses in 2018 and 2019 against the past five years. Those taxpayers, however, would likely need to amend their 2018 and 2019 tax returns if they have already been filed to see any changes, according to the tax consulting firm Calvetti Ferguson. Since the modification under the CARES Act only applies until December 31, 2020, the 2017 law will take effect the following year. Here's how that change to the tax code is relevant to the claim: Americans who earn $1 million or more will benefit the most from the temporary suspension of the deduction limit, according to an analysis by the nonpartisan congressional body, the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT). In early April 2020, Whitehouse and Doggett requested the committee to research "the distributional effects" of the provision within the CARES Act. Later, the committee's chief of staff, Thomas Barthold, shared its findings in a letter to the congressmen, including the caveat: "There is, of course, a great deal of uncertainty about the economic effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, and how those economic effects will translate into business losses for individuals. The revenue estimate represents our best effort to give Congress useful information about the potential scale of revenue changes associated with this provision." The letter included a table showing what class of Americans will receive what percentage of benefits from the amendment to the 2017 tax law. The table shows that almost 82% of the provision's benefits will go toward about 43,000 Americans who earn $1 million or more annually. Put another way, hedge-fund investors and owners of real estate businesses are "far and away" the two prime beneficiaries of the change to the 2017 tax law, Steve Rosenthal, a tax expert at the nonpartisan Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, told The Washington Post. The JCT also found that suspending the limitation for "pass-through" businesses will cost taxpayers about $90 billion in 2020 alone, the Post reported. Using those numbers, you can do back-of-the-napkin math to estimate the amount of money the country's wealthiest population could reduce from their tax burden as a result of the change (82% of $90 billion): about $73.8 billion. Then, if you divide that total by the estimated number of impacted Americans who earn $1 million or more (43,000), you end up with an average of $1,716,279—or about $1.7 million—each. "If you take the reports' calculations at face value, that means that, on average, each of the eligible taxpayers would get a windfall of ~$1.7 million!" Forbes contributor Shahar Ziv wrote. Clearly, not all of those earning only $1 million will receive a $1.7 million tax cut; however, just as some may receive less than the $1.7 million, some may benefit much more. In sum, given that U.S. millionaires won't receive stimulus payments based on their income under the CARES Act but rather that the Act's provisions enable those Americans to take advantage of a temporary tax relief—potentially to the tune of $1.7 million on average—we rate this claim as a "Mixture" of true and false information.

FMD_test_964

Did a Homebuyer Discover a Barn Full of Classic Cars on His Property?

07/19/2007

One of the many "fortunate discovery" scenarios people sometimes fantasize about involves taking possession of a dwelling and turning up something of great value left behind by a previous resident perhaps a forgotten stash of currency, discarded coins that were once common but are now worth a pretty penny to collectors, jewelry hidden away and never retrieved, etc. Purchasing an old farmhouse and discovering the property included a barn stuffed full with a few hundred vintage automobiles is a reverie probably outside the range of even the most optimistic daydreamer's imaginings, but that's the backstory that was created to enliven a set of photographs circulated in early 2007 that showed an "eclectic collection of old cars in a decaying building." A dream come true. A NY man retired. He wanted to use his retirement money wisely, so it would last, and decided to buy a home and a few acres in Portugal. The modest farmhouse had been vacant for 15yrs.; the owner and wife both had died, and there were no heirs. The house was sold to pay taxes. There had been several lookers, but the large barn had steel doors, and they had been welded shut. Nobody wanted to go to the extra expense to see what was in the barn, and it wasn't complimentary to the property anyway..... so, nobody made an offer on the place. The NY guy bought it at just over half of the property's worth, moved in, and set about to tear in to the barn..... curiosity was killing him. So, he and his wife bought a generator, and a couple of grinders..... and cut thru the welds. What was in the barn...............? The referenced pictures (the full set is viewable here) were indeed taken in a barn somewhere in Portugal, but the "lucky find" aspect of the story doesn't quite ring true. As Tom Cotter of Sports Car Market magazine noted when he looked into this story: here Huge collections of cars don't just happen. Cars are accumulated sometimes lovingly, sometimes not by someone with a purpose. I was sure this collection was not assembled by accident; nobody would simply sell an old farm and fail to mention to the new owners the stash of old cars in the barn. What Cotter found out by tracking down the photographer was that the owner of the barn (and the 180 or so vintage cars contained within) was not a lucky buyer who had just purchased the property and was astonished to find a treasure trove in one of the farm buildings. The owner was an automobile dealer in the 1970s and 1980s who had built up an assemblage of cars over the years and stashed it in the barn (locking and soldering the doors shut when the structure was full) and who simply hired a photographer to document his collection: I was eventually able to contact the photographer who was contracted by the cars' owner to shoot the photographs that would ultimately appear on millions of car-guy computer monitors beginning on January 20 [2007]. Manuel Menezes Morais shot the photos, but he was sworn to secrecy about the cars' location and the owner's name. However, he was able to obtain permission from the elusive owner to give me the following information: The owner of the cars was a car dealer in the 1970s and 1980s, and decided to save the more interesting cars that came through his doors. When the barn was full, he padlocked and "soldered" the doors shut. (Perhaps welding was too permanent.) Web sites varied on the number of cars: 58, 100, and 180 were speculated. According to Morais, there are 180 cars in the barn. And, aw shucks, none of the cars is for sale. A partial inventory of the various models of automobiles stored in the barn can be viewed here. here Cotter, Tom. "Portuguese Barn Find: Fact or Fiction?" Sports Car Market. May 2007.

FMD_test_965

Was an image of Patti LaBelle utilized by Fox News in their homage to Aretha Franklin?

08/17/2018

On 16 August 2018, Aretha Franklin, the iconic Grammy Award-winning singer known as the "Queen of Soul," passed away at the age of 76. As fans took to social media to share their memories of the late soul singer, many of them noticed a curious graphic that had been shared by the official Fox News Twitter account. The news network used the same graphic in their television broadcast about Franklin's death. This graphic was of particular interest because while the foreground picture is that of Aretha Franklin, the woman in the green jacket seen in the background is not the Queen of Soul. That is actually an image of singer Patti LaBelle performing at the "Women of Soul: In Performance at the White House" concert in 2014. Zachary Pleat (@zpleat) tweeted, "Yep here's video pic.twitter.com/IIkMDuKB7e" on August 16, 2018. Jessica Santostefano, Vice President of the Media Desk at Fox News, issued an apology for the mistake, stating, "We sincerely apologize to Aretha Franklin's family and friends. Our intention was to honor the icon using a secondary image of her performing with Patti LaBelle in the full-screen graphic, but the image of Ms. Franklin was obscured in that process, which we deeply regret." LaBelle and Franklin both performed at a 2014 White House concert, but the network's explanation for the error seemed questionable to some viewers because Franklin didn't appear at all in the photograph of LaBelle that formed the basis of the graphic. The original photograph, which was taken during LaBelle's performance of "Somewhere Over the Rainbow" by Reuters photographer Jonathan Ernst, can be seen below.

FMD_test_966

Did a Jury Find That a Cop Had Lied About a Fatal Shooting, But Brett Kavanaugh Threw Out the Verdict?

10/01/2018

At 1:30 a.m. on the morning of March 23, 2002, a 41-year-old dental surgery student was shot and killed by an off-duty police officer while pulling his car from a parking lot in front of a D.C.-area apartment complex. In the middle of the night in March 2002, Brian Hundley and a woman were in a car parked outside an apartment complex in Washington, D.C. Off-duty Metropolitan Police Department Officer Marcus Gaines tapped on the window of the car as he walked past. Hundley, who was in the driver's seat, began to drive the car in the direction of Officer Gaines. Officer Gaines pulled his gun, yelled "police," and ordered Hundley to stop and get out of the car. Hundley complied and exited the car. According to Officer Gaines, while Hundley was standing outside the car, he suddenly moved his right hand from behind his back and began lunging toward Officer Gaines, who was about 10 to 15 feet away. In apparent self-defense, Officer Gaines shot and killed Hundley. The Hundley family brought a civil suit against Gaines, another officer, and the District of Columbia in three separate areas: first, a tort law claim of assault and battery based on the officer's fatal shot; second, a violation of the Fourth Amendment's ban on excessive force; and third, a tort law claim of negligence based on Gaines' initial stop of Hundley. A jury awarded the Hundley estate $242,000 based on the third claim, ruling that Hundley's death was the result of the officer's negligence in performing this initial traffic stop. Both sides were unhappy with the ruling, according to the Washington Post's 2004 coverage of the trial. The jury found that Officer Marcus Gaines was negligent in the steps leading to the shooting of Brian Hundley, 41, in a Northwest Washington parking lot. However, it rejected the family's bid for more damages, finding that Gaines did not abuse Hundley, violate his civil rights, or inflict emotional distress upon him when he killed him with a single gunshot to the chest. Although the verdict was a victory on paper, Hundley's relatives and lawyers called the amount of the award a bitter insult to Hundley's life and said they would appeal. "It really defies logic," said Carl Hundley, who brought the wrongful death suit on behalf of his late brother. "They found the [traffic] stop was negligent; they found my brother didn't threaten the officer. One is left to wonder if they are just deciding his life had no value." The family's attorney, Gregory L. Lattimer, called the award a "travesty." "A 41-year-old man dies at the police's hands without threatening him or doing anything wrong, and his life is worth $241,000. How are the police allowed to get away with this?" A spokeswoman for the D.C. attorney general's office, which defended the department, said that the jury erred in siding with the family and that the city might seek to overturn the award. On appeal, both the defendants (Officer Gaines et al.) and the plaintiffs (the Hundley family) challenged that ruling, as described in court documents. Hundley's estate challenged the assault and battery and excessive force verdict, arguing that the jury's verdict was inconsistent with the written interrogatory answer. The defendants challenged the judgment for the plaintiffs on the negligence claim. This appeal was heard by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, and the opinion was written by Judge Brett Kavanaugh, who later became President Trump's controversial nominee to the Supreme Court. The crux of the appeal argument centered on jury inconsistency. In the original trial, the jury was asked to rule on the three issues brought to the court and, in what is known as an interrogatory jury question, on the reliability or truth of Officer Gaines' version of events. In addition to asking the jury to render a verdict on the assault and battery and excessive force claims, the judge also instructed the jury to answer a written interrogatory: "Do you find that Brian Hundley was shot after placing his right hand behind his back and then making a lunging motion toward Officer Marcus Gaines?" The written interrogatory tracked Officer Gaines' testimony regarding the apparent self-defense shooting. The jury answered "No." Both the lawyers representing Gaines and the lawyers representing the interests of the Hundley family pointed to this fact as a reason for appeal, as jury inconsistency is valid grounds for appeal under Federal Law. In the Hundley family's case, they argued that the jury's written interrogatory response is inconsistent with the jury's findings for the defendants on the assault and battery and excessive force claims. Gaines et al., on the other hand, pointed to the finding as a reason to reject the damages awarded to the Hundleys by the jury, as their verdict with respect to negligence relied on a narrative the jury themselves said was not truthful. Kavanaugh agreed that the jury verdict was inconsistent: "Two distinct versions of events were presented to the jury. The jury could conclude either that Officer Gaines shot Hundley in self-defense as described by Officer Gaines, or that he shot Hundley without justification. In making their cases to the jury, both sides agreed that liability turned on which version of events the jury believed. Yet the jury found for the defendants [Gaines et al.] on the assault and battery and excessive force claims while simultaneously answering a written interrogatory indicating that the jury did not believe Officer Gaines' version of events. The two answers cannot coexist; they make no sense in the context of the evidence presented in this case." Ultimately, Kavanaugh rendered a 180-degree shift on both sides of this argument. He ruled that because the negligence claim relied on a narrative deemed false by the jury, that charge and the damages awarded because of it should be overturned. This aspect of the decision has led to the online narrative that a jury found that a cop lied but Brett Kavanaugh threw out the verdict. While this meme expresses a factually accurate statement, it tells only a portion of the story. Using the same logic that prompted the reversal of the negligence charge, Kavanaugh also overturned the earlier rulings that did not hold the officer liable for assault or excessive force, remanding that aspect of the case for a new trial. "We agree with Hundley's estate that the jury verdict on the assault and battery and excessive force claims was inconsistent with the jury's answer to the written interrogatory. We agree with the defendants that the negligent stop, as a matter of law, did not proximately cause the shooting death and thus cannot justify the damages for the shooting death. We therefore reverse the judgment of the District Court and remand for a new trial for Hundley's estate on the assault and battery and excessive force claims." It is uncertain if the Hundley family sought a retrial after this ruling or reached a settlement with the defendants. (An email to the lawyer who represented the Hundleys in this matter was not immediately returned.) Regardless, Kavanaugh's ruling did have the effect of reversing a cash settlement given to the Hundley family, but it also allowed for a new trial on the first two claims the Hundleys had lost during their initial trial.

FMD_test_967

Jim Renacci tried to avoid paying taxes on nearly $14 million that he made.

10/22/2012

The congressional contest between Democratic Rep. Betty Sutton and Republican Rep. Jim Renacci is among the nation's most costly and hard-fought races, and it has also devolved into one of the nastiest. After Renacci placed ads accusing Sutton of voting to raise taxes on just about everyone, Sutton fired back with an ad claiming that Renacci supports tax breaks for millionaires like himself and tried to avoid paying taxes on nearly $14 million that he earned. "We play by the rules, but Renacci thinks he's above them," says a male blue-collar worker shown in Sutton's ad. On the same day that Sutton unveiled the ad accusing Renacci of avoiding taxes, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee made a similar assertion in a different ad, which stated: "Renacci tried to skip out on paying over a million in taxes." The tax avoidance claims in Sutton's new ad echo charges that were raised against Renacci in 2010, when he first ran for Congress and defeated Democratic Rep. John Boccieri. They stem from a dispute Renacci had with the Ohio Department of Taxation, which accused him and his wife, Tina, of misreporting their income in 2000 and assessed them nearly $1.4 million in back taxes, interest, and penalties. The Renaccis filed state tax returns claiming they had a loss of $247,336 that year, but auditors determined they actually made $13,730,440. The couple filed a tax appeal when the state assessed them $954,650 in back taxes, $146,938 in interest, and $293,876 in penalties. The quarrel was over Renacci's trust income from an S corporation, which wasn't taxable for several years before Ohio's tax commissioner changed the state's policy. S corporations permit income to be taxed at an individual rate for federal tax purposes and avoid double taxation on corporate income. Renacci was among a group of taxpayers who fought the state decision. He contended that the trust income should have been tax-free and that he had reasonable cause to exclude it on his tax return, according to tax department and court documents. Others dropped their appeals, but Renacci continued to fight, even after a 2006 Ohio Supreme Court ruling in a similar case in which the court stated that the trust income was subject to taxation. In that case, the taxpayers reported their S Corporation income on their 2000 tax return and then unsuccessfully asked for a refund. A 2007 legal brief the state of Ohio filed in Renacci's case observed that nearly all other litigants who created grantor trusts in an attempt to shelter, i.e., exclude their S corporation income from Ohio income taxation, gave up their appeals, and that the Renaccis were almost alone in their persistence. Court records show the Renaccis eventually sent the state more than $1.3 million, but they continue to argue that the $359,822 they paid in penalties and interest was improper. "He was proud of his fight and to have fought till the end, along with many other Ohioans for tax fairness," Renacci spokesman James Slepian told the Plain Dealer in 2010. When asked about Sutton's new ad, Slepian this month called her a desperate politician who knows she's losing and has no record to run on, and said she's engaging in the bogus, gutter politics of recycled personal attacks that have defined her sad career in Congress. Indeed, the charges against Renacci are somewhat recycled. The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees union placed a television ad in 2010 that contained a more extreme version of the charges that Sutton is making. That ad claimed he cheated on his income taxes, that he hid more than $13 million, and was forced to pay $1.4 million in back taxes and penalties. Renacci filed a defamation suit against the union after the ads began to air. Court records show he dropped the case on Feb. 3, 2011, shortly after he took office in Congress. PolitiFact Ohio found a claim in that ad to be Mostly True because Renacci could have disclosed the trust income on his state tax return, as the state warned he should, but he didn't. He also could have paid the taxes and contested the amount, but didn't. And he didn't amend his return, despite an explicit 2002 warning from Ohio's tax Department that he could face penalties for fraud and failure to pay if he didn't. However, Renacci ultimately worked within the system to resolve the case, paid the full amount that was due, and was never charged with tax fraud. The claim in this ad is an easier call. Reams of legal documents show that Renacci battled with the state over trust income from an S corporation, trying to avoid paying taxes on the $13.7 million at issue in the case. On the Truth-O-Meter, Sutton's claim rates True.

FMD_test_968

Says Mike Enzi is getting about 84 percent of his campaign funds from Washington-based PACs. That's more than any senator of either party.

10/30/2013

Some fathers help their daughters by teaching them how to ride a bike. But if youre Dick Cheney, you do it by attacking her political rival on national television. The former vice president appeared on ABCsThis Weekon Oct. 27, 2013, to discuss national security issues, and was asked about the Republican primary battle in Wyoming between incumbent Sen. Mike Enzi and his daughter, Liz Cheney. ThoughLiz Cheney has previously said her father wouldnt be campaigning for her, he didnt pass on the opportunity to take a few shots at Enzi. He accused the three-term senator of getting about 84 percent of his campaign funds from Washington-based PACs, which Cheney said was more than any senator of either party. Enzi is far from the most prestigious, vocal or well-known lawmakers on the Hill. So we were surprised to hear that the three-term senator from Wyoming, of all places, is the upper chambers leader in percentage of donations from PACs. We decided totake a deeper look. Counting PAC money Off the bat, we ran into trouble with the term Washington-based PAC. The Center for Responsive Politics, a nonpartisan group that tracks campaign finance data, noted that most political action committees, but not all, are based in the nations capitol, and its difficult to separate which of Enzis donors are from D.C. What's probably safe to say is that the vast majority are not based in his home state, Viveca Novak at the center told PoltiFact (which is what Cheney was driving at anyway). According to data provided by the Center for Responsive Politics, in the Senate campaign cycle beginning in 2009, Enzi raised $1.64 million, with $1.19 million, or 73 percent, coming from PACs. Thats not the 84 percent figure that Dick Cheney mentioned. Liz Cheneys campaign said they got to 84 percent by including a $74,463 transfer to the campaign from a joint fundraising committee, as well as $826,000 given to Enzis leadership PAC from other political groups. So the Cheney campaign counted those transfers as PAC money, while the center didnt. Using the centers data, Enzis percentage of PAC money is higher than any other senator -- by quite a bit actually. The next closest is Sen. Thad Cochran, R-Miss., who has received 66 percent of his donations from PACs in the last five years. The disparity is even larger over the course of Enzis entire career. Nearly 70 percent of the $6.55 million the Wyoming Republican has raised since 1991 comes from PACs. In second is Sen. Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, at a distant 52 percent. A large chunk of Enzis PAC money comes from congressional leadership groups who are backing the senior senator over Cheneys challenge. He gets quite a bit from health groups, as well -- which isnt surprising, since he has worked prominently on the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee for years. Its not that Enzi is taking more money from PACs than all of his colleagues, but a higher proportion of his money raised is from these outside groups Its worth noting that of the 10 senators who have relied the most on PACs this cycle, nearly all hail from states in the bottom third of the population rankings. Candidates from smaller states have a shallower pool of in-state donors to pull from, pushing them to rely on PACs in their increasingly expensive election fights. Cheney has proven to be a formidable fundraiser, pulling in $1 million between July and September, for her contest against Enzi. Doug Weber at the Center for Responsive Politics had another explanation for Enzis reliance on PACs. Enzi hasn't really raised and spent much in the past, Weber said in an email. His 2002 and 1996 elections were the cheapest Senate victories of their cycle. So it may be a function of a modest fundraising effort -- raising from individuals involves a lot more work. (Republican House Speaker John) Boehner raised more from individuals just this year than Enzi has since 1989. And even though Enzi tops this list, hes far from the most prolific fundraiser in Washington. In the current Congress,hes 356th in money raised, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Enzis campaign didnt deny Cheneys claims. While spokeswoman Kristin Walker noted that two-thirds of Enzis individual donors in the last cycle were from Wyoming, she added he has always raised the money he needed to be competitive. Our ruling While Dick Cheney differed from our nonpartisan sources on the final number, the fact remains he was right: Enzi has received a higher proportion of his money from PACs than anyone in the Senate. Its more a product of circumstancesEnzis from a small state and hes facing a strong challengerthan evidence that Enzi has gone Washington, as Cheney was implying. We rate it Mostly True.

FMD_test_969

Says he is the only candidate in the race for Clackamas County Chair who will refuse to join the Public Employees Retirement System.

05/08/2012

Wilsonville businessman John Ludlow is in a four-way race for Clackamas County Commission Chair in next week's election. He says that he is the only candidate in the race who will refuse to join the Public Employees Retirement System.Is he the only candidate in the race to make such a promise? Perhaps just as important a question: Are elected officials even able to decline joining the retirement system?The Public Employees Retirement System is a hot-button issue with critics who claim it eats way too much money, hurting taxpayers to benefit public employees. The retirement program is open to participating employers, from the state of Oregon to school districts and cities.We turned to Paul Cleary, the retirement system's executive director. He pointed toOregon Revised Statutes 238A.100 (2): A person who is elected or appointed to an office with a fixed term ...may elect not to become a member of the pension program by giving the Public Employees Retirement Board written notice not later than 30 days after taking office. The trick here, says Cleary, is that for a person to decline membership, that person cannot have been a PERS member, ever. Ludlow is a former Wilsonville city councilor and served as Wilsonvilles mayor from 1989 to 1991, but received no retirement benefits from his time in public office.Ludlow, 63, says he has never been a member of PERS, and the Public Employees Retirement System confirms he is not a member.The other Clackamas County commission chair candidates are members of the Public Employees Retirement System. They are county Chairwoman Charlotte Lehan, county Commissioner Paul Savas, and state Rep. Dave Hunt. They cannot opt out. Savas said he never knew he could decline to join.He is the only candidate who will refuse, and who can refuse, to join PERS. We expect Ludlow to keep his promise if he wins, and we rate his statement True.

FMD_test_970

Cell Phone Guns

03/03/2016

On 26 February 2016, Facebook user Karl de la Guerra published an "Officer Warning" post alongside several pictures showing a gun disguised as a cell phone, which was presented as a threat to police. The photographs were shared tens of thousands of times, often as a warning to officers to remain vigilant, but the pictured item was neither illegal nor widely available at the time. According to the Facebook page "IDEAL Conceal Patent Pending," the depicted weapon was marketed to licensed gun owners as a discreet method of carrying: "We invented a new style of self-defense. It looks like a cellphone when folded up, but push the safety and you are ready to defend yourself." On 22 February 2016, the page posted an image indicating that the manufacturer advocated the guns to protect (not harm) police officers: "YEPPER!" posted by IDEAL Conceal - patent pending on Monday, February 22, 2016. In a separate post, the company responded to a user interested in purchasing the concept gun: "Prototype phase is finishing up, production mid-2016." Subsequent comments indicated that the concept was marketed at gun enthusiasts, not criminals: "What you're seeing is a 3D model. Production will begin mid-summer. Planning to show the first prototype in May at the NRA show in Louisville!! STAY TUNED!" IDEAL Conceal's website listed a projected price ($395) and a target market: "Specializing in concealed weaponry, we aim to deliver a high-quality handgun that can be deployed very quickly for the defense of you or your family. The idea for Ideal Conceal follows the present-day demand for handguns that people can carry on a day-to-day basis, in a manner that makes carrying a gun easy to do. From soccer moms to professionals of every type, this gun allows you the option of not being a victim. Our mission is to promote security and public safety by designing and manufacturing innovative and unparalleled products engineered to protect..." The unrivaled Ideal Conceal pistol is a carefully engineered double-barreled derringer, cunningly designed to look like a smartphone when folded up; one click of the safety and you're ready to go. This product is a defensive weapon designed with the utmost safety in mind. On 28 February 2016, de la Guerra posted an update about his original claim (but didn't delete the first one): "Friday morning I posted some information I found in a foreign publication regarding a .380 double-barrel pistol designed to appear like a cell phone. As those of you who have followed me on FB for a while know, I regularly post information on dangerous items that can potentially cause harm to those in public safety. This is merely an extension of my work as a protective services instructor. Since I posted that last piece of information, the FB friend requests I have received have rapidly increased. And since I know none of these people, I can only assume that they took an interest in my post. In some cases, it appears that interest is of a negative context. To further clarify my position, I have taken the liberty of posting a FB message I received this morning (no names mentioned) and my associated response." The rumor strongly resembled earlier warnings about purported Super Soaker modifications as "new gang trends," or a claim that gang members were removing lug nuts from officers' vehicles. All instances seemed to involve warnings rooted in things folks imagined criminals might be doing, rather than information about things that criminals actually were doing. IDEAL Conceal told us that the device was designed for officers (and others) to carry guns discreetly and legally, and that the manufacturers are strong supporters of law enforcement: "Thanks so much for taking the time to contact us. We totally support law enforcement. Further, we would never promote or make a product for ambushing anyone, let alone police. In fact, we have received MANY requests from Law Enforcement to purchase this weapon for undercover and off-duty officers. This gun is for people who need or want to carry to protect themselves. Also, this pistol cannot be fired from the closed position as people assume. This is just an everyday type of conceal carry handgun. Also, it is not even on the market yet. It will come out mid-2016. Thanks again for contacting us. Hopefully, you can help correct this dreadful rumor." The gun's makers expressed support for both police and the National Rifle Association, and the stealth gun didn't appear to be in any way a covert criminal effort to get the jump on cops. Also, people reaching for actual phones and wallets have been shot by officers in the past, making the premise that carrying a phone-shaped gun in your pocket was an effective way to target police officers extremely shaky. However, cell phone guns were not unheard of before this. In the past fifteen years, various warnings have been sounded about guns disguised as phones (and other everyday objects), but this is the first time that they appear to have been marketed to mainstream gun enthusiasts in the United States.

FMD_test_971

Golf Club Gift

07/20/2007

Claim: A legendary golfer is rewarded by a sultan with the gift of a golf club. LEGEND Examples: [Osteen, 2004] Years ago, a famous golfer was invited by the king of Saudi Arabia to play in a golf tournament. He accepted the invitation, and the king flew his private jet over to the United States to pick up the pro. They played golf for several days, and enjoyed a good time. As the golfer was getting on the plane to return to the United States, the king stopped him and said, "I want to give you a gift for coming all this way and making this time so special. Anything you want. What could I get you?" Ever the gentleman, the golfer replied, "Oh, please; don't get me anything. You've been a gracious host. I've had a wonderful time. I couldn't ask for anything more." The king was adamant. He said, "No, I insist on giving you something so you will always remember your journey to our country." When the golfer realized that the king was resolute, he said, "Okay, fine. I collect golf clubs. Why don't you give me a golf club?" He boarded the plane, and on his flight back home, he couldn't help wondering what kind of golf club the king might give him. He imagined that it might be a solid gold putter with his name engraved on it. Or maybe it would be a sand wedge studded with diamonds and jewels. After all, this would be a gift from the oil-rich king of Saudi Arabia. When the golfer got home, he watched the mail and the delivery services every day, to see if his golf club had come yet. Finally, several weeks later, he received a certified letter from the king of Saudi Arabia. TheU.S. professional thought that rather strange. Where's my golf club? he wondered. He opened the envelope, and to his surprise, inside he discovered a deed to a five-hundred-acre golf course in America. [Collected via e-mail, July 2006] I heard a rumor that Arnold Palmer was once asked by a Saudi king to come and play golf with him. Palmer wasn't sure if he should go, but his friends convinced him. As he was playing the king told him he wanted to give him a gift for coming to play with him. Palmer declined, but the king was persistent. Palmer said he could give him a golf club. The king said he would send it to him. After returning home Palmer got to wondering what the club would look like. Solid gold? Diamond studded? The package arrived, but it was not the size of a golf club. Palmer opened it and found the keys and a deed to a golf club (resort). Origins: How old is old? This story about a wealthy patron and his gift of a golf club has been kicking around at least since 1949, when it appeared in Reader's Digest: Lowell Thomas tells about an explorer who brought an Indian maharajah some gifts which were unobtainable in Asia. The grateful potentate wanted to reciprocate, and after much pleading he finally got the explorer to suggest: "Oh, well, if in your travels around England you happen to find any golf clubs, buy a few for me." Later the maharajah reported: "I've bought two golf clubs for you. Both have 18 holes, and one even has a swimming pool. But I have a disappointment for you. St. Andrews refuses to sell." Some urban legends are "wish fulfillment" tales, accounts wherein those who have acted in especially kindly or well-mannered ways are unexpectedly rewarded with expensive gifts by the well-heeled but previously unrecognized folks they'd assisted. One story of this sort tells of a good-hearted motorist who stops to render aid to the occupants of a limousine that has broken down, and for his troubles the millionaire who was riding in that vehicle pays off the chap's mortgage. That hoary moral lesson on the value of being kind to others has been trotted out about many famous people (or their wives) over the years, including Donald Trump, Bill Gates, Mrs. Perry Como, and Mrs. Nat King Cole. mortgage The "gift of a golf club" story is another tale of this ilk, in which once again a beneficent wealthy person over-rewards for a service received, this time with a multi-million dollar piece of real estate rather than the far more mundane and less expensive item requested. Also worked into this yarn is a common belief about the mega-rich, that they live and spend on so different a plane from the rest of us that the term "golf club" would naturally prompt them to think in terms of clubhouses and greens, while their less financially fortunate counterparts would be mentally conjuring up putters and drivers. (Of course, since golf is played with a set of clubs, it would be rather unusual for a golfer to state that he'd like a club without specifying which one [e.g., a 3-wood, a 7-iron, a putter], a detail that would eliminate the ambiguity necessary for this legend to work. Hence some versions, such as the first example quoted above, note that the golfer is also a "collector" of clubs and thus unconcerned about which single club his benefactor might provide him.) The "golf club" story is similar to a joke presented as a diary entry made by Bill Gates, a man often used in illustrative stories as verbal shortform for "very wealthy person" (in the same way Albert Einstein is used for "very smart person"). Says that bogus diary entry: "Memo to self Next time, when my wife says we need to buy china, she means dishes." Barbara "peking into the lives of the rich and famous" Mikkelson Last updated: 9 October 2013 Fun Fare: A Treasury of Reader's Digest Wit and Humor. Pleasantville, N.Y.: Reader's Digest Association Inc., 1949 (p. 230).

FMD_test_972

Ode to the Welfare State

01/08/2012

Claim: Image shows an "Ode to the Welfare State" published in a 1949 newspaper. Examples: [Collected via e-mail, January 2012] Imagine. (62) years ago someone saw it coming.Now we have (50) million on welfare Origins: On 3 November 1949, President Harry Truman appeared in St. Paul, Minnesota, in conjunction with that state's Truman Day Celebration, and that evening he delivered an address to local residents on the subject of opposition to Democratic efforts to promote the general welfare, stating (in part): address We know that there will be more prosperity for all if all groups have a fair share of the wealth of the country. We know that the country will achieve economic stability and progress only if the benefits of our production are widely distributed among all its citizens. We believe that it is the Federal Government's obligation, under the Constitution, to promote the general welfare of all our people and not just a privileged few. The policies we advocate are based on these convictions. We maintain that farmers, like businessmen, should receive a fair price for the products they sell. We maintain that workers are entitled to good wages and to equality of bargaining power with their employers. We believe that cooperatives and small business should have a fair opportunity to achieve success, and should not be smothered by monopolies. We hold that our great natural resources should be protected and developed for the benefit of all our people, and not exploited for private greed. We believe that old people and the disabled should have an assured income to keep them from being dependent on charity. We believe that families should have protection against loss of income resulting from accident, illness, or unemployment. We hold that our citizens should have decent housing at prices they can afford to pay. We believe in assuring educational opportunities for all our young people in order that we may have an enlightened citizenry. We believe in better health and medical care for everyone not for just a few. We hold that all Americans are entitled to equal rights and equal opportunities under the law, and to equal participation in our national life, free from fear and discrimination. Now, my friends, these are the policies that spell the progress for all our people. President Truman's remarks ostensibly prompted the New York Daily News to dub his address a "pie-for-everybody" speech and publish the following "Ode to a Welfare State" in response: Father, must I go to work? No, my lucky sonWe're living on Easy Street On dough from Washington We've left it up to Uncle Sam, So don't get exercisedNobody has to give a damn We've all been subsidized But if Sam treats us all so well And feeds us milk and honeyPlease, daddy, tell me what the hell He's going to use for money Don't worry, bub, there's not a hitch In this here noble plan He simply soaks the filthy rich And helps the common man But father, won't there come a time When they run out of cashAnd we have left them not a dime When things will go to smash? My faith in you is shrinking, son, You nosy little brat;You do too damn much thinking, son To be a Democrat. As often happens with many popular political items even in today's era of the Internet, the "Ode to a Welfare State" poem gained currency in late 1949/early 1950 as it was republished in various newspapers across the country, sometimes as an editorial piece and sometimes through reader submission. For example, it turned up in the Hagerstown, Maryland, Morning Herald on 20 December 1949: As another example, the ode was submitted to the Los Angeles Times Last updated: 9 February 2015

FMD_test_973

Did Pence Deliver Empty PPE Boxes to a Rehabilitation Center?

05/08/2020

Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease. In May 2020, a video supposedly showing Vice President Mike Pence delivering empty boxes that were supposed to be filled with personal protective equipment (PPE) to the Woodbine Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center in Alexandria, Virginia, was featured on the show "Jimmy Kimmel Live." A clip of this segment was later shared on social media along with the caption: "Mike Pence caught on hot mic delivering empty boxes of PPE for a PR stunt." This is genuine footage of Pence. However, it does not show him "caught on hot mic" admitting that he just delivered a bunch of empty boxes to a health care facility. This video actually shows Pence making a humorous quip after delivering boxes that were truly filled with PPE. The full video from C-Span shows Pence transporting several boxes from a truck to the door of the health care center. After unloading the boxes from his dolly, Pence returns to the truck to grab another round of boxes but is informed by someone that the remaining boxes are empty. Pence then jokes that he should carry one of the empty boxes for the cameras. The man replies with a quip of his own, saying that the empty ones are much easier to carry than the full ones, which draws laughter from the crowd. Pence then closes the van door. You can see this exchange around the 9-minute mark of the following video from C-Span: https://www.c-span.org/video/?471876-1/vice-president-pence-delivers-ppe-woodbine-rehabilitation-center. We reached out to the Woodbine Rehabilitation Center to confirm that it had received PPE from the vice president. While we have yet to receive a response, the facility did post a message on Facebook to thank Pence and his team. Jon Thompson, a spokesperson for the vice president, called the claim that Pence was delivering empty boxes "absolute garbage" in a tweet. Coleman, Justine. "Pence Delivers PPE to Alexandria Nursing Home." The Hill. 7 May 2020. C-Span. "Vice President Pence Delivers PPE to Woodbine Rehabilitation Center." 7 May 2020.

FMD_test_974

People haven't had a raise -- 90 percent of Americans have not had a raise for 40 years.

10/16/2019

San Francisco hedge fund billionaire Tom Steyer is perhaps best known for his TV ads calling for President Trumps impeachment. At his first debate appearance as a Democratic presidential candidate last night in Ohio, Steyer repeated his call to remove what he termed the criminal in the White House. But he also railed against income inequality, leading fellow Democratic contender Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar to quip: ... no one on this stage wants to protect billionaires. Not even the billionaire wants to protect billionaires. Steyers claim that caught our attention was that the vast majority of Americans havent received a raise for decades. I would undo every Republican tax cut for rich people and major corporations, Steyer promised. But there's something else going on here that is absolutely shameful, and that's the way the money gets split up in terms of earnings. As a result of taking away the rights of working people and organized labor, people haven't had a raise -- 90 percent of Americans have not had a raise for 40 years. Was his claim about raises accurate? We set out on a fact check. PolitiFacts analysis We turned toPolitiFacts analysisin April of a similar claim made by Democratic presidential contender and South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg. Well place a rating on Steyers claim based on what PolitiFact found. Since 1973, the income of the bottom 90 percent, so pretty much all of us, didnt budge, or even retreated a little bit, Buttigieg claimed. PolitiFact investigated whether income levels for most people -- adjusted for inflation, which economists consider a necessity for such comparisons -- havent increased since 1973. It found that income levels have actually risen beyond inflation during that period, but the share of income taken by the bottom 90 percent hews pretty closely to what Buttigieg said. It rated the mayors claim Half True, meaning it is partially accurate but leaves out important details or takes things out of context. CBO data shows income growth In its fact check, PolitiFact revieweddata from the Congressional Budget Office, the nonpartisan number-crunching arm of Congress, covering 1979 to 2015, most of the period in question. The figures CBO used were adjusted for inflation and federal taxes, but not for state and local taxes. They showed income growth for people in four different economic ranges: the lowest 20 percent of the income distribution, the middle 60 percent, the 81st percentile to the 99th percentile, and the top 1 percent. They didnt mirror Buttigiegs precise parameters, but economists said they are useful for showing whether the mayor was broadly right or not, PolitiFact reported. Heres a chart showing the CBO data: The top 1 percent, in red, has the most unique and most impressive growth. The other income groups show positive but much slower growth, after adjusting for inflation. This undercuts Buttigiegs assertion that for most people, income didnt budge, or even retreated a little bit, since the 1970s, PolitiFact said. Other data supports the claims by Buttigieg and Steyer. Inflation-adjustedfigures from the Economic Policy Institute, for example, show clear wage stagnation for the bottom 60 percent of the income scale. The rate did go up for the 70 and 80 percent levels, which means the 90 percent figure would be a bit exaggerated. PolitiFact also cited theWorld Inequality Database. It shows the bottom 50 percent and the next 40 percent -- essentially the 90 percent that Buttigieg cited -- have taken declining shares of the nations income since 1973. By contrast, both the top 10 percent and the top 1 percent have seen their shares grow. When we asked Steyers campaign for evidence supporting his claim, it pointed to anAugust report by the Pew Research Center. It found todays real average wage, defined as the wage after accounting for inflation, has had some ups and downs, but has about the same purchasing power it did 40 years ago. And what wage gains there have been have mostly flowed to the highest-paid tier of workers. Our ruling Tom Steyer claimed at the Democratic presidential debate in Ohio that, People haven't had a raise -- 90 percent of Americans have not had a raise for 40 years. PolitiFact in Aprilfact-checkeda similar claim by South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg: Since 1973, the income of the bottom 90 percent, so pretty much all of us, didnt budge, or even retreated a little bit. It found that income for every group, as calculated by the Congressional Budget Office, has actually increased beyond the rate of inflation since the 1970s. However, another measurement -- the share of income taken by the bottom 90 percent -- has indeed declined since 1973. It rated the mayors claim Half True. We agreed with PolitiFacts assessment and rated Steyers claim Half True, as well. HALF TRUE The statement is partially accurate but leaves out important details or takes things out of context. Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check.

FMD_test_975

Is Only 9% of the American Rescue Plan Related to COVID-19?

03/12/2021

Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And, please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease. fighting Find out Read Submit Become a Founding Member CDC WHO On March 11, 2021, U.S. President Joe Biden signed the American Rescue Plan, a $1.9 trillion stimulus package to provide relief to Americans who have been struggling during the COVID-19 pandemic. In the days leading up to this bill's passage, a number of Republican lawmakers and pundits criticized the bill, arguing that only 9% of the relief package had anything to do with COVID-19. signed Conservative author Melisa Tate, for example, wrote on Twitter that the bill "only gives 9% to the American people" while the rest went to politicians and their cronies. Sen. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., said that she voted against the "COVID relief" bill because "only 9% of this bill is COVID-related" while "the rest is allocated to liberal pet projects and blue state bailouts." Twitter voted against The claim that only 9% of the $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan is going to COVID relief is largely false. The vast majority of this bill will provide financial relief to people, businesses, and governments who have struggled during the COVID-19 pandemic. The argument that only 9% of the measure will go to COVID relief appears to be an exaggeration of the fact that the American Rescue Plan will provide approximately $160 billion (about 8.5% of the total) for testing, protective gear, vaccine production and distribution, and other measures to directly combat the virus. $160 billion (about 8.5% of the total) for testing While it's true that only about 9% of this bill goes to fighting the virus directly, that figure does not include the vast majority of funds aimed at providing financial relief to those who have struggled through the pandemic. For example, the 9% does not include the most famous part of the American Rescue Plan, the $1,400 stimulus checks for individuals, which is expected to amount to around $400 billion (or about 21% of the total). This 9% figure also doesn't account for items such as unemployment insurance, a child tax care credit, funding for schools to re-open, rent assistance, and other measures aimed at providing relief to Americans. $400 billion account for items Sen. Angus King, I-Maine, told NPR that there were two parts to the American Rescue Plan. The first dealt with combating COVID directly, while the second aimed at dealing with the financial crisis that resulted from the pandemic: NPR "There are really two pieces to this bill. One is directly related to the health crisis, but the other, and the larger piece, is related to the economic crisis that the health crisis has created." The vast majority of the American Rescue Plan is concerned with providing relief to people, businesses, and governments that have suffered during the COVID-19 pandemic. According to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, about $300 billion (or 15% of the bill) "is spent on long-standing policy priorities that are not directly related to the current crisis." In other words, about 85% of the bill is related specifically to the impacts of COVID-19. Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget In short: The American Rescue Plan is a multi-faceted, $1.9 trillion to bill that provides financial relief to those struggling during the COVID-19 pandemic. While it's true that only 9% of this funding will be used to directly combat the virus (via vaccine distribution and other health measures), this bill provides relief to Americans in several other ways. The $1,400 COVID-19 relief checks, for example, account for more than 20% of this $1.9 trillion bill.

FMD_test_976

Did President Trump Share a Photo of a 'Bikers for Trump' Member with a Nazi Tattoo?

08/13/2018

On 11 August 2018, President Trump welcomed members of the "Bikers for Trump" group to the Trump National Golf Course in Bedminster, New Jersey. Shortly afterwards a supposed tweet from President Trump featuring an image of one of the "Bikers for Trump" bearing an apparent Nazi 'SS' tattoo started making its way around online: welcomed online The text shown above was taken from a tweet posted by President Trump, but that tweet did not include the photograph seen above. The President posted four photographs from the Bedminster event, none of which (as far as we can tell) prominently featured a biker with a Nazi tattoo on his arm. Here's a screenshot of President Trump's actual tweet: actual tweet The biker photograph itself was snapped by Lauren Hudgins at the right-wing "Patriot Prayer" rally held in Portland, Oregon, a week before Trump's Bedminster event: Patriot Prayer This is one of the dudes I saw today at the #PatriotPrayer rally with just straight up Nazi tattoos. pic.twitter.com/hI5nMiizqr #PatriotPrayer pic.twitter.com/hI5nMiizqr Lauren Hudgins (@lehudgins) August 5, 2018 August 5, 2018 It's unknown exactly who first combined President Trump's tweet with the photograph of the "Bikers for Trump" member bearing the apparent Nazi tattoo, but that idea was suggested by Twitter user @ASchmalbert shortly after Trump posted his message about the bikers' visit to Bedminster (although that suggestion did not state that the resulting mash-up should necessarily be cast as something the President himself had tweeted in its entirety): The pictured tattoo appears to be an SS Bolt, a white supremacist symbol derived from Schutzstaffel (SS) paramilitary organization in Nazi Germany. (Some social media users offered that the tattooed "SS" was just the latter part of a larger tattoo showing the KISS rock band's somewhat similar logo. This argument doesn't appear to be valid, however, as the SS symbol in the biker's photograph does not appear to be preceded by the letter "I.") symbol The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) noted that while SS Bolts are symbols commonly used by white supremacists and neo-Nazis, it's difficult to determine a user's intent based solely on a picture: noted The SS bolts are typically used as a symbol of white supremacy, but there is one context in which this is not necessarily always so. Decades ago, some outlaw biker gangs appropriated several Nazi-related symbols, including the SS bolts, essentially as shock symbols or symbols of rebellion or non-conformity. Thus SS bolts in the context of the outlaw biker subculture does not necessarily denote actual adherence to white supremacy. However, because there are a number of racists and full-blown white supremacists within the outlaw biker subculture, sometimes it actually is used as a symbol of white supremacy. Often the intended use and meaning of the SS bolts in this context is quite ambiguous and difficult to determine. The photograph of the "Bikers for Trump" member with an 'SS' tattoo on his arm was taken in Portland, Oregon, during a "Patriot Prayer" rally. That photograph was not shared by President Trump, nor did any other information suggest the same person was in attendance at the 'Bikers for Trump' rally in Bedminster, New Jersey. Stanglin, Doug. "Portland Protests: Police Use 'Flash Bangs' at Right-Wing Rally That Drew Counterprotesters." USA Today. 4 August 2018. My Central Jersey. "Bikers for Trump Meet with President in Bedminster." 12 August 2018. ADL. "SS Bolts." Retrieved 13 August 2018.

FMD_test_977

John McCain's description of 'Rich'

09/13/2008

Claim: John McCain said he would define the income level that divides the middle class from the rich as $5 million. Example: [Collected via e-mail, September 2008] I have heard many times that John McCain said (paraphrasing his comment, I'm sure) that the middle class includes people who make under $5 million. I am trying to find that in print to forward to relatives who say it is untrue. Origins: On August 16, 2008, presidential candidates Barack Obama and John McCain made back-to-back appearances at the Presidential Candidates Forum held at Saddleback Church in Lake Forest, California, where they responded to questions posed by Pastor Rick Warren. During that forum, Pastor Warren asked both candidates to define "rich" for the purposes of taxation (although, since the candidates appeared separately, the question was not posed to both of them with the same wording). To Democratic candidate Barack Obama, Pastor Warren said: "OK. Taxes, this is a real simple question. Define rich. I mean give me a number. Is it $50,000, $100,000, $200,000? Everybody keeps talking about who we're going to tax. How can you define that?" Senator Obama didn't quite answer the question directly, stating that an income level of less than $150,000 per year was middle class and that his tax plan would call for a "modest increase" in taxes for those making more than $250,000 per year: "Look, here's how I think about it. And this is reflected in my tax plan. If you are making $150,000 a year or less as a family, then you're middle class or you may be poor. But $150,000 down, you're basically middle class; it obviously depends on the region where you're living. I would argue that if you're making more than $250,000, then you're in the top three percent, four percent of this country. You're doing well. Now, these things are all relative. And I'm not suggesting that everybody making over $250,000 is living on easy street. But the question that I think we have to ask ourselves is, if we believe in good schools, if we believe in good roads, if we want to make sure that kids can go to college, if we don't want to leave a mountain of debt for the next generation, then we've got to pay for these things; they don't come for free, and it is irresponsible. I believe it is irresponsible intergenerationally for us to invest or for us to spend $10 billion a month on a war and not have a way of paying for it. That, I think, is unacceptable. So nobody likes to pay taxes. I haven't sold 25 million books, but I've been selling some books lately, and so I write a pretty big check to Uncle Sam. Nobody likes it. What I can say is that under the approach I'm taking, if you make $150,000 or less, you will see a tax cut. If you're making $250,000 a year or more, you're going to see a modest increase. What I'm trying to do is create a sense of balance and fairness in our tax code. One thing I think we can all agree on is that it should be simpler so that you don't have all these loopholes and big stacks of stuff that you've got to comb through, which wastes a huge amount of money and allows special interests to take advantage of things that ordinary people cannot take advantage of. To Republican candidate John McCain, Pastor Warren said: "Ok, on taxes, define 'rich.' Everybody talks about taxing the rich, but not the poor, the middle class. At what point—give me a number, give me a specific number—do you move from middle class to rich? Is it $100,000, is it $50,000, is it $200,000? How does anybody know if we don't know what the standards are?" Senator McCain responded by stating that he didn't think "rich" should be solely defined by income level and that the question was moot because he wanted to cut spending rather than increase taxes on the rich; along the way, he mentioned an income level of $5 million (immediately noting that "I'm sure that comment will be distorted"): "Some of the richest people I've ever known in my life are the most unhappy. I think that rich should be defined by a home, a good job, an education, and the ability to hand to our children a more prosperous and safer world than the one that we inherited. I don't want to take any money from the rich; I want everybody to get rich. I don't believe in class warfare or redistribution of wealth. But I can tell you, for example, there are small businessmen and women who are working 16 hours a day, seven days a week that some people would classify as 'rich,' my friends, and want to raise their taxes and want to raise their payroll taxes. Let's keep taxes low. Let's give every family in America a $7,000 tax credit for every child they have. Let's give them a $5,000 refundable tax credit to go out and get the health insurance of their choice. Let's not have the government take over the health care system in America. So, I think if you are just talking about income, how about $5 million? But seriously, I don't think you can—I don't think seriously that—the point I'm trying to make here, seriously—and I'm sure that comment will be distorted—but the point is that we want to keep people's taxes low and increase revenues. And, my friend, it was not taxes that mattered in America in the last several years. It was spending. Spending got completely out of control. We spent money in a way that mortgaged our kids' futures." Although this item is "true" in the strictly literal sense that John McCain did make the remark attributed to him, how much importance to place upon it is a subjective issue. Predictably, Democrats painted Senator McCain's remarks as indicative of his being out of touch with ordinary Americans and desirous of giving tax breaks to the rich, while the McCain campaign dismissed the candidate's statement as an obvious joke. Meanwhile, economists asked to comment on the issue observed that the definition of "rich" is a murky one, and that the dividing line between "poor" and "middle class" (rather than between "middle class" and "rich") is probably the more significant one. Economists said in interviews that neither candidate was wrong because there are no agreed-upon definitions for the terms that describe income segments. "To be fair to both of them, 'rich' is an adjective," said James P. Smith, a senior economist at the Rand Corp., a nonpartisan think tank in Santa Monica. "Economic science is not going to tell you that 'this' is the cutoff point." Yet the $5 million level, Smith said, includes "almost nobody." Experts said that of all the households in the nation, fewer than one-tenth of 1% had an annual income of $5 million or more. Ken Goldstein, an economist for the Conference Board, a business-research group based in New York, said he would define rich as income of about $500,000 or more. "If you set the bar at half a million, you're talking about the top 1% of taxpayers. If you think about the last eight years, those are the folks who have benefited the most." Other economists said they would have gone with a lower figure. Even the moderator who asked the question of the candidates, Pastor Rick Warren of Orange County's Saddleback Church, did not seem to anticipate a reply beyond the lower six figures, urging each man to "give me a specific number ... is it $100,000, is it $50,000, is it $200,000?" Most ordinary Americans tend to massage the definitions of such terms in an attempt to crowd themselves into what many consider the least offensive category. "If you do surveys, 95% of people think they are middle class," said Len Burman, director of the Tax Policy Center, a nonpartisan group that has analyzed the candidates' tax proposals. "This includes people who are objectively quite poor and people who are objectively quite rich." Burman added: "I guess it says something nice about America that rich people don't want to act like they're better than anybody else and poor people don't like complaining about how tough it is to pay their bills." Economists tend to spend more time debating the definition of poor, in large part because that cutoff has consequences for an array of social programs designed to assist those whose incomes fall below the poverty line. Last updated: September 13, 2008. Sources: Miller, Greg. "Who's Rich? McCain and Obama Have Very Different Definitions." Los Angeles Times. August 18, 2008. Montopoli, Brian. "DNC Looks to Exploit McCain's '$5 Million' Comment." CBSNews.com. August 19, 2008. Reuters. "Obama Rips McCain for $5 Million 'Rich' Definition." August 18, 2008.

FMD_test_978

Americas hard-working agricultural producers have taken a disproportionate hit when it comes to illegal retaliatory tariffs.

08/09/2018

As President Donald Trumpstrade warwages on, we decided to check in on the most affected sectors. U.S. Agriculture Department Secretary Sonny Perdue said farmers, who will receive $12 billion in aid, were particularly affected by the dispute. Americas hard-working agricultural producers have been treated unfairly by Chinas illegal trading practices and have taken a disproportionate hit when it comes to illegal retaliatory tariffs, Perdue said in a USDApress releaseon July 26. Well leave aside the question of whether the retaliatory tariffs are any more illegal than the initial U.S. tariffs on imports. But we were interested in the second half of his claim: Have agricultural producers taken a disproportionate hit? The Agriculture Department pointed out that 37 percent of U.S. exports facing retaliatory tariffs are agricultural exports. Those are the tariffs as of July 31, 2018 coming from China, the European Union, India, Turkey, Mexico and Canada. Thats disproportionate to the total goods the United State exports: about 10 percent are agricultural goods, according to the USDAs 2017 data. Its hard to measure the exact numbers, though. Thats because tariffs are listed individually by the governments that issue them (in this case, not the United States), and because the United States doesnt keep close tabs on exports. USDA calculated the 37 percent figure using official import customs data from the retaliating partner through a private third party, Global Trade Atlas. Export data is notoriously bad, Laura Baughman, president of the Trade Partnership, told us in July. Its inaccurate because people dont necessarily report it very carefully, since you are not assessing tariffs on exports. However, the agricultural industry is on average much more dependent on world markets than other industries, according to David Laborde, a senior research fellow at the International Food Policy Research Institute. Exports comprise 10 percent of total GDP in the United States, whereas they comprise about 20 percent of GDP in the American agricultural sector. That fraction iseven higherfor crops like cotton (76 percent is exported), soybeans (50 percent) and wheat (46 percent), according to USDA. About 16 to 17 percent of exports to China are agricultural goods, so any conflict with China (like the ongoing one) takes a heavy toll on agriculture, Laborde said. He calculated that 86.8 percent of agricultural exports to China are impacted by retaliatory tariffs while 36.9 percent of the non-agricultural exports are covered. Farmers face two additional aggravators: their products are easily replaceable and theyre an easy political target. One ton of U.S. soybeans is a nearly perfect substitute to one ton of Brazilian soybeans, Laborde pointed out. But high-tech medical equipment (another type of products exported to China) is difficult to substitute, so Chinese consumers are more willing to endure the tariff. And from a political economy point of view, Laborde said it made sense for China to maintain pressure on farmers in particular, as a core constituency for the Trump administration. Perdue said, Americas hard-working agricultural producers have taken a disproportionate hit when it comes to illegal retaliatory tariffs. Its difficult to measure the impact of tariffs on the economy and particularly hard to measure the impact of retaliatory tariffs on exports. That said, the economy sets up agricultural producers to bear the brunt of tariffs. Exports are doubly important for the agricultural sectors GDP as for the countrys GDP. USDA calculated that 37 percent of exports facing tariffs are agricultural goods, whereas agricultural goods comprise 10 percent of total exports. We rate this statement Mostly True.

FMD_test_979

Is the GoFundMe Campaign of Catherine Elizabeth Clennan genuine?

12/28/2016

On 23 December 2016, a woman identifying herself as Catherine Elizabeth Clennan created a GoFundMe campaign destined for viral attention, in which she asked donors to supply her with US$5,000,000 in order to fulfill her "lifelong dream" (of having five million dollars). Clennan's bid for money stated that at 27, she dreamed of one day being independent of her family who "pay for everything" for her. Although she said that she hoped to raise $2,000,000 to buy a home in California, the campaign's goal was set at more than twice that amount: My name is Catherine Elizabeth Clennan and my whole life I have been trying to live by other's definitions of who I 'should be'. I have been trying so hard to live this lie that I came face to face with a choice: either live as others definitions of you and die OR strike out on your own and find for yourself who you really are. Well I chose life. I chose to live by my own definition ... With this choice I am in the process of turning my life in a new direction. Currently I live in Laramie, Wyoming. in a property owned by my family. They pay everything for me - and I am 27 years old. I feel that as long as I live by their definition I am 'taken care of', but this definition is leading me to deaths door - it forces me to live a lie - to turn my back to who I really am; a free spirit, an artist, a woman, a lesbian, a civil rights activist, a woman who goes against the grain, a woman who knows that not everything is as it seems. I need $2,000,000 dollars to purchase my dream home in California. I need the money to help me walk out of the lie that I am living, but more importantly I need the money to live my dream - which is to live as much as my life in the spiritual dimension as possible. The money will go towards the purchase of a new home, new transportation, and the various fees and taxes that accumulate with a move across the country. These funds will help me live the life that I feel I am meant to live, the life I want to live - the life defined not by other people - but by me. These funds will help me break free from the tyranny of what other people think is 'right'. The 'right' job, the 'right' education, the 'right' way to earn a living... Although GoFundMe marked the campaign as "trending" as of 28 December 2016, Clennan had only received $21 of that goal on that date: Although she has not indicated that her campaign is a hoax or prank (and GoFundMe has not flagged or removed it), Clennan does not appear to have much of an online footprint other than this campaign, aside from a LinkedIn profile and what may be a Huffington Post contribution (which as of April 2016 indicated she was an active student). That single article led some social media users to claim Clennan worked for the Huffington Post, but it looked as if she had submitted only one piece as a contributor. LinkedIn contribution In that article, Clennan expressed a desire to "be a public figure": Exposing my vulnerabilities publicly and confidently gave that girl the strength she needed to participate. Thats when I knew exactly what I wanted to do with my life I want to use computer science to inspire other women to explore computer science. I want to be a public figure in computer science that is the exact opposite of what you would typically expect to find in the field. I want to be that girl who no one thought she could, who had all the odds against her, that everyone thought was dumb, and yet she becomes incredibly successful in computer science. Then I want to turn that success around and use it as a pedestal to expose every wound, every failure, every painful vulnerability I have, even with my hands trembling, Clennan invited potential donors to visit her Facebook page for more information, but few additional details were available there. It remains possible that her goal is genuine and presented honestly with no expectations that it would go over poorly or go viral, but also within the realm of possibility that the GoFundMe request was a step in her stated aim to become a public figure. Facebook Clennan, Catherine. "The Benefits Of Being A Dumb Girl In Computer Science." Huffington Post. 12 April 2016.

FMD_test_980

Harley Skim should be rephrased as "Harley Skimmed through the document quickly."

06/17/2015

FACT CHECK: Is Harley Davidson repossessing paid-up motorcycles belonging to bikers involved in the Waco shootout? Claim: Harley Davidson has been repossessing paid-off motorcycles belonging to owners involved in a biker shootout in Waco, Texas. UNCONFIRMED Example: [Collected via e-mail, June 2015] Just read that Harley Davidson helps Waco PD to repossess motorcycles involved in the Twin Peaks incident even if they were not defaulting on their loan. Say it ain't so!!! Example: On 17 May 2015, several motorcycle clubs convened at a Waco, Texas, location of the Twin Peaks chain of restaurants. Violence erupted amid rival biker factions, leading to shootings that left nine attendees dead and eighteen more injured. A number of controversies stemmed from the deadly incident, such as conflicting eyewitness statements about what took place during the shootout, and one of those controversies involved the fate of motorcycles confiscated by police in the aftermath. Rumors circulated claiming that Harley Davidson and the Waco Police Department were in cahoots to seize and repossess the bikes of those present at the scene, regardless of whether the motorcycles were paid off or their registered owners were current on their payments. On 12 June 2015, the Waco Police Department seemingly addressed this scuttlebutt on their Facebook page, describing a rough inventory of motorcycles impounded and returned to date: We initially impounded 130 motorcycles and 91 other vehicles. As of June 10, 2015, 52 motorcycles and 47 vehicles have been released to the owners. In addition to those, 12 of the motorcycles and 3 of the other vehicles were released to the lienholders due to repossession. On 15 June 2015, a blog post claimed that manufacturer Harley Davidson had taken "bikes that were paid up and sold them, claiming a default of loan for being involved in criminal activity in California." The blog's author pointed to language (either in Harley Davidson Financial Services contracts or a Department of Consumer Affairs guide to Repossession Practices) stipulating that the use of a vehicle during the commission of a crime (or suspected crime) was grounds for forfeiture, regardless of whether the loan was current at the time the vehicle was impounded. This morning, someone told me it happened to them. So I called Harley Davidson Financial Services and asked. I have indeed confirmed that Harley took bikes that were paid up and sold them, claiming a default of loan for being involved in criminal activity. This is a different state, but it's basically the same thing. Read the part in the contracts used by all Harley dealerships and other dealership loans about using the vehicle to engage in criminal activity: In some cases, you may not get your vehicle back at all. The legal owner can accelerate the maturity of your contract if: You provided false or misleading information on the credit application when buying the vehicle. You tried to avoid repossession by hiding the vehicle or taking it out of California. You destroyed, or threatened to destroy, the vehicle, or failed to take care of it. You committed, or threatened to commit, a criminal act of violence against the legal owner or anyone who tried to repossess the vehicle. You used the vehicle, or allowed it to be used, in a crime, and the vehicle was seized by a federal, state, or local authority. In general, police are required by law to provide notice of impounded vehicles to both the registered owners and all lienholders of those vehicles. Also, lienholders must typically provide police with a "hold harmless" affidavit and other evidence documenting that they are entitled to possession of a vehicle in order to claim it from police impound. Without additional information, it would be difficult to say definitively whether Harley Davidson Financial Services (HDFS) exercised any claims over bikes impounded after the Waco shootout. We attempted to contact HDFS to inquire about the issue but could reach only representatives waiting to talk to active account holders (not media contacts). It appears, though, that civil asset forfeiture (rather than lienholder repossession) is the likely fate of unreturned bikes impounded by Waco police. Three Waco Tribune articles examined whether motorcycles impounded at the scene would be taken from their owners for good. In an 18 May 2015 piece, the newspaper reported that owners might not be reunited with their motorcycles due to "civil forfeiture procedures": Even if the men bond out of jail, they likely won't be riding their motorcycles home. The motorcycles were confiscated as part of the massive law enforcement investigation, and sources say they likely will be seized and forfeited by McLennan County through civil forfeiture procedures and sold at auction. On 24 May 2015, the Waco Tribune published a far lengthier piece on the possibility that some of the bikes would be auctioned off. Titled "Vehicle forfeiture efforts could be lucrative, but difficult in Twin Peaks shooting," that article provided local background regarding civil forfeiture practices for all cases in the district (dating back to at least 1989): It's possible some of the vehicles could be declared illegal contraband associated with a crime, and ownership transferred to the county through a process known as civil forfeiture. The collective value of the vehicles likely exceeds $1 million, assuming typical vehicle values. As of Friday afternoon, McLennan County District Attorney Abel Reyna had not filed any civil forfeiture notices with the McLennan County district clerk. Reyna declined through a spokesperson to discuss this or any other aspect of the Twin Peaks case. But Reyna is known for his aggressive pursuit of civil forfeiture, and defense attorneys are watching his moves in this case where so much property is at stake and so many owners are in jail. Yet another article published in the Waco Tribune, this one from 12 June 2015, quoted Waco Police Chief Brent Stroman, who provided an update regarding the then-current status of bikes that remained impounded. The paper again reported that some of the vehicles could be seized by police (not Harley Davidson) and sent to auction under extant civil asset forfeiture laws: A total of 130 motorcycles and 91 other vehicles were impounded from the scene that day, Stroman said, a number slightly above the original estimate. Of those, 52 motorcycles and 47 vehicles have been released to the owners, while 12 of the motorcycles and 3 of the other vehicles were released to the lienholders to be repossessed. Stroman said he did not know how many, if any, vehicles would be seized and put up for auction. Ultimately, it appeared to be true that some of the bikes remaining in police impound lots in June 2015 were fated to go to auction regardless of whether owners were current on payments at the time the bikes were seized. However, multiple local newspaper articles that covered the situation in depth described the potential repossessions as being within the scope of the Waco Police Department and not Harley Davidson Financial Services.

FMD_test_981

Austin is recognized as the safest major city in Texas, boasting an unemployment rate of less than 3% and winning the title of the top place to reside in the entire United States for two consecutive years.

04/26/2018

Austin Mayor Steve Adler, who is seeking a second term this November, reacted to a game-show moment with a swaggering claim. In an April 25, 2018, tweet, Adler responded to a clue from that night's episode of Jeopardy: "Per Rick Perry, it's the blueberry in the tomato soup." Perry, the Republican former governor, often offers the blueberry characterization of the Democrat-dominant capital. On the program, a contestant correctly answered "Austin" for $600. Next, Adler said in his tweet, accompanied by a photo of the Jeopardy clue: "What is the safest big city in Texas with an unemployment rate under 3% that has been named the best place to live in the entire United States two years running?" Is all of that true about Austin? Not entirely: In 2017, we found "Half True" an Adler reference to Austin as the state's safest big city. Not for the first time, we noted then that the FBI advises against using crime data it collects to declare one city safer than another. That said, such statistics at the time suggested that the five-county Austin region in 2015 had a lower violent crime rate than other Texas regions and that El Paso had a lower violent crime rate than Austin in the first half of 2016. Seeking the mayor's factual backup, the morning after Adler posted his comment, which was retweeted more than 200 times, we reached mayoral spokesman Jason Stanford. Stanford advised by phone that Adler didn't have fresh information to offer in support of his 2018 safest big city in Texas statement. He suggested we check federal statistics to confirm Austin's jobless rate and told us that U.S. News had consecutively named Austin the nation's best place to live. Checking Austin's unemployment, our search for Austin's jobless rate on the Texas Workforce Commission website showed that from January through March 2018, the latest month of available data, the city's jobless rate ran shy of 3 percent. We also fetched a longer view showing the city's jobless rate mostly staying below 3 percent from January 2017 on (all the rates not seasonally adjusted). Austin's unemployment rate was last above 3 percent, according to the TWC, when it was 3.1 percent in August 2017. The Austin rate's 15-month low, 2.5 percent, occurred in December 2017. SOURCE: Website, Unemployment, Texas Labor Market Information, Texas Workforce Commission (search completed April 26, 2018). Austin ranked best place to live two times in a row. On April 10, 2018, U.S. News announced that for the second straight year, the online publication found Austin the best place to live in the United States among the country's 125 largest metropolitan areas; Colorado Springs, Colo., placed second. The rankings were based on affordability, job prospects, and quality of life, U.S. News said, and on surveying thousands of U.S. residents to find out what qualities they consider important in a hometown. The methodology, U.S. News said, also factored in data from the U.S. Census Bureau, the FBI, and the Bureau of Labor Statistics—plus U.S. News rankings of the country's high schools and hospitals. Austin, the self-proclaimed Live Music Capital of the Planet, earned a score of 7.7 out of 10 for the 2018 rankings, U.S. News said, with even its few downsides having upsides. The story states: "The median sale price for a single-family home in Austin is well above the national median." Then again, the story notes, Austinites' pocketbooks benefit from no personal or corporate income tax and a low state and local tax rate. Another semi-warning in the story: "Summers in Austin take some getting used to, with temperatures often scorching." Though, the story adds, the metro area experiences mild weather throughout the rest of the year, temperatures have been known to drop in the winter. The story also notes: "Austin is among the nation's worst metro areas for traffic congestion." But, the story suggests, that can be addressed with flexible work schedules, due diligence when choosing a neighborhood, and, for those wanting to get in some exercise while commuting, using public transportation, walking, and biking. Our ruling: Adler referred to Austin as the safest big city in Texas with an unemployment rate under 3% that has been named the best place to live in the entire United States two years running. Hizzoner was right about Austin's jobless rate of late and Austin getting named the city's best place to live two years in a row, though it's worth clarifying that the rankings considered only the country's 125 largest metro areas. Whether Austin is the safest big Texas city rests on interpreting crime data the FBI counsels against using to compare communities. That said, we previously found that the five-county Austin region in 2015 had a lower violent crime rate than other Texas regions, while in the first half of 2016, El Paso had a lower violent crime rate than Austin. On balance, we rate this Adler claim Mostly True. MOSTLY TRUE: The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information. Click here for more on the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check.

FMD_test_982

Is This Bill Clinton with Jeffrey Epstein?

07/22/2019

On July 10, 2019, we examined a claim that Google was "scrubbing" its search results of any pictures showing President Bill Clinton together with convicted sex offender and billionaire financier Jeffrey Epstein. While this rumor was false (Google's search results were not notably different from those of Yahoo, DuckDuckGo, Yandex, or Bing), we were left with one unanswered question: Are there any photos of Epstein and Clinton? After all, Clinton flew on Epstein's private plane, a convicted sex offender who was arrested again in July 2019 on new charges related to child sex prostitution. The two were also both present at a "small dinner party" in 1995 hosted by Revlon mogul Ron Perelman to raise funds for the Democratic National Convention. It seems reasonable to believe that someone at some point took a photograph of these two well-known public figures together. On July 22, 2019, Josh Rosner, the managing director of independent research consultancy Graham Fisher & Co, alerted us to his tweet containing a photograph of Epstein and Clinton that was published in a 2003 issue of Vanity Fair: Josh Rosner published, "Disturbing! The #press wiped all pictures of @BillClinton & #JeffreyEpstein from the #internet. Even @VanityFair, which published this image in '03 from their #sex(?) trip to Brunei, scrubbed it." Again, no evidence exists that this image was "wiped" from the Internet. In fact, this image is available online in Vanity Fair's digital archive (subscription required). This photograph was published in a March 2003 article by Vicky Ward entitled, "The Talented Mr. Epstein." The photograph's caption reads: "Epstein with President Clinton in Brunei, 2002." One possible explanation for why this photograph doesn't appear in search engines is that Vanity Fair didn't publish it as a standalone image. Rather, it is embedded in a digital copy of the March 2003 edition of the magazine. While we're not in the business of offering predictions, we would bet that this image will start finding its way into Google Images and other image-based search engines in the near future, especially if more outlets pick up and publish stories including this image. Clinton is mentioned three other times in the Vanity Fair story; each iteration is reproduced below (emphasis ours): "Lately, Jeffrey Epstein's high-flying style has been drawing oohs and aahs: the bachelor financier lives in New York's largest private residence, claims to take only billionaires as clients, and flies celebrities including Bill Clinton and Kevin Spacey on his Boeing 727. But pierce his air of mystery and the picture changes. Vicky Ward explores Epstein's investment career, his ties to retail magnate Leslie Wexner, and his complicated past. In addition to the town house, Epstein lives in what is reputed to be the largest private dwelling in New Mexico, on an $18 million, 7,500-acre ranch which he named 'Zorro.' 'It makes the town house look like a shack,' Epstein has said. He also owns Little St. James, a 70-acre island in the U.S. Virgin Islands, where the main house is currently being renovated by Edward Tuttle, a designer of the Aman resorts. There is also a $6.8 million house in Palm Beach, Florida, and a fleet of aircraft: a Gulfstream IV, a helicopter, and a Boeing 727, replete with trading room, on which Epstein recently flew President Clinton, actors Chris Tucker and Kevin Spacey, supermarket magnate Ron Burkle, Lew Wasserman's grandson, Casey Wasserman, and a few others, on a mission to explore the problems of AIDS and economic development in Africa. Epstein is known about town as a man who loves women—lots of them, mostly young. Model types have been heard saying they are full of gratitude to Epstein for flying them around, and he is a familiar face to many of the Victoria's Secret girls. One young woman recalls being summoned by Ghislaine Maxwell to a concert at Epstein's town house, where the women seemed to outnumber the men by far. 'These were not women you'd see at Upper East Side dinners,' the woman recalls. 'Many seemed foreign and dressed a little bizarrely.' This same guest also attended a cocktail party thrown by Maxwell that Prince Andrew attended, which was filled, she says, with young Russian models. 'Some of the guests were horrified,' the woman says. 'He's reckless,' says a former business associate, 'and he's gotten more so. Money does that to you. He's breaking the oath he made to himself—that he would never do anything that would expose him in the media. Right now, in the wake of the publicity following his trip with Clinton, he must be in a very difficult place.' In 2002, around the time that this photograph was taken, Clinton told New York Magazine via a spokesperson that, 'Jeffrey is both a highly successful financier and a committed philanthropist with a keen sense of global markets and an in-depth knowledge of twenty-first-century science. I especially appreciated his insights and generosity during the recent trip to Africa to work on democratization, empowering the poor, citizen service, and combating H.I.V./AIDS.' Clinton once had a relationship with Epstein and even took multiple trips on his private plane. However, the former president said that he hasn't had contact with Epstein for a decade and knows nothing about the crimes the latter has been accused or convicted of. Clinton, of course, isn't the only high-profile politician connected to Epstein. U.S. President Donald Trump has also been photographed with Epstein.

FMD_test_983

We have the highest corporate tax rate in the world. Its 35 percent.

10/09/2011

With unemployment remaining stubbornly high, U.S. Rep.Jim Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., was asked what the federal government could do to create jobs.The suburban Milwaukee congressman, who was first elected to the House in 1979, didnt hesitate in replying.Weve got to address the fact that we have the highest corporate tax rate in the world, Sensenbrenner told the editorial board of theMilwaukee Journal Sentinelon Sept. 29, 2011. Its 35 percent.Sensenbrenner argued that if corporate taxes in the U.S. were lower than they are in other parts of the world, more U.S.-based multinational companies would repatriate their profits back to America, creating more jobs here.Its Sensenbrenners opinion that lowering the U.S. corporate tax rate would create jobs. We cant check an opinion.But we can check whether the rate is 35 percent and if it is the highest in the world.Sensenbrenners district director, Loni Hagerup, pointed to a 2011reportfrom theOrganization for Economic Corporation and Development, a Paris-based group of 34 large, industrialized democracies.The widely quoted report says the U.S. corporate tax rate is 35 percent, tops among the member countries.Next in line were France and Belgium (both 34 percent), and then Australia, Japan, Spain and Mexico (each 30 percent).Seems pretty straightforward. Sensenbrenner is right, right?Lets first look at two points:1. Combined corporate tax rateSome analysts, when comparing countries, use the Paris groups report but cite a different figure -- the combined corporate tax rate, rather than merely the corporate tax rate. The combined rate includes not only federal but also state tax rates for corporations. The combined corporate tax rate in the U.S. is 39.2 percent, which ranks second behind Japans 39.5 percent.But Sensenbrenner was asked what the federal government could do to create jobs, so the corporate tax rate -- not the combined rate -- is relevant here.2. Limitations of the corporate rateWe consulted experts at two Washington, D.C. research organizations --TaxFoundationpresidentScottHodgeandRoberton Williams, senior fellow at theTax Policy Center. Both said Sensenbrenner is correct in stating that the U.S. corporate tax rate is 35 percent and that the rate is the highest in the world, but they added some context to the discussion.Williams said the corporate tax rate is not a good measure of the taxes that corporations actually pay. While some corporations might pay the full 35 percent rate, many pay considerably less, depending on the types of investments they make, depreciation they take and other factors that reduce taxable income, he said.Hodge agreed. He added, however, that the effective federal tax rate (after deductions) that corporations pay is about 26 percent -- and that also is among the highest rates of all industrialized nations.Our conclusionAsked what the federal government could do to create jobs, Sensenbrenner said lower the corporate tax rate, which he said was 35 percent and the highest in the world. A widely quoted annual report says the U.S. corporate tax rate is 35 percent and is highest among 34 large, industrialized countries. Two experts agreed with the rate and the ranking.We rate Sensenbrenners claim True.

FMD_test_984

Russian Flag at Texas State Capitol

12/19/2016

On 19 December 2016, a photograph purportedly showing a Russian flag on display at the Texas State Capitol was circulated on social media: Many social media users shared the above-displayed photograph along with claims that it showed pro-Russian elements celebrating Donald Trump's election and insinuated that Russia had helped installed him as the next President of the United States. In fact, this image actually shows a group of demonstrators who were protesting Trump's election on the day Texas' electors met to cast their ballots for him, taken by a Texas Tribune photographer who goes by the handle @BobPhoto on Twitter: Russian flag flies at Texas Capitol prior to #ElectoralCollege @TexasTribune @bobphoto #txlege pic.twitter.com/0pcYFoY3bA #ElectoralCollege @TexasTribune @bobphoto #txlege pic.twitter.com/0pcYFoY3bA bobphoto (@bobphoto) December 19, 2016 December 19, 2016 Guys with Russian flag in line House gallery #ElectoralCollege #txlege @TexasTribune @bobphoto pic.twitter.com/PZ9YqtRdMj bobphoto (@bobphoto) December 19, 2016 #ElectoralCollege #txlege @TexasTribune @bobphoto pic.twitter.com/PZ9YqtRdMj December 19, 2016 Aliyya Swaby, another reporter for the Texas Tribune, added some more context to these photographs when she shared an image of the protesters outside of the capitol building: Joke contingent of pro-Russia supporters shows up to "protect our investment" and ensure electors vote Trump pic.twitter.com/xuod4x3tWk pic.twitter.com/xuod4x3tWk Aliyya Swaby (@AliyyaSwaby) December 19, 2016 December 19, 2016 This display was not one celebrating Trump's alleged friendly relationship with Russia; it was a tongue-in-cheek message delivered by a group of protesters.

FMD_test_985

Fraudulent Promotion Offering Free Airline Tickets

02/07/2016

Scammers and malware purveyors are always looking for ways to entice online users into following web links that will lead those victims into the traps set for them, and offers of free airline tickets are prime bait in that pursuit of prey. Airline tickets are something nearly everyone uses and have considerable value, but their non-material nature and the fact that they're not tremendously expensive (compared to, say, a new car) makes it seem plausible to the public that they're something a business might actually be giving away for free as part of an advertising promotion. Virtually every major U.S. air carrier including American Airlines, Delta Air Lines, Southwest Airlines, Emirates, United Airlines, US Airways, Continental Airlines, Alaska Airlines, WestJet Airlines, Allegiant Air, and Air Canada has been invoked in various online "free ticket" giveaway scams in recent years: Air Canada The primary type of free ticket fraud is the "sweepstakes scam," which is intended to lure victims into completing numerous surveys, disclosing a good deal of personal information, and then agreeing to sign up for costly, difficult-to-cancel "Reward Offers" hidden in the fine print. The scammers spread links via e-mail and Facebook that purport to offer free air travel tickets to those who follow those links. These web pages (which are not operated or sponsored by the airlines they reference) typically ask the unwary to click what appear to be Facebook "share" buttons and post comments to the scammer's site (which is really a ruse to dupe users into spreading the scam by sharing it with all of their Facebook friends). Those who follow such instructions are then led into a set of pages prompting them to input a fair amount of personal information (including name, age, address, and phone numbers), complete a lengthy series of surveys, and finally sign up (and commit to paying) for at least two "Reward Offers" (e.g., Netflix subscriptions, credit report monitoring services, prepaid credit cards): Pursuant to the Terms & Conditions, you are required to complete 2 of the Reward Offers from the above. You will need to meet all of the terms and conditions to qualify for the shipment of the reward. For credit card offers, you must activate your card by making a purchase, transferring a balance, or making a cash advance. For loan offers you must close and fund the loan. For home security and satellite tv offers you must have the product installed. You may not cancel your participation in more than a total of 2 Reward Offers within 30 days of any Reward Offer Sign-Up Date as outlined in the Terms & Conditions (the Cancellation Limit). Not only that, but the fine print on the "free" tickets offers typically states that by accepting its terms, the user agrees to receive telemarketing phone calls and text messages from a variety of different companies: Similar phony free ticket lures are used to spread malware. In those versions of the scam, those who attempt to reach the URL provided for the purpose of claiming the free tickets are instead victimized by a Facebook "lifejacking" attack, a malicious script that takes over a user's Facebook profile without their knowledge and propagates itself to their friends' accounts as well. lifejacking In short, those who seek "free" merchandise generally end up paying a dear cost for it.

FMD_test_986

Does Walmart Sell Insulin for $25 a Vial Without a Prescription?

02/07/2019

In early February 2019, amid continued public outcry over the soaring cost of life-saving pharmaceuticals, readers shared a screen-captured image on social media of a local news station's reporting on the story of a woman who said she bought inexpensive insulin without a prescription at Walmart: pharmaceuticals Readers asked us whether this was true. It is true, although you should note Walmart sells human insulin, an older version of the glucose-moderating hormone, whereas most insulin-dependent diabetics are currently prescribed insulin analogs that have evolved to help prevent dangerous swings in blood-glucose levels. The screenshot above was taken from a 4 February 2019 news broadcast from DallasFort Worth television station KDFW: We confirmed with Walmart that the retail chain does indeed sell human insulin without a prescription (except in Indiana). That product is Novo Nordisk-manufactured Novolin, which Walmart has branded as ReliOn and sells for $24.88 per vial. Walmart spokeswoman Marilee McInnis confirmed to us that the company has "maintained, through negotiation, the same retail to patients since 2011." To say that the insulin is sold "over-the-counter" isn't quite accurate, however, as customers must ask a pharmacist for it. Indiana Although this revelation might be important, life-saving information for diabetics, an important caveat is that human insulin behaves differently than the newer analog insulin currently retailing for more than $300 a vial. retailing Dr. Todd Hobbs, chief medical officer for Novo Nordisk, wrote that the different types of insulin have the same effect of lowering blood-glucose levels, but, "Training is required whenever someone is prescribed insulin, whether that be human insulin or the newer analog insulin products. Differences in the timing of all types of insulin must be considered for patients to effectively use them ... The difference in the types of insulin is related to how slowly or rapidly they are absorbed once injected. Scientific advances over the years have made improvements on the speed and length of time this absorption occurs." wrote Diabetes Forecast, a health-oriented magazine associated with the American Diabetics Association, explained the history of the two types of insulin and the difference in health benefits this way: explained In the 1970s, researchers discovered how to program bacteria in the lab to manufacture human insulin, and in 1982, regular human insulin became the first recombinant DNA drug product. Its a very pure, clean product, and its exactly what we as humans make, [Virginia Commonwealth University School of Pharmacy associate professor and a spokesman for the American Association of Diabetes Educators Evan] Sisson says. Human insulin is now available as short-acting regular (or R) insulin, which is used at mealtimes, and intermediate-acting NPH (or N) insulin, which is used as a basal insulin ... While the development of human insulin was a major advancement, it wasnt perfect. Regular insulin didnt hit the bloodstream quick enough to cover the rapid absorption of carbohydrates after meals, and it stuck around too long after meals, causing hypoglycemia [low blood glucose, which can lead to unconsciousness and death if untreated]. In 1996, Eli Lilly introduced the first rapid-acting insulin analog to the market: insulin lispro (Humalog). Insulin aspart (Novo Nordisks Novolog) and insulin glulisine (Sanofis Apidra) quickly followed. With rapid-acting insulin analogs, onset occurs 10 to 20 minutes after injection, instead of the 30 to 60 minutes it takes for regular human insulin to take effect. This allows people to inject their insulin right before a meal, rather than having to dose 30 minutes or more before eating ... hypoglycemia Deliver a dose of NPH [human] insulin, and itll reach its peak about six to eight hours later. This means your insulin may peak while youre sleeping, posing a serious danger if you dont wake up to treat. Long-acting analogs, on the other hand, dont peak, resulting in more-stable blood glucose levels and fewer unexpected highs or lows. In fact, one study showed that long-acting analog insulin glargine reduced overnight bouts of hypoglycemia by up to 48 percent compared with NPH. In another study, detemir reduced nighttime hypoglycemia by 34 percent. This is especially beneficial for people with type 1, who need to be much more precise about matching insulin dosages with their insulin needs to avoid nighttime lows, says Sisson. Note, there are two types of diabetes. Type 1 diabetics' bodies cannot manufacture insulin, the hormone responsible for glucose absorption. Type 2 diabetics' bodies, on the other hand, become resistant to insulin. In most cases, Type 1 diabetes starts in childhood, whereas Type 2 is sometimes referred to as "adult-onset" diabetes. Writing for Insulin Nation, Nicki Nichols explained why the older form of human insulin is difficult to control in children: Insulin Nation When my child was first diagnosed, she was on NPH. It was incredibly difficult to limit a growing childs diet to such a strict schedule. Heres what it looked like: 8 a.m.- 45-carb meal10:30 a.m. 15-carb snack12 p.m. 45-carb meal2 p.m. 15-carb snack5 p.m. 45-carb meal7:30 p.m. 15-20 carb snack before bed to keep blood sugar up overnight. I cannot tell you how many times my child refused to eat the 45 carbs in her dinner. There is something wrong when you are fussing at your 5-year-old to stop eating her green beans and to eat her bread, or mashed potatoes, or pasta. The screen shot from the KDFW report no doubt went viral as a result of an ongoing controversy over the cost of analog insulin, which as of 7 February 2019 soared to a retail price of more than $300 per vial. Americans have been awash in medical horror stories such the death of Jesse Lutgen, a 32-year-old Type 1 diabetic who lost his job at a distribution center in Dubuque, Iowa, and with it, his health insurance. He was found dead in his home in February 2018, having run out of insulin. His last vials of the medication were given to him by a friend. soared Jesse Lutgen Hobbs, Todd, MD. "The Truth About Human Insulin." Novo Nordisk. 29 November 2018. Tsai, Allison. "Can Switching from Analog to Human Insulin Save You Money?" Diabetes Forecast. March 2017. Johnson, Carolyn Y. "Why Treating Diabetes Keeps Getting More Expensive." The Washington Post. 31 October 2016. Nichols, Nicki. "Why Walmart Insulins Arent the Answer to High Insulin Prices." Insulin Nation. 16 September 2016. Des Moines Register. "Iowa Man Loses Job, Health Insurance, Access to Insulin and His Life. When Will Congress Act?" 6 February 2019.

FMD_test_987

Dash Scam

08/03/2015

FACT CHECK: Did a leaked audio recording capture actress and Fox News contributor Stacey Dash admitting Fox News hired her to attract "old, white dudes" who are "horny"? Claim: A recently leaked tape captured actress and Fox News contributor Stacey Dash admitting Fox News hired her to attract "old, (horny) white dudes." Example: [Collected via Twitter, August 2015] https://t.co/nN17nRrePh they know what we like #RaceWars #OpieRadio #SherrodsTwitterArmy #Sirius #SiriusXM #StandupLabs #NYC #redeye #fnc https://t.co/nN17nRrePh #RaceWars #OpieRadio #SherrodsTwitterArmy #Sirius #SiriusXM #StandupLabs #NYC #redeye #fnc Sherrod Small (@Sherrod_Small) August 3, 2015 August 3, 2015 Leaked Tapes Capture Stacey Dash Saying FOX Hired Her to Attract Horny, Old Men https://t.co/6NZMgaOzn0 via @Mannyotiko https://t.co/6NZMgaOzn0 @Mannyotiko john osalvo (@jojokejohn) August 3, 2015 August 3, 2015 Leaked Tapes Capture Stacey Dash Saying FOX Hired Her to Attract Horny, OldMen https://t.co/TWPYK3tKgp pic.twitter.com/ebygMzv6TX https://t.co/TWPYK3tKgp pic.twitter.com/ebygMzv6TX Manny Otiko (@Mannyotiko) August 1, 2015 August 1, 2015 Origins: On 1 August 2015, the web site The Business Standard News (tagline "BS News, keeping it real") published an article titled "Leaked Tapes Capture Stacey Dash Saying FOX Hired Her to Attract Horny, Old Men." article It claimed "conservative hero Stacey Dash" (a Fox News contributor who previously appeared in the film Clueless) was "just in it for the money," adding: The Business Standard News has acquired audio files of a conversation between Stacey Dash and her friend Rashika Johnson. Dash is heard on tape breaking down why she decided to come out as a conservative. Girl, its all about getting paid, Dash said. Im in my 40s going up against bitches half my age for roles. It was getting tough. This conservative gig is about cash money. I got a mortgage and kids to put through college. They hired me because I make old, white dudes horny, Dash told her friend. Take a look at the other women on FOX News, they all look like models. Hell, I get emails from old white men in the South, saying they never thought of f**king a black woman until they saw me. Ann Coulter told me there is good money to be made selling lame books to dumb rednecks, Dash said. Like her, I dont believe half the crap I say. Im an actress, give me a script and Ill give you a performance. However, The Business Standard News features the following disclaimer on its site, indicating its content (including the claim about Stacey Dash) is not intended to be taken seriously: disclaimer The Business Standard News is a satirical site designed to poke fun at the absurdity of the modern-day news cycle. The stories are outlandish, but reality is so strange nowadays they could be true. In addition to the article about Stacey Dash, The Business Standard News featured similarly fabricated and "outlandish" pieces including "FOX News Hires Ex-Porn Star Jenna Jameson as Pundit," "GOP Serves Fried Chicken, Watermelon to Black Conservative Group," and "Bill Cosby Loses His Illuminati Membership, Parking Rights." Last updated: 3 August 2015 Originally published: 3 August 2015

FMD_test_988

Says Donald Trump has outlined policies that read like a Kremlin wish list.

09/22/2016

Concerned by Donald Trump's secrecy about his dealings with other countries, 55 former government, military and national security officials Democrats and some Republicans havesigned a letterurging him to reveal his international business relationships and foreign investments, and to pledge to divest himself of all overseas business interests if he wins the presidency. The letter was drafted in part by Michael Morell, former acting director and deputy director of the Central Intelligence Agency. It says that the limited amount of information available to the public Trump has refused to release his tax returns suggests business relationships that would be problematic and might influence his policy positions as president, particularly when it comes to Russia. On the campaign trail, Mr. Trump has repeatedly praised Vladimir Putins authoritarian leadership, while outlining policies that read like a Kremlin wish list. He has claimed that Putin would never invade Ukraine, suggested permanently ceding Crimea to Russia, and placed conditions on upholding our obligation to protect our NATO allies. He even encouraged Russian espionage to interfere with our election, a tactic Putin has deployed across Central Asia and Europe to boost his preferred candidates. In addition, he has floated lifting sanctions against Russia, which would benefit both Putin and the Trump Organization. For this fact-check, we were interested in whether Trump has outlined policies that read like a Kremlin wish list. We talked to Russia experts who signed the letter as well as those who didn't. We emailed several people in the Trump campaign asking for reaction and information to dispute the assertion. We received no reply. We contacted Morell and more than a half dozen of the signers to get details on the claim. Their focus is on the issues mentioned in the letter: NATO, Ukraine and the lack of support for economic sanctions against Russia. Let's review them separately. NATO:In July, Trumptold theNew York Timesthat he wouldn't automatically come to the defense of a NATO ally that hasn't paid its expected contribution. I would be absolutely prepared to tell those countries, 'Congratulations, you will be defending yourself,' he said. NATO was created as deterrent to the former Soviet Union, of which Russia was the key player. Putin hasstrongly objectedto attempts to expand NATO because of Russian security concerns, so anything that weakens NATO could strengthen Russia. This is exactly what Putin wants to sow the seeds of doubt in those countries on his periphery over whether the West will be there for them, Morell told us in an email. This kind of talk forces those states to be more accommodating to Russian interests. Trump'spotential unwillingness to defend NATO memberswho don't contribute enough financially to the alliance is essentially undermining unconditional nature of our commitment to their defense, said a cosigner of the letter, Richard Nephew, a former principal deputy coordinator of sanctions policy for the State Department who is now at Columbia University. Crimea and Ukraine:Russiaannexed Crimea, andPutin supportedan uprising in eastern Ukraine, sending in fighters after a revolution removed a pro-Russian president in 2014. Putin said annexation was morally and legally justified. The United States and the European Union disagreed. Trump hada different attitude. The people of Crimea, from what I've heard, would rather be with Russia than where they were,he saidin a July 31 interview with ABC's George Stephanopoulos. He also called Putins grab so smart inan April 12, 2014 Fox News interview. As PolitiFact reported in August, Trumps comments actually echo theofficial Kremlin positionthat Crimea is now Russian and its citizens prefer it that way. Trump has sided with Putin on all these issues, said Samantha Vinograd, another co-signer and former director for international affairs and Iraq at the National Security Council. If you look at how Trump will not condemn Russia's military takeover of Crimea, that's something that literally Putin was probably jumping up and down over when he said that. This lets Putin off the hook for the first land grab in Europe since World War II, said Morell. That gift to Putin even has a bow on it. Sanctions against Russia:The European Union and the United States responded to the situation in Ukraine by issuing sanctions against Russia.They affectRussian banks, arms makers and energy companies, andhave bothlimited Russia's access to Western markets and hindered its ability to deal with a recession caused by the sharp drop in oil prices. Clearly, Russia would like to see those sanctions lifted.Trump has saidhe would consider removing them. That undermines sanctions as a tool, said Vinograd. You don't just remove them without proof that a country has met its international obligations. What other Russia experts say Experts we consulted who didn't sign the letter agreed that many of Trump's comments line up with actions that Putin would probably like to see. I think Trump's foreign policy is the most pro-Russian policy we've seen from a major presidential candidate, at least since World War II, said Matthew Kroenig, associate professor at Georgetown University and a senior advisor on the Marco Rubio campaign who signed an anti-Trump letter last spring. With talk of tearing up NATO and positive talk about President Putin, it seems to be a very sympathetic Russian foreign policy, Putin and the Russians would be delighted to see him elected, Kroenig added. To be more supportive of the Kremlin, Trump would have to scrap America's nuclear arsenal and sign a treaty to give the Ukraine back to Russia. Michael McFaul, who served as U.S. ambassador to Russia from 2012 to 2014, made additional points in an Aug. 17, 2016,Washington Postcommentary. For example, a political battle over building a wall on the Mexican border, would be a major distraction in this country and a United States convulsed by infighting over Trump's deeply divisive policy proposals gives Putin more freedom to act around the world. But Peter Feaver, a professor of political science and public policy at Duke University, said the claim that Trump's policies read like a Kremlin wish list is hyperbole to be sure, because it's looking at some of Trump's statements and not others. For example, the candidate's pledge to reinvigorate the United States military would not be part of a Russian wish list. He said the idea that NATO allies aren't paying their fair share for the defense of Europe is a longstanding United States complaint. It's just that Trump is the first to threaten to take action by not defending a country that's attacked but is not paying. And he described the situation in Crimea and Eastern Ukraine in a way that was favorable to Russia's interpretation of what's happening, said Feaver. So I wouldn't say his comments are are on the Kremlin's wish list, but they were certainly reinforcing Putin's approach and undermining NATO, which is a way of achieving one of Putin's goals, which is to weaken NATO. He also cautioned that it can be hard to tell what Trump really thinks, given all the things he says in off-the-cuff remarks. Only the other hand, he noted, Trump seldom backtracks on an outrageous statement he's made. The claim that Trump's policies read like a Kremlin wish list has a lot more to do with Donald Trump's overall statements about Russia than it does with any concrete policies, and that's because Donald Trump doesn't really have many concrete policies, said Emma Ashford, a defense and foreign policy research fellow at the libertarian Cato Institute. Trump tends to be quite inconsistent on a lot of things such as working with Russia to fight ISIS, she said. So with Donald Trump's inconsistency, it's really really hard to tell what he would do on some of these issues. Our ruling Morell and others said Trump has outlined policies that read like a Kremlin wish list. Trumps comments on backing away from NATO, supporting Russia on the Ukraine and rethinking sanctions against Russia certainly qualify as statements that dovetail with what the Putin administration would like. But not all of his opinions, such as wanting to increase military spending, are in lockstep with policies the Kremlin might favor. We rate the statement Mostly True. https://www.sharethefacts.co/share/5df18d2f-7ff9-4a32-8bc9-ab8300a0ac0c

FMD_test_989

Are Old Canadian $2 Bills Worth $20,000?

10/27/2014

Claim: Old Canadian $2 bills are worth $20,000 each. OF AND INFORMATION Examples: [Collected via Twitter, October 2014] Some Old $2 Bills Are Now Worth $20,000 - https://t.co/Smg3HP6J2Q via @MTLBlog https://t.co/Smg3HP6J2Q @MTLBlog Matt Vardy (@mattvardy) July 21, 2014 July 21, 2014 Origins: In September 2012, a rare Canadian $2 bill went up for auction in Toronto with an estimated value of $15,000-$20,000. While this exceptional piece of collector currency ended up selling for only about $10,000, it also sparked the rumor that all old Canadian $2 bills were worth $20,000 each. Several publications have penned stories over the years about the $2 bills' incredible increase in value. On June 9, 2014, the MTL Blog published an article with the headline "Old $2 Bills Are Now Worth $20,000." While that statement is true, it is also very misleading. The article refers only to a very specific set of $2 bills. According to Jared Stapleton, the vice-president of the Canadian Paper Money Society, the Bank of Canada accidentally printed a few bills in 1986 with the wrong signatures on them. Bills printed with the AUG, AUH, and AUJ prefixes were supposed to be signed by Bank of Canada governor Gerald Bouey and deputy governor John Crow, but a few were accidentally issued with the signatures of incoming Bank of Canada governor John Crow and deputy governor Gordon Thiessen. Stapleton said that only five of these bills are known to exist, and though that makes them extremely rare, the VP of the Canadian Paper Money Society opined that he was doubtful the remaining bills would necessarily fetch a price similar to that of the one sold in 2012. Some people are content with low-grade older bills, but condition is often rough because "you're dealing with a paper product and they can get damaged and soiled easily," Stapleton said. Anyone seeking currency and coins for investment should "collect the best." The Canadian $2 bill has become a bit of a collector's item since it was withdrawn from circulation and replaced by a coin commonly known as the "toonie" in 1996, but the majority of these bills have not significantly increased in value since then. It's possible that a Canadian $2 bill could sell for as much as $20,000, but it's very unlikely that you have one of those bills resting in your wallet. Last updated: October 27, 2014 D'Alimonte, Michael. "Old $2 Bills Are Now Worth $20,000." MTL Blog. June 9, 2014.

FMD_test_990

Congress shoveled $700 billion into the Troubled Assets Relief Program, $325 billion of which has been spent without purchasing any toxic assets.

04/09/2009

The Troubled Assets Relief Program, or TARP, was envisioned as a giant pot of money the federal government could use to buy toxic assets, the mortgage-backed investments that triggered the nation's financial crisis. The idea was to buy the bad assets so banks would be in better shape to do more lending. That was the original vision of Henry Paulson, the Bush administration's treasury secretary and one of the architects of the plan. He won quick approval from Congress in early October 2008. But Paulson changed his strategy. Instead of using the early TARP money to buy the toxic assets, he decided to use it to invest in banks. That, Paulson said, would get them to resume lending. Since then, critics have questioned whether the TARP money has been wisely spent. They have criticized TARP investments in banks that did not appear to be in serious trouble, and said it was unwise to spend $25 billion on the auto industry. In his column on March 24, 2009, conservative writer George Will took aim at a variety of recent acts by Congress and the Obama administration. He described members of Congress as braying yahoos and said the Obama administration had invited private sector investors to become business partners with the capricious and increasingly anticonstitutional government. This latest plan to unfreeze the financial system came almost half a year after Congress shoveled $700 billion into the Troubled Assets Relief Program, $325 billion of which has been spent without purchasing any toxic assets. We had a vague recollection that TARP spending had been broadened at some point, but we wondered if Will was correct that such a large amount had been spent without buying the assets that were the original focus of the program. (Indeed, the program was named after them, creating a metaphorical acronym that suggested it was a temporary protection from storms.) A quick history: In early October, with fears that the economy was on the brink of collapse, Congress approved the $700 billion Paulson wanted, and President George W. Bush signed the measure into law. As we noted above, the early vision was to buy toxic assets. But just 10 days later, Paulson and the Bush administration changed the game plan. Instead of buying toxic assets, they said they would buy stock in American banks to put them on sound footing so they could resume lending. Today we are taking decisive actions to protect the U.S. economy, Paulson said on Oct. 14. We regret having to take these actions. Today's actions are not what we ever wanted to do but today's actions are what we must do to restore confidence to our financial system. Criticism grew. Some said Paulson had gotten too much leeway to spend the money. Congress began harrumphing and holding hearings, and oversight groups known as SIGTARP (the Special Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program) and COP (the Congressional Oversight Panel) began to scrutinize the spending. (A quick aside: The financial crisis has spawned some of coolest acronyms this side of the Pentagon, making it possible for Treasury officials to utter sentences like, COP and SIGTARP have examined the TARP but haven't yet focused on the P-PIP.) The $325 billion cited by Will comes from the March 11 testimony by Neel Kashkari, the interim assistant secretary for financial stability who directs the TARP, before the Domestic Policy Subcommittee of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. Asked about the status of the program and how much more would be needed, Kashkari said, We've deployed about 325 billion cash dollars out the door. And at that point, none of the money had been spent on buying toxic assets, according to the Government Accountability Office, a nonpartisan congressional research group, and the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, an independent group tracking spending on TARP and other stimulus programs on its siteStimulus Watch. We should note that since that testimony, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner has unveiled his proposal for buying the toxic assets, which would be partly paid for by a portion of the TARP money. But that wasn't the case when Will's column was published, so we find his claim to be True.

FMD_test_991

Are the majority of cruise ships registered under flags of foreign countries?

03/23/2020

Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease. 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 its 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 there are valid reasons for such policies: "There are many factors that determine where a cruise ship—or for that matter, any maritime vessel—is flagged. Those determinations are made by individual cruise lines and other ship operators based on varying factors including the capabilities of the flag to deliver the services needed; representation and reputation of the flag in the international shipping community; the performance of the flag state, which dictates how a ship is prioritized by port states; the pool of seafarers able to meet the needs of the flag; and the flag's fees, charges, and taxes," the association stated in an email. 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" made no bones about observing 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. Cruise lines 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, employees 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 pay close attention, as 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.

FMD_test_992

Because of Obamacare, Medicare is going broke.

12/23/2016

As U.S. House SpeakerPaul Ryandiscussed the repeal and replacement of the Affordable Care Act, a top priority of President-electDonald Trump, he made a claim about the financial health ofMedicare. What people dont realize is, because of Obamacare, Medicare is going broke, the Wisconsin RepublicantoldFox News hostBret Baieron Nov. 10, 2016. The Affordable Care Act certainly has its detractors. When Ryan claimed the same month that Obamacare is not a popular law, our rating wasMostly True. The polls generally showed most Americans had an unfavorable opinion of it. But surprisingly for Ryan, who is regarded as a federal budget expert, his claim about the law flies in the face of evidence that it actually helps shore up Medicare. What the ACA did on Medicare https://www.sharethefacts.co/share/7de6b429-1d9a-42de-ad08-c7998eaa6ca5 Heres howMarc Goldwein, senior policy director at the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, lays it out: On one side of the ledger, Obamacare slowed the growth of Medicare spending by, among other things, reducing increases in payments made to nearly all health care providers. On the other side of the ledger, the law included a surtax on high-income earners that brings more money into Medicare. Two health care policy experts further told us that the combination of spending curbs and revenue increases forMedicare Part A-- which covers hospital, nursing home and home care services, and is financed mainly through payroll taxes -- has extended the solvency of Medicare. (Medicare Part B, which is voluntary, covers doctor visits and some medical care.) Paul Ginsburg, a professor of the practice of health policy and management at the University of Southern California, pointed us to anOctober 2016 reportfrom the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service. The report noted that in 2010, the Medicare trustees projected that Obamacares spending curbs and revenue increases would mean MedicaresHospital Insurance Trust Fund, which finances Part A, would remain solvent until 2029. Thats 12 years later than had been projected a year before the Affordable Care Act became law. (The projection has since been revisedto 2028.) Michael Sparer, a professor health policy and management at Columbia University in New York, put it this way, financially speaking: If Obamacare were repealed completely, it would put Medicare in worse shape, not better shape. Finally, its worth noting that bothFactcheck.organd the Washington PostFact Checkeralso concluded that Ryans claim is wrong. They both also noted that, even if the Part A trust fund did become depleted in 2028, the program wouldnt be broke, in that it is still set up to cover an estimated 87 percent of expenses. FactCheck.orgs rating was false and the Fact Checker gave Ryan its worst rating, four Pinnocchios, which is for statements deemed to be whoppers. Ryans office opted not to provide us any information to support his claim. Our rating Ryan said: Because of Obamacare, Medicare is going broke. Financially, Medicare isnt entirely in the clear, given that actuaries project that a key reserve fund will run out of money in 2028. But the Medicare trustees themselves, along with a host of experts, say the Affordable Care Acts changes to Medicare -- including holding the line on spending and raising taxes -- actually puts Medicare in better shape than before the law was adopted. Thats a long way from making Medicare go broke. We rate Ryans statement Pants on Fire.

FMD_test_993

The Origins of Princess Leia's Hairstyle

12/30/2016

Following the death of Carrie Fisher, the resurgent interest in her most famous role as Princess Leia in Star Wars prompted renewed attention to the inspiration behind the most distinctive aspect of her character's appearance. Princess Leia's iconic look was inspired by real-life Mexican revolutionaries. The debate regarding Princess (later General) Leia Organa's hair, specifically her hair buns, began in 2002 when Star Wars creator George Lucas offered this explanation to Time magazine: "In the 1977 film, I was working very hard to create something different that wasn't fashion, so I went with a kind of Southwestern Pancho Villa woman revolutionary look, which is what that is. The buns are basically from turn-of-the-century Mexico. Then it took such hits and became such a thing." However, as Remezcla reported, the claim came under question when the character's hair was compared to pictures of adelitas, the women who fought in the Mexican Revolution, which exhibited no such hairstyle. Lucas's revelation about the hairstyle's origins only seemed to cause confusion across the internet. Some found it difficult to locate photographic evidence for Lucas's claims, perhaps only seeing images of soldaderas wearing hats. All that Star Wars historian Michael Heilemann could find were bun-less images of adelitas. As a result, some began to look elsewhere for other possible explanations. In fact, some critics argued that Leia's hair more closely resembled a traditional hairstyle worn by women of the Hopi Native American tribe. Eric Tang, an associate professor of African and African Diaspora Studies at the University of Texas-Austin, contributed to the discussion when he posted a picture taken from a Star Wars exhibition currently on display at the Denver Art Museum that seemingly supported the "Mexican revolutionary" claim. The museum confirmed to Snopes on December 30, 2016, that the referenced photograph was part of their exhibition and sent full-length pictures of the display, along with a transcription of the audio accompanying it. Princess Leia's side cinnamon-bun hairdo was one of the most iconic looks from the original Star Wars films. Some twenty years later, actress Natalie Portman wore these fake hair rolls to reprise the hairstyle as Padmé Amidala in the film Attack of the Clones. Clearly, George Lucas and his team had learned a thing or two in the intervening years. While it took actress Carrie Fisher two hours to have her hair done as Leia, Portman could just pop on her side buns in a matter of minutes. But where did this unusual hairstyle originate in the first place? For Princess Leia in the original Star Wars, George Lucas was inspired by a traditional Hopi Native American hairstyle. For Leia's mother, Padmé, Lucas's prequel team looked at Hopi and Mexican Revolution imagery for inspiration and sketched even more dramatically shaped variations of the coiffure, as you can see in the drawing in this display. The response to Leia's hair had been so overwhelming in the 1970s and beyond that Lucas encouraged the prequel designers to be even more outlandish, drawing everything from space mohawks to snakelike coils, hair nautilus shells, and everything in between. A museum spokesperson could not directly confirm the origin of the picture other than to say it was "sourced from the Lucas Museum of Narrative Art archives at Skywalker Ranch." We contacted Lucasfilm seeking additional information, but the film company did not respond. However, we were able to track it down fairly easily, as it is a famous photograph of Mexican soldadera and guerrilla fighter Clara de la Rocha, as seen below alongside her father, General Herculano de la Rocha. Clara de la Rocha is described in the book Las Soldaderas: Women of the Mexican Revolution as a guerrilla commander who played an important role in the seizing of the city of Culiacán, Sinaloa, in 1911, alongside her father. She eventually earned the rank of coronela, or colonel, in the fight against Porfirio Díaz's regime. One of her descendants, Alexandra de la Rocha, told Public Radio International that she saw Tang's post about the exhibit and recounted some of the soldadera's exploits: "She actually crossed a river on horseback ... and was able to take out a power station in order to allow the rebel forces to attack during the night without being seen. She was a grizzled woman, as her father was. They were mountain people, and were actually miners and owned a lot of land. They were business people." Clara de la Rocha died in 1970 in Culiacán, the site of her most famous battle. While she was certainly not the only inspiration for the Leia Organa character's hairstyle, she was by all accounts a major one.

FMD_test_994

Free $200 Amazon Gift Card

10/23/2014

Claim: Amazon is giving out free $200 gift cards to Facebook users. Examples: [Collected via e-mail, October 2014] Amazon, it appears, is offering a $200 gift card if you "like" their page and comment about your appreciation. Is this for real? How exactly would they pay up?? If you like it, it posts to your facebook stream and other people see it and automatically trust you and click on like and share as well. Origins: In October 2014, a fraudulent offer for a free $200 Amazon gift card started circulating on Facebook. The message contained a link which redirected bargain hunters to a website adorned with Amazon's logo. That website, however, had no affiliation with the retail giant. It was also marked as "High Risk" by Scam Adviser. Scam Adviser The $200 Amazon gift card scam is very similar to recent schemes which targeted Costco and Kroger shoppers. While each scam has slight variations, they all feature three main components. First, they require people to like or share the message on Facebook in an attempt to spread the scam around the Internet. Second, they direct people to complete a fraudulent survey which extracts personal information such as email addresses, telephone numbers, dates of birth and credit card numbers. Lastly, these scams never end with a free monetary gift card. Costco Kroger The Better Business Bureau gave these three tips to identify scams on Facebook: Facebook 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. 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. This isn't the first time that a Facebook scam has targeted Amazon shoppers. A similar scheme circulated around the social networking site in 2011 and again in 2012. 2011 2012 Last updated: 23 October 2014

FMD_test_995

Says federal debt doubled during the Bush administration.

07/19/2012

Former Texas state Rep. Paul Sadler answered a debate question on June 26, 2012, with a call to stop expanding government programs until the federal debt is under control. Squaring off in Dallas with retired teacher Grady Yarbrough, his opponent in the July 31, 2012, runoff for the Democratic U.S. Senate nomination, Sadler said, "Until we get our financial house in order, we cannot continue to spend money. We just can't." "The U.S. has never seen national debt like this," Sadler said. "It doubled during the Bush administration." We decided to see if Sadler's claim about debt under President George W. Bush holds up. Sadler sent us an email with several presidents' names linked to numbers, such as Bill Clinton 1.4, and told us the numbers' sources were the U.S. Treasury, Financial Management Service, Bureau of the Public Debt, Federal Reserve Bank of New York, and Office of Management and Budget. The same figures and sources, listed in the same order, appear on a July 28, 2011, New York Times chart illustrating how much of the federal debt accumulated under each president since 1981. According to the chart, the Bush administration began with a $5.8 trillion gross federal debt, which grew by $6.1 trillion to reach $11.9 trillion—an increase of 105 percent, or slightly more than double. The Times ascribed the increase in debt to tax cuts, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the economic downturn in 2001, and the recession starting in 2007. Following a suggestion from Treasury spokesman Matthew Anderson, we found that plugging the fiscal years of Bush's presidency—October 2001 through September 2009—into the Treasury's online calculator gives debt figures that tally with the Times graphic. While that period begins nearly nine months into Bush's presidency, it also aligns with the years over which he held budgetary sway. Gross federal debt, though, is only one measure of how much the government owes. Because Sadler's numbers match the Times chart, we started with that statistic, which includes money the federal government owes itself, including for programs such as Social Security and Medicare, in addition to public debt. Public debt itself is another commonly used measure. Debt held by the public is money borrowed from investors outside the federal government, in the form of Treasury notes and other securities. Which to use? We consulted Oregon State University political scientist Robert Sahr, who studies U.S. debt, policy, presidents, and inflation. Sahr suggested we use public debt and emailed us part of a textbook's explanation of why net public debt, rather than gross debt, is seen as a better measure of how much government is borrowing. We returned to the Treasury calculator and found that during Bush's fiscal years, public debt rose from $3.3 trillion to $7.6 trillion—up 130 percent, clearly more than double. Also, we asked Sahr whether he agreed that debt doubled under Bush. "Adjusted for inflation," he said, "public debt did not double, though it came close." Sahr produced a spreadsheet for us with fiscal year-end debt numbers from the federal Office of Management and Budget. Among the results: As with the Treasury calculator, 2001-2009 public debt in non-inflation-adjusted dollars went up 130 percent. Adjusted for inflation (to 2011 dollars), though, the increase was 88 percent. Returning to gross federal debt, which was Sadler's basis: Sahr's spreadsheet showed the same 105-percent increase in non-inflation-adjusted dollars as the New York Times chart. In 2011 dollars, though, the increase was 70 percent. Some news analyses have compared changes in debt using inauguration dates. We checked those with the Treasury calculator, finding that from Bush's first inauguration, January 20, 2001, to the day President Barack Obama took office, January 20, 2009, gross federal debt in non-inflation-adjusted dollars rose from $5.7 trillion to $10.6 trillion, up 86 percent. The calculator didn't have an amount for public debt on January 20, 2001, but says the non-adjusted figure was $6.3 trillion on January 20, 2009. When we checked back in with Sadler, he objected to adjusting the debt changes for inflation, saying by email: "I seriously doubt any holder of the debt or your bank would allow you to adjust your debt for inflation. The amount owed is the amount owed—you don't get to adjust it for inflation." Sahr said later: "Sure, you're paying in current dollars. But if you're looking at the change in debt over eight years, part of the change is the change in the value of the dollar over those years." A final note: Such accounting and tallies can be read as blaming Bush alone for the increases. As PolitiFact has noted numerous times, such assumptions are overly sweeping. Many factors are at play, including Congress, which votes on many spending decisions affecting the debt. Our ruling: We see how Sadler reached his conclusion. In raw terms, both the public debt and gross federal debt more than doubled during the fiscal years corresponding to Bush's presidency. However, adjusting for inflation, gross debt increased 70 percent over those years, while public debt increased 88 percent. That's not quite doubling. We rate Sadler's claim Mostly True.

FMD_test_996

Was a UFO Spotted Over New Jersey?

09/16/2020

In mid-September 2020, videos started to circulate on TikTok that supposedly showed an alien spaceship, or unidentified flying object (UFO), flying over New Jersey. The video, which racked up millions of views within a few days, shows several curious onlookers observing the "UFO" near New Jersey's Route 21 highway. While this may have been an unidentified flying object to these onlookers, this "alien spaceship" has since been identified as a Goodyear Blimp. The video was taken on Monday, Sept. 14, in an area close to MetLife Stadium, which was hosting the NFL's Monday Night Football game between the New York Giants and the Pittsburgh Steelers. A Goodyear spokesman told Insider that the company's blimp was indeed flying in the area: "A representative for Goodyear confirmed to Insider that the company flew a blimp in New York City and northern New Jersey on Monday evening to capture aerial footage of the NFL game between the Pittsburgh Steelers and the New York Giants at MetLife Stadium in East Rutherford, New Jersey." The object in the video resembles the size and shape of a Goodyear blimp. The "alien" looking light can also be explained, as many Goodyear blimps are equipped with bright digital displays. While it's easy to see how this large, unidentified, flying, and seemingly glowing object could be mistaken for a UFO, it's also easy to see how the "UFO" in the viral video looks eerily similar to the Goodyear Blimp. Here's a comparison of the "UFO" from the viral video (left) and a genuine photograph of the Goodyear Blimp that was taken in 2016. Young, Jabari. "ESPN's Week 1 Monday Night Football Ratings Fall Nearly 11%." MSNBC. 16 September 2020. Greenspan, Rachel. "Viral Videos of a 'UFO' in New Jersey Really Captured a Goodyear Blimp." Insider. 15 September 2020. CORRECTION [Sept. 17, 2020]: A previous version of this article erroneously stated the NY Jets played the Pittsburgh Steelers on Sept. 14, 2020. It was the NY Giants.

FMD_test_997

Wisconsin Bans Poor People from Buying Shellfish, Potatoes and Ketchup?

05/16/2015

Claim: Wisconsin has passed a bill banning poor people from purchasing shellfish, potatoes, and ketchup. Example: [Collected via e-mail, May 2015] Is this true? Origins: Recent months have seen efforts by lawmakers in several states to limit what recipients of food stamps and other forms of public assistance may purchase with those benefits. For example, a member of the Missouri legislature introduced a bill that would bar recipients of supplemental nutrition assistance programs (SNAP) from using their benefits to purchase cookies, chips, energy drinks, seafood, or steak. Kansas passed a law prohibiting recipients of Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) funds from spending those monies on a variety of goods and services. Similarly, in May 2015, the Wisconsin State Assembly passed a bill (Assembly Bill 177) that would require those who receive food stamps to spend at least two-thirds of their benefits on foodstuffs designated by the state as nutritional items. The list of allowed nutritional items includes meat, fish, fresh produce, and white potatoes, but specifically excludes food stamps from being used for purchases of crab, lobster, shrimp, or any other shellfish. The larger list of allowed foodstuffs excludes such items as white potatoes, nuts, cranberry sauce, popsicles, spaghetti sauce, soup, ketchup, pickles, baked beans, flavored peanut butter, flavored milk, and brown eggs. Contrary to various inaccurate headlines, however, the proposed law (if fully passed and enacted as law) would not "ban" food stamp recipients from purchasing these food items; rather, it would restrict them from spending more than one-third of their SNAP benefits on such foodstuffs. It's also unlikely the bill will be codified as law, as it would require a federal waiver that no state has ever received. No state has received such a waiver, but Rep. Brooks said he believes his bill is less restrictive than some proposed in other states and has a better chance of being implemented. Proponents of the bill argue that it would promote healthier eating habits, which would benefit both food stamp recipients and taxpayers. They argue that limiting the purchase of junk food promotes healthy eating, reduces unspecified "abuses," and benefits society in the long run. "There is a direct financial benefit not just to the individual, which of course is obvious to have better health, but also to state taxpayers and society as a whole," said Assembly Speaker Robin Vos. Opponents, however, contend that the bill would neither promote healthier eating nor reduce fraud. "It's a restriction that's designed just to make the lives of those that are already struggling that much harder," said Rep. Lisa Subeck. "And instead, we should be focusing not on the foods people buy but on putting people to work by creating jobs that get people off of FoodShare." To illustrate Democrats' opposition, Rep. Evan Goyke held a platter of four Wisconsin cheeses. All four were cheddar. One was shredded, and three were in block form. Three displayed flags that said "GOP Prohibited." One flag said "GOP Approved." The approved cheese was a block of mild cheddar. Two sharp cheddars—one shredded and one block—were not approved. One mild cheddar was not approved because it was too large, Goyke said. "The stated goals of this bill are nutrition and fraud," said Rep. Mark Spreitzer. "When you look at something like this cheese plate, there's no evidence of sharp cheddar fraud. People are not buying sharp cheddar in order to defraud FoodShare, and there's no nutritional difference. So if those are the stated goals, the bill is not accomplishing either." Last updated: 16 May 2015

FMD_test_998

Is Netflix Asking Users to Update Payment Information?

11/15/2019

In November 2019, we received a few emails from readers alerting us that they had received an email from someone purporting to be from Netflix that asked them to update their payment information: I believe there is a scam going around in regards to Netflix. My husband received a notice that something is wrong with our account and the link given doesnt go to an actual Netflix website. They ask for all the profile information including a credit number and info. I checked the actual website and our account is in good standing and all the info is accurate. This is not a genuine email from Netflix. This email is an attempt to steal credit card information and is known as a phishing scam. Phishing scams use various forms of bait (hence the name) in an attempt to trick people into giving up personal information, such as passwords or credit card information. These scammers may promise a prize, such as a cash giveaway, in order to entice people to give up their information. Or, as in this case, pose as a trusted company. This Netflix phishing scam has been circulating since at least 2017. In December 2018, so many people had reported they were targeted with a version of this scam that the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) issued a statement called "Netflix phishing scam: Dont take the bait": statement Phishing is when someone uses fake emails or texts to get you to share valuable personal information like account numbers, Social Security numbers, or your login IDs and passwords. Scammers use your information to steal your money, your identity, or both. They also use phishing emails to get access to your computer or network. If you click on a link, they can install ransomware or other programs that can lock you out of your data. Scammers often use familiar company names or pretend to be someone you know. Heres a real world example featuring Netflix. Police in Ohio shared a screenshot of a phishing email designed to steal personal information. The email claims the users account is on hold because Netflix is having some trouble with your current billing information and invites the user to click on a link to update their payment method. Readers can find additional tips on how to spot and respond to this scam here. The FTC has also published a few tips on how to spot similar scams, which we've reproduced below: here How to Recognize PhishingScammers often update their tactics, but there are some signs that will help you recognize a phishing email or text message. Phishing emails and text messages may look like theyre from a company you know or trust. They may look like theyre from a bank, a credit card company, a social networking site, an online payment website or app, or an online store. Phishing emails and text messages often tell a story to trick you into clicking on a link or opening an attachment. They may Netflix has also addressed the phishing scams that have targeted the company's users. The help section of the Netflix website (located at help.Netflix.com) informs readers they can always check the standing of their accounts on the official Netflix website, and that they should never give payment information to third-party outlets: help.Netflix.com Netflix website, If you suspect you have received a fraudulent email or text message that appears to be from Netflix, follow these tips to keep your information safe and secure, and follow the steps below to report the message: How do I report a suspicious or phishing email or text message (SMS)? If you received a suspicious or phishing email, forward it to phishing@netflix.com and delete the email. Please include the message header information, which can be found using this Google article. phishing@netflix.com Google article If you received a suspicious text message (SMS), forward it to phishing@netflix.com using the steps for your device below. phishing@netflix.com Engadget. "How to Recognize and Avoid Phishing Scams." Retrieved 14 November 2019. Lawler, Richard. "FTC Issues Warning About a Netflix Phishing Scam." Engadget. 26 December 2018. Tressler, Colleen. "Netflix Phishing Scam: Dont Take the Bait." FTC. 26 December 2018.

FMD_test_999

Did Nancy Pelosi Tweet That She Is 'Disgusted' with 'President' Trump?

12/29/2017

In December 2017, an image purportedly showing an oddly spaced and strangely punctuated message posted to Twitter by House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, expressing disgust with President Donald Trump's stance on a recently passed (and highly controversial) tax reform bill, received viral attention: passed controversial I am disgusted with "President" Trump allowing people to keep more of the money they earn. It is this type of wide spread theft of public resources that keeps America from being great "Mr. President". This tweet did not appear on Pelosi's Twitter timeline. Although some critics may argue that this only shows that the message was posted and then quickly deleted, that assumption would also be false. timeline For one thing, we could not find a single tweet linking to the original message. More tellingly, however, is the watermark in the bottom right corner of this image. Tweeterino.com is a fake tweet generator that lets users attribute any fictional phrase to any Twitter user. According to the site, hundreds of fake tweets from Nancy Pelosi already exist: fake tweet tweets The House Minority Leader did legitimately post criticism of the tax reform bill, repeatedly calling it a "GOP Tax Scam" and saying that that the bill would explode the deficit, and noted that 86 million middle class families would see a tax hike: There are few things more disturbing than hearing the swell of cheers from the @HouseGOP as they raise taxes on 86 million middle class families. #GOPTaxScam @HouseGOP #GOPTaxScam Nancy Pelosi (@NancyPelosi) December 19, 2017 December 19, 2017 -86 million middle class families get a tax hike-83% of benefits go to the top 1 percent-13 million Americans will be added to the rolls of the uninsured Thats the real story of the #GOPTaxScam. #GOPTaxScam Nancy Pelosi (@NancyPelosi) December 20, 2017 December 20, 2017 The House Minority Leader also appeared to take as much issue with how the legislation was passed as she did with was what it contained, since the following message was pinned to the top of her Twitter timeline: No hearing. No expert testimony. No listening to the American people. That has been the story of the #GOPTaxScam. #GOPTaxScam Nancy Pelosi (@NancyPelosi) December 20, 2017 December 20, 2017 The criticisms levied by Pelosi were backed by reports from nonpartisan organizations such as the Tax Policy Center and Congress's own Joint Committee on Taxation. We wrote about these claims (and several others) in an explainer about the bill. explainer