Datasets:

1-800-SHARED-TASKS

/

COLING-2025-FINNLP-FMD

like 2

Follow

1-800-Shared-Tasks 33

Eric Trump Tweets (Illegal) Ballot Selfie

["Donald Trump's son, Eric, posted -- and then deleted -- a possibly illegal photograph of his ballot on Twitter."]

On 8 November 2016, a screenshot purportedly showing a deleted tweet from Donald Trump's son, Eric, featuring an image of his marked ballot, was widely circulated via social media: "Eric Trump deleted his violation of New York state law, so here it is for posterity" pic.twitter.com/Y0ss1Ew5Wc pic.twitter.com/Y0ss1Ew5Wc, noah kulwin (@nkulw) November 8, 2016. The above-displayed screenshot is real. The tweet was posted by Eric Trump on 8 November 2016 but was deleted shortly afterward. Although the tweet's URL currently leads to Twitter's "Sorry, that page doesn't exist" page, we managed to archive a cached version of the tweet. Taking a "ballot selfie" or posting a photograph showing the inside of your voting booth may or may not be illegal, depending on the state in which you're voting. Unfortunately, Eric Trump posted his ballot picture from New York, a state where "ballot selfies" are still against the law, as a federal judge had affirmed just a few days earlier. A federal judge stated he would not overturn a New York state ban against ballot selfies or the showing of a marked election ballot to others. Manhattan Judge P. Kevin Castel said in a written ruling that people who want to publicize their ballot choices can do so through "other powerful means." The ruling came in response to a lawsuit brought on behalf of voters. The lawsuit contended that voters had a First Amendment right to share a photograph of their ballot with others, even through social media. Lawyers for the state and New York City argued against it. The state contended that a law more than a century old banned people from showing their marked ballot to others. U.S. District Judge Kevin Castel in Manhattan said it would "wreak havoc on election-day logistics" to issue a preliminary injunction against the law, which prohibits the display of "ballot selfies." Under the law, which dates from the 19th century, it is a misdemeanor for voters to share the contents of completed ballots. Violators could face up to one year in prison. Three voters sued on Oct. 26 to block enforcement of the law, saying that sharing ballot selfies was a form of speech protected by the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment. However, the judge stated that because of the imminence of the election, the voters needed to show a "clear or substantial likelihood" that their lawsuit would succeed before he could issue an injunction, and that they had not done so. "The public's interest in orderly elections outweighs the plaintiffs' interest in taking and posting ballot selfies," though they remained free to express their political message through "other powerful means," Castel wrote. It should be noted that Eric Trump's ballot photograph does not include his name or his picture. While it is assumed that the tweet pictured the real ballot Trump used to cast his vote, that element has not been verified. Ohlheiser, Abby. "Yes, Your Ballot Selfie Still Might Be Illegal. Sorry." Washington Post. 8 November 2016. Stempel, Jonathan. "Judge Refuses to Block New York 'Ballot Selfie' Law." Reuters. 3 November 2016.

['interest']

True

eric trump deleted his violation of new york state law, so here it is for posterity pic.twitter.com/Y0ss1Ew5Wc noah kulwin (@nkulw) November 8, 2016Although the tweet's URL currently leads to Twitter's "Sorry, that page doesn't exist" page, we managed to archive a cached version of the tweet:Taking a "ballot selfie" or posting a photograph showing the inside of your voting booth may or may not be illegal, depending upon what state you're voting in. Unfortunately, Eric Trump posted his ballot picture from New York, a state where "ballot selfies" are still against the law as a federal judge had affirmed just a few days earlier:

Was Rev. Al Sharpton Paid $24K to Speak at George Floyd's Funeral?

['You can claim anything if you remove the barrier of evidence. ']

Rumors are surging in the wake of George Floyd's death and resulting protests against police violence and racial injustice in the United States. Stay informed. Read our special coverage, contribute to support our mission, and submit any tips or claims you see here. Read contribute here In June 2020, several social media users copy-pasted a piece of text across social media that claimed the Rev. Al Sharpton was paid $24,000 to speak at the funeral of George Floyd, the Black man whose death while in police custody sparked nationwide protests against police brutality and racial injustice. social media Verbatim or near-verbatim copies of this message "Al Sharpton was paid $24,000 to speak at George Floyd's funeral" have been shared by dozens of users on Facebook and Twitter. The earliest posting of this message that we could find was shared on June 13, a few days after Floyd's funeral service, by Brian Benedetto. That post had been shared more than 69,000 times: However, none of the posts that we examined offered any evidence to support the claim. These posts weren't accompanied by links to news articles, quotes, TV interviews, financial records, or any other evidence to prove this accusation. It seems that this claim was simply conjured up out of thin air. This type of post, a piece of text overlaid on a bright background, is frequently used to share unfounded claims, which are repeated over and over until some people become convinced that they are true. Poynter wrote in 2019: Poynter When Facebook started letting users post text on top of colored backgrounds in 2016, it seemed like a fairly benign way to get people to share more personal thoughts on the platform. [...] But since then, like other formats on Facebook, the text post feature has been weaponized into an effective way to spread misinformation on the platform. Over the past few weeks, some of the most viral hoaxes on Facebook have spread in the form of text posts. They make salacious political claims without linking to any website or attaching a photo or video. They often come from regular Facebook users instead of Pages or Groups. There is no evidence to support the claim that Sharpton was paid $24,000 to speak at Floyd's funeral. This claim did not originate with a credible source and is not supported by any available evidence. However, we can't definitively say that Sharpton was not paid for this speaking engagement. We reached out to Sharpton and The Fountain of Praise Church in Houston for more information and will update this story if we hear back. A video of Sharpton's eulogy can be viewed below: eulogy Funke, Daniel. "Forget Fake News Stories. False Text Posts Are Getting Massive Engagement on Facebook." Poynter. 6 March 2019. Emmrich, Stuart. "The Most Moving Moment of Al Sharptons Eulogy for George Floyd." Vogue. 2 June 2020. CBS Minnesota. "Al Sharpton To Deliver Eulogy At George Floyd Memorial Service." 2 June 2020.

['share']

NEI

Rumors are surging in the wake of George Floyd's death and resulting protests against police violence and racial injustice in the United States. Stay informed. Read our special coverage, contribute to support our mission, and submit any tips or claims you see here.In June 2020, several social media users copy-pasted a piece of text across social media that claimed the Rev. Al Sharpton was paid $24,000 to speak at the funeral of George Floyd, the Black man whose death while in police custody sparked nationwide protests against police brutality and racial injustice.Poynter wrote in 2019:A video of Sharpton's eulogy can be viewed below:

Was This Man Mugged While Delivering Comic Books to His Sick Daughter?

['A photograph of actor Hugh Jackman from a film set was shared online with a joking explanation of what it depicted.']

In March 2017, an image parodying the many heartstring-tugging items that are circulated on Facebook along with exhortations to viewers to "like," "share," or add an "amen" to them itself gained wide currency via social media. The image featured a photograph of a man who was purportedly mugged while delivering comic books to his sick daughter: Of course, the pictured man's wounds did not stem from a mugging, and the pictured girl is neither sick nor the man's daughter. This photograph shows actors Hugh Jackman and Dafne Keen, on the set of the 2017 film Logan. The image was originally posted by Jackman to his Twitter page on 10 March 2017: Twitter Guess who won this battle. Introducing the awesomely talented @DafneKeen @WolverineMovie @20thcenturyfox pic.twitter.com/c0SFq1bel6 @DafneKeen @WolverineMovie @20thcenturyfox pic.twitter.com/c0SFq1bel6 Hugh Jackman (@RealHughJackman) March 10, 2017 March 10, 2017 This viral meme most likely originated as a joke on the Facebook group "Comic Book Collecting," but the image managed to fool some social media users who were unfamiliar with the X-Men/Wolverine film franchise. Facebook Similar japes have circulated on the internet in the past, such as a photograph from the movie Tropic Thunder that was shared as an image of Vietnam veterans, a clip from the movie Grown Ups 2 that was shared with the claim it depicted a dangerous accident in a toy store, and a clip from the movie The Shallows shared as if it depicted a genuine shark attack. Tropic Thunder Grown Ups 2 The Shallows

['share']

False

Of course, the pictured man's wounds did not stem from a mugging, and the pictured girl is neither sick nor the man's daughter.This photograph shows actors Hugh Jackman and Dafne Keen, on the set of the 2017 film Logan. The image was originally posted by Jackman to his Twitter page on 10 March 2017:Guess who won this battle. Introducing the awesomely talented @DafneKeen @WolverineMovie @20thcenturyfox pic.twitter.com/c0SFq1bel6 Hugh Jackman (@RealHughJackman) March 10, 2017This viral meme most likely originated as a joke on the Facebook group "Comic Book Collecting," but the image managed to fool some social media users who were unfamiliar with the X-Men/Wolverine film franchise.Similar japes have circulated on the internet in the past, such as a photograph from the movie Tropic Thunder that was shared as an image of Vietnam veterans, a clip from the movie Grown Ups 2 that was shared with the claim it depicted a dangerous accident in a toy store, and a clip from the movie The Shallows shared as if it depicted a genuine shark attack.

President Joe Biden and Democrats send a fortune to Ukraine but nothing for our children.

[]

An ad in the Georgia U.S. Senate race doesn't mention either incumbent Democratic Sen. Raphael Warnock or his Republican challenger, Herschel Walker. However, the ad, created by the conservative nonprofit Citizens for Sanity, pulls no punches and levels a charge that Democratic policies are abandoning children. In an election featuring two Black candidates, the ad claims that President Joe Biden and his liberal allies treat Black Americans like second-class citizens, following up with images of violent street crime and buildings in ruins. The ad also asserts that Biden and the Democrats send a fortune to Ukraine but nothing for our children. This is ridiculously wrong. Spending on U.S. children in fiscal year 2021 was seven times larger than federal outlays so far for the war in Ukraine. The ad comes amid plummeting Republican support for financial assistance to Ukraine. The percentage of Republicans telling pollsters that the U.S. is doing too much in Ukraine has skyrocketed from 6% in March to 48% today. First, let's set the baseline for how much the United States has spent aiding Ukraine in its fight against Russia. Since the war started in February 2022, Congress has allocated $66 billion to help Ukraine, according to calculations by Mark F. Cancian, a senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington, D.C.-based think tank. That is what has been appropriated by Congress, though some funds won't be spent immediately, such as money for orders of weapons that haven't been fabricated yet. Most of the votes to approve the funding were significantly bipartisan. By comparison, federal spending on U.S. children during Biden's administration has been far larger. Federal outlays on behalf of children were already significant before the pandemic and grew under Biden, according to statistics collected by the Urban Institute, a nonpartisan research organization in Washington, D.C. Under President Donald Trump, existing federal spending on children's behalf—a combination of tax credits, health care, nutrition, education, child care, and housing—amounted to about $7,000 per child. In 2021, during Biden's administration, that number increased by more than 50%, to $10,710. Federal spending on U.S. children in 2021 totaled $482 billion, the Urban Institute found—far more than the $66 billion that has been appropriated to support Ukraine. The increase was largely traceable to Biden's American Rescue Plan, which passed with only Democratic support in Congress just weeks after Biden's 2021 inauguration. One of the bill's centerpieces, an effort to aid children and families, came from an expansion of the child tax credit that taxpayers could receive as a monthly cash payment, rather than waiting for a reduction in what they owed at tax time. The change was for one year only; efforts to extend it permanently have stalled. The bill also provided additional funding to states for education and child care, increased nutritional assistance under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, and added federal funding for Medicaid, the federal-state health insurance plan for low-income Americans. Dozens of other children's programs and tax credits received smaller increases, the Urban Institute said. The child tax credit expansion alone was larger than the total U.S. outlays in Ukraine. More than 36 million families with over 61 million children received more than $92 billion in relief through the child tax credit expansion, according to the Treasury Department. Citizens for Sanity did not respond to an inquiry for this article. On a largely bipartisan basis, Congress has approved roughly $66 billion in assistance to Ukraine. By comparison, proposals supported by Biden and that won the support of only Democrats in Congress spent $482 billion on behalf of U.S. children in 2021. The child tax credit expansion alone paid out $92 billion to U.S. families with children, or 1.5 times the amount the U.S. has spent so far on the war in Ukraine. We rate the statement Pants on Fire!

['Children', 'Federal Budget', 'Foreign Policy', 'Taxes']

False

An ad in the Georgia U.S. Senate race doesnt mention either incumbent Democratic Sen. Raphael Warnock or his Republican challenger, Herschel Walker. But the ad, by the conservative nonprofitCitizens for Sanity, pulls no punches, and levels a charge that Democratic policies are abandoning children.The ad comes amid plummeting Republican support for supporting Ukraine financially. The percentage of Republicans telling pollsters that the U.S. is doing too much in Ukraine hasskyrocketedfrom 6% in March to 48% today.Since the war started in February 2022, Congress has spent $66 billion to help Ukraine,according to calculationsby Mark F. Cancian, a senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington, D.C.-based think tank. That is what has been appropriated by Congress, though some wont be spent immediately, he said, such as money for orders of weapons that havent been fabricated yet.Federal outlays on behalf of children were already significant before the pandemic and grew under Biden, according to statisticscollectedby the Urban Institute, a nonpartisan research organization in Washington, D.C.The child tax credit expansion alone was larger than the total U.S. outlays in Ukraine. More than 36 million families who have more than 61 million children received more than $92 billion in relief through the child tax credit expansion, according to theTreasury Department.

Does This Image Show a Peaceful Meeting of a Lion and a Zebra at a Watering Hole?

['Food and drink, all in the same place!']

Lions and zebras generally do not coexist completely peacefully in the wild. Photographs and videos of these animals together on the plains of Africa frequently depict stalking, hunting, chasing, fighting, and, of course, eating behaviors. This is likely why an image purportedly showing a lion and zebra sharing a moment of peace together at a watering hole is often shared with comments such as "unbelievable but true!" This image has been circulated with various captions over the years, including "It's not eating time," "Alex and Marty" (a reference to the animated zebra-lion friendship in the movie Madagascar), "National Geographic: Behind the Scenes," and "Morning Sam" (a reference to an old cartoon in which Ralph E. Wolf and Sam Sheepdog put their feud on hold when they clock out of work for the day). However, this picture is not an accurate representation of a lion and a zebra enjoying a moment at a watering hole. It was digitally created for a 2010 advertisement for Traveler's Insurance. The general concept of the advertisement was that while animals would normally be skittish at a watering hole (as predators might be nearby), Traveler's Insurance could "take the scary out of life" so that customers might enjoy the world in peace. The description for the advertisement via Coloribus states: "This commercial featuring baboons, lions, zebras, crocodiles, vultures, and all sorts of other animals getting along famously at what would normally be a very dangerous watering hole, is the first spot in the new 'Take the scary out of life' campaign from Travelers Insurance." The viral image may appear genuine when viewed on its own, but in the context of the commercial (where it can be glimpsed around the 10-second mark), it becomes clear that the representation was created with the aid of digital editing. Not only is this image fabricated, but the idea that watering holes serve as neutral safe spaces for thirsty animals does not seem to be supported by much evidence. This notion most likely originated with, or at least was popularized by, a passage from Rudyard Kipling's The Second Jungle Book, in which he described a "water truce" during a severe drought: "By the Law of the Jungle it is death to kill at the drinking-places when once the Water Truce has been declared. The reason for this is that drinking comes before eating. Everyone in the Jungle can scramble along somehow when only game is scarce; but water is water, and when there is but one source of supply, all hunting stops while the Jungle People go there for their needs. In good seasons, when water was plentiful, those who came down to drink at the Waingunga or anywhere else, for that matter, did so at the risk of their lives, and that risk made no small part of the fascination of the night's doings." This water truce played a part in Disney's live-action remake of The Jungle Book, released in 2016. Lions sometimes do not attack typical prey animals for various reasons (e.g., they are severely outnumbered; they cannot match the speed of the prey without first sneaking up on it), but if a lion is hungry, the concept of a waterhole "truce" will not stop it. A 2013 study about the predatory habits of a group of lions in Zimbabwe's Hwange National Park found that the felines frequently hunted near watering holes, especially when resources were scarce, as such sites are frequented by a variety of prey. The study noted, "Lion kills were located in a preferentially selected zone around artificial waterholes, suggesting that these scarce resources form passive traps for ungulate prey. Lions are stalk-and-ambush hunters that use vegetative cover for concealment during hunting and are known to ambush prey in habitats surrounding high-prey abundance areas. In the Hwange ecosystem, lion habitat selection and movements are driven by waterholes, and lions appear to rotate their hunting behavior between these different hunting grounds. Water sources are also considered crucial in lion habitat selection in the Serengeti and are thought to act as passive traps for ungulates in the Kruger ecosystem. Contrary to our predictions, areas close to waterholes were highly selected for kills regardless of seasonal conditions."

['insurance']

False

This image has been shared with a variety of captions over the years, such as "It's not eating time," "Alex and Marty" (a reference to the animated zebra-lion friendship in the movie Madagascar), "National Geographic: Behind the Scenes," and "Morning Sam" (a reference to an old cartoon in which Ralph E. Wolf and Sam Sheepdog put their feud on hold when they clock out of work for the day):Here's the description for the advertisement via Coloribus:Not only is this image a fabricated one, but the idea that watering holes serve as neutral safe-spaces for thirsty animals doesn't appear to be backed by much evidence. This idea most likely originated with, or at least was popularized by, a passage from Rudyard Kipling's The Second Jungle Book in which he described a "water truce" during a severe drought:A 2013 study about the predatory habits of a group of lions in Zimbabwe's Hwange National Park found that the felines frequently hunted near watering holes, especially when resources were scarce, as such sites are frequented by a variety of prey:

Michelle Obama at Soup Kitchen

['Photograph shows Michelle Obama serving a government funded soup kitchen meal to a person with an expensive cell phone?']

Claim: Photograph shows Michelle Obama serving a government funded soup kitchen meal to a person with an expensive cell phone. REAL PHOTOGRAPH; INACCURATE DESCRIPTION Examples: [Collected via e-mail, June 2009] Recently Michelle Obama went to serve food to the homeless at a government funded soup kitchen. Cost of a bowl of soup at homeless shelter: $0.00 dollars Having Michelle Obama Serve you your soup: $0.00 dollars Snapping a picture of a homeless person who is receiving a government funded meal while taking a picture of the first lady using his $500 Black Berry cell phone and $100.00 per month cellular service: Priceless Origins: The above-displayed photograph is genuine, a snapshot taken on an occasion in March 2009 when Michelle Obama spent some time serving lunch to men and women at Miriam's Kitchen, a social service agency in Washington D.C., as part of the First Lady's effort to "spotlight local organizations, connect with the city and help those in need amid the economic crisis." However, all the assumptions and implications of the text accompanying this picture are incorrect or unsubstantiated. To wit: The photograph does not depict anyone "receiving a government funded meal": Miriam's Kitchen is a privately funded organization with the goal of "providing individualized services that address the causes andconsequences of homelessness in an atmosphere of dignity and respect"; it is not government run or taxpayer funded. Miriam's Kitchen A cell phone capable of capturing images (even a BlackBerry Pearl) is not necessarily a "$500 phone" with a "$100 per month cellular service." Many much more affordable options are available, including cellular providers who give free phones to low-income customers under the Lifeline assistance program. So a homeless person might very well carry a cell phone, as Scott Schenkelberg, the Executive Director of Miriam's Kitchen, observed when questioned about this photograph during an interview: BlackBerry Pearl affordable Lifeline interview Q: Since the First Lady's visit, both your guests and your food have been the subject of some criticism within the blogosphere. For example, some critics noted thatone of your guests had a cell phone and suggested that it was inappropriate to serve free food to someone who could afford a cell phone. A: I suspect some people don't understand how inexpensive cell phones are, or how critical they are to this population. These days, you can purchase a cell phone at 7-11 for $10, then pay for minutes as you go. Our clients have a very fragile safety net. Many of them don't have shelter and are extremely vulnerable. For them, cell phones could literally be a lifeline. If they're looking for a job, the cell phone would also be incredibly important can you even imagine trying to apply for a job without a phone number? Cell phones simply aren't luxuries anymore. If a guest can scrape together some money to purchase a cell phone, I think that's wonderful. The assumption that a truly homeless person wouldn't have (or couldn't afford) a cell phone is also a mistaken one. As Scott Schenkelberg noted, the ranks of the homeless served by organizations such as Miriam's Kitchen include not just the long-term, chronically homeless, but also the "newly homeless": those who had recently been getting by economically until a sudden job loss or other reversal left them with nowhere to go: Until recently, we served mostly the chronically homeless, people who had fallen out of the economy long ago. More recently, we've been seeing more new faces, people who just fell into homelessness or other hard times. These people are generally high-functioning individuals who were hurt by the poor economy. It's very troubling to see previously self-sufficient people coming to Miriam's Kitchen in such high numbers. Last updated: 16 June 2009 Sweet, Lynn. "Can Michelle Influence what We Eat, Too?" Chicago Sun-Times. 6 March 2009 (p. C10). Associated Press. "First Lady Puts Service on the Menu." The Australian. 7 March 2009.

['loss']

NEI

The photograph does not depict anyone "receiving a government funded meal": Miriam's Kitchen is a privately funded organization with the goal of "providing individualized services that address the causes andconsequences of homelessness in an atmosphere of dignity and respect"; it is not government run or taxpayer funded. A cell phone capable of capturing images (even a BlackBerry Pearl) is not necessarily a "$500 phone" with a "$100 per month cellular service." Many much more affordable options are available, including cellular providers who give free phones to low-income customers under the Lifeline assistance program. So a homeless person might very well carry a cell phone, as Scott Schenkelberg, the Executive Director of Miriam's Kitchen, observed when questioned about this photograph during an interview:

Trey Gowdy Admitted Nothing Could Have Saved Benghazi Victims?

['Rep. Trey Gowdy conceded a point of dispute in the Benghazi controversy, but it was misleading to characterize his remark as an "accidental" admission.']

One of the most polarizing events ofthe Obama administration was an11 September 2012 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, leaving four Americans dead and years of partisan bickering in its wake. In May 2016, comments made by Rep. Trey Gowdy, the chairman of the Select Committee on Benghazi, became popular on social media. The controversy aboutGowdy's remarks began with a 15 May 2016 letter [PDF] sent to Trey Gowdy, Chairman of the House Select Committee on the Events Surrounding the 2012 Terrorist Attack in Benghazi, by Elijah Cummings and Adam Smith, two House committee members, objecting to the former's incessant demands for information about Benghazi from the Department of Defense (DOD): PDF We are writing to object to your repeated, unnecessary, and ever-changing demands for information from the Department of Defense. Our nation's warfighters are charged with a solemn responsibility, but your evolving list of increasing demands is now putting a strain on the Pentagon that is completely unwarranted, unreasonable, and unjustified. Contrary to your claims that the Select Committee has made "significant breakthroughs," the information we have received over the past two years is consistent with many previous investigations into the attack, including those conducted by the independent House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, and the House Committee on Armed Services. In some cases, witnesses have provided new details, but they do not alter the fundamental conclusions of these previous investigations. None of the witnesses has provided any evidence to support reckless allegations made by Republicans to justify the creation of the Select Committee, and we have obtained no evidence that the Defense Department was ordered to stand down or withhold critical aid to those in need. In that letter, Cummings and Smith cited January 2016 remarks made by Gowdy's former Chief Counsel, retired Army Lt. Gen. Dana Chipman, that they contended showed Gowdy's investigation to be unnecessary: Chief Counsel Unfortunately, your letter failed to include any statements from your own former Republican Chief Counsel a retired three-star general with more than 33 years of service in the United States Army who repeatedly commended the military's actions on the night of the attacks during closed interviews with Defense Department officials. For example, on January 8, 2016, the Select Committee conducted a transcribed interview with former Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta. During that interview, your former Chief Counsel stated: I think you ordered exactly the right forces to move out and to head toward a position where they could reinforce what was occurring in Benghazi or in Tripoli or elsewhere in the region. And, sir, I dont disagree with the actions you took, the recommendations you made, and the decisions you directed. Your former Chief Counsel acknowledged that it is clear from the time and distances involved that none of the military forces could have gotten to Benghazi in time to save lives. He stated: And, again, sir, I dont mean to suggest that anything could have been done differently to affect the outcome in Benghazi, and I think you would agree with that. In addition, on January 13, 2016, the Select Committee conducted a transcribed interview with the Defense Departments former Chief of Staff, Jeremy Bash. During that interview, your former Republican Chief Counsel stated: I would posit that from my perspective, having looked at all the materials over the last 18 months, we could not have affected the response to what occurred by 5:15 in the morning on the 12th of September if Benghazi, Libya. So let me start with that positing or that stipulation ... I dont see any way to influence what occurred there. But what I am worried about is were caught by surprise On 9/11, weve got nothing postured to respond in a timely manner and you can debate whats timely, whats untimely, but nothing could have affected what occurred in Benghazi. The conclusions of your former Republican Chief Counsel match almost exactly the findings from more than two years ago of the House Committee on Armed Services, which conducted its own investigation into the attacks in Benghazi. Rep. Buck McKeon, the Republican Chairman of the Committee who led that investigation, concluded at the time, I think Ive pretty well been satisfied that given where the troops were, how quickly the thing all happened and how quickly it dissipated, we probably couldnt have done more than we did. The letter also referenced unflattering comments made about Gowdy's handling of the investigation by fellow Republicans: The letter concluded by saying that Gowdy had personally "damaged the credibility of the Select Committee beyond repair." Pundits and media critics characterized some of the Committee's activities to be a larger part of a "stand down conspiracy theory" continually unsupported by factual analyses of the events of that day. On 18 May 2016, the Select Committee on Benghazi Democrats published a videoto their YouTube channel showing Gowdy being questioned by a Fox News interviewer about Gen. Chipman's supposedly having said that no U.S. military forces could have gotten to Benghazi in time to save lives. A description published alongside that video said that Gowdy had "finally conceded" a key point: After years of repeated Republican conspiracy theories that Secretary Hillary Clinton or others ordered the U.S. military to stand down in Benghazi or otherwise prevented a military response that could have saved American lives, Rep. Trey Gowdy, the Chairman of the House Select Committee on Benghazi, finally conceded in an interview on FOX News that the military could not have gotten to Benghazi in time to save the lives of the four Americans killed that night: Whether or not they could have gotten there in time, I dont think there is any issue with respect to that they couldnt. His admission comes after Democrats released statements from his Chief Counsel earlier this week from closed-door interviews conducted by the Select Committee with Defense Secretary Panetta and his Chief of Staff, Jeremy Bash. In response, Benghazi Select Committee Ranking Member Elijah E. Cummings, House Armed Services Ranking Member Adam Smith, and House Intelligence Ranking Member Adam Schiff issued the following statements: Chairman Gowdy has finally admitted what we have all known for years: the central Republican allegation that the military was told to withhold assets that could have saved lives in Benghazi for political reasons is wrong, said Ranking Member Cummings. Based on the Chairmans admission today, I call on the Select Committee to stop harassing the Pentagon with baseless demands, release the transcripts of our witness interviews, and stop wasting millions of taxpayer dollars dragging out the investigation closer and closer to the election. During the Fox News interview, Gowdy was asked whether General Chipman had in fact "said from the beginning that nothing could be done to save the four Americans in Benghazi." Gowdy confusingly denied that was true, contesting that General Chipman's remark, as quoted by Cummings and Smith in their letter, was a "very small point" taken out of context, then himself stated that U.S. troops could not have reached Benghazi in time to save lives: Q: There's a report that's floating out there that says your attorney, General Dana Chipman, said from the beginning that nothing could be done to save the four Americans in Benghazi in September of 2012. Is that true? A: No, sir. Dana Chipman is an honorable man, he served his country with great distinction, and he served this committee with great distinction. That [letter] was a transcript from one question he asked Leon Panetta and Jeremy Bash. When you see the full transcript, and you will, then you will see what Dana was talking about was a very small point. The posture of the troops, the order that was given by Panetta and the President, how that order was received, all that is what we want to ask people about. Whether or not they could have gotten there in time, I don't think there's any issue with respect to that. They couldn't. The next issue is, why could you not? Why were you not positioned to do it? Multiple online references to this interview maintained that Gowdy had "accidentally" admitted that no lives could have been saved in Benghazi, but that characterization was inaccurate: hespoke deliberately during an interview in which he appeared specifically to discuss the issue, and he followed up his statement that military forces could not have rescued the Benghazi victims by questioning why troops "were not positioned to do it." Whether Gowdy would have otherwise stated such had the controversial letter not been leaked was a matter of speculation, but itistrue that heaffirmed that help could not have arrived in time to save the lives of the victims of the Benghazi attacks. Daly, Matthew. "Gowdy Remarks Stir Partisan Benghazi Feud." Associated Press. 18 May 2016. McAuliff, Michael. "Trey Gowdys Former Top Lawyer Undercuts the Benghazi Committee." Huffington Post. 16 May 2016. U.S. House of Representatives Select Committee on Benghazi. "More Than 10,000 Days of Delays: Obama Admins Delays of Benghazi Documents Equivalent to Over 27 Years." 18 May 2016.

['asset']

True

The controversy aboutGowdy's remarks began with a 15 May 2016 letter [PDF] sent to Trey Gowdy, Chairman of the House Select Committee on the Events Surrounding the 2012 Terrorist Attack in Benghazi, by Elijah Cummings and Adam Smith, two House committee members, objecting to the former's incessant demands for information about Benghazi from the Department of Defense (DOD):In that letter, Cummings and Smith cited January 2016 remarks made by Gowdy's former Chief Counsel, retired Army Lt. Gen. Dana Chipman, that they contended showed Gowdy's investigation to be unnecessary:

FDIC Insurance Pays Out Over 99 Years?

['After a bank failure, does the FDIC have 99 years to pay back insured deposits?']

Claim: After a bank failure, the FDIC has 99 years to pay back insured deposits. Examples: [Collected via e-mail, July 2008] I heard an "expert" on KFI AM 640 in LA say the FDIC has up to 99 years to repay you in the event of a bank failure. This sounds like a misrepresentation, but when asked by the host, she said, "It's in the fine print." [Collected via e-mail, September 2008] I have heard a story about a man who enters a bank week after week, making a deposit of a government check for a seemingly insignificant amount (the number I heard was $0.35 per check). The teller asks why he is depositing such a small check. His response is that his bank went bust and that the checks are from the FDIC. The gist of this apocryphal tale is that FDIC insurance is not a good thing and that if it does pay out, it will take forever to recover your "insured" loss. This tale was repeated yesterday to my sister-in-law by a bank teller trying to dissuade her from moving an uninsured money market account to an FDIC-insured CD with another bank. Origins: Economic turmoil in the United States in recent years has prompted many Americans to consider just how safe their money is, especially in light of some bank failures that have reminded us that even seemingly secure investments, such as ordinary savings accounts, are not completely risk-free. Although most bank customers are aware that their deposits are insured, they aren't necessarily familiar with the details of how that insurance works, a circumstance that has fostered the spread of rumors that create additional insecurity. After a wave of bank failures that followed the stock market crash of 1929 and the prolonged economic depression that ensued, the U.S. federal government created the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) to restore public confidence in (and help stabilize) the U.S. banking system. The FDIC provided federal government guarantees of deposits up to $100,000 per account holder per bank (and up to $250,000 per account holder for deposit retirement accounts), subject to certain conditions, at insured financial institutions. FDIC bank failures in the U.S. have been a relatively uncommon phenomenon since the savings-and-loan crisis of the late 1980s, so many consumers have had little or no exposure to the process by which FDIC deposit insurance works, a circumstance that has led to the uncertainty reflected in the examples cited above. Widely believed rumors hold that FDIC insurance actually covers just a small fraction of the original deposit amount (e.g., 1.5%), or that the FDIC only reimburses depositors in full over a very long period of time (e.g., 99 years), resulting in the mistaken belief that FDIC insurance isn't really much of a guarantee at all. In fact, these rumors are so prevalent that they were included (as numbers #3 and #4) in a list of the top ten misconceptions about the FDIC published in the Spring 2006 edition of the FDIC Consumer News newsletter, where they were addressed as follows: If a bank fails, the FDIC could take up to 99 years to pay depositors for their insured accounts. This is a completely false notion that many bank customers have reported hearing from someone attempting to sell them another kind of financial product. The truth is that federal law requires the FDIC to pay the insured deposits "as soon as possible" after an insured bank fails. Historically, the FDIC pays insured deposits within a few days after a bank closes, usually the next business day. In most cases, the FDIC will provide each depositor with a new account at another insured bank. Or, if arrangements cannot be made with another institution, the FDIC will issue a check to each depositor. The FDIC pays failed-bank depositors 100 percent of their insured funds, including principal and interest. All too often, we receive questions similar to this one: "Is it true that if my FDIC-insured bank fails, I would only get $1.31 for every $100 in my checking account?" As with misconception number 3, this misinformation appears to be spread by some financial advisors and salespeople. Federal law requires the FDIC to pay 100 percent of the insured deposits up to the federal limit. If your bank fails and you have deposits over the limit, you may be able to recover some or, in rare cases, all of your uninsured funds. However, the overwhelming majority of depositors at failed institutions are within the insurance limit, and insured funds are always paid in full. As noted, this type of misinformation is often passed along by unscrupulous or misinformed financial advisors who are trying to steer customers toward investments or accounts that are not insured. If you have any doubts about exactly what is or is not covered by FDIC insurance, you may want to undertake some additional verification on your own. *Note: In October 2008, the FDIC insurance limit was temporarily increased to $250,000 per account, with that increase slated to remain in effect through the end of 2009, but subsequently extended through the end of 2013. In July 2010, the FDIC insurance limit was permanently increased to $250,000 per depositor, per insured depository institution for each account ownership category. Last updated: 8 April 2014

['stock market']

False

After a wave of bank failures that came in the wake of the stock market crash of 1929 and the prolonged economic depression that followed, the U.S. federal government created the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) to restore public confidence in (and help stabilize) the U.S. banking system. The FDIC provided federal government guarantees of deposits up to $100,000 per account holder per bank (and up to $250,000 per account holder for deposit retirement accounts), subject to certain conditions, at insured financial institutions.* In July 2010 the FDIC insurance limit was permanently increased to $250,000 per depositor, per insured depository institution for each account ownership category.

Major Oil Companies

['E-mail criticizes U.S. environmental regulations on the oil industry.']

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.

['economy']

False

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: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: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).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.

Says Hillary Clintons top 10 donors are mainly banks, corporations and media, while Bernie Sanders top 10 donors are labor unions.

[]

As Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders gains ground on Democratic presidential frontrunner Hillary Clinton, the two candidates supporters have been sparring, including over campaign donations. Recently, a reader sent us a social media meme that paints Clintons list of donors as dominated by corporate interests, whereas Sanders top 10 donors come largely from labor unions -- a dichotomy that, to Democratic primary voters, puts Sanders in a more favorable light. Hillary: Top ten donor list. Representing banks, corporations and media, the meme reads, providing a top-10 list with dollar amounts. Bernie: Top ten donor list. Representing people. The meme is topped by each candidates presidential campaign logo. (See the meme below.) We cant tell who produced this meme, but we thought it was worth a closer look. Well start by noting that reasonable people can disagree about whether labor unions represent people, as the meme says, as opposed to just unionized workers, who are a relatively small subset of the entire population. Well also note that while this meme may appeal to union supporters and critics of Wall Street and big corporations, it also could be used as evidence that Sanders is just as reliant on one type of donor -- labor unions -- as Clinton is on big corporations. We found that the data cited in the meme refers to cumulative donations over the course of each candidates political career as calculated by the Center for Responsive Politics, not just fundraising from the current presidential cycle. (ClintonandSandershave announced their fundraising hauls for the second quarter of 2015, but have not yet released the full data that is due at the Federal Election Commission by July 15; a more complete analysis of the data will be compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics after that.) ForClinton, we found a high degree of similarity with the meme when we checked the database on July 6. Clintons top 10 cumulative donors between between 1999 and 2016 were, in descending order, Citigroup ($782,327), Goldman Sachs ($711,490), DLA Piper ($628,030), JPMorgan Chase ($620,919), EMILYs List ($605,174) Morgan Stanley ($543,065), Time Warner ($411,296), Skadden Arps ($406,640), Lehman Brothers ($362,853) and Cablevision Systems ($336,288). That list is quite close to what the meme says. It includes five financial-services companies, two law firms that do a lot of corporate work, two media conglomerates and one group, EMILYs list, that supports abortion-rights Democratic candidates. Its worth noting that Clinton was a senator from New York, meaning that some of the donors on her list were not simply Wall Street and corporate behemoths, but also constituents, based in New York. The database results forSandersare also quite close to whats in the meme. The data for Sanders goes back to 1989. His top 10 are, in descending order, Machinists/Aerospace Workers union ($105,000), Teamsters union ($93,700), National Education Association ($84,350), United Auto Workers ($79,650), United Food & Commercial Workers union ($72,500), Communications Workers of America ($68,000), Laborers Union ($64,000), Carpenters & Joiners Union ($62,000), National Association of Letter Carriers ($61,000), and the American Association for Justice ($60,500). In the meme, the letter carriers union makes the list, but the Center for Responsive Politics has the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees cracking the top 10 instead. Either way, nine of the 10 are unions, and the tenth is the national association representing plaintiffs attorneys. During his career, Sanders has received strong support from progressive Democrats, so this pattern of financial backing is not surprising. So the meme is pretty accurate for both candidates. However, we see a few things worth pointing out. As we noted, this data refers to their entire political careers back to the 1990s. Once the full presidential data is released, those figures may show different patterns. That is not made clear in the meme, said Anthony J. Corrado, a campaign-finance expert at Colby College. Most people would assume that this is money raised so far in the 2016 presidential campaign. Also, the donors listed are not the ones who gave the money, since that would be against the law. Rather, it was their PACs, employees and those employees families. In fact, due to how the forms are filled out, the data is less likely to capture individual donations from union members than from employers of companies. Most individual donations are listed by employer, and if, say, a union carpenter lists his affiliation as his company, the fact that hes a union member wouldnt be recorded. Finally, lists such as this ignore that both candidates are collecting many small donations, too. According to the Clinton campaign, she raised roughly $50 million in contributions under $200 during her '08 campaign. Data for the 2016 cycle is not available yet. All told, its possible to look at the top donors on the two lists and say both candidates are captive to a particular set of interest groups, said Kyle Kondik, managing editor of Sabatos Crystal Ball at the University of Virginia Center for Politics. However, he added, labor is a Democratic constituency whose beliefs generally line up with Democratic policies, and were talking about a Democratic primary here. So all things being equal, Sanders donor list probably looks better, politically, than Clintons. Kondik added that, as the meme indicates, Clinton has a much larger reservoir of money than Sanders has. The value of having a large financial advantage over your competitors in a primary setting seems to be worth occasional questions about how the financial advantage was built, he said. Our ruling Social media memes say that Clintons top 10 donors are mainly banks, corporations and media, while Bernie Sanders top 10 donors are labor unions. This contention fits quite closely with campaign data from the Center for Responsive Politics. However, its worth noting that this data refers to cumulative donations as far back as the 1980s, rather than just donations to their current presidential bids. The statement is accurate but needs clarification, so we rate it Mostly True.

['National', 'Campaign Finance']

True

We found that the data cited in the meme refers to cumulative donations over the course of each candidates political career as calculated by the Center for Responsive Politics, not just fundraising from the current presidential cycle. (ClintonandSandershave announced their fundraising hauls for the second quarter of 2015, but have not yet released the full data that is due at the Federal Election Commission by July 15; a more complete analysis of the data will be compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics after that.)ForClinton, we found a high degree of similarity with the meme when we checked the database on July 6.The database results forSandersare also quite close to whats in the meme. The data for Sanders goes back to 1989.

Was there an allegation that Derek Chauvin failed to report $500,000 in income?

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

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

['taxes']

NEI

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

Costco 'Free Grocery Box' Scam

['Making fraudulent promises about free holiday groceries as unemployment rises during a pandemic is a surefire way to earn coal in your stocking. ']

On Nov. 29, 2020, a Facebook page purporting to represent Costco, a chain of membership-only warehouse stores, posted a message offering a free grocery box to anyone who shared and commented on their post. The message was allegedly written by Costco's CEO, Craig Jelinek (whose name was misspelled "Jelinekand" in this scam Facebook post due to a typo): "My name is Craig Jelinekand, and I'm the CEO of Costco Inc. To celebrate our 35th birthday, every single person who shares and comments in the next 24 hours will get one of these Christmas Food Boxes delivered straight to their door on Monday, November 30th. Each food box contains groceries worth $250 and a $35 Costco voucher. Make sure you validate your entry. Limit one food box per person." This message was not posted on Costco's official page, nor was it written by the company's CEO. This is a scam shared by an imposter Facebook page. A nearly identical version of this scam (with Aldi swapped in for Costco) was also shared on social media in November 2020. Costco has not commented on this scam offer yet, but Aldi posted a message on Facebook alerting their customers about the scam: "Hey ALDI fans! Looks like another Facebook scam is making its way around. We can confirm it is a scam, and the page has no affiliation with ALDI. We're sorry for any confusion this may have caused! We have been working with Facebook since yesterday to get the page taken down, but we'd love your help! Please share this post to help us spread the word, and always be sure to look for the blue check mark by our name for authenticity!" One indication that this "free Costco grocery box" offer is a scam is that it did not originate on Costco's Facebook page. Rather, this message was shared to a page called "Costco US," whereas Costco's real page is called "Costco." Here's a screenshot of the real page (left) that has a verified symbol and the fake page (right), which does not. Social media users could have also clicked the "Page Transparency" button on Facebook to uncover more details about this fake page. In this case, the page transparency button reveals that the scam "Costco US" page was created on Nov. 29, the same day that this "free grocery box" scam started to circulate. It would be unusual, to say the least, for Costco to start an entirely new page (one that its shoppers do not know about) to host a giveaway. A reverse image search on the included photos also shows that this page is not legitimate. The image supposedly showing "free Costco grocery boxes" is actually several years old and did not originally display boxes adorned with the "Costco" logo. The original image shows plain cardboard boxes. The scammers inserted a digital version of the Costco logo to make it seem like the store was genuinely giving away boxes of groceries. A similar scam involving the grocery store Aldi also used a doctored version of this image. The best way to tell that this offer is a scam, however, is to ask yourself a simple question: Does it seem too good to be true? This type of scam is commonplace on social media. A fraudulent page (in this case, a fake Costco page) posts an especially appealing offer (free grocery boxes) and then asks social media users to like, share, or comment on the post. This ensures that the scam message will spread to as many people as possible, giving the fraudsters a better chance of success. "Success," in this case, means tricking people into parting with personal information, such as email addresses, passwords, or credit card numbers. We've had many occasions to alert readers to this kind of fraud: These types of viral coupon scams often involve websites and social media pages set up to mimic those of legitimate companies. Users who respond to those fake offers are required to share a website link or social media post to spread the scam more widely and lure in additional victims. Then those users are presented with a survey that extracts personal information such as email addresses, telephone numbers, dates of birth, and sometimes even credit card numbers. Finally, those who want to claim their free gift cards or coupons eventually learn they must first sign up to purchase a number of costly goods, services, or subscriptions. The Better Business Bureau offers consumers several general tips to avoid getting scammed.

['share']

False

The message was purportedly written by Costco's CEO Craig Jelinek (whose name was misspelled "Jelinekand" in this scam Facebook post due to a typo):Costco has not commented on this scam offer yet, but Aldi posted a message to Facebook alerting their customers about the scam:One indication that this "free Costco grocery box" offer is a scam is that it did not originate on Costco's Facebook page. Rather, this message was shared to a page called "Costco US," whereas Costco's real page is called "Costco." Here's a screenshot of the real page (left) that has a verified symbol and the fake page (right), which does not. A reverse image search on the included photos also shows that this page is not on the up-and-up. The image supposedly showing "free Costco grocery boxes" is actually several years old and did not originally show boxes adorned with the "Costco" logo. The original image (below) shows plain cardboard boxes. The scammers inserted a digital version of the Costco logo in order to make it seem like the store was truly giving away boxes of groceries. A similar scam involving the grocery store Aldi also used a doctored version of this image:The Better Business Bureau offers consumers several general tips to avoid getting scammed:

Alka-Seltzer Marketing

['Did Alka-Seltzer dramatically increase their sales by instructing consumers to use two tablets instead of one?']

Claim: Alka-Seltzer dramatically increased its sales by instructing consumers to use two tablets instead of one. Origins: The history of corporate America is replete with examples (both real and apocryphal) of schemes to manipulate consumers into not only purchasing new products but also buying more of the products they already use. Nearly everyone has heard the tale of the clever marketing man who doubled his company's sales of its shampoo product by adding the final word to the instructions: "Lather. Rinse. Repeat." Countless comedians have mused on the deliberate waste promoted by selling hot dogs in packs of eight while buns come in packages of twelve. "Artificial obsolescence"—the yearly introduction of superficial stylistic changes in big-ticket items such as automobiles and appliances to lure status-conscious consumers into replacing perfectly functional products—dates back to the 1920s. In that decade, the auto industry faced a crisis: by 1926, according to reliable estimates, everyone who could afford a car already had one, and in 1927, production and sales declined for the first time. The answer was not Fordism—the durable, dependable, unchanging Model T. No, the solution was Sloanism, or the annual style change named for Alfred P. Sloan, president of General Motors. The object of superficial changes in detail on a yearly basis, Sloan said, was "to create demand for new value and, so to speak, create a certain amount of dissatisfaction with past models as compared with the new one." When Sloanism began in the 1920s, the notion that a serviceable product could be rendered obsolete by appearance alone was transferred from the apparel of the upper class to the single most important industrial product in America. With the help of the ad copywriter, status and symbolism became compelling reasons for buying a new car, even though the old black Ford in the yard still ran like a top. In the early 1960s, Alka-Seltzer, the venerable fizzy heartburn and acid indigestion pain-relief tablet, found itself in a predicament similar to that of automakers in the late 1920s. As exemplified by Speedy, the "cartoon disk with a squeaky voice and pop eyes" who had been introduced in the early days of television and by the 1960s was one of the corniest mascots still in use to sell an adult product, Alka-Seltzer had fallen out of favor with the younger segment of the drug-buying public. Alka-Seltzer's customers were mostly older individuals, and the product was not attracting many new buyers among American youth, for whom it "had become the symbol of people who drank too much and ate too much ... the unforgivable symbol of a slob, a hangover cure." Nor was the typical advertising of the era likely to appeal to them: traditionally, pain-relief products had been advertised in gruesome commercials filled with horrors that would have caused pain if you didn't already have it. People ran around groaning, clutching their heads and stomachs; men and women crawled into corners and shrieked "Pain! Pain! Pain!" at television viewers who immediately turned off their sets. In one Frankensteinian commercial, an ugly Neanderthal man endured a series of tortures: hammers dropped from the skies to pound his head, hoses appeared like snakes to whip him with water, and straitjackets tied him up. You wanted to scream at him to "get off my telly!" People did not watch proprietary drug advertising unless they already had a headache or stomach problem and were looking for a quick fix, so most of the time, from the advertiser's point of view, advertising was like throwing money into a black hole. The creative minds at the (Jack) Tinker & Partners advertising think tank solved the problem by coming up with different reasons for people to take Alka-Seltzer and fashioning a series of entertaining commercials around those themes: [We] created the kickoff commercial that set the style for all the variety of commercials that followed. It was a truly wonderful, iconic commercial, an ovation to stomachs, a sweet-natured montage of big ones, little ones, slim ones, and fat ones, all filmed at stomach level. There was a street digger's jackhammer stomach, a young chick's bare midriff, and two men talking, facing each other—one with a flat stomach and one with a big round one—an array of stomachs presented with self-deprecating humor and sweet humanness to a happy, bouncy tune. "No matter what shape your stomach's in" was its opening phrase. Self-deprecating humor was new and popular in the sixties and unheard of in drug commercials; when it appeared, it was news. It was followed by 16 completely different commercials, each entertaining and stylish, each giving you a different reason to take Alka-Seltzer. One of these 16 commercials was based on an "Alka-Seltzer on the Rocks" theme, for which Tinker & Partners created "a frothy, luminous commercial composed of nothing but two Alka-Seltzers dropping into a crystal glass of water." The key phrase here was "two Alka-Seltzers"—up until this series of ads, both the Speedy commercials and Alka-Seltzer's packaging had promoted the use of only a single tablet at a time. We met an attractive doctor at Miles [Laboratories], Dorothy Carter, who demonstrated to us that in order for aspirin to break through the pain barrier, it often required two aspirins, not one, to do the job. As aspirin is one of the ingredients that make Alka-Seltzer effective, we asked her if two Alka-Seltzers would be better than one. Yes, two would work better than one. But the directions on the package said to take only one, and all the old Speedy commercials demonstrated only one fizzing in water. [We] did a little dance with Dorothy Carter in the laboratory. What a stroke of good fortune that was! We changed the directions on the packages and began showing two Alka-Seltzers dropping into a glass of water in every commercial. Miles created portable foil packs that held two Alka-Seltzers each and sold them in new places—magazine stands, bars, fast-food restaurants, powder rooms—they became ubiquitous, and, naturally, Miles began selling twice as much Alka-Seltzer. Alka-Seltzer's sales didn't quite double, and not all of the increase was directly attributable to consumers using two tablets instead of one, but Alka-Seltzer did experience a dramatic reversal of fortune due to the Tinker & Partners commercials and their emphasis on two tablets—an emphasis that was later fortified with the catchy and enduring "Plop, plop; fizz fizz" jingle, which drove from the public consciousness any thought that anyone had ever used anything less than two Alka-Seltzers at a time. A common bit of trivia claims that Alka-Seltzer's famous "Plop, plop; fizz, fizz" jingle was written by the father of actress Julianna Margulies (of TV medical drama ER and The Good Wife fame). Although Julianna's father, Paul Margulies, was an advertising executive who helped create the "Plop-plop, fizz-fizz, oh what a relief it is" campaign for Alka-Seltzer, the jingle was actually composed by musician Tom Dawes, a former member of The Cyrkle, who toured America with the Beatles in 1966 after scoring a #2 hit with a recording of Paul Simon's "Red Rubber Ball."

['loan']

NEI

the early 1960s, Alka-Seltzer, the venerable fizzy heartburn and acid indigestion pain-relief tablet, was in a fix similar to that of auto makers in the late 1920s. As exemplified by Speedy, the "cartoon disk with a squeaky voice and pop eyes" who had been [We] created the kickoff commercial that set the style for all the variety of commercials that followed. It was a truly wonderful, iconic commercial, an ovation to stomachs, a sweet-natured montage of big ones, little ones, slim ones, fat ones, all filmed at stomach level. There was a street digger's jackhammer stomach, a young chick's bare midriff, two men talking, facing each other, one with a flat stomach and one with a big round one, an array of stomachs presented with self-deprecating humor and sweet humanness to a happy, bouncy tune. "No matter what shape your stomach's in" was its opening phrase. Self-deprecating humor was new and popular in the sixties and unheard-of in drug commercials, when it appeared it was news.their emphasis on two tablets an emphasis that was later fortified with the catchy and enduring "Plop, plop; fizz fizz" jingle, which drove from the public consciousness any thought that anyone had ever used anything less than two Alka-Seltzers at a time.A common bit of trivia claims that Alka-Seltzer's famous "Plop, plop; fizz, fizz" jingle was written by the father of actress Julianna Margulies (of TV medical drama ER and The Good Wife fame). Although Julianna's father, Paul Margulies, was an advertising executive who helped create the "Plop-plop, fizz-fizz, oh what a relief it is" campaign for Alka-Seltzer, the jingle was actually composed by musician Tom Dawes, a former member of The Cyrkle, who toured America with the Beatles in 1966 after scoring a #2 hit with a recording of Paul Simon's "Red Rubber Ball." Mann, Charles C. The Aspirin Wars: Money, Medicine, and 100 Years of Rampant Competition. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1991. ISBN 0-394-57894-5. 1. Marling, Karal Ann. As Seen on TV: The Visual Culture of Everyday Life in the 1950s. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1994. ISBN 0-674-04882-2 (p. 136).

Says Obama broke his promise to help homeowners facing foreclosure.

[]

As the economic collapse began to threaten homeowners, presidential candidate Barack Obama vowed to come to their aid.We must help the millions of homeowners facing foreclosure, he said on the campaign trail in June 2008. His plan called for changes in bankruptcy laws, a crackdown on predatory and fraudulent lenders and a $10 billion fund to help homeowners avoid foreclosure.With Obama seeking re-election in 2012, his record on the foreclosure crisis is under attack. The Republican group Crossroads GPS said in a recent television ad that Obama broke his promise to help struggling homeowners.The adshows Obama saying he would help them and then stamps BROKEN on the screen.PolitiFact examined the Crossroads claim and found that, indeed, Obama has had limited success with his plans to ease the mortgage crisis.I don't think there's much doubt, even within the administration, that the (foreclosure assistance) programs overpromised and underperformed -- embarrassingly so, said Ken Harney, who writes a weekly syndicated real estate column. 'They wimped out'During the 2008 campaign and his first few months in office, Obama promised a lot: $10 billion foreclosure prevention fund to help struggling homeowners Change in bankruptcy law to allow judges to modify mortgage loan terms Tax credits for struggling homeowners A crackdown on predatory and fraudulent lenders Better disclosure about mortgages to home-buyers A moratorium on foreclosuresThe results, experts say, have been mixed at best. Obama himself says the housing crisis is the most stubborn issue he has faced.If we were not a capitalist economy, it would be very easy, said Ken Thomas, an independent bank analyst and economist in Miami. Were a market-regulated economy, were not a government-regulated economy. That makes it very hard for the government to do anything.The Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act, which Obama signed in 2009, makes it a federal crime to make a materially false statement on a mortgage application or to willfully overvalue a property to influence any action by a mortgage lending business. PolitiFact's Obameter gave that aPromise Kept. And new standards for helping people understand their mortgage were included in the Dodd-Frank financial overhaul passed in 2010,another Promise Kept.But he's had limited success with the promises that would have provided the biggest help to homeowners, according to five experts we interviewed. A temporary foreclosure moratorium happened in early 2009 as banks halted their filings while they waited for the new administration to get its plan in place to address the crisis. Its not clear, though, that it ultimately kept many people out of foreclosure.Analysts say the change in bankruptcy law to allow judges to modify individual loans could have made a significant difference, butit died in Congress.That sort of took the wind out of the program, in a way. If it had passed, it would have put much more fire under the feet of the mortgage servicers, said Alex Schwartz, a professor of urban policy at the New School and author of the bookHousing Policy in the United States. Instead, he said, you were left with voluntary participation of servicers.The foreclosure prevention fund was the heart of his promise. He originally pledged $10 billion but ended up setting aside $75 billion, using TARP funds. He predicted the money would assist 9 million homeowners.But after three years, only about 2 million people have won permanent mortgage help, according to theDepartment of Housing and Urban Development.The two main programs were dubbed HAMP and HARP. Under the Home Affordable Modification Program, or HAMP, lenders were encouraged to restructure loans for borrowers who were struggling to pay. The banks received small payments from the government as incentive. The Home Affordable Refinance Program, or HARP, aimed to help people refinance their loans at lower interest rates.Everything has fallen short of original expectations, said Mark Zandi, chief economist for Moodys.Other experts agree.Obamas program was overly complicated, it was voluntary, it was at a retail level, requiring people to call in and work with individual servicers. It was a mess, Schwartz said. (On our Obameter, we've rated the foreclosure fund aPromise Brokenbecause it fell far short of Obama's goal of helping 9 million homeowners. )Another shortcoming of the programs: The Obama administration did not require banks to include principal reduction in modifications. The programs allowed loan servicers to reduce loan balances, but it shocked no one when most banks opted not to.Making that a requirement would have gone a long way toward keeping people in their homes.Theres a real risk that when people are so severely underwater, they could walk away from their mortgages, Schwartz said. So you can make a strong case for principal reduction.Harney, the real estate columnist, also blamed the president for not flexing more political muscle with the banks.At a time when the administration could have pushed the big TARP-recipient banks much harder on modifications, short sales and principal reductions, they wimped out, Harney said. Whether the close connections between Wall Street and the new White House/Treasury staff got in the way of stronger designs, I don't know. The numbers speak for themselves.The landscape nowNumbers about the foreclosure crisis show things have improved only slightly.According toRealtyTrac, a website that collects and tracks foreclosure data, about 150,000 new foreclosure suits were filed nationwide in January 2009, the month Obama took office. They peaked at 203,948 in April 2009 and didnt dip below 100,000 in a single month until April 2011. And last month, another 97,000 new foreclosures were filed.Crossroads cites the high rate of underwater mortgages as evidence that Obamas programs failed. In early 2008, the number of underwater homes was estimated at 9 million. RealtyTrac says the current total is 12 million, or 28 percent of all mortgages.But that statistic, sobering as it is, offers a poor gauge of Obamas policies. Borrowers ended up in this situation because they took out high-priced mortgages and then their property values plummeted -- a market occurrence largely outside any presidents control.It mostly reflects bad policy leading up to the crash, said Schwartz. Policies that encouraged reckless mortgage underwriting, which inflated prices.Still, there are some signs of progress.Early this year, changes to HARP relaxed eligibility standards and extended the length of the program to the end of 2013. HAMP also was extended through next year. Schwartz said the programs were originally geared to subprime, high-risk mortgages. So as the recession worsened and people with more conventional mortgages lost jobs and income, the programs didnt accommodate them. The new standards attempt to reach a bigger pool of homeowners, including people deeper underwater and those still in good standing on their loans.The Treasury Department recently announced that the number of active permanent mortgage loan modifications agreed to by banks rose 12,139 to 794,748 during March, the most recent timeframe available. The Obama campaign cited HUD data showing that HAMP has trimmed a median of $535 off monthly payments of mortgages that have been modified as evidence of progress.I still think its meaningful and its helpful, Zandi said. Its just not as helpful as they had hoped for.Its also worth noting that there were forces working against Obama amid these efforts. The Republican-controlled House, for one.The Obama administration has been completely hamstrung by Congress, refusing to spend any money on stimulus, Schwartz said.The economy, for another.They (the foreclosure programs) havent been as effective as hoped and the reason is because a lot of the foreclosures were triggered by the 8 million-plus loss in jobs, said Norm Miller, an economist, financial analyst and professor at the University of San Diego.Our rulingThe Crossroads GPS ad said Obama has broken his promise to help millions of people facing foreclosure. Help is a vague notion, and theres certainly no doubt that the president has tried several avenues to stem the tide of home loan defaults. But theres also no doubt that his efforts have fallen far short of expectations -- and even the benchmarks he set for himself.Two primary programs aimed at helping people keep their homes -- HAMP and HARP -- have reached more households in recent months, but they are unlikely to ever help the 9 million homeowners Obama said he would assist. And its reasonable that he could have leaned harder on lenders to produce better results in the aftermath of multi-billion-dollar bank bailouts.Although Obamas efforts havent been the utter failure Crossroads suggests, there are still millions of struggling homeowners who need help in the ongoing foreclosure crisis. We rate the ads claim Mostly True. Update:This item has been updated to correct that Republicans control the House of Representatives rather than the entire Congress.

['National', 'Economy', 'Housing', 'Message Machine 2012']

True

As the economic collapse began to threaten homeowners, presidential candidate Barack Obama vowed to come to their aid.We must help the millions of homeowners facing foreclosure, he said on the campaign trail in June 2008. His plan called for changes in bankruptcy laws, a crackdown on predatory and fraudulent lenders and a $10 billion fund to help homeowners avoid foreclosure.With Obama seeking re-election in 2012, his record on the foreclosure crisis is under attack. The Republican group Crossroads GPS said in a recent television ad that Obama broke his promise to help struggling homeowners.The adshows Obama saying he would help them and then stamps BROKEN on the screen.PolitiFact examined the Crossroads claim and found that, indeed, Obama has had limited success with his plans to ease the mortgage crisis.I don't think there's much doubt, even within the administration, that the (foreclosure assistance) programs overpromised and underperformed -- embarrassingly so, said Ken Harney, who writes a weekly syndicated real estate column.'They wimped out'During the 2008 campaign and his first few months in office, Obama promised a lot: $10 billion foreclosure prevention fund to help struggling homeowners Change in bankruptcy law to allow judges to modify mortgage loan terms Tax credits for struggling homeowners A crackdown on predatory and fraudulent lenders Better disclosure about mortgages to home-buyers A moratorium on foreclosuresThe results, experts say, have been mixed at best. Obama himself says the housing crisis is the most stubborn issue he has faced.If we were not a capitalist economy, it would be very easy, said Ken Thomas, an independent bank analyst and economist in Miami. Were a market-regulated economy, were not a government-regulated economy. That makes it very hard for the government to do anything.The Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act, which Obama signed in 2009, makes it a federal crime to make a materially false statement on a mortgage application or to willfully overvalue a property to influence any action by a mortgage lending business. PolitiFact's Obameter gave that aPromise Kept. And new standards for helping people understand their mortgage were included in the Dodd-Frank financial overhaul passed in 2010,another Promise Kept.But he's had limited success with the promises that would have provided the biggest help to homeowners, according to five experts we interviewed. A temporary foreclosure moratorium happened in early 2009 as banks halted their filings while they waited for the new administration to get its plan in place to address the crisis. Its not clear, though, that it ultimately kept many people out of foreclosure.Analysts say the change in bankruptcy law to allow judges to modify individual loans could have made a significant difference, butit died in Congress.That sort of took the wind out of the program, in a way. If it had passed, it would have put much more fire under the feet of the mortgage servicers, said Alex Schwartz, a professor of urban policy at the New School and author of the bookHousing Policy in the United States. Instead, he said, you were left with voluntary participation of servicers.The foreclosure prevention fund was the heart of his promise. He originally pledged $10 billion but ended up setting aside $75 billion, using TARP funds. He predicted the money would assist 9 million homeowners.But after three years, only about 2 million people have won permanent mortgage help, according to theDepartment of Housing and Urban Development.The two main programs were dubbed HAMP and HARP. Under the Home Affordable Modification Program, or HAMP, lenders were encouraged to restructure loans for borrowers who were struggling to pay. The banks received small payments from the government as incentive. The Home Affordable Refinance Program, or HARP, aimed to help people refinance their loans at lower interest rates.Everything has fallen short of original expectations, said Mark Zandi, chief economist for Moodys.Other experts agree.Obamas program was overly complicated, it was voluntary, it was at a retail level, requiring people to call in and work with individual servicers. It was a mess, Schwartz said. (On our Obameter, we've rated the foreclosure fund aPromise Brokenbecause it fell far short of Obama's goal of helping 9 million homeowners.)Another shortcoming of the programs: The Obama administration did not require banks to include principal reduction in modifications. The programs allowed loan servicers to reduce loan balances, but it shocked no one when most banks opted not to.Making that a requirement would have gone a long way toward keeping people in their homes.Theres a real risk that when people are so severely underwater, they could walk away from their mortgages, Schwartz said. So you can make a strong case for principal reduction.Harney, the real estate columnist, also blamed the president for not flexing more political muscle with the banks.At a time when the administration could have pushed the big TARP-recipient banks much harder on modifications, short sales and principal reductions, they wimped out, Harney said. Whether the close connections between Wall Street and the new White House/Treasury staff got in the way of stronger designs, I don't know. The numbers speak for themselves.The landscape nowNumbers about the foreclosure crisis show things have improved only slightly.According toRealtyTrac, a website that collects and tracks foreclosure data, about 150,000 new foreclosure suits were filed nationwide in January 2009, the month Obama took office. They peaked at 203,948 in April 2009 and didnt dip below 100,000 in a single month until April 2011. And last month, another 97,000 new foreclosures were filed.Crossroads cites the high rate of underwater mortgages as evidence that Obamas programs failed. In early 2008, the number of underwater homes was estimated at 9 million. RealtyTrac says the current total is 12 million, or 28 percent of all mortgages.But that statistic, sobering as it is, offers a poor gauge of Obamas policies. Borrowers ended up in this situation because they took out high-priced mortgages and then their property values plummeted -- a market occurrence largely outside any presidents control.It mostly reflects bad policy leading up to the crash, said Schwartz. Policies that encouraged reckless mortgage underwriting, which inflated prices.Still, there are some signs of progress.Early this year, changes to HARP relaxed eligibility standards and extended the length of the program to the end of 2013. HAMP also was extended through next year. Schwartz said the programs were originally geared to subprime, high-risk mortgages. So as the recession worsened and people with more conventional mortgages lost jobs and income, the programs didnt accommodate them. The new standards attempt to reach a bigger pool of homeowners, including people deeper underwater and those still in good standing on their loans.The Treasury Department recently announced that the number of active permanent mortgage loan modifications agreed to by banks rose 12,139 to 794,748 during March, the most recent timeframe available. The Obama campaign cited HUD data showing that HAMP has trimmed a median of $535 off monthly payments of mortgages that have been modified as evidence of progress.I still think its meaningful and its helpful, Zandi said. Its just not as helpful as they had hoped for.Its also worth noting that there were forces working against Obama amid these efforts. The Republican-controlled House, for one.The Obama administration has been completely hamstrung by Congress, refusing to spend any money on stimulus, Schwartz said.The economy, for another.They (the foreclosure programs) havent been as effective as hoped and the reason is because a lot of the foreclosures were triggered by the 8 million-plus loss in jobs, said Norm Miller, an economist, financial analyst and professor at the University of San Diego.Our rulingThe Crossroads GPS ad said Obama has broken his promise to help millions of people facing foreclosure. Help is a vague notion, and theres certainly no doubt that the president has tried several avenues to stem the tide of home loan defaults. But theres also no doubt that his efforts have fallen far short of expectations -- and even the benchmarks he set for himself.Two primary programs aimed at helping people keep their homes -- HAMP and HARP -- have reached more households in recent months, but they are unlikely to ever help the 9 million homeowners Obama said he would assist. And its reasonable that he could have leaned harder on lenders to produce better results in the aftermath of multi-billion-dollar bank bailouts.Although Obamas efforts havent been the utter failure Crossroads suggests, there are still millions of struggling homeowners who need help in the ongoing foreclosure crisis. We rate the ads claim Mostly True.

Did Musician Tommy Lee Write This Open Letter to Donald Trump?

['The Mtley Cre musician shared a letter on his Facebook page ... but we have questions.']

In March 2020, some social media users encountered an open letter that was supposedly written by Mötley Crüe musician Tommy Lee to U.S. President Donald Trump, which began with "Dear fucking lunatic." Lee did not write this letter. The Mötley Crüe musician posted the letter to his Facebook page (which is likely why some people mistakenly assumed he had written it) on March 20, 2020, and attributed the letter to a man named Craig Alan Wilkins. However, "Craig Alan Wilkins" didn't write this letter either. The majority of the text in this letter—most everything except for the introduction starting with "Do you know how fucking insane you sound, you off-brand butt plug?"—was published on Daily Kos in December 2017 in an article by "Aldous J. Pennyfarthing." Pennyfarthing's letter was written in response to an interview Trump gave to The New York Times in 2017, in which he said, "

['interest']

False

The majority of text in this letter most everything except for the intro starting with "Do you know how fucking insane you sound, you off-brand butt plug?" was published on the Daily Kos in December 2017 in an article by "Aldous J Pennyfarthing."Pennyfarthing's letter was written in response to an interview Trump gave to The New York Times in 2017, in which he said, "Yeah, China. Chinas been. I like very much President Xi. He treated me better than anybodys ever been treated in the history of China."It's unclear who amended the opening paragraph in this letter. It's possible that a Facebook user named "Craig Alan Wilkins" shared Pennyfarthing's open letter with a new introductory paragraph. While the author of the opening paragraph is still uncertain, the majority of this text was written by Aldous J Pennyfarthing, the pen name for author Tom Breuer, and was originally published on the Daily Kos in 2017. This open letter was subsequently published in Pennyfarthing's 2018 book Dear F*cking Lunatic: 101 Obscenely Rude Letters to Donald Trump.

They're paying a less rate of tax -- these richest people in America -- than they have in the last 80 years.

[]

As U.S. Rep. Steve Rothman recently told workers at a small business in Bergen County, the middle-class must pick up the tab for wealthy Americans paying their lowest income tax rate in 80 years.The congressman pointed to that reduced tax rate during a campaign video posted Feb. 13 on YouTube, where he is seen talking to employees of Lanzo Plumbing in Hackensack.If these guys and gals making over a million dollars a year...wont pay their fair share because the Republicans are protecting them, that means working people and the middle-class and seniors have to pick up the tab for them. Its crazy, Rothman (D-9th Dist.) said. They're paying a less rate of tax -- these richest people in America -- than they have in the last 80 years.As PolitiFact New Jersey found, Rothmans claim is off, but not by much.The federal income tax rate for the top income bracket stood at 35 percent in 2011, marking a lower statutory rate than during most of the last eight decades. But for five tax years -- 1988 to 1992 -- the top rates were lower than they are today, according to data from the Internal Revenue Service.Now, lets trace the evolution of the top income tax rate.In 1931, the top rate was 25 percent on taxable income greater than $100,000. The following year, the top rate increased to 63 percent on income above $1 million, and then grew in 1936 to 79 percent on income greater than $5 million.The top rate remained at 70 percent or greater through 1980 -- and exceeded 90 percent during World War II and from the early 1950s to the early 1960s.By 1988, the top rate fell to 28 percent and stayed there through 1990. For 1991 and 1992, the top rate rose to 31 percent, and then increased to 39.6 percent for tax years 1993 to 2000. In 2003, the top rate reached its current level of 35 percent.So, for most of the last 80 years, the top statutory rate has been higher than it is today, with the exception of tax years 1988 to 1992.Since various tax deductions can reduce an overall tax bill, we also looked at actual taxes paid as a percentage of ones income.According to a June 2010 report by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, the top 1 percent of households, on average, paid 19 percent of their income in federal income taxes in 2007. That figure was lower than amounts paid in 25 of the 28 years between 1979 and 2006, according to the budget office.Its worth noting that as a group, the top 1 percent were covering a larger share of federal income taxes in 2007 than they did in 1979.Still, based on taxes paid as a percentage of income, Rothmans claim is mostly on target.Paul Swibinski, a consultant to Rothmans campaign, told us the congressmans statement was close enough. But he argued that Rothman was speaking off the cuff and said scoring him as partially truthful would send the wrong message.Steve was being completely genuine and completely honest, Swibinski said in an e-mail. Do we want our politicians to parse every single word they say -- just go around repeating the same words over and over because it's safe ? ?? That would seem to me to contradict the purpose of Politifact.Our rulingIn a YouTube video, Rothman claimed the wealthiest Americans are paying a lower tax rate than they have in the last 80 years.We looked at two measures -- the top statutory income tax rates and taxes paid as a percentage of ones income. In both cases, Rothmans statement is slightly off, but his overall point about current income tax rates is solid.The top statutory rate is lower now than during most of the last eight decades, and the top 1 percent of households were paying a smaller percentage of their income in federal income taxes as of 2007 than in nearly all of the previous 28 years.We rate the statement Mostly True. To comment on this ruling, go toNJ.com.

['New Jersey', 'Wealth', 'Taxes']

True

To comment on this ruling, go toNJ.com.

Some Concerned Over Trump Veteran Donations

["While money raised during an event for veterans was donated to the Donald J. Trump Foundation, it was eventually given to various veterans' charities and not used for his presidential campaign."]

While most of the leading Republican presidential candidates attended a Fox News-hosted debate in Iowa on 28 January 2016, Donald Trump boycotted the event (as a protest over Fox's allowing Megyn Kelly, whom Trump felt had asked him "unfair questions in a previous debate, to serve as a moderator) and instead hosted his own event as a fund-raiser for veterans. Trump instructed supporters to visit the website of the Donald J Trump Foundation for Vets in order to make donations to the cause. Some potential donors were skeptical, however, as the receiving entity was listed as the Donald J Trump Foundation and not a veterans' charity: website The Donald J Trump Foundation is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization. An email confirmation with a summary of your donation will be sent to the email address provided above. Around half of the $5.6 million raised by Trump during his veterans' charity event on 28 January 2016 was initially paid to the Donald J Trump Foundation, before then being distributed to veterans groups. The rest of the funds raised were donated directly to veterans charities, without first passing through the foundation. It's inaccurate to say that the money ended up in the candidate's personal account or was used to fund his presidential campaign. charities The handling of the donations became part of the focus of a lawsuit brought by the New York Attorney Generals office against the Trump Foundation, the president, and Ivanka and Eric Trump in June 2018. The lawsuit alleged that the joint operation of the fundraiser by the Trump foundation and the Trump's presidential campaign, among other examples, constituted improper political activity. When the case was finally settled in 2019, the New York Supreme Court noted that "the Funds did ultimately reach their intended destinations, i.e., charitable organizations supporting veterans." settled In response to queries over the matter, on 31 May 2016 Donald Trump held a press conference to announce that he eventually gave "close to six million dollars" to veterans groups and that the press "should be ashamed of themselves" for asking questions about the money he donated. "I have never received such bad publicity for doing such a good job," Trump said in a press conference at Trump Tower in Manhattan. He issued a list of the veterans groups who received the money, saying that "As of this moment, [the total amount donated] is $5.6 million. All of the money has been spent." Trump said he didn't release the names of the veterans organizations sooner because he wanted to respect their privacy and asserted that the money for a number of these groups had already been delivered some time earlier. Trump's list of checks already issued read as follows: 22Kill: $200,000. Achilles International : $200,000 American Hero Adventures: $100,000 Americas for equal living: $100,000 Americas vet dogs: the veteran canine corp Inc: $75,000 AmVets: $75,000 Armed Services YMCA: $75,000 Bob Woodruff Family Foundation Inc: $75,000 Central Iowa Shelter and Services: $100,000 Connected Warriors Inc: $75,000 Disabled American Veterans Charity: $115,000 Fisher House Foundation: $115,000 Folds of Honor Foundation: $200,000 Foundation for American Veterans: $75,000 Freedom Alliance : $75,000 Green Beret Foundation: $350,000 Higher Heroes USA: $75,000 Homes for our Troops: $100,000 Honoring Americas Warriors: $100,000 Hope for the Warriors: $65,000 Intrepid Fallen Heroes Fund: $175,000 Canines for Warriors: $50,000 Liberty House: $100,00 Marine Corps Law Enforcement Foundation: $1.1m (including $1m from Trump himself, he says) Navy Seal Foundation: $465,000 Navy Marine Corps Relief Society: $75,000 New England Wounded Vets Inc: $75,000 Operation Home Front: $65,000 Project for Patriots: $100,000 (this check is check is ready to go but Trump is still vetting the group, he says, awaiting an IRS determination letter. They have to give us that final document. Puppy Jake Foundation: $100,000 Racing for Heroes, Inc: $200,000 Support Siouxland Soldiers: $100,000 Task Force Dagger Foundation: $50,000 The Mission Continues: $75,000 National Military Families Inc: $75,000 Veterans Airlift Command: $100,000 Veterans Count: $25,000 Veterans in Command Inc: $150,000 Vietnam Veterans Workshop Inc: $75,000 Warriors for Freedom Foundation: $50,000 And I believe were going to have some more coming in. MacGuill, Dan. "Was Donald Trump Fined for Stealing Money Intended for Veterans?" 14 November 2019. UPDATE [Nov. 14, 2019] Updated to report 2019 settlement of the lawsuit filed by New York Attorney General alleging improper political activity.

['funds']

NEI

Trump instructed supporters to visit the website of the Donald J Trump Foundation for Vets in order to make donations to the cause. Some potential donors were skeptical, however, as the receiving entity was listed as the Donald J Trump Foundation and not a veterans' charity:Around half of the $5.6 million raised by Trump during his veterans' charity event on 28 January 2016 was initially paid to the Donald J Trump Foundation, before then being distributed to veterans groups. The rest of the funds raised were donated directly to veterans charities, without first passing through the foundation. It's inaccurate to say that the money ended up in the candidate's personal account or was used to fund his presidential campaign.The handling of the donations became part of the focus of a lawsuit brought by the New York Attorney Generals office against the Trump Foundation, the president, and Ivanka and Eric Trump in June 2018. The lawsuit alleged that the joint operation of the fundraiser by the Trump foundation and the Trump's presidential campaign, among other examples, constituted improper political activity. When the case was finally settled in 2019, the New York Supreme Court noted that "the Funds did ultimately reach their intended destinations, i.e., charitable organizations supporting veterans."

Which Party Is More Effective at Reducing Abortions?

['It is hard to draw a straight line between federal government policy (let alone presidential policy) and abortion procurement.']

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 In September 2020, social media users began circulating a text meme charting the decrease in abortion rates in the U.S. during previous presidential administrations, attributing the greater drop in those rates during Democratic administrations to a difference in approach (i.e., making it illegal vs. making it unnecessary): As we noted in an earlier article on a similar topic, following the 1973 Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision that protected a pregnant woman's liberty to choose to have an abortion without excessive government restriction, the abortion rate rose immediately afterward until it peaked in the 1980s, and it has fairly consistently declined since that peak through presidential administrations of both parties: article Following nationwide legalization of abortion in 1973, the total number, rate (number of abortions per 1,000 women aged 1544 years), and ratio (number of abortions per 1,000 live births) of reported abortions increased rapidly, reaching the highest levels in the 1980s before decreasing at a slow yet steady pace. Although it is true that the abortion rate has experienced greater declines during Democratic administrations than Republican ones, we can't draw any definitive conclusion that, as the meme tries to suggest, this difference is primarily due to varying approaches by the two main political parties. The simple idea presented by the meme has a number of flaws, chief among them that political factors that might influence the abortion rate (e.g., policies, legislation, judicial appointments and rulings) do not neatly conform to presidential terms of office -- what takes place during one administration generally continues to have an effect throughout subsequent administrations. As well, events occurring at state and local levels (not necessarily directly tied to federal actions) can have a substantial impact on the availability and prevalence of abortions. More important, though, is that we cannot definitively determine to what extent political factors influence the abortion rate. As the Guttmacher Institute (a pro-abortion-rights research organization) observed, recent declines in the abortion rate appear to have been driven not primarily by abortion restrictions but by a broader decline in pregnancies: observed Abortion restrictions target either individuals ability to access the procedure (such as by imposing coercive waiting periods and counseling requirements) or providers ability to offer it (such as through unnecessary and intentionally burdensome regulations). Any one of these restrictions could result in some people being forced to continue pregnancies they were seeking to end; this could, in theory, lower the abortion rate. With the available evidence, it is impossible to pinpoint exactly which factors drove recent declines, and to what degree. However, previous Guttmacher analyses have documented that abortion restrictions, while incredibly harmful at an individual level, were not the main driver of national declines in the abortion rate ... Rather, the decline in abortions appears to be part of a broader decline in pregnancies, as evidenced by fewer births over the same period. What's driving that decline in pregnancies, then? We don't know that for sure, either, but likely a combination of social, cultural, economic, medical, and political factors: combination Experts say the decline isnt due to a single cause, but rather a combination of several factors, including changing economics, delays in childbirth by women pursuing jobs and education, the greater availability of contraception, and a decline in teen pregnancies. The trend seen in the United States is also seen in much of the developed world, including Western Europe, said Dr. John Rowe, a professor at Columbia Universitys Mailman School of Public Health. One important factor driving this is the changing roles of women in society, Rowe said. In general women are getting married later in life, he explained. They are leaving the home and launching their families later. [Dr. Helen Kim, an associate professor at Northwestern Universitys Feinberg School of Medicine] said the concept of the ideal family size may be changing. There are shifts where having smaller families is a trend, she added. I cant speak on this as a sociologist, but this is what Ive seen among my peers and colleagues. One of the biggest factors is the decline in teen pregnancies, Rowe said. Thats good news ... And that makes a huge difference to their lives. The Guttmacher Institute posited a similar mix of factors to explain the decline in the abortion rate: Because both abortions and births [have] declined, it is clear that there were fewer pregnancies overall in the United States ... The big question is why. One possible contributing factor is contraceptive access and use. Since 2011, contraception has become more accessible, as most private health insurance plans are now required by the Affordable Care Act (ACA) to cover contraceptives without out-of-pocket costs. In addition, thanks to expansions in Medicaid and private insurance coverage under the ACA, the proportion of women aged 1544 nationwide who were uninsured dropped more than 40% between 2013 and 2017. There is evidence that use of long-acting reversible contraceptive methods -- specifically IUDs and implants -- increased through at least 2014, especially among women in their early 20s, a population that accounts for a significant proportion of all abortions Another possible contributing factor might be a decline in sexual activity. Findings from one national survey suggest a long-term increase in the number of people in the United States -- mostly younger men -- reporting not having sex in the past year. Yet another possibility is that infertility is increasing in the United States, thereby reducing the chances of getting pregnant and subsequently seeking to obtain an abortion. More generally, there are a host of other potential factors that could be driving declines in pregnancy rates, from individuals evolving desires about whether and when to become parents to peoples changing economic and social circumstances. Finally, it is possible that ... there could have been an increase in self-managed abortions happening outside of medical facilities, which the census would be unable to capture. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) also offered a combination of potential explanations for lower abortion rates: combination Multiple factors influence the incidence of abortion including the availability of abortion providers; state regulations, such as mandatory waiting periods, parental involvement laws, and legal restrictions on abortion providers; increasing acceptance of nonmarital childbearing; shifts in the racial/ethnic composition of the U.S. population; and changes in the economy and the resulting impact on fertility preferences and access to health care services, including contraception. As we stated four years ago, "causation between the presidency and abortion rates [is] difficult to demonstrate in any case, because it is hard to draw a straight line between federal government policy (let alone presidential policy) and abortion procurement." That observation remains true today. Carroll, Linda and Shamard Charles, M.D. "Americans Aren't Making Enough Babies to Replace Ourselves." NBC News. 13 January 2019. Nash, Elizabeth and Joerg Dreweke. "The U.S. Abortion Rate Continues to Drop: Once Again, State Abortion Restrictions Are Not the Main Driver." Guttmacher Institute. 18 September 2019. Kasprak, Alex. "Abortion Rates Fall During Democratic Administrations and Rise During Republican Ones." Snopes.com. 11 November 2016.

['economy']

NEI

Voting in the 2020 U.S. Election may be over, but the misinformation keeps on ticking. Never stop fact-checking. Follow our post-election coverage here.As we noted in an earlier article on a similar topic, following the 1973 Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision that protected a pregnant woman's liberty to choose to have an abortion without excessive government restriction, the abortion rate rose immediately afterward until it peaked in the 1980s, and it has fairly consistently declined since that peak through presidential administrations of both parties: More important, though, is that we cannot definitively determine to what extent political factors influence the abortion rate. As the Guttmacher Institute (a pro-abortion-rights research organization) observed, recent declines in the abortion rate appear to have been driven not primarily by abortion restrictions but by a broader decline in pregnancies:What's driving that decline in pregnancies, then? We don't know that for sure, either, but likely a combination of social, cultural, economic, medical, and political factors:The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) also offered a combination of potential explanations for lower abortion rates:

Bruce Willis' Wife Shares 'Final Update' About His Dementia Diagnosis?

['The video was posted after Emma Heming Willis, Willis wife, appeared on the "Today" show to discuss his health on Sept. 25, 2023.']

On Oct. 4, 2023, the purported celebrity gossip YouTube channel Just In published a video that claimed actor Bruce Willis wife had shared a final update about his dementia diagnosis. video The clip's title read, "Bruce Willis Wife TEARFULLY Shares FINAL Update About His Dementia." The video had been viewed over 12,200 times on Just Ins YouTube channel at the time of this writing. (@JustInCeleb/YouTube) The YouTube video also circulated on TikTok. One post we found on the platform that featured a clip of the YouTube video had received over 520,000 views at the time of this writing. Another TikTok post we found that featured a clip of the YouTube video had 91,000 views. We also found posts on other social media platforms that contained the video, like Facebook and Twitter. post post Facebook Twitter The claim was false. The video was posted after Emma Heming Willis, Willis wife, appeared on the "Today" show to discuss his health on Sept. 25, 2023. In March 2022, Willis family announced he would be retiring from acting after he was diagnosed with aphasia, a cognitive disorder that impacts a persons ability to communicate. Nearly a year later, in February 2023, the family said his condition had progressed, and that hed been diagnosed with frontotemporal dementia. appeared announced said While Willis does have health issues that have been credibly reported to the public, there is no evidence that Heming Willis had given any final update about his condition. The clip's narration, scripting, sequencing and thumbnail image all looked to have been a product of artificial intelligence (AI), video-creation tools. At the bottom of the description contained under the YouTube video, a disclaimer reads: reads Disclaimer: Content might be gossip, rumors, exaggerated or indirectly besides the truth. Viewer advised to do own research before forming their opinion. Content might be opinionated. As we've seen with many of these AI-generated videos across multiple celebrity gossip YouTube channels, this clip contained a misleading video title with a mix of old and unrelated news, false claims and other emotionally charged moments that likely were meant to elicit angry responses in the comments. Such videos often end up with hundreds or thousands of comments from users who indicated that they had believed the misleading information presented in the clips. We've also previously fact-checked other false celebrity gossip rumors from Just In, like the false claim that actor Mel Gibson said fellow actor Ashton Kutcher was a "hidden handler" for Hollywood elites. We found there was no truth to the claim. false claim Guy, Zoe. Bruce Willis Diagnosed With Frontotemporal Dementia. Vulture, 16 Feb. 2023, https://www.vulture.com/2023/02/bruce-willis-dementia-diagnosis.html. Jacoby, Sarah & Anna Kaplan. Bruce Willis Wife, Emma, Gives Update on His Life with Dementia in TODAY Exclusive. TODAY.Com, 26 Sept. 2023, https://www.today.com/health/news/bruce-willis-wife-gives-health-update-rcna116860. Liles, Jordan. Mel Gibson Reveals Ashton Kutcher Is a Hidden Handler for Hollywood Elites? Snopes, 19 Sept. 2023, https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/gibson-kutcher-handler-hollywood/. Sharf, Zack. Bruce Willis Stepping Away From Acting Following Aphasia Diagnosis. Variety, 30 Mar. 2022, https://variety.com/2022/film/news/bruce-willis-retiring-acting-apashia-1235219017/.

['share']

False

On Oct. 4, 2023, the purported celebrity gossip YouTube channel Just In published a video that claimed actor Bruce Willis wife had shared a final update about his dementia diagnosis.The YouTube video also circulated on TikTok. One post we found on the platform that featured a clip of the YouTube video had received over 520,000 views at the time of this writing. Another TikTok post we found that featured a clip of the YouTube video had 91,000 views. We also found posts on other social media platforms that contained the video, like Facebook and Twitter.The video was posted after Emma Heming Willis, Willis wife, appeared on the "Today" show to discuss his health on Sept. 25, 2023. In March 2022, Willis family announced he would be retiring from acting after he was diagnosed with aphasia, a cognitive disorder that impacts a persons ability to communicate. Nearly a year later, in February 2023, the family said his condition had progressed, and that hed been diagnosed with frontotemporal dementia.At the bottom of the description contained under the YouTube video, a disclaimer reads:We've also previously fact-checked other false celebrity gossip rumors from Just In, like the false claim that actor Mel Gibson said fellow actor Ashton Kutcher was a "hidden handler" for Hollywood elites. We found there was no truth to the claim.

The Northridge earthquake was not accurately reported.

['Was the Northridge quake underreported as a 6.7 to get FEMA off the hook?']

Claim: The magnitude of the 17 January 1994 Northridge earthquake was deliberately under-reported in order to spare the government from having to pay out emergency relief funds. Examples: [Harvey, 1994] Urban Myth No. 5,212: It's linked to the earthquake, of course what isn't these days? The [Los Angeles] Times has heard from several callers who claim there's a conspiracy to hide the fact that the quake's magnitude was really 8.0. One caller quoted an unnamed structural engineer who said that only an 8.0 temblor could have inflicted the damage of the Northridge quake. And why the conspiracy? The unfounded rumor that FEMA is obligated to give outright grants, rather than loans, to damaged houses and businesses after quakes of 8.0 or more. [Collected on the Internet, 2000] Right after the Northridge earthquake in 1994, word was going around that the State of California coerced CalTech to declare the magnitude of the earthquake under 7.0. This was due to a hidden clause in the state laws saying state income tax in California is suspended that year for affected areas when there is a major earthquake over 7.0 on the Richter Scale. Origins: On 17 January 1994, Los Angeles area residents were shaken awake at 4:31 A.M. by the seismic event that would come to be known as the Northridge quake. In the usual way of earthquakes, those few seconds of violent shaking took a terrible toll. The quake killed 57 people, injured another 9,000, and caused property damage in the $13-$15 billion range. It closed seven freeway sites and two hospitals, and left 150,000 people without water, 40,000 without natural gas, and 25,000 without homes. It was devastatingly awful. Folks were shocked when the quake was reported to have registered a mere 6.7 on the Richter scale. They were thus prepared to believe almost anything that would confirm the quake's intensity to have been much higher. After the Northridge quake, a bogus fax on fake Caltech letterhead (misstated as "Cal Tech") was circulated throughout the Los Angeles area. It purportedly assigned an "intensity scale" to different Los Angeles ZIP codes, with the strength of the quake measured in one ZIP code area listed as a whopping 9.5. The numbers quoted in the fax were, in fact, estimates of the intensity of the shaking around the Los Angeles basin based on the modified Mercalli scale, which uses the Roman numbers I through XII. (The Mercalli scale is a measurement derived from observable earthquake damage; the Richter scale is based on seismometer readings. The Mercalli scale is thus largely a subjective measurement, while the Richter scale is generally considered to be more objective and scientifically accurate.) Parts of Santa Monica and the San Fernando Valley experienced Mercalli IX-level intensity, which was misconstrued on the fax as a 9-level Richter scale measurement (instead of the officially reported 6.7). Caltech (actually the U.S. Geological Survey at Caltech) had not under-reported the figure the Northridge quake was a 6.7 no matter who measured it. Earthquake data is almost instantaneously shared among a number of organizations worldwide, and one group's under-reporting the magnitude would have been quickly picked up by the others. Even if Caltech had wanted to suppress the real numbers, it would have been unable to do so without the cooperation of a number of other scientific organizations. The scary fax played into what people wanted to believe. Those who'd lived through the quake swore it had to have been much stronger than the 6.7 that was being reported. From this belief was the legend born: if Caltech was fudging the magnitude of the event, there had to be a reason. Inventive sorts that humans are, it wasn't long before someone advanced the plausible-sounding explanation that the amount and type of aid provided to disaster victims by the government was predicated upon the severity of the event; by convincing Caltech to under-report, the Federal Emergency Management Association (FEMA) slipped off the hook. According to this rumor, since the quake's intensity was under 7.0, FEMA only had to provide loans to earthquake victims rather than outright grants, which saved the agency billions of dollars. The rumor, of course, was false. FEMA never gives loans to those disadvantaged by disaster; its assistance comes in the form of grants to those affected. That agency works with the Small Business Administration (SBA), which provides low-interest loans. Also, FEMA bases its aid on need, not upon a standardized chart that determines how much can be allocated according to what scientists measure. Likewise, insurance companies base their earthquake policy liability on damage estimates, not on magnitude scales. This makes sense under a system like the one hinted at in the legend, survivors of a large earthquake in a relatively unpopulated zone would be eligible for free aid while those trying cope with the aftermath of a lesser disaster in a far more densely populated area would be saddled with repaying government loan debts (or would receive no financial assistance at all). An extreme hypothetical example could see millions of free dollars directed towards the rebuilding of one house in Alaska while 200,000 uninsured and homeless Californians had do without, all because Alaska was hit by an 8.2 while California had to cope with only a 6.7. The legend took off the way it did for reasons other than just the usual mistrust of government and science that marks such whispers. Getting up close and personal with the unthinkable heightens the experience, which explains in part why this legend was so widely believed by Los Angeleans: they'd been shaken out of bed and back to reality by this earthquake, whereas they had experienced other large quakes that had taken place in other lands merely as words on a page or images on a television screen. In a world where the ruin of the 6.9 Kobe quake (17 January 1995) was dispassionately presented by the nightly news and barely given a second thought here in California, what the authorities were telling skeptical Los Angeleans was a 6.7 felt like it was more because it had been experienced with all our senses, not just the television-dulled ones. There was yet another reason for this legend's running rampant: its location. The quake's epicenter was in the heart of the San Fernando Valley, a heavily-populated area, and so felt stronger to many people because those who experienced the sensation were right on top of the worst of it. Additionally, we humans have a desire to star ourselves in the drama of the moment. A 6.7 didn't sound worthy of the harrowing experience endured by those resident on 17 January 1994, and those who'd been through the shake and looked to regale others with their horrific accounts were especially receptive to any suggestion that the figure was far too low. On a final note, one further rumor attached to FEMA in California: that illegal immigrants who surfaced to apply for disaster relief would be rounded up, handed over to INS, and deported. That rumor did not begin with the Northridge quake, however; it was recorded in the aftermath of the 17 October 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake in the San Francisco area. While FEMA's aid is now available only to U.S. citizens, legal residents of the U.S., and the resident parents of U.S. citizens (that is, children born in the USA), at the time of the Loma Prieta quake, the assistance it directed was available to citizens and non-citizens alike. As for alerting the INS to potential illegals, FEMA pointed out at that time that it didn't ask about the citizenship status of aid applicants, with questions about citizenship status not even being presented on any of its forms. (That has since changed FEMA Form 90-69 is specifically for that purpose.) Barbara "not a milked shake" Mikkelson Additional information: Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Earthquake Myths (U.S. Geological Survey) Last updated: 18 July 2007 Sources: Harvey, Steve. "Only in L.A." Los Angeles Times. 2 March 1994 (p. B2). Jackson, Robert and Miles Corwin. "Aid Centers Open But No Money Yet." Los Angeles Times. 23 October 1989 (p. A1). Mitchell, Sean. "Warning: The Following L.A. Stories Are Not True." Los Angeles Times. 24 November 1996 (Magazine, p. 32).

['loan']

NEI

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Earthquake Myths (U.S. Geological Survey)

Is there an anticipated asteroid impact on Earth during the Christmas period?

['The Earth is constantly surrounded by "near-earth objects."']

On Oct. 23, 2019, the U.K. tabloid Express published an article that left some readers believing they need not make Christmas plans that year because Earth was in danger of being hit by a large asteroid. The article was entitled "Asteroid Terror: NASA Spot Mammoth Space Rock to Hit Earth's Orbit Five Days Before X-mas." The subheading gave earthlings an even smaller chance of survival: "AN ASTEROID the size of the World Trade Centre is on a dangerous Earth-bound orbit that could see the rock smash the planet during Christmas festivities." When the article was regurgitated by even less reputable websites, the fear-mongering title morphed into a factually inaccurate claim. For instance, the website Digital Wise rehashed this article under the title "NASA Issues Warning Over Asteroid Predicted To Hit Earth Five Days Before Christmas!" However, NASA has made no such announcement, and Earth is not in danger of being hit by an asteroid around Christmas. These articles are all based on a real asteroid (known as 216258 2006 WH1) and its holiday approach toward Earth. However, they present the information as if this asteroid is particularly dangerous. But there's nothing unusually threatening about asteroid 216258 2006 WH1. NASA's Center for Near Earth Object Studies (CNEOS) currently lists 26 near-Earth objects that are scheduled to pass by our planet within the next 60 days. While asteroid 216258 2006 WH1 (which was discovered in 2006) will indeed be passing by Earth around Christmas, CNEOS reports that the asteroid is expected to safely pass by at a distance of about 15.19 LD (lunar distance), approximately 3.6 million miles. Dr. Paul W. Chodas, the Director of the Center for Near Earth Object Studies, told us in an email that there is "nothing unusual or dangerous" about asteroid 216258 2006 WH1. He stated, "It is simply making a close approach to the Earth. Astronomers have been observing this asteroid's position for 13 years; we know its orbit very accurately, we can predict its close approaches accurately for the next 200 years, and we know with certainty that it cannot hit our planet." Lindley Johnson, NASA's Planetary Defense Officer and Program Executive of the Planetary Defense Coordination Office (PDCO), also told us that this asteroid "poses no hazard to impacting Earth." NASA and other U.S. agencies are lead players in the international effort to develop plans to respond to a possible Near-Earth Object (NEO) impact. In 2018, the White House released the National Near-Earth Object Preparedness Strategy and Action Plan, which identifies key steps that U.S. agencies need to take to better prepare the United States and the world for detecting and responding to a possible impact. NASA has been directed by Congress to catalogue and characterize all NEOs bigger than 140 meters, the ones that could be catastrophic. NASA is approximately 35% complete for NEOs 140 meters and larger, and approximately 96% complete for those 1 km and larger. Strategic investments in our space-based programs will benefit all of humanity as we continue to catalogue any NEOs that pose a potential threat. This particular asteroid's trajectory has been well tracked by NASA's Center for Near-Earth Object Studies since its discovery 13 years ago and poses no hazard to impacting Earth. Here's a little more information about near-Earth objects from CNEOS. The organization writes on its website (emphasis ours): "On a daily basis, about one hundred tons of interplanetary material drifts down to the Earth's surface. Most of the smallest interplanetary particles that reach the Earth's surface are the tiny dust particles that are released by comets as their ices vaporize in the solar neighborhood. The vast majority of the larger interplanetary material that reaches the Earth's surface originates as the collision fragments of asteroids that have run into one another some eons ago. With an average interval of about 10,000 years, rocky or iron asteroids larger than about 100 meters would be expected to reach the Earth's surface and cause local disasters or produce tidal waves that can inundate low-lying coastal areas. On average, every several hundred thousand years or so, asteroids larger than a kilometer could cause global disasters. In this case, the impact debris would spread throughout the Earth's atmosphere so that plant life would suffer from acid rain, partial blocking of sunlight, and from the firestorms resulting from heated impact debris raining back down upon the Earth's surface. Since their orbital paths often cross that of the Earth, collisions with near-Earth objects have occurred in the past, and we should remain alert to the possibility of future close Earth approaches. It seems prudent to mount efforts to discover and study these objects, to characterize their sizes, compositions, and structures, and to keep an eye on their future trajectories. No one should be overly concerned about an Earth impact of an asteroid or comet. The threat to any one person from auto accidents, disease, other natural disasters, and a variety of other problems is much higher than the threat from NEOs. Over long periods of time, however, the chances of the Earth being impacted are not negligible, so some form of NEO insurance is warranted. At the moment, our best insurance rests with the NEO scientists and their efforts to first find these objects and then track their motions into the future. We need to first find them, then keep an eye on them. NASA's Near-Earth Object Observations Program is constantly monitoring the skies for approaching asteroids and meteors. So far, the program has discovered more than 19,000 NEOs. When NASA discovers an NEO, it works to determine as much information as possible about the object, such as its size, speed, and orbit, so that the agency can calculate when it will approach Earth and how close it will come when it does. But the 19,000 NEOs in NASA's database aren't really what we have to worry about. The organization writes that thousands of NEOs have yet to be discovered: "Asteroid impacts are a continuously occurring natural process. Every day, 80 to 100 tons of material falls upon Earth from space in the form of dust and small meteorites (fragments of asteroids that disintegrate in Earth's atmosphere). Over the past 20 years, U.S. government sensors have detected nearly 600 very small asteroids a few meters in size that have entered Earth's atmosphere and created spectacular bolides (fireballs). Experts estimate that an impact of an object the size of the one that exploded over Chelyabinsk, Russia, in 2013—approximately 55 feet (17 meters) in size—takes place once or twice a century. Impacts of larger objects are expected to be far less frequent (on the scale of centuries to millennia). However, given the current incompleteness of the NEO catalogue, an unpredicted impact—such as the Chelyabinsk event—could occur at any time. Still, the chances of an asteroid larger than 140 meters hitting Earth in the next 100 years are minimal. The current congressionally directed objective of the NEO Observations Program is to find, track, and characterize at least 90 percent of the predicted number of NEOs that are 140 meters and larger in size—larger than a small football stadium—and to characterize a subset representative of the entire population. Objects of this size and larger pose a risk to Earth of greatest concern due to the level of devastation an impact would cause and should continue to be the focus of global search efforts. While no known asteroid larger than 140 meters in size has a significant chance to hit Earth for the next 100 years, less than half of the estimated 25,000 NEOs that are 140 meters and larger in size have been found to date. Asteroid 216258 2006 WH1 will pass by Earth a few days before Christmas. However, NASA has issued no warnings about a catastrophic impact, and CNEOS reports that this asteroid will get no closer than 3 million miles from Earth during its approach."

['investment']

False

On Oct. 23, 2019, the U.K. tabloid Express published an article that left some readers believing they need not make Christmas plans this year because Earth was in danger of being hit by a large asteroid:When the article was regurgitated by even less-reputable websites, the fear-mongering title morphed into a factually inaccurate claim. For instance, the website Digital Wise rehashed this article under the title "NASA Issues Warning Over Asteroid Predicted To Hit Earth Five Days Before Christmas!"NASA's Center for Near Earth Object Studies (CNEOS) currently lists 26 near-Earth objects that are scheduled to pass by our planet within the next 60 days. While asteroid 216258 2006 WH1 (which was discovered in 2006) will truly be passing by earth around Christmas, CNEOS reports that the asteroid is expected to safely pass by earth at a distance of about 15.19 LD (lunar distance), approximately 3.6 million miles.Here's a little more information about near-earth objects from CNEOS. The organization writes on its website (emphasis ours): But the 19,000 NEOs in NASA's database aren't really what we have to worry about. The organization writes that thousands of NEOs have yet to be discovered:Still, the chances of an asteroid larger than 140 meters hitting earth in the next 100 years is minimal:

National Park Service Twitter Account Shut Down After Anti-Trump Retweets

["The Department of Interior took action after a tweet was shared via the National Park Service account unfavorably comparing the attendance at Trump's inauguration with that at Obama's."]

On 20 January 2017, the day Donald J. Trump took office as President of the United States, news outlets posted photospurporting to compare the size of the crowd attending Trump's inauguration to that attending Barack Obama's first inaugural ceremony in 2009. Although there was not yet an official count of how many people actually showed up atthe Trump event, so an accurate numerical comparison couldn't be made, the photos did appear to show a significantdisparity between the sizes of the crowds, with far fewer in attendance at Trump's inauguration than Obama's. photos For obvious reasons, the side-by-side images were relished byanti-Trump factions, whoshared and retweeted them all day long. There wasone instance in particular wherein a retweet of the photos caught the attention of incoming Trump officials, who deemed them inappropriate so inappropriate, in fact, that the Department of Interior promptlydeactivated every oneof its Twitter accounts in response. The offending retweet (since deleted) appeared on the National Park Service (@NatlParkService) Twitter feed: This was followed by another retweet (since deleted) of a text suggesting that the Trump administration had scrubbed information from the White House web site for ideological reasons: scrubbed All of which caused a smalluproar on Twitter, where some users jokedthat the National Park Service had "gone rogue," others wondered about the legality of the retweets, and still others defended their content as "factual, not anti-Trump." Later that day, the NPS Twitter account, along with all the other Department of Interior accounts, went silent. According to a report by CNN, the order came down from a "career staffer" at the department: gone rogue report In statements to The Washington Post, a National Park Service spokesperson explained why the action was taken and saidit would only be temporary: Thomas Crosson, a spokesmanfor the National Park Service, the Interior agency whose employee retweeted the offending tweets,said the action was inconsistent with the agencys approach to engaging the public through social media. The Department of Interiors communications team determined that it was important to stand down Twitter activity across the Department temporarily, except in the case of public safety, Crosson said in an email. Now that social media guidance has been clarified, the Department and its bureaus should resume Twitter engagement as normal this weekend. With one exception, Crosson said: No social media posts on the policy priorities of the new Interior secretary, because Trump nominee Rep. Ryan Zinke (R-Mont.) has not yet been confirmed. Indeed, by the next morning, U.S.Department of Interior Twitter accounts went online again, commencing with a note of contritiontweeted by @NatlParkService: note We regret the mistaken RTs from our account yesterday and look forward to continuing to share the beauty and history of our parks with you pic.twitter.com/mctNNvlrmv pic.twitter.com/mctNNvlrmv NationalParkService (@NatlParkService) January 21, 2017 January 21, 2017 There has been no announcement regarding who may have been responsible for the retweets, or whether disciplinary action would be taken. Klein, Betsy. "Comparing Donald Trump and Barack Obama's Inaugural Crowd Sizes." CNN. 21 January 2017. Merica, Dan."Trump Admin Tells National Park Service to Halt Tweets." CNN.20 January 2017. Rein, Lisa."Interior Department Reactivates Twitter Accounts Ffter Shutdown Following Inauguration." The Washington Post.21 January 2017.

['share']

True

On 20 January 2017, the day Donald J. Trump took office as President of the United States, news outlets posted photospurporting to compare the size of the crowd attending Trump's inauguration to that attending Barack Obama's first inaugural ceremony in 2009. Although there was not yet an official count of how many people actually showed up atthe Trump event, so an accurate numerical comparison couldn't be made, the photos did appear to show a significantdisparity between the sizes of the crowds, with far fewer in attendance at Trump's inauguration than Obama's.This was followed by another retweet (since deleted) of a text suggesting that the Trump administration had scrubbed information from the White House web site for ideological reasons:All of which caused a smalluproar on Twitter, where some users jokedthat the National Park Service had "gone rogue," others wondered about the legality of the retweets, and still others defended their content as "factual, not anti-Trump." Later that day, the NPS Twitter account, along with all the other Department of Interior accounts, went silent. According to a report by CNN, the order came down from a "career staffer" at the department:Indeed, by the next morning, U.S.Department of Interior Twitter accounts went online again, commencing with a note of contritiontweeted by @NatlParkService:We regret the mistaken RTs from our account yesterday and look forward to continuing to share the beauty and history of our parks with you pic.twitter.com/mctNNvlrmv NationalParkService (@NatlParkService) January 21, 2017

Wayne Allyn Root -- Why Obama Will Lose in a Landslide

['Wayne Allyn Root opined that President Obama will lose his re-election bid in 2012 by a landslide.']

Wayne Allyn Root opined that President Obama will lose his re-election bid in 2012 by a landslide. Most political predictions are made by biased pollsters, pundits, or prognosticators who are either rooting for Republicans or Democrats. I am neither. I am a former Libertarian vice-presidential nominee and a well-known Vegas oddsmaker with one of the most accurate records of predicting political races. Neither Obama nor Romney is my horse in the race. I believe both Republicans and Democrats have destroyed the U.S. economy and brought us to the edge of economic disaster. My vote will go to Libertarian presidential candidate Gary Johnson in November, whom I believe has the most fiscally conservative track record of any governor in modern U.S. political history. Without the bold spending cuts of a Gary Johnson or Ron Paul, I don't believe it's possible to turn around America. But as an oddsmaker with a remarkable track record of picking political races, I play no favorites. I simply use common sense to call them as I see them. Back in late December, I released my New Year's predictions. I predicted back then—before a single GOP primary had been held, with Romney trailing for months to almost every GOP competitor from Rick Perry to Herman Cain to Newt—that Romney would easily rout his competition to win the GOP nomination by a landslide. I also predicted that the presidential race between Obama and Romney would be very close until election day, but that on election day, Romney would win by a landslide similar to Reagan-Carter in 1980. Understanding history, today I am even more convinced of a resounding Romney victory. Thirty-two years ago at this moment in time, Reagan was losing by nine points to Carter. Romney is currently running even in the polls. So why do most pollsters give Obama the edge? Origins: Wayne Allyn Root, a political commentator who was the Libertarian Party's 2008 vice-presidential candidate, is a regular contributor to FOX News and the author of several books, including The Conscience of a Libertarian: Empowering the Citizen Revolution with God, Guns, Gambling & Tax Cuts. He writes political opinion columns published on Townhall.com, and his entry for 30 May 2012 was the article excerpted above, entitled "Why Obama Will Lose in a Landslide." Last updated: 11 June 2012.

['economy']

False

[Rest of article here.]Origins: Wayne Allyn Root, a political commentator who was the Libertarian Party's 2008 vice presidential candidate, is a regular contributor to FOX News and the author of several books, including The Conscience of a Libertarian: Empowering the Citizen Revolution with God, Guns, Gambling & Tax Cuts. He writes political opinion columns published on Townhall.com,and his entry for 30 May 2012 was the article excerpted above, entitled "Why Obama Will Lose in a Landslide."

The latest stimulus package sends stimulus checks to imprisoned murderers, rapists, and child molesters.

['Incarcerated people are eligible for stimulus checks under broad criteria outlined in the latest COVID-19 relief package., This was also true of relief bills passed last year under the Trump administration']

Another round of stimulus payments is hitting the bank accounts of eligible Wisconsinites, but some state lawmakers have strong opinions about who should be able to receive them. State Sen. Julian Bradley, R-Franklin, and state Rep. Joe Sanfelippo, R-New Berlin, introduced legislation that would require money sent to Wisconsin prisoners under the latest COVID-19 relief package to be spent on any restitution they owe. Bradley made his argument for the bill in a March 15, 2021 report from the Associated Press. "President Biden's irresponsible stimulus package sends stimulus checks to imprisoned murderers, rapists, and child molesters," he said. This issue has been discussed often amid the debate over how to respond to the COVID-19 crisis and has even factored into packages passed under former President Donald Trump. Let's break it down. Are prisoners eligible? Our friends at PolitiFact National dug into this question after U.S. Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Arkansas, said Democrats voted to give stimulus checks to criminals in prison. They rated the claim Mostly True. While Bradley described some crimes in detail for dramatic effect, the crux of his claim is the same as Cotton's. Before the Senate passed the relief package, Democrats rejected an amendment from Cotton and Republican U.S. Sen. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana that would have barred stimulus checks from going to prisoners. U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., argued this would harm the Black and brown families of prisoners already disproportionately affected by mass incarceration. Without that amendment, the bill that was passed stated that incarcerated people were eligible for stimulus checks as long as they are citizens or legal U.S. residents and either filed a tax return or requested a payment from the Internal Revenue Service. The IRS further notes that inmates can't be denied relief if they meet those criteria. That said, this isn't new. Prisoners were eligible for checks through similarly broad requirements in the CARES Act and a supplemental package passed in 2020 with Republican support under the Trump administration. The IRS attempted to block that group from receiving payments under the CARES Act, but a federal court ultimately rejected that effort. So, Republicans like Bradley, who want to pin the blame solely on President Joe Biden and other Democrats, are a bit off the mark. In an interview, Bradley said the latest stimulus checks are going to imprisoned murderers, rapists, and child molesters. Prisoners can, in fact, receive payments under the latest COVID-19 package—something that has been true since the federal government started providing pandemic relief. Implying that this is the work of Democrats, as Bradley did, leaves out the fact that the same was true of packages passed under Trump. We rate his claim Mostly True.

['National', 'Legal Issues', 'States', 'Taxes', 'Wisconsin']

True

State Sen. Julian Bradley, R-Franklin, and state Rep. Joe Sanfelippo, R-New Berlin, introduced legislation that would require money sent to Wisconsin prisoners under the latest COVID-19 relief package to be spent on any restitution they owe. Bradley made his argument for the bill in aMarch 15, 2021 reportfrom the Associated Press.Our friends at PolitiFact Nationaldug into this questionafter U.S. Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Arkansas, said Democrats voted to give stimulus checks to criminals in prison. They rated the claim Mostly True.And without that amendment, the bill that was passed said incarcerated people were eligible for stimulus checks as long as theyre a citizen or legal U.S. resident and either filed a tax return or requested a payment from the Internal Revenue Service.The IRS further notesthat inmates cant be denied relief if they meet those criteria.Prisoners were eligible for checks through similarly broad requirements in the CARES Act and a supplemental package passed in 2020 with Republican support under the Trump administration. The IRS attempted to block that group from receiving payments under the CARES Act, but a federal courtultimately rejected that effort.

Says he was the only statewide elected official to speak in favor of a federal guest worker plan at the 2012 Republican Party of Texas convention.

[]

Jerry Patterson, an unsuccessful candidate for lieutenant governor this year, subsequently said that he somewhat uniquely spoke out for a federal guest-worker program a few years ago. According to a March 30, 2014,news storyin theSan Antonio Express-News, Republicans including state Sen. Dan Patrick of Houston, who's in a May 27, 2014, runoff for the party's lieutenant governor nomination with incumbent David Dewhurst, have talked about not putting language supportive of a guest-worker program in this years party platform, which is to be finalized by delegates to the next state convention in June 2014. Patrick has stumped on securing the Texas-Mexico border, also objecting in a Jan. 25, 2014,Twitter postto the illegal invasion. TheExpress-Newsstory described Patterson, the state land commissioner since 2003, as saying he was the only statewide elected official to speak in favor of the guest-worker plank at the June 2012 state convention where it was initially adopted. Patterson separately said on his2014 campaign website: Many of my elected colleagues privately expressed support, but told me that they just couldnt take the risk. Did Patterson, who often flies his own plane between cities, venture solo in this way? Immigration in 2012 platform The immigration plank, on page 21 ofthe platform, states that mass deportation of all the undocumented individuals in the United States would neither be equitable nor practical, while blanket amnesty would only encourage more illegal entries. The plank also calls for securing the border, modernizing Social Security cards and limiting birthright citizenship to babies born to a U.S. citizen. Finally, the plank calls for a temporary worker program to bring skilled and unskilled workers into the United States for temporary periods of time when no U.S. workers are currently available, to be self-funded through participation fees and fines, the plank says. The guest-worker plank was characterized by proponents at the time as a meaningful breakthrough for the state party. A June 9, 2012, Texas Tribunenews storyquoted TexasGOPvote.com's Bob Price, a convention delegate, as saying adoption of the guest-worker provisions takes away a tool that Democrats have used for years to drive a wedge between conservative Hispanics and Republicans. William Kelberlan, a delegate from Williamson County, told the Tribune: It was a tough pill to swallow; it didn't go down easily. Kelberlan said he recognized the need for immigration reform but thought more time was needed to hammer out the details of what form it should take. Patterson spoke in favor of the guest-worker plank, according to the story, but it was silent on whether he was the sole statewide elected official to do so. Patterson invokes 'cojones' To our inquiry, Patterson indicated he remembers his solo status well. Aint much to elaborate, he said by email. Asked if hed heard the speeches given by other statewide elected officials and why he knows he was alone in this regard, Patterson replied: I know all the statewides. I know what they do and say. I know who hascojones (um, courage) and who doesn't. I was the only one. By email, Steve Munisteri, the party chairman, confirmed Patterson was the only statewide elected official to speak during floor debate of the guest-worker plank and then only after delegates agreed to let him do so, Munisteri said. Separately, Brad Bailey told us he helped draft the relevant language as a delegate from Senate District 11 in Houston. By phone, Bailey said Patterson was alone among statewide elected officials in speaking about the guest-worker section. Main speeches lacked mention of guest-worker idea We didn't have to take anyone's word for this. Munisteri reminded us the party placed video recordings of the convention online. So we watched the speeches given by several statewide elected officials: U.S. Sens. Kay Bailey Hutchison and John Cornyn; Gov. Rick Perry; Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst; Attorney General Greg Abbott; Agriculture Commissioner Todd Staples and State Comptroller Susan Combs. None plus Patterson, in his main speech to the convention aired support for a guest-worker law. In fact, only Staples mentioned conditions near the Texas-Mexico border. Patterson spoke from floor during platform debate But as delegates discussed the party platform, Patterson stepped to a microphone on the convention floor after Munisteri adjudged that two-thirds of the delegates, by a show of hands, had agreed to suspend the rules to let him join the conversation even though he wasnt a delegate. (Hear Pattersons remarks starting about the 11:15 mark of thevideo here.) Patterson opened by describing himself as a conservative who believes the platforms immigration plank and border security go hand in hand. He then said he supported the then-pending state law requiring most voters to present photo identification at the polls as well as initiatives stressing English as the states primary language. Patterson said he also supported a physical barrier on the U.S.-Mexico border, including a fence in some cases. He added that he opposed unconditional birthright citizenship, bilingual balance and restrictions on police officers asking someones immigration status during an apprehension or investigation of a crime. Further, he said, he was opposed to amnesty for illegal immigrants. But, Patterson said, I will tell you that I very loudly, firmly and with great fervor support a guest-worker program as part of our border security. We have folks in this country who are here to do us harm, Patterson said. They are criminal, they arecoyotes, they run things back and across the border whether they are illegals, whether they are drugs or contraband. And we also have folks in this country, Patterson continued, who want to work hard, pay their taxes, obey our laws. And there is no way for those to come here and do that lawfully because our immigration system is broken. We need a guest-worker, temporary guest-worker program that is in the immigration plank in our platform, he said. Our ruling Patterson said he was unique among statewide elected officials in speaking for the guest-worker section that became part of the Republican Party of Texas platform in 2012. True. TRUE The statement is accurate and theres nothing significant missing. Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check.

['Immigration', 'Economy', 'Workers', 'Texas']

True

According to a March 30, 2014,news storyin theSan Antonio Express-News, Republicans including state Sen. Dan Patrick of Houston, who's in a May 27, 2014, runoff for the party's lieutenant governor nomination with incumbent David Dewhurst, have talked about not putting language supportive of a guest-worker program in this years party platform, which is to be finalized by delegates to the next state convention in June 2014. Patrick has stumped on securing the Texas-Mexico border, also objecting in a Jan. 25, 2014,Twitter postto the illegal invasion.TheExpress-Newsstory described Patterson, the state land commissioner since 2003, as saying he was the only statewide elected official to speak in favor of the guest-worker plank at the June 2012 state convention where it was initially adopted. Patterson separately said on his2014 campaign website: Many of my elected colleagues privately expressed support, but told me that they just couldnt take the risk.The immigration plank, on page 21 ofthe platform, states that mass deportation of all the undocumented individuals in the United States would neither be equitable nor practical, while blanket amnesty would only encourage more illegal entries. The plank also calls for securing the border, modernizing Social Security cards and limiting birthright citizenship to babies born to a U.S. citizen.A June 9, 2012, Texas Tribunenews storyquoted TexasGOPvote.com's Bob Price, a convention delegate, as saying adoption of the guest-worker provisions takes away a tool that Democrats have used for years to drive a wedge between conservative Hispanics and Republicans.But as delegates discussed the party platform, Patterson stepped to a microphone on the convention floor after Munisteri adjudged that two-thirds of the delegates, by a show of hands, had agreed to suspend the rules to let him join the conversation even though he wasnt a delegate. (Hear Pattersons remarks starting about the 11:15 mark of thevideo here.)Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check.

Did an AR Dragon Fly Over a Baseball Stadium?

["Some viewers may be a little confused about what this video does and doesn't show."]

A video of a large, augmented-reality, fire-breathing dragon flying over a baseball stadium is frequently shared on social media. While viewers were undoubtedly aware that this footage didn't actually show a real mythical creature's visit to a ball game, some social media users seemed a bit confused about what this video actually depicted. Is it a hologram? CGI? Virtual reality? At the opening of the South Korean baseball championship, they used a 3D hologram powered by 5G technology. A realistic dragon flew over the stadium. Just unbelievable!!! pic.twitter.com/y3jR64aXXB pic.twitter.com/y3jR64aXXB Godfather IV (@godfatheriv) August 13, 2019. This video shows an augmented reality (AR) dragon. AR, which refers to technology that mixes the real world with computer-generated (CGI) images, is different from virtual reality (VR), which uses computer technology to create a simulated environment. Unlike a hologram, CGI objects can only be seen via some sort of screen. According to information from Live Science and The Franklin Institute, augmented reality is the result of using technology to superimpose information—sounds, images, and text—on the world we see. Picture the "Minority Report" or "Iron Man" style of interactivity. Augmented reality (AR) is one of the biggest technology trends right now, and it is only going to get bigger as AR-ready smartphones and other devices become more accessible around the world. AR allows us to see the real-life environment right in front of us—trees swaying in the park, dogs chasing balls, kids playing soccer—with a digital augmentation overlaid on it. For example, a pterodactyl might be seen landing in the trees, the dogs could be mingling with their cartoon counterparts, and the kids could be seen kicking past an alien spacecraft on their way to score a goal. In other words, this dragon didn't actually "fly over" the stadium; it was only viewable via a screen. This video was created by the company SK Telecom for the SK Wyverns' opening day (a wyvern is a "winged two-legged dragon with a barbed tail") of the 2019 Korean Baseball Organization season. The dragon was visible on the stadium's large LED screen and home televisions. While the people at this game couldn't see the dragon with the naked eye, they were able to see this mythical beast via their phones. Korea.com reported that fans could also interact with the dragon by pressing the "cheer button" on a smartphone app. An augmented reality (AR) image of a wyvern, a mythical dragon-like creature, suddenly appeared on the opening day of the 2019 Korea Baseball Organization (KBO) season at Incheon's SK Happy Dream Park, home of the defending league champions SK Wyverns. An image of the team's mascot was shown on the world's largest LED baseball scoreboard at the stadium. In addition, the flying creature put on an interactive performance when fans pressed the cheer button on a smartphone app. Fans who watched the event on TV or their smartphones could also see this high-tech spectacle. For the wyvern's performance, SK used its self-developed AR and virtual reality (VR) technologies such as eSpace, a hyperspace platform for replicating the real world in cyberspace, and T real Platform, which enables AR content to be freely created and shared. The use of the latest 5G wireless technology also allowed large-scale AR streaming. A second video of this augmented reality dragon was posted to the SK Telecom YouTube page. That video shows fans downloading this app and interacting with the dragon via their phones. In November 2019, a similar video supposedly showing a "hologram" lion roaring at a stadium in Argentina went viral on social media: Estudiantes de La Plata celebrated reopening their stadium with the most incredible hologram show ?? pic.twitter.com/cKCsJAKwD3 pic.twitter.com/cKCsJAKwD3 ESPN FC (@ESPNFC) November 11, 2019. Again, this was not a hologram visible to the naked eye, but an augmented reality display that could only be seen on screens. Emspak, Jesse. "What is Augmented Reality? Live Science. 1 June 2018. The Franklin Institute. "What is Augmented Reality? Retrieved 15 August 2019. Landers, Chris. "Korea's SK Wyverns Used Augmented Reality to Bring a Fire-Breathing Dragon to Opening Day." MLB. 25 March 2019. Hwaya, Kim. "Augmented Reality Dragon Wows Baseball Fans on Opening Day." Korea.net. 27 March 2019.

['lien']

True

At the opening of the South Korean baseball championship they used a 3D hologram using 5G technology. Realistic Dragon flew over the stadium.Just unbelieveble!!! pic.twitter.com/y3jR64aXXB Godfather IV (@godfatheriv) August 13, 2019This video shows an augmented reality (AR) dragon. AR, which refers to technology that mixes the real world with computer-generated (CGI) images, is different from virtual reality (VR), the use of computer technology to create a simulated environment. Unlike a hologram, the CGI objects can only be seen via some sort of screen:According to information from Live Science and The Franklin Institute, respectively: Korea.com reported that fans could also interact with the dragon by pressing the "cheer button" on a smartphone app:Estudiantes de La Plata celebrated reopening their stadium with the most incredible hologram show ?? pic.twitter.com/cKCsJAKwD3 ESPN FC (@ESPNFC) November 11, 2019

Did Mark Twain Say, 'In the Beginning of a Change, the Patriot Is a Scarce Man'?

["We're happy to report that not all of the quotes attributed to Mark Twain on the internet are bogus."]

Mark Twain (1835-1910), the author of "Huckleberry Finn" and "Tom Sawyer," remains one of the most celebrated American writers and humorists. He is certainly among the most quotable authors of all time, not to mention one of the most misquoted. For whatever reason, people like to attribute jokes and aphorisms to Twain that he never said or wrote. In early 2023, we were alerted to a meme that was circulating with a quote attributed to Twain on the subject of patriotism. It had been met with some skepticism online, in part because some people pointed out that the year given for the quote, 1935, was 34 years after Twain's death. When we investigated, however, we found that the quote itself is properly attributed to him, and 1935 was the date it was first published. The passage is an excerpt from a section titled "Maxims in the Rough" from "Mark Twain's Notebook," a collection first published in 1935 by Harper & Brothers. Here is the full paragraph, plus the three that immediately followed it, for context: Maxims in the Rough Mark Twain's Notebook In the beginning of a change, the patriot is a scarce man, brave, hated, and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot. The soul and substance of what customarily ranks as patriotism is moral cowardice and always has been. In any civic crisis of a great and dangerous sort, the common herd is not privately anxious about the rights and wrongs of the matter; it is only anxious to be on the winning side. In the North, before the War, the man who opposed slavery was despised, ostracized, and insulted by the "Patriots." Then, by and by, the "Patriots" went over to his side, and thenceforth his attitude became patriotism. There are two kinds of patriotism: monarchical patriotism and republican patriotism. In the one case, the government and the king may rightfully furnish you their notions of patriotism; in the other, neither the government nor the entire nation is privileged to dictate to any individual what the form of his patriotism shall be. The Gospel of Monarchical Patriotism is: "The King can do no wrong." We have adopted it with all its servility, with an unimportant change in the wording: "Our country, right or wrong!" We have thrown away the most valuable asset we have—the individual right to oppose both flag and country when he (just he by himself) believes them to be in the wrong. We have thrown it away; and with it all that was really respectable about the grotesque and laughable word, Patriotism. Source: Twain, Mark. "Mark Twain's Notebook." London, New York: Harper & Brothers, 1935. https://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/digital/collection/ItalTravLit/id/22396. Accessed 18 Jan. 2023.

['asset']

True

Mark Twain (1835-1910), the author of "Huckleberry Finn" and "Tom Sawyer," remains one of the most celebrated American writers and humorists. He is certainly among the most quotable authors of all time, not to mention one of the most misquoted. For whatever reason, people like to attribute jokes and aphorisms to Twain that he never said or wrote.The passage is an excerpt from a section titled "Maxims in the Rough" from "Mark Twain's Notebook," a collection first published in 1935 by Harper & Brothers. Here is the full paragraph, plus the the three that immediately followed it, for context:

Hydrogen Beer

['Are those crazy Japanese getting high on hydrogen beer?']

Claim: A few sips of hydrogen beer enables Japanese karaoke nuts to sing soprano parts and shoot blue flames out of their mouths at dramatic moments. Example: [Collected on the Internet, 1994] January 1, 1994TOKYO (AP) Here in the chic pubs of the Aoyama district, the latest fad inspired by beer makers struggling through a sluggish economy is the flammable suds of the new Hydrogen Beer. The latest craze among the environmentally conscious crowd of twentysomethings, the "Suiso" beer made by the Asaka Beer Corporation has been extremely popular at karaoke sing-along bars and discotheques. Hydrogen, like helium, is a gas lighter than air. Because hydrogen molecules are lighter than air, sound waves are transmitted more rapidly; individuals whose lungs are filled with the nontoxic gas can speak with an uncharacteristically high voice. Exploiting this quirk of physics, chic urbanites can now sing soprano parts on karaoke sing-along machines after consuming a big gulp of Suiso beer. The drink comes in a transparent hexagonal bottle imported from the maker of the new American drink, Zima," according to Hideki Saito, marketing director of Asaka Beer Corp. While the bottles are imported from Tennessee, the labels are made with a 100% biodegradable polymer. The bottle caps are equipped with a safety valve to prevent excess build-up of pressure in high temperatures. The flammable nature of hydrogen has also become another selling point, even though Asaka has not acknowledged that this was a deliberate marketing ploy. It has inspired a new fashion of blowing flames from one's mouth using a cigarette as an ignition source. Many new karaoke videos feature singers shooting blue flames in slow motion, while flame contests took place in pubs everywhere in Tokyo on New Year's eve. So far, Asaka beer has insisted that the quantities of hydrogen used in the drinks is too low to create potential for bodily harm. In the factory, the carbon dioxide that is dissolved in the beer is partially extracted and replaced with hydrogen gas. Mr. Saito maintained that the remaining carbon dioxide mixed with hydrogen prevents the rate of combustion from increasing dramatically. Carbon dioxide is a nonflammable gas that is naturally contained in the exhaled breath of humans. However, the company has hesitated from marketing the product in the US due to legal complications. Each bottle of Suiso beer sells for approximately 1,200 yen, or 11 US dollars. The bottles are packed in special crates lined with concrete to prevent chain explosions in the event of a fire. Origins: Initially making the rounds in 1994, this bit of fiction is still in circulation on the Internet and continues to pop up in the media. Additional spurious details about an injured participant engaging in a lawsuit against the brew's manufacturer and a karaoke bar wereadded to the story in late 1998. Folks will believe most anything, provided someone sticks "AP" at the front of it. Though it was decked out to look like it, the above wasn't a real wire service story. (Even so, this tale has suckered a fine selection of highly-respected newspapers, including The New York Times in March 1996, the Boston Globe in November 1997, and The Washington Post in September 1999. It has also appeared in a widely-used introductory-level college chemistry textbook.) There is no Asaka Beer Corporation. Due to tight government regulations, there are only five beer companies in Japan: Kirin (40.6% market share), Asahi (37.6%), Sapporo (15.8%), Suntory (5%) and Orion (1%). Nor is there a Suiso beer. Both these names are made up, nothing more than wonderful bits of embroidery employed to give a fanciful tale an aura of believability. Proving yet again that no story is too good not to be improved upon, the following version appeared in inboxes everywhere in late 1998: TOKYO (AP) The recent craze for hydrogen beer is at the heart of a three way lawsuit between unemployed stockbroker Toshira Otoma, the Tike-Take karaoke bar and the Asaka Beer Corporation. Mr Otoma is suing the bar and the brewery for selling toxic substances and is claiming damages for grievous bodily harm leading to the loss of his job. The bar is countersuing for defamation and loss of customers. The Asaka Beer corporation brews "Suiso" brand beer, where the carbon dioxide normally used to add fizz has been replaced by the more environmentally friendly hydrogen gas. A side effect of this has made the beer extremely popular at karaoke sing-along bars and discotheques. Hydrogen, like helium, is a gas lighter than air. Because hydrogen molecules are lighter than air, sound waves are transmitted more rapidly; individuals whose lungs are filled with the nontoxic gas can speak with an uncharacteristically high voice. Exploiting this quirk of physics, chic urbanites can now sing soprano parts on karaoke sing-along machines after consuming a big gulp of Suiso beer. The flammable nature of hydrogen has also become another selling point, even though Asaka has not acknowledged that this was a deliberate marketing ploy. It has inspired a new fashion of blowing flames from one's mouth using a cigarette as an ignition source. Many new karaoke videos feature singers shooting blue flames in slow motion, while flame contests take place in pubs everywhere. "Mr Otoma has no-one to blame but himself. If he had not become drunk and disorderly, none of this would have happened. Our security guards undergo the most careful screening and training before they are allowed to deal with customers" said Mr Takashi Nomura, Manager of the Tike-Take bar. "Mr Otoma drank fifteen bottles of hydrogen beer in order to maximise the size of the flames he could belch during the contest. He catapulted balls of fire across the room that Gojira would be proud of, but this was not enough to win him first prize since the judgement is made on the quality of the flames and that of the singing, and after fifteen bottles of lager he was badly out of tune." "He took exception to the result and hurled blue fireballs at the judge, singeing the front of Mrs Mifune's hair, entirely removing her eyebrows and lashes, and ruining the clothes of two nearby customers. None of these people have returned to my bar. When our security staff approached he turned his attentions to them, making it almost impossible to approach him. Our head bouncer had no choice but to hurl himself at Mr Otoma's knees, knocking his legs from under him." "The laws of physics are not to be disobeyed, and the force that propelled Mr Otoma's legs backwards also pivoted around his centre of gravity and moved his upper body forward with equal velocity. It was his own fault he had his mouth open for the next belch, his own fault he held a lighted cigarette in front of it and it is own fault he swallowed that cigarette." "The Tike-Take bar takes no responsibility for the subsequent internal combustion, rupture of his stomach lining, nor the third degree burns to his oesophagus, larynx and sinuses as the exploding gases forced their way out of his body. His consequential muteness and loss of employment are his own fault." Mr Otoma was unavailable for comment. As well he might be, since he doesn't exist. There's still no Suiso beer, no Asaka Beer Corporation, and certainly no such lawsuit. The names used in the piece give an additional clue to its being a leg-pull: Takashi Nomura and Toshiro Mifune are both actors in classic Japanese films, and Otoma comes from Katsuhiro Otomo, a modern director. This newest version makes more of a story out of the tale, turning what purported to be a staid news article about a karaoke innovation into a bemusing report about yet another silly lawsuit. Merely the mental picture of a drunken Japanese hurling blue fireballs at the judges who'd passed him over is enough to keep one entertained for hours. Karaoke is weird enough without anyone having to blow blue flames as part of it. Barbara "Molson Dry wit" Mikkelson Last updated: 7 October 2006 Sources: Pollack, Andrew. "Fleeting Fame Sells in Asia ." The New York Times. 11 March 1996 (p. D1). Reucroft, Stephen and John Swain. "Dinosaur Birds." The Boston Globe. 3 November 1997 (p. C4). Schwarcz, Joe. "Hydrogen, the First Element; What a Blast!" The Washington Post. 8 September 1999 (p. H1). Zumdahl, Steven and Zumdahl, Susan. Chemistry. Boston; Houghton-Mifflin, 2000 ISBN 0-39598-581-1 (p. 524). PC Week. "Spark Me Up." 18 April 1994 (p. A5). Also told in: Fiery, Ann. The Complete and Totally True Book of Urban Legends. Philadelphia: Running Press Books, 2001. ISBN 0-7624-107404 (pp. 77-80). The Complete and Totally True Book of Urban Legends

['economy']

False

Also told in: Fiery, Ann. The Complete and Totally True Book of Urban Legends. Philadelphia: Running Press Books, 2001. ISBN 0-7624-107404 (pp. 77-80).

Lifetime passes for complimentary quick dining options.

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

In January2015, links began circulating on Facebook promisingusers free lifetime passes to popular fast food outlets such as KFC, McDonald's, Wendy's, Starbucks, Subway, and Burger King, typically presented as promotions offeredin celebration of the brands' purported anniversaries: The embedded links led to severalURLs, and users who clicked through on them to claim the promised lifetime passes were routed to a pages that clonedthe style of Facebook-based content (but werehostedoff Facebook): As noted, the visible URLs in the above-reproduced imagesdon't belong to any official domains owned by these fast food chains. The ads are survey/sweepstakes scams that urge usersto share their enticementsvia Facebook in order to recruit friends to further the fake promotions and dupevisitors intosubscribing to various expensive offers to claim their "free" passes.Most social media users are familiar with survey scams conducted in this fashion: Kohl's, Costco, Home Depot, Lowe's,Kroger, Best Buy, Macy's, Olive Garden, Publix, Target, and Walmart are among retailers used asbait byscammers, withmany of these scams aiming to capturepersonal information and valuable page likes from Facebook users.A July 2014 article from the Better Business Bureau explainedhow userscan spot and avoid scammersimitating high-profilebrands on social media:Don't believe what you see. It's easy to steal the colors, logos and header of an established organization. Scammers can also make links look like they lead to legitimate websites and emails appear to come from a different sender.Legitimate businesses do not ask for credit card numbers or banking information on customer surveys. If they do ask for personal information, like an address or email, be sure there's a link to their privacy policy.When in doubt, do a quick web search. If the survey is a scam, you may find alerts or complaints from other consumers. The organization's real website may have further information.Watch out for a reward that's too good to be true. If the survey is real, you may be entered in a drawing to win a gift card or receive a small discount off your next purchase. Few businesses can afford to give away $50 gift cards for completing a few questions.A nearly identical scam commonin October 2015 promised a lifetime pass to Starbucks in the same manner. Many users who completed the steps were dismayed to discover that no such reward awaited them. As noted, the visible URLs in the above-reproduced imagesdon't belong to any official domains owned by these fast food chains. The ads are survey/sweepstakes scams that urge usersto share their enticementsvia Facebook in order to recruit friends to further the fake promotions and dupevisitors intosubscribing to various expensive offers to claim their "free" passes.Most social media users are familiar with survey scams conducted in this fashion: Kohl's, Costco, Home Depot, Lowe's,Kroger, Best Buy, Macy's, Olive Garden, Publix, Target, and Walmart are among retailers used asbait byscammers, withmany of these scams aiming to capturepersonal information and valuable page likes from Facebook users. Kohl's Costco Home Depot Lowe's Kroger Best Buy Macy's Olive Garden Publix Target Walmart scammers A July 2014 article from the Better Business Bureau explainedhow userscan spot and avoid scammersimitating high-profilebrands on social media: article Don't believe what you see. It's easy to steal the colors, logos and header of an established organization. Scammers can also make links look like they lead to legitimate websites and emails appear to come from a different sender. Legitimate businesses do not ask for credit card numbers or banking information on customer surveys. If they do ask for personal information, like an address or email, be sure there's a link to their privacy policy. When in doubt, do a quick web search. If the survey is a scam, you may find alerts or complaints from other consumers. The organization's real website may have further information. Watch out for a reward that's too good to be true. If the survey is real, you may be entered in a drawing to win a gift card or receive a small discount off your next purchase. Few businesses can afford to give away $50 gift cards for completing a few questions. A nearly identical scam commonin October 2015 promised a lifetime pass to Starbucks in the same manner. Many users who completed the steps were dismayed to discover that no such reward awaited them. Starbucks

['credit']

False

The embedded links led to severalURLs, and users who clicked through on them to claim the promised lifetime passes were routed to a pages that clonedthe style of Facebook-based content (but werehostedoff Facebook):As noted, the visible URLs in the above-reproduced imagesdon't belong to any official domains owned by these fast food chains. The ads are survey/sweepstakes scams that urge usersto share their enticementsvia Facebook in order to recruit friends to further the fake promotions and dupevisitors intosubscribing to various expensive offers to claim their "free" passes.Most social media users are familiar with survey scams conducted in this fashion: Kohl's, Costco, Home Depot, Lowe's,Kroger, Best Buy, Macy's, Olive Garden, Publix, Target, and Walmart are among retailers used asbait byscammers, withmany of these scams aiming to capturepersonal information and valuable page likes from Facebook users.A July 2014 article from the Better Business Bureau explainedhow userscan spot and avoid scammersimitating high-profilebrands on social media:Don't believe what you see. It's easy to steal the colors, logos and header of an established organization. Scammers can also make links look like they lead to legitimate websites and emails appear to come from a different sender.Legitimate businesses do not ask for credit card numbers or banking information on customer surveys. If they do ask for personal information, like an address or email, be sure there's a link to their privacy policy.When in doubt, do a quick web search. If the survey is a scam, you may find alerts or complaints from other consumers. The organization's real website may have further information.Watch out for a reward that's too good to be true. If the survey is real, you may be entered in a drawing to win a gift card or receive a small discount off your next purchase. Few businesses can afford to give away $50 gift cards for completing a few questions.A nearly identical scam commonin October 2015 promised a lifetime pass to Starbucks in the same manner. Many users who completed the steps were dismayed to discover that no such reward awaited them.As noted, the visible URLs in the above-reproduced imagesdon't belong to any official domains owned by these fast food chains. The ads are survey/sweepstakes scams that urge usersto share their enticementsvia Facebook in order to recruit friends to further the fake promotions and dupevisitors intosubscribing to various expensive offers to claim their "free" passes.Most social media users are familiar with survey scams conducted in this fashion: Kohl's, Costco, Home Depot, Lowe's,Kroger, Best Buy, Macy's, Olive Garden, Publix, Target, and Walmart are among retailers used asbait byscammers, withmany of these scams aiming to capturepersonal information and valuable page likes from Facebook users.A July 2014 article from the Better Business Bureau explainedhow userscan spot and avoid scammersimitating high-profilebrands on social media:A nearly identical scam commonin October 2015 promised a lifetime pass to Starbucks in the same manner. Many users who completed the steps were dismayed to discover that no such reward awaited them.

Did Clint Eastwood's Net Worth Leave His Family 'in Tears'?

['A strange online death hoax about Clint Eastwood\'s net worth purportedly leaving his family "in tears" circulated in online advertisements late in 2020.']

Clint Eastwood's Academy Award-winning work includes four Oscars: Best Director and Best Actor in a Leading Role for both 1993's "Unforgiven" and 2004's "Million Dollar Baby." Eastwood's work spans decades, and some of his roles were uncredited. For example, he briefly appeared in 1995's "Casper." Additionally, since at least September 2020, he appeared uncredited in an online advertisement that read: "Clint Eastwood's Net Worth Left His Family In Tears." Of course, Eastwood had nothing to do with the dubious ad. Furthermore, he was not dead. As of December 2020, Clint Eastwood was alive and filming a new movie during the COVID-19 pandemic. The 90-year-old actor was born on May 31, 1930. The misleading advertisements that falsely claimed Eastwood's net worth "left his family in tears" led readers to a seemingly endless, multi-page story on refinancegold.com. The headline for the slideshow-style article read: "Special Celebs & Their Incredible Net Worth." Clint Eastwood's name finally appeared on page 225 after readers had clicked "Next" 225 times, right before the end of the story. The page included no mention of his family being left "in tears." Clint Eastwood ~ $375 Million (Photo by Frazer Harrison/Getty Images for AFI) Clint Eastwood is Hollywood's star from the 70s who has had a long and fruitful acting career in succeeding decades, mostly portraying rough-and-tough characters in Western settings. These days, he is a highly accomplished director. He is best known for his roles in the Dollars Trilogy and Dirty Harry films. With a $375 million net fortune in his bank account from his long career as an actor, producer, and director in show business, he will never need to ask for a loan in his life again. We previously covered other misleading net worth advertisements for Alex Trebek, Sean Connery, Jaleel White, and Richard Gere. On the TrustPilot.com reviews website, a user named Paul H. posted a one-star review for refinancegold.com, the website that created the misleading Clint Eastwood advertisement: "Hurtful Misleading Ad to Draw You In." Their morally despicable ad to draw you to their website should warn you right off about having anything to do with this company. The hook was: "Clint Eastwood's Net Worth Left His Family in Tears" (accompanied by a picture of Clint looking distraught and at death's door - the sort of picture we could all be caught with at the wrong time of the day). I'm not particularly a fan of Clint Eastwood, but as far as I know, he's very much alive and not going bankrupt any time soon. I'm sure he doesn't need me to defend him, but this sort of ad is hurtful to those who love him, deceitful, and without conscience. Avoid this company like the plague; how far can you trust people who are willing to draw you in with that sort of ad? Snopes debunks a wide range of content, and online advertisements are no exception. Misleading ads often lead to obscure websites that host lengthy slideshow articles with many pages. It's called advertising "arbitrage." The advertiser's goal is to make more money on ads displayed on the slideshow's pages than it costs to show the initial ad that lured them to it. Feel free to submit ads to us, and be sure to include a screenshot of the ad and the link to where the ad leads.

['loan']

False

Clint Eastwood's Academy Award-winning work includes four Oscars: Best Director and Best Actor in a Leading Role for both 1993's "Unforgiven" and 2004's "Million Dollar Baby." Eastwood's work spans decades, and some of his roles were uncredited. For example, he briefly appeared in 1995's "Casper." Also, since at least September 2020 he appeared uncredited in none other than an online advertisement that read: "Clint Eastwood's Net Worth Left His Family In Tears."Of course, Eastwood had nothing to do with the dubious ad. Further, he was not dead. As of December 2020, Clint Eastwood was alive and filming a new movie during the COVID-19 pandemic. The 90-year-old actor was born on May 31, 1930.The misleading advertisements that falsely claimed Eastwood's net worth "left his family in tears" led readers to a seemingly endless, multi-page story on refinancegold.com. The headline for the slideshow-style article read: "Special Celebs & Their Incredible Net Worth." (Photo by Frazer Harrison/Getty Images for AFI)We previously covered other misleading net worth advertisements for Alex Trebek, Sean Connery, Jaleel White, and Richard Gere. White and Gere were both still alive.On the TrustPilot.com reviews website, a user named Paul H. posted a one-star review for refinancegold.com, the website that created the misleading Clint Eastwood advertisement:Snopes debunks a wide range of content, and online advertisements are no exception. Misleading ads often lead to obscure websites that host lengthy slideshow articles with lots of pages. It's called advertising "arbitrage." The advertiser's goal is to make more money on ads displayed on the slideshow's pages than it cost to show the initial ad that lured them to it. Feel free to submit ads to us, and be sure to include a screenshot of the ad and the link to where the ad leads.

Did Monica Lewinsky 'Leave Behind' a 'Stunning' Net Worth?

['Online advertisements falsely implied that Monica Lewinsky was dead and claimed that her net worth stunned her family.']

In late December 2020, a misleading online advertisement appeared, announcing that Monica Lewinsky was dead and that her net worth stunned her family. It read: "Monica Lewinsky's Net Worth Stuns Her Family At Age 47. Monica Lewinsky Leaves Behind A Net Worth That Will Boggle Your Mind." However, this was not true. She is alive, and despite what the ad claimed, there was no indication in the resulting story that her net worth shocked her family. The ad was sponsored by the Therapy Joker website and was hosted on the Yahoo! Gemini advertising service. Readers who clicked the ad were led to a 430-page story with the headline: "The Biggest Hollywood Celebrities & Their Incredible Net Worth: Can You Guess Who Has The Biggest Bank Account?" Lewinsky's net worth appeared on page 417, meaning that readers had to click "Next Page" 417 times to reach her section: "Monica Lewinsky: Activist and TV Personality - $500,000." Monica Samille Lewinsky is a woman of many skills. This popular American television personality is also a successful fashion designer, activist, and a former intern at the White House. The paparazzi constantly followed her, and she was a regular face in the media during her time at the White House. However, she decided to leave all that behind and pursue a different career. Additionally, she authored the book, "Monica: Her Story," which added to her fame. The London School of Economics and Political Science alumna is now 47 years old and remains a popular television personality. She rents a lavish apartment and enjoys a luxurious lifestyle. Her fleet of cars includes a Mini Cooper and a Cadillac. We hope she has a professional financial advisor to assist her with her banking needs. Currently, the media personality, activist, and fashion designer has retained her fame, and we hope Lewinsky continues to manage the money she has accumulated over the years. The page mentioned nothing about Lewinsky's purported death, nor did it present any information about her family being stunned by her net worth. The misleading advertisement and exceptionally lengthy article reflect a strategy known in the advertising world as "arbitrage." The Therapy Joker website's goal was to make more money from ads displayed on each of the 430 pages than it cost to lure readers with the initial "Monica Lewinsky's Net Worth Stuns Her Family" ad. The business and technology blog Margins defined "arbitrage" as "leveraging an inefficient set of systems to make a riskless profit, usually by buying and selling the same asset." Margins also referred to it as "the mythical free lunch that economics tells us does not exist." Lewinsky was a White House intern in the mid-1990s who became famous after her affair with former U.S. President Bill Clinton became a public scandal. In December 1998, Clinton was impeached by the U.S. House of Representatives. However, the Senate did not vote to convict and remove him from office, and he served the remainder of his second term in the White House. We previously covered similar misleading net worth stories for Sean Connery, Jaleel White, Richard Gere, Chuck Norris, Clint Eastwood, and Alex Trebek. Snopes debunks a wide range of content, and online advertisements are no exception. Misleading ads often lead to obscure websites that host lengthy slideshow articles with numerous pages. It's called advertising "arbitrage." The advertiser's goal is to make more money on ads displayed on the slideshow's pages than it cost to show the initial ad that lured them to it. Feel free to submit ads to us, and be sure to include a screenshot of the ad and the link to where the ad leads.

['profit']

False

In late December 2020, a misleading online advertisement appeared to announce that Monica Lewinsky was dead and that her net worth stunned her family. It read: "Monica Lewinsky's Net Worth Stuns Her Family At Age 47. Monica Lewinsky Leaves Behind A Net Worth That Will Boggle Your Mind."Lewinsky's net worth appeared on page 417. This meant that readers had to click "Next Page" 417 times to reach the page for Lewinsky:The business and technology blog Margins defined "arbitrage" as "leveraging an inefficient set of systems to make a riskless profit, usually by buying and selling the same asset." Margins also referred to it as "the mythical free lunch that economics tells us does not exist."Lewinsky was a White House intern in the mid-1990s who became famous after her affair with former U.S. President Bill Clinton became a public scandal. In December 1998, Clinton was impeached by the U.S. House of Representatives. However, the Senate did not vote to convict and remove him from office. He served the remainder of his second term in the White House.We previously covered similar misleading net worth stories for Sean Connery, Jaleel White, Richard Gere, Chuck Norris, Clint Eastwood, and Alex Trebek.Snopes debunks a wide range of content, and online advertisements are no exception. Misleading ads often lead to obscure websites that host lengthy slideshow articles with lots of pages. It's called advertising "arbitrage." The advertiser's goal is to make more money on ads displayed on the slideshow's pages than it cost to show the initial ad that lured them to it. Feel free to submit ads to us, and be sure to include a screenshot of the ad and the link to where the ad leads.

Is America Really 'Rounding the Turn' on COVID-19?

['We fact-checked the claims of those who sought to downplay the seriousness of the pandemic in the weeks prior to the 2020 presidential election.']

Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And, please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease. fighting Find out Read Submit Become a Founding Member CDC WHO In the final days before the 2020 presidential election, U.S. President Donald Trump accelerated his months-long campaign strategy to downplay the seriousness of the COVID-19 pandemic. At rallies and on Twitter, Trump repeated claims that alleged a nefarious scheme on behalf of news reporters to undermine his reelection campaign by highlighting COVID-19 statistics when, in Trump's reality, he wanted Americans to believe the country was "rounding the turn" on the deadly outbreak. rounding the turn By pointing to alleged successes, ranging from the country's mortality rate to its testing levels, Trump sought to convince Americans his administration was making positive strides in curbing the virus' spread, and that the worse of the outbreak was over. With that messaging, he attempted to frame his Democratic rival Joe Biden as the candidate who would instead ruin the economy with strict lockdowns to curb the spread. On Oct. 30, Trump tweeted: economy tweeted "Biden would lock us down forever. We are rounding the corner!" Below, we determined the legitimacy of Trump's framing of the COVID-19 outbreak in the run-up before Election Day. We considered key metrics to which scientists point for measuring the outbreak's status: the rolling average in the increase in new cases and deaths each day, and mortality rates. We based our analysis on COVID-19 patient information compiled by multiple sources, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and The COVID Tracking Project, to which local governments and health care systems refer, as of Oct. 30. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention The COVID Tracking Project First, let let us define what a wave means during outbreaks of infectious diseases. When a fatal epidemic starts, a rising number of people fall ill and die, and that number grows until some sort of change occurs. For example, as researchers deepen their understanding of a new disease, they can tell communities how to better protect themselves from illness and those messages could stop rising case numbers and fatalities. Or, a disease may become less transmissible over time, people may grow immune, or scientists may discover new treatments. If or when that type of change happens, the community would have tallied its all-time high record number of patients and deaths, and see a steady decrease in such measurements from then on. But over the course of an infectious disease outbreak, that pattern a rise in cases and deaths, a peak, and then a decline often repeats. For example, the largest 19th-century epidemic of influenza, an outbreak that occurred between 1889 and 1892, consisted of three such waves, all of which varied in intensity. Let's circle back to COVID-19, which is the disease caused by the coronavirus dubbed SARS-CoV-2. The president alleged on multiple occasions, including at the final of two presidential debates with Biden on Oct. 22, that the country's "excess mortality rate is way down, and much lower than almost any other country," without further explanation. final of two presidential debates But in reality, epidemiologists are still developing definitive estimates for the country's rate of excess mortalities or the number of COVID-19 patients who died, in part, due to the virus exacerbating pre-existing health problems. "Data are incomplete because of the lag in time between when the death occurred and when the death certificate is completed," according to the CDC. excess mortalities CDC Rather, to measure the pandemic's deadliness, scientists often referred to what's called the "observed case fatality ratio," or the percentage of people who were testing positive for COVID-19 and dying within the sum of all positive cases. As of this writing, that proportion was 2.6% in America the seventh-highest rate among hardest-hit countries globally, per Johns Hopkins data. Czechia held the top spot, followed by India and Poland. Additionally, to determine a country's ability to contain the virus, researchers considered the number of COVID-19 deaths per 100,000 people, healthy or not. In the days before the election, almost 70 people for every 100,000 in the U.S. were testing positive for COVID-19 and dying a rate that was the fifth worst death globally, according to Johns Hopkins data. Comparatively, Indonesia had the lowest death rate among countries most impacted by the virus, with roughly five deaths per every 100,000 people. data All of this said, an October study published by the Journal of the American Medical Association compared America's death rates including preliminary estimates of excess mortalities in the U.S. with that of 18 countries with similar economies and confirmed the findings of the Johns Hopkins data: the U.S. had one of the highest rates of deaths per 100,000 people. The researchers determined: October study Compared with other countries, the US experienced high COVID-19associated mortality and excess all-cause mortality into September 2020. After the first peak in early spring, US death rates from COVID-19 and from all causes remained higher than even countries with high COVID-19 mortality. In other words, it was outright false to claim the country had the lowest case-fatality ratio globally, or the lowest rate of deaths per 100,000 people, and the CDC was still analyzing that data to form definitive estimates for the country's excess mortalities. the CDC There is some truth within the president's framing of the pandemic's death toll shortly before the election: The survival rate among severely ill COVID-19 patients in the U.S. appeared to be improving. survival rate During mid-September and late October, the seven-day average of deaths per day hovered below 860, which was well below the peak of more than 2,100 in the spring, according to the tracking project. As you can see in the graph below, that statistic was on a downward slope since that high point with slight ebbs and flows, though it never fell below about 480 daily mortalities. No evidence showed the virus was becoming less fatal over time, but rather that the medical community had improved treatments for severely ill patients, and that more younger people with lower health risks comprised that group. Dr. Leora Horwitz, director of NYU Langones Center for Healthcare Innovation & Delivery Science, told The New York Times for an Oct. 29 story on the dropping death rate: Langones Center The New York Times We understand better when people need to be on ventilators and when they dont, and what complications to watch for, like blood clots and kidney failure. We understand how to watch for oxygen levels even before patients are in the hospital, so we can bring them in earlier. And of course, we understand that steroids are helpful, and possibly some other medications. Nonetheless, epidemiologists were preparing in the weeks before the presidential election for the raw number of deaths to increase as the country's seven-day rolling average of new COVID-19 cases (or the sum of the current day's increase plus the six preceding days' increases, divided by seven) increased a trend we unpack below. According to CDC models, between 3,900 to 10,000 people could die during the third week of November alone, raising the country's COVID-19 death toll to at least 243,000 people. Facing a crowd of supporters in Michigan on Oct. 27, Trump repeated what he believes is the reason for America's high number of COVID-19 cases compared to other counties. "You know why we have so many cases? Because we test more," he said. said Not quite. Directly equating the increase in cases to the increase in testing (or upward slopes in graphs depicting COVID-19 data) was a flawed argument that, in effect, removed the role of individual responsibility to make lifestyle changes to prevent the spread of the virus. individual responsibility Without question, increased testing would reveal more positive cases thats the nature of probability, and partly the reason for the country's all-time high positivity rate in the spring (seen in the graph below). However, in order for increased testing to be the sole reason for more positive COVID-19 tests among Americans, the proportion of positive tests (within the sum of tests) would have to decrease, or remain steady, over time. And looking nationally, this measurement, called the "positivity rate," was on a slight upward climb in the final weeks before the 2020 election, according to Johns Hopkins data. Over the course of several weeks before the election, the country's moving average rate of positive tests increased from 4.2% to 6.3%. Per the World Health Organization (WHO), an area's positivity rate should remain at 5% or lower for at least two weeks before its leaders lift rules on social distancing. As of this writing, just 17 states met that threshold. just 17 states "The data speak for themselves," said Fauci, a leading member of the White House coronavirus task force, in an interview with BBC, where he described some states' high positivity rate as an indication the country was going in the wrong direction. interview with BBC After all, the Trump administration listed "ending the COVID-19 pandemic" as one of the president's top accomplishments in a campaign flyer on Oct. 27, according to a copy obtained by Politico and displayed below. A spokesperson for the White House later told Fox News the statement was "poorly worded" and meant to emphasize the administration's goal to overcome the pandemic. copy Fox News Alleging success was undoubtedly a key reelection strategy for Trump. The day after the Michigan rally, for example, Trump went to Bullhead City, Arizona, where he said: "We have great numbers, we have some incredible numbers," in reference to the COVID-19 outbreak. said While he did not explain to what statistics, exactly, he was referring, nor highlight any specific evidence to support his claim, his supporters interpreted the comment to mean the pandemic was less of a problem in the fall than during the spring and summer months. For the purpose of this report, we considered "great numbers" to mean the U.S. had hit its peak case total and was seeing a steady decrease in positive tests since then or that the country was completing a wave. With that background in mind, consider the country's seven-day rolling average of new COVID-19 cases and deaths (or the sum of the current day's increase plus the six preceding days' increases, divided by seven), which researchers consider one of the most reliable indicators of the country's pandemic status. As you can see in the graph below, which was a compilation of data by Johns Hopkins, the rolling average had steadily increased since the beginning of the U.S. outbreak, with two slight dips in summer and fall. For purposes of checking this claim, let us narrow in on the weeks before the November election. Between mid-September and late October, the seven-day average of new cases was rising from a trough as you can see in the below-displayed graph via The COVID Tracking Project, to which governments and health care systems refer for developing COVID-19 plans.That meant the number of new COVID-19 cases from one day to the next was increasing not decreasing (which would show a downward slope), nor remaining stagnant when the president suggested otherwise. In fact, the rolling average reached a record high in late October, when the country tallied an average of more than 70,000 new cases daily and Trump alleged progress containing the virus. The COVID Tracking Project All of this said, the country's rising cases never showed a downward slope that signified an end of a wave in infections. In the words of Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), the country in October was experiencing an "exacerbation of the original first wave" of COVID-19 cases. To determine whether the country was overcoming the pandemic, let us recap the above-explained trends: But that data did not include the rolling average of new COVID-19 cases on a state-by-state basis rather than nationally which was among the strongest measurements of the country's progress. As Lisa Maragakis of Johns Hopkins explained, "the spread of the coronavirus so far has been more like a patchwork quilt than a wave," with the virus wreaking havoc to varying degrees in different areas at different times. Lisa Maragakis In other words, if most states had curbed the spread of COVID-19 and reduced their number of new daily cases since the start of the outbreak, while populous states did not, the nation's moving average would not reflect the majority of the country's progress, lending some credibility to Trump's claim that most of the country was making positive steps. That was not the case, however. Less than a dozen states were tallying a downward trend of new cases per 100,000 people, as of late October, according to Johns Hopkins data. As seen in the below-displayed graphic, states in shades of orange were experiencing a surge in new cases as of late October, and states in shades of green were seeing a decline in new cases. The darker the shade, the bigger the change. Another compilation of the tracking project's data by The Washington Post came to the same conclusion. The graphics below showed how the pandemic progressed in summer and fall by comparing the daily rates of new cases to each state's peak, or its highest increase in new cases for one day. The Washington Post As you can see, most states' trajectories appeared to be worsening rapidly. "We see no evidence that any state in the current surge has reached its peak and begun to decline," the COVID tracking project tweeted on Oct. 29. tweeted Here's the bottom line: The outbreak was far from under control no matter what each presidential candidate claimed in their final pitches to voters. "We should have been way down in baseline and daily cases, and we're not," Fauci said, while speaking with the the Journal of the American Medical Association. In sum, scientists as of this writing were expecting the rolling average of new COVID-19 cases to continue to climb, with no indication that they had peaked or would begin to decline. So by describing the country as "rounding the turn" on COVID-19, the president was blatantly mischaracterizing actual COVID-19 data. For that reason, we rate this overall claim C-SPAN. "Trump-Biden Second Debate." 22 October 2020. New York Times. "Covid in the U.S.: Latest Map and Case Count." 27 October 2020. Johns Hopkins University and Medicine. "Coronavirus Resource Center." Accessed 27 October 2020. Chiwaya, Nigel and Corky Siemaszko. "Trump Says We're 'Rounding the Turn,' But COVID-19 Is Spreading Faster Than Ever, NBC Numbers Show." NBCNews. 27 October 2020. BBC. "The Andrew Marr Show." 25 October 2020. Ankel, Sophia. "Trump Kept on Declaring the US is 'Rounding the Turn' on COVID-19, Even As It Recorded Its 2 Worst-Ever Days of Infections." Business Insider. 25 October 2020. Farzan, Anthonia, et. al. "U.S. Coronavirus Infections hit Record Levels, With Hospitalizations and Deaths on the Rise." Washington Post. 27 October 2020. Bump, Phillip. "We Are Not 'Rounding the Corner' On the Coronavirus, pART 8,219,000." The Washington Post. 20 October 2020. Johns Hopkins. "America Is Reopening. But Have We Flattened The Curve?" Accessed 28 October 2020. Barone, Emily. "U.S. COVID-19 Cases Are Skyrocketing, But Deaths Are Flat -- So Far. These 5 Charts Explain Why." TIME. 26 October 2020. Parke, Caleb. "WH Communications Director Farah Says Science Office's COVID Statement Was 'Poorly Worded' FOXNews. 28 October 2020. White House. "Advancing America's Global Leadership In Science & Technology." October 2020. The COVID Tracking Project. "The Pubic Deserves The Most Complete Data Available About COVID-19 In The US. No official Source Is Providing it, So We Are." Accessed 28 October 2020. Wagner, Abram. "What Makes A 'Wave' Of Disease? An Epidemiologist Explains," The Conversation. Accessed 29 October 2020. World Health Organization. "About Pandemic Phases." Accessed 29 October 2020. Wagner, Abram. "What Makes a 'Wave' of Disease? An Epidemiologist Explains." University of Michigan School of Public Health. 6 July 2020. Maragakis Lockerd, Lisa. "First and Second Waves of Coronvirus." Johns Hopkins Medicine. 29 October 2020. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. "National Center for Health Statistics." Accessed 30 October 2020. This report was updated on Nov. 4, 2020, to clarify that Indonesia had the lowest death rate among countries most impacted by the virus.

['economy']

False

Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And, please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease. At rallies and on Twitter, Trump repeated claims that alleged a nefarious scheme on behalf of news reporters to undermine his reelection campaign by highlighting COVID-19 statistics when, in Trump's reality, he wanted Americans to believe the country was "rounding the turn" on the deadly outbreak.By pointing to alleged successes, ranging from the country's mortality rate to its testing levels, Trump sought to convince Americans his administration was making positive strides in curbing the virus' spread, and that the worse of the outbreak was over. With that messaging, he attempted to frame his Democratic rival Joe Biden as the candidate who would instead ruin the economy with strict lockdowns to curb the spread. On Oct. 30, Trump tweeted:We based our analysis on COVID-19 patient information compiled by multiple sources, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and The COVID Tracking Project, to which local governments and health care systems refer, as of Oct. 30.The president alleged on multiple occasions, including at the final of two presidential debates with Biden on Oct. 22, that the country's "excess mortality rate is way down, and much lower than almost any other country," without further explanation.But in reality, epidemiologists are still developing definitive estimates for the country's rate of excess mortalities or the number of COVID-19 patients who died, in part, due to the virus exacerbating pre-existing health problems. "Data are incomplete because of the lag in time between when the death occurred and when the death certificate is completed," according to the CDC.In the days before the election, almost 70 people for every 100,000 in the U.S. were testing positive for COVID-19 and dying a rate that was the fifth worst death globally, according to Johns Hopkins data. Comparatively, Indonesia had the lowest death rate among countries most impacted by the virus, with roughly five deaths per every 100,000 people.All of this said, an October study published by the Journal of the American Medical Association compared America's death rates including preliminary estimates of excess mortalities in the U.S. with that of 18 countries with similar economies and confirmed the findings of the Johns Hopkins data: the U.S. had one of the highest rates of deaths per 100,000 people. The researchers determined:In other words, it was outright false to claim the country had the lowest case-fatality ratio globally, or the lowest rate of deaths per 100,000 people, and the CDC was still analyzing that data to form definitive estimates for the country's excess mortalities.There is some truth within the president's framing of the pandemic's death toll shortly before the election: The survival rate among severely ill COVID-19 patients in the U.S. appeared to be improving.No evidence showed the virus was becoming less fatal over time, but rather that the medical community had improved treatments for severely ill patients, and that more younger people with lower health risks comprised that group. Dr. Leora Horwitz, director of NYU Langones Center for Healthcare Innovation & Delivery Science, told The New York Times for an Oct. 29 story on the dropping death rate:Facing a crowd of supporters in Michigan on Oct. 27, Trump repeated what he believes is the reason for America's high number of COVID-19 cases compared to other counties. "You know why we have so many cases? Because we test more," he said.Not quite. Directly equating the increase in cases to the increase in testing (or upward slopes in graphs depicting COVID-19 data) was a flawed argument that, in effect, removed the role of individual responsibility to make lifestyle changes to prevent the spread of the virus.Per the World Health Organization (WHO), an area's positivity rate should remain at 5% or lower for at least two weeks before its leaders lift rules on social distancing. As of this writing, just 17 states met that threshold."The data speak for themselves," said Fauci, a leading member of the White House coronavirus task force, in an interview with BBC, where he described some states' high positivity rate as an indication the country was going in the wrong direction.After all, the Trump administration listed "ending the COVID-19 pandemic" as one of the president's top accomplishments in a campaign flyer on Oct. 27, according to a copy obtained by Politico and displayed below. A spokesperson for the White House later told Fox News the statement was "poorly worded" and meant to emphasize the administration's goal to overcome the pandemic.Alleging success was undoubtedly a key reelection strategy for Trump. The day after the Michigan rally, for example, Trump went to Bullhead City, Arizona, where he said: "We have great numbers, we have some incredible numbers," in reference to the COVID-19 outbreak.Between mid-September and late October, the seven-day average of new cases was rising from a trough as you can see in the below-displayed graph via The COVID Tracking Project, to which governments and health care systems refer for developing COVID-19 plans.That meant the number of new COVID-19 cases from one day to the next was increasing not decreasing (which would show a downward slope), nor remaining stagnant when the president suggested otherwise. In fact, the rolling average reached a record high in late October, when the country tallied an average of more than 70,000 new cases daily and Trump alleged progress containing the virus.As Lisa Maragakis of Johns Hopkins explained, "the spread of the coronavirus so far has been more like a patchwork quilt than a wave," with the virus wreaking havoc to varying degrees in different areas at different times.Another compilation of the tracking project's data by The Washington Post came to the same conclusion. The graphics below showed how the pandemic progressed in summer and fall by comparing the daily rates of new cases to each state's peak, or its highest increase in new cases for one day.As you can see, most states' trajectories appeared to be worsening rapidly. "We see no evidence that any state in the current surge has reached its peak and begun to decline," the COVID tracking project tweeted on Oct. 29.

A Stanford study has confirmed election fraud by demonstrating discrepancies in exit polls.

['Two researchers released a paper (not a study) examining whether primary election fraud that favored Hillary Clinton had occurred.']

On 8 June 2016, the Facebook page "The Bern Report" shared a document authored by researchers Axel Geijsel of Tilburg University in The Netherlands and Rodolfo Cortes Barragan of Stanford University suggesting that "the outcomes of the 2016 Democratic Party nomination contest [are not] completely legitimate: That social media share described the document as "a fantastic research piece put together by a couple of college students, Rodolfo Cortes Barragan & Axel Geijsel." That document (properly termed a "paper," not a "study," as the latter term implies some form of professional vetting) concluded with the statement that the data examined by its author "suggest that election fraud is occurring in the 2016 Democratic Party Presidential Primary election" and that "this fraud has overwhelmingly benefited Secretary Clinton at the expense of Senator Sanders": document Are the results we are witnessing in the 2016 primary elections trustworthy? While Donald Trump enjoyed a clear and early edge over his Republican rivals, the Democratic contest between former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Senator Bernard Sanders has been far more competitive. At present, Secretary Clinton enjoys an apparent advantage over Sanders. Is this claimed advantage legitimate? We contend that it is not, and suggest an explanation for the advantage: States that are at risk for election fraud in 2016 systematically and overwhelmingly favor Secretary Clinton. We provide converging evidence for this claim. First, we show that it is possible to detect irregularities in the 2016 Democratic Primaries by comparing the states that have hard paper evidence of all the placed votes to states that do not have this hard paper evidence. Second, we compare the final results in 2016 to the discrepant exit polls. Furthermore, we show that no such irregularities occurred in the 2008 competitive election cycle involving Secretary Clinton against President Obama. As such, we find that in states wherein voting fraud has the highest potential to occur, systematic efforts may have taken place to provide Secretary Clinton with an exaggerated margin of support. In an appendix, Geijsel and Barragan stated that their research was still in progress and had not yet been subject to peer review, but since the information was highly topical they believed it better to pre-release their findings due to the ongoing primary ballot count in California (among other factors): Statement on peer-review: We note that this article has not been officially peer-reviewed in a scientific journal yet. Doing so will take us several months. As such, given the timeliness of the topic, we decided to publish on the Bern Report after we received preliminary positive feedback from two professors (both experts in the quantitative social sciences). We plan on seeking peer-reviewed publication at a later time. As of now, we know there may be errors in some numbers (one has been identified and sent to us: it was a mislabeling). We encourage anyone to let us know if they find any other error. Our aim here truly is to understand the patterns of results, and to inspire others to engage with the electoral system. The post-introduction portion of the paper began with a comparison of outcomes in "primary states with paper trails and without paper trails," holding that potentially inaccurate results led the researchers to "restrict [our] analysis to a proxy: the percentage of delegates won by Secretary Clinton and Senator Sanders." After identifying via the Ballotpedia web site 18 states that use a form of paper verification for votes compared to 13 states without such a "paper trail," they concluded that states without "paper trails" demonstrated a higher rate of support for Hillary Clinton: Analysis: The [data] show a statistically significant difference between the groups. States without paper trails yielded higher support for Secretary Clinton than states with paper trails. As such, the potential for election fraud in voting procedures is strongly related to enhanced electoral outcomes for Secretary Clinton. In the Appendix, we show that this relationship holds even above and beyond alternative explanations, including the prevailing political ideology and the changes in support over time. The information included in the Appendix didn't explicate exactly what those alternative explanations might be: Are there other variables that could account for our main effect (states without paper trails going overwhelmingly for Clinton)? We conducted a regression model and included the % of Non-Hispanic Whites in a state as of the last Census, the states electoral history from 1992 to 2012 of favoring Democratic or Republican nominees for President (i.e., the blueness of a state), and our variable of interest: paper trail vs. no paper trail. As expected, race/ethnicity and political ideology played a role: The Whiter and more liberal a state, the less it favored Clinton. However, the effect for paper trail remains significant. States with paper trails show significantly less support for Clinton. As such, even beyond the potential for other likely factors to play a role, the potential for fraud is associated with gains for Clinton. Dependent variable: Percent support for Clinton in the primaries In the paper's second portion, the researchers examined discrepancies between exit polls and final results by state, a subject of debate (hashtagged #ExitPollGate on social media) that antedated the publication of their paper and was addressed in a Nation article disputing the claim that exit polls revealed fraud. The Nation's analysis held that fraud detection exit polling varied significantly from the type of exit polling typically carried out in the United States: While exit polls are used to detect potential fraud in some countries, ours arent designed, and arent accurate enough, to accomplish that purpose. [A polling company VP], who has conducted exit polls in fragile democracies like Ukraine and Venezuela, explained that there are three crucial differences between their exit polls and our own. Polls designed to detect fraud rely on interviews with many more people at many more polling places, and they use very short questionnaires, often with just one or two questions, whereas ours usually have twenty or more. Shorter questionnaires lead to higher response rates. Higher response rates paired with larger samples result in much smaller margins of error. Theyre far more precise. But it costs a lot more to conduct that kind of survey, and the media companies that sponsor our exit polls are only interested in providing fodder for pundits and TV talking heads. All they want to know is which groups came out to vote and why, so thats what they pay for. As well, standard exit polling conducted in the U.S. can be very inaccurate and systematically biased for a number of reasons, including: including o Differential nonresponse, in which the supporters of one candidate are likelier to participate than those of another candidate. Exit polls have limited means to correct for nonresponse, since they can weight only by visually identifiable characteristics. Hispanic origin, income and education, for instance, are left out. o Cluster effects, which happen when the precincts selected arent representative of the overall population. This is a very big danger in state exit polls, which include only a small number of precincts. As a result, exit polls have a larger margin of error than an ordinary poll of similar size. These precincts are selected to have the right balance of Democratic and Republican precincts, which isnt so helpful in a primary. o Absentee voters arent included at all in states where they represent less than 20 percent or so of the vote. As the New York Times put it, "[N]o one who studies the exit polls believes that they can be used as an indicator of fraud in the way the conspiracy theorists do." Nonetheless, Geijsel and Barragan contended in their paper that: Anomalies exist between exit polls and final results Data procurement: We obtained exit poll data from a database kept by an expert on the American elections. Analysis: On the overall, are the exit polls different from the final results? Yes they are. The data show lower support for Secretary Clinton in exit polls than the final results would suggest. While an effect size of 0.71 is quite substantial, and suggests a considerable difference between exit polls and outcomes, we expected that this difference would be even more exaggerated in states without paper voting trails. Indeed, the effect size in states without paper voting trails is considerably larger: 1.50, and yields more exaggerated support for the Secretary in the hours following the exit polls. The expert whose numbers were utilized for the paper wasn't expressly cited by name, but his moniker appeared on the linked spreadsheet: Richard Charnin. Charnin indeed lists some impressive statistical credentials on his personal blog, but he also appears to expend much of his focus on conspiracy theories related to the JFK assassination (which raises the question of whether his math skills outstrip his ability to apply skeptical reasoning to data). spreadsheet conspiracy theories Geijsel addressed questions about exit poll numbers in a subsequent e-mail to a blogger who was highly skeptical of his research: skeptical In short, exit polling works using a margin of error, you will always expect it to be somewhat off the final result. This is often mentioned as being the margin of error, often put at 95%, it indicates that there's a 95% chance that the final result will lie within this margin. In exit polling this is often calculated as lying around 3%. The bigger the difference, the smaller the chance that the result is legitimate. This is because although those exit polls are not 100% accurate, they're accurate enough to use them as a reference point. In contrast to the idea that probably 1 out of 20 results will differ. Our results showed that (relatively) a huge amount of states differed. This would lead to two possibilities, a) the Sanders supporters are FAR more willing to take the exit polls, or b) there is election fraud at play. Considering the context of these particular elections, we believe it's the latter. Though that's our personal opinion, and others may differ in that, we believe we can successfully argue for that in a private setting considering the weight of our own study, the beliefs of other statisticians who have both looked at our own study (and who have conducted corroborating studies), and the fact that the internet is littered with hard evidence of both voter suppression and election fraud having taken place. That blogger passed the anlysis on to his father ("a retired Professor Emeritus in Mathematics and Applied Statistics at the University of Northern Colorado"), Donald T. Searls, Ph.D., for comment: comment I simply asked him to review it in full and send me his comments as to its methodology and his view as to its validity. For the record, he has been a Republican for as long as I can recall and has no interest in voting for the Democratic nominee, whoever that might be. I received his response via e-mail today. Here is what he wrote: I like the analysis very much up to the point of applying probability theory. I think the data speak for itself (themselves). It is always problematic to apply probability theory to empirical data. Theoretically unknown confounding factors could be present. The raw data is in my mind very powerful and clear on its own. My personal opinion is that the whole process has been rigged against Bernie at every level and that is devastating even though I don't agree with him. I called him after receiving his response to [ask him to] clarify his remarks on the application of probability theory to the data. His comment to me was that he did not believe it was necessary for the authors to take that step. If he had done the study himself, he would not have bothered with doing so. As he said, the data speaks for itself. Although Geijsel cited a number of sources to substantiate the claim that fraud was well-documented in the 2016 primary season, most of those citations involved persons with an interest in the overall dispute (such as groups party to lawsuits). That factor doesn't necessarily cast doubt on the researchers' findings, but it highlights that not much independent and neutral verification of their conclusions has occurred yet. Cohn, Nate. "Exit Polls, And Why The Primary Was Not Stolen From Bernie Sanders." 27 June 2016. Geijsel, Axel and Rodolfo Cortes Barragan. "Are We Witnessing a Dishonest Election?" 7 June 2016. Holland, Joshua. "Reminder: Exit-Poll Conspiracy Theories Are Totally Baseless." The Nation. 7 June 2016. Booman Tribune. "My Dad's View of Election Fraud Study." 11 June 2016. Booman Tribune. "Election Fraud Study Authors Respond." 13 June 2016.

['interest']

NEI

That social media share described the document as "a fantastic research piece put together by a couple of college students, Rodolfo Cortes Barragan & Axel Geijsel." That document (properly termed a "paper," not a "study," as the latter term implies some form of professional vetting) concluded with the statement that the data examined by its author "suggest that election fraud is occurring in the 2016 Democratic Party Presidential Primary election" and that "this fraud has overwhelmingly benefited Secretary Clinton at the expense of Senator Sanders":As well, standard exit polling conducted in the U.S. can be very inaccurate and systematically biased for a number of reasons, including:The expert whose numbers were utilized for the paper wasn't expressly cited by name, but his moniker appeared on the linked spreadsheet: Richard Charnin. Charnin indeed lists some impressive statistical credentials on his personal blog, but he also appears to expend much of his focus on conspiracy theories related to the JFK assassination (which raises the question of whether his math skills outstrip his ability to apply skeptical reasoning to data).Geijsel addressed questions about exit poll numbers in a subsequent e-mail to a blogger who was highly skeptical of his research:That blogger passed the anlysis on to his father ("a retired Professor Emeritus in Mathematics and Applied Statistics at the University of Northern Colorado"), Donald T. Searls, Ph.D., for comment:

Redrawn Map of the United States

['Is the federal government planning to eliminate 16 states from the U.S.?']

The America you know and love could look completely different in a matter of weeks. Under a plan circulating in the D.C. corridor right now, up to 16 states are at risk of being terminated due to epic fiscal mismanagement. These states would simply be wiped from existence and merged into their neighbors. We've even seen the redrawn map of the U.S., and it's nothing less than terrifying. California may be forced to become a part of Mexico without any state strong enough to absorb it! This item about a plan "circulating in the D.C. corridor right now" to eliminate 16 states from the U.S. is nothing but more of the usual financial scare lore put out in conjunction with an investment come-on by the folks at Wall Street Daily. This latest panic piece is offered in a Wall Street Daily video featuring a number of talking heads issuing scary-sounding statements about how the "U.S. government is only months away from a total financial collapse," then lurches head-on into tinfoil hat territory by describing some nebulous plan supposedly being hatched in Washington (by whom, exactly, is never explained) to carve the United States into ten economic regions, eliminating 16 states in the process by merging them into neighboring states (and, apparently, getting rid of a 17th state by kicking Hawaii out of the U.S. altogether). According to Wall Street Daily, this remarkable, radical transformation of the United States, which hasn't yet been discussed, proposed, or voted upon by Congress, and which has somehow escaped the notice of the entire U.S. news media (other than Wall Street Daily, of course), is going into effect in a mere matter of weeks, by 15 October 2013. Not surprisingly, this "redrawn map of the United States" just happens to correspond exactly with a map of administrative regions for the government agency most frequently mentioned in crazy conspiracy theories, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Aside from its sheer ridiculousness, this purported scheme for the federal government to enact a forcible redrawing of the United States has a major problem: it isn't possible because the U.S. Constitution specifically prohibits it. Article IV, Section 3 of that document declares that states cannot be formed from, or merged with, other states without the consent of both Congress and the legislatures of the affected states. So, if this is nothing but nonsense, what's the point of it? The point is that if you make up a bunch of stuff that sounds sufficiently alarming, and you promote your product as something that will help protect people against this scary thing that isn't really happening, you might be able to lure some gullible folks into sending their money (i.e., a "very limited, introductory offer" price of $49.50, plus a yearly "discounted rate" of $79) to you. It's crucial that you obtain a copy of the redrawn map of the United States and spread the word quickly about its existence. Circulate it among your friends and family. Let them know that this threat is real. That soon, the very state that they call home—where they've raised their family, paid taxes, and planned their future—may soon no longer exist. Whether or not your state is targeted for termination, it's essential that you begin taking steps, such as those contained inside the Mayflower Maneuver, to best position yourself for the future. And that means staying continually informed about this developing situation. Last updated: 18 September 2013.

['investment']

False

is offered in a Wall Street Daily video featuring a number of talking heads issuing scary-sounding statements about how the "U.S. government is only months away from a total financial collapse," then lurches head-on into tinfoil hat territory by describing some nebulous plan supposedly being hatched in Washington (by whom, exactly, is never explained) to carve the United States into ten economic regions, eliminating 16 states in the process by merging them into neighboring states (and, apparently, getting rid of a 17th state by kicking Hawaii out of the U.S. altogether). Not surprisingly, this "redrawn map of the United States" just happens to correspond exactly with a map of administrative regions for the government agency most frequently mentioned in crazy conspiracy theories, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA):Aside from its sheer ridiculousness, this purported scheme for the federal government to enact a forcible redrawing the United States has a major problem in that it isn't possible, because the U.S. Constitution specifically prohibits it. Article IV, Section 3 of that document declares that states cannot be formed from, or merged with, other states without the consent of both Congress and the legislatures of the affected states:So, if this is nothing but nonsense, what's the point to it? The point is that if you make up a bunch of stuff that sounds sufficiently alarming, and you promote your product as something that will help protect people against this scary thing that isn't really happening, you might be able to lure some gullible folks into sending their money (i.e., a "very limited, introductory offer" price of $49.50, plus a yearly "discounted rate" of $79) to you:

Most private sector jobs in the history of Buffalo exist in Buffalo today

[]

New York Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo toured a sprawling solar panel factory that the state funded in Buffalo two weeks ago and said, "I am just blown away by this facility." Cuomo returned to Buffalo on Friday, a day after U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara announced bombshell corruption allegations that included bid rigging to build the plant at RiverBend for SolarCity. "The criminal charges won't stop Buffalo's resurgence," Cuomo said in his remarks at the Albright-Knox Art Gallery in Buffalo. He cited the completion of the $750 million facility as a milestone in the state's Buffalo Billion economic development initiative, which he claimed is working because the private sector believes in Buffalo again. Cuomo defended the state's investments in Buffalo by citing the number of private jobs in the Buffalo region. "Most private sector jobs in the history of Buffalo exist in Buffalo today," Cuomo said. He has devoted his time and the state's resources to upstate revitalization. Is he right? Does Buffalo have more private sector jobs than ever before? Neither the state nor the U.S. Department of Labor tracks the number of jobs for the city of Buffalo alone. Instead, they break the state into regions, including the Buffalo-Niagara Falls metropolitan area. The state and national labor departments both show the same numbers for private sector jobs, but information is available only back to 1990. The way job data is compiled changed in 1990, so the figures from the past 25 years can't be accurately compared with the numbers before 1990. The federal and state labor departments reported 479,500 private sector jobs in August in the Buffalo Niagara region, compared to 439,000 jobs in 1990. The closest the Buffalo area came to the August jobs number before Cuomo took office was in November 2000, when the state reported 474,700 private sector jobs. Private sector jobs in June and July of this year exceeded that number but still fell below the August figure. During Cuomo's remarks in Buffalo, he stated that the most private sector jobs in the history of Buffalo exist in Buffalo today. Data from the federal and state labor departments support his claim. There are more private sector jobs in Buffalo today than at any other time dating back to at least 1990. The data doesn't prove that his policies and economic development projects are responsible for the increase, but we rate his claim as True.

['Economy', 'Jobs', 'New York']

True

https://www.sharethefacts.co/share/a3b65649-df87-4209-b2b6-41b9c7676fd6

Due to ... tax cuts and lower (property) values, 2009 property taxes were almost $3 billion below 2007 property taxes.

[]

In his annual State of the State address, Gov. Charlie Crist said Floridians are paying far less in property taxes than they used to.Property owners were seeing double-digit percentage increases in taxes levied prior to the beginning of my administration, Crist said on March 2, 2010. Now, they have seen significant decreases over the past three years. Due to ... tax cuts and lower (property) values, 2009 property taxes were almost $3 billion below 2007 property taxes.Previously, we rated Crist's claim that hepassed the largest tax cutin Florida history. In this item, we'll focus on whether the amount of property tax relief matches Crist's description.The relevant information to back up Crist's claim comes from a Senate committee hearing last month. In the meeting, James McAdams, the Department of Revenue's property tax oversight program director, gave an update on property tax collections across Florida.According to McAdams, Florida property taxes collected between 2007 and 2009 dropped by $2.28 billion, or 7.5 percent, the Associated Press reported.McAdams was unable to delineate how much of the drop was attributed to tax reforms implemented by the Legislature, and how much was a result of falling property values.I would classify that as dropping like a rock, said Senate Finance and Taxation Committee Chairman Thad Altman, R-Viera.Altman's comment prompted a response from Crist during his televised remarks in front of a joint session of the Legislature.Sen. Altman, we agree that does, indeed, qualify as 'dropping like a rock,' Crist said.The Department of Revenue's 2009annual report, meanwhile, included an even bigger reduction. The annual report said property tax collections fell from $31.04 billion in 2007, to $28.14 billion in 2009. That's a $2.9 billion decrease in three years. (See page 32 of the report).In his State of the State address, Crist said 2009 property taxes were almost $3 billion below 2007 property taxes. A report prepared for a Senate committee pegs the number at about $2.28 billion and the Department of Revenue's annual report pegs the number at $2.9 billion. With the qualifier almost, that's close enough not to distort the broader point. We rate Crist's claim True.

['Taxes', 'Florida']

True

In his annual State of the State address, Gov. Charlie Crist said Floridians are paying far less in property taxes than they used to.Property owners were seeing double-digit percentage increases in taxes levied prior to the beginning of my administration, Crist said on March 2, 2010. Now, they have seen significant decreases over the past three years. Due to ... tax cuts and lower (property) values, 2009 property taxes were almost $3 billion below 2007 property taxes.Previously, we rated Crist's claim that hepassed the largest tax cutin Florida history. In this item, we'll focus on whether the amount of property tax relief matches Crist's description.The relevant information to back up Crist's claim comes from a Senate committee hearing last month. In the meeting, James McAdams, the Department of Revenue's property tax oversight program director, gave an update on property tax collections across Florida.According to McAdams, Florida property taxes collected between 2007 and 2009 dropped by $2.28 billion, or 7.5 percent, the Associated Press reported.McAdams was unable to delineate how much of the drop was attributed to tax reforms implemented by the Legislature, and how much was a result of falling property values.I would classify that as dropping like a rock, said Senate Finance and Taxation Committee Chairman Thad Altman, R-Viera.Altman's comment prompted a response from Crist during his televised remarks in front of a joint session of the Legislature.Sen. Altman, we agree that does, indeed, qualify as 'dropping like a rock,' Crist said.The Department of Revenue's 2009annual report, meanwhile, included an even bigger reduction. The annual report said property tax collections fell from $31.04 billion in 2007, to $28.14 billion in 2009. That's a $2.9 billion decrease in three years. (See page 32 of the report).In his State of the State address, Crist said 2009 property taxes were almost $3 billion below 2007 property taxes. A report prepared for a Senate committee pegs the number at about $2.28 billion and the Department of Revenue's annual report pegs the number at $2.9 billion. With the qualifier almost, that's close enough not to distort the broader point. We rate Crist's claim True.

Authentic Photos of Gaza's Al-Azhar University Before/After Israeli Strikes?

['According to news reports, no universities in Gaza have survived the Israeli onslaught.']

The protracted, often bloody Israeli-Palestinian conflict exploded into a hot war on Oct. 7, 2023, when the militant Palestinian group Hamas launched a deadly attack on Israel and Israel retaliated by bombarding the Gaza Strip. More than 20,000 people, the vast majority of them Palestinians, were reportedly killed during the first two months of the war alone. The violence is driven by mutual hostilities and territorial ambitions dating back more than a century. The internet has become an unofficial front in that war and is rife with misinformation, which Snopes is dedicated to countering with facts and context. You can help. Read the latest fact checks. Submit questionable claims. Become a Snopes Member to support our work. We welcome your participation and feedback. Israeli-Palestinian conflict Hamas deadly attack on Israel retaliated were reportedly killed mutual hostilities Read Submit Become a Snopes Member feedback In January 2024, as Israels bombardment of Gaza continued, a pair of photographs went viral showing the apparent impact of the violence on Gazas universities. viral Al-Azhar University in the north of the Gaza Strip was targeted by Israeli forces in particular, and since late 2023, a number of posts on Reddit, TikTok and X appeared to show what the educational institution looked like "before" and "after" it was hit by Israeli strikes. targeted Reddit TikTok X The above images accurately depict one of Al-Azhar Universitys buildings before and after military operations by Israel in Gaza. We found photographic evidence from reliable news sources as well as from the universitys official Facebook page verifying the claim, and as such rate this story as True. In November 2023, Al-Azhar University shared the before and after images in a Facebook post detailing the destruction that took place on the university campus after bombardment from Israel. One picture in particular showed the "before" version of the untouched building for the Faculty of King Hassan II For Environmental Sciences and Agriculture. November 2023 The post stated (English version via Google Translate): Part of the destruction and damage caused to university facilities and buildings as a result of the Israeli occupation forces bombing of the new university campus buildings south of Gaza City. (Screenshot via Facebook) We found images of this particular building from different angles in years prior including from the Moroccan press agency in 2021 that detailed a new specialty for Veterinary Medicine had been made available at the university. A news release from the Kingdom of Morocco noted that the facility had been reconstructed with Moroccos help and was inaugurated in 2015. angles Moroccan press agency news release On Nov. 22, 2023, Reuters published the photograph of the same building after it was destroyed, with the caption: The remains of Al-Azhar University of Gaza is seen, amid the ongoing ground operation of the Israeli army against Palestinian Islamist group Hamas, in the Gaza Strip, November 22, 2023. [...] EDITOR'S NOTE: REUTERS PHOTOGRAPHS WERE REVIEWED BY THE IDF AS PART OF THE CONDITIONS OF THE EMBED. NO PHOTOS WERE REMOVED. published (Screenshot via Reuters) We determined that this was the same structure as the one posted by the Al-Azhar University Facebook page by observing the matching architectural details, including the white domes atop the building, the remnants of the signage and arch at the front of the building. Geneva-based Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor, an independent nonprofit organization, said Israel was systematically destroying universities in Gaza in stages, with the first stage including the bombing of the Islamic and Al-Azhar universities. said Getty Images also published photographs of other Al-Azhar University buildings that had been destroyed by the bombardment. A New York Times interactive from Dec. 12, 2023, mapped out all the neighborhoods with satellite imagery that lay in ruins from thousands of Israeli strikes and the ground invasion. Switching between the Before and Now tabs in the interactive, visible damage can be seen on Al-Azhar Universitys campus, as well as the noticeable Israeli tanks in the courtyard. published New York Times The Israeli military said they had destroyed buildings on Al-Azhar Universitys campus because the Hamas terror organization used the university building for the purpose of fighting against our forces. said They claimed to find: terror infrastructure, including an underground tunnel that ran from the university's yard and [continued] to a school one kilometer away. Furthermore, numerous weapons, including explosive devices, rocket parts, launchers, explosive device detonation systems, and several technological assets were located and taken for an intelligence analysis and investigation. claimed We were unable to determine independently if the Israeli militarys findings were true. According to an Al Jazeera report, in more than 100 days of Israeli bombardment, hundreds of schools, including those run by the United Nations, had been bombed and students and teachers killed. Centers of higher education, including universities, have been completely paralyzed and according to Wafa, a Palestinian news agency, 12 institutions of higher learning have been either damaged or destroyed. Al Jazeera Wafa Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor said the Israeli army killed 94 university professors along with hundreds of teachers, and called the attacks an intentional destruction of Palestinian cultural and historical properties including universities, schools, libraries, and archives. said 26 November 2023, Palestinian Territories, Gaza City: Palestinians... Getty Images, https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/november-2023-palestinian-territories-gaza-city-news-photo/1803522346. Accessed 26 Jan. 2024. Fabian, Emanuel. IDF Says It Destroyed Buildings Containing Hamas Infrastructure at Gaza Citys Al-Azhar University. Times of Israel, 8 Dec. 2023, https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/idf-says-it-destroyed-buildings-containing-hamas-infrastructure-at-gaza-citys-al-azhar-university/.Accessed 26 Jan. 2024. Hassan II Faculty of Gaza, New Vision of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences. Map Ecology, 1 Mar. 2021, https://mapecology.ma/en/slider-en/hassan-ii-faculty-gaza-new-vision-agricultural-environmental-sciences/.Accessed 26 Jan. 2024. Holder, Josh. Gaza After Nine Weeks of War. The New York Times, 12 Dec. 2023. NYTimes.com, https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2023/12/12/world/middleeast/gaza-strip-satellite-images-israel-invasion.html.Accessed 26 Jan. 2024. How Israel Has Destroyed Gazas Schools and Universities. Al Jazeera, 24 Jan. 2024. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/1/24/how-israel-has-destroyed-gazas-schools-and-universities. Accessed 26 Jan. 2024. Israel Kills Dozens of Academics, Destroys Every University in the Gaza Strip. Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor, 20 Jan. 2024. https://euromedmonitor.org/en/article/6108/Israel-kills-dozens-of-academics,-destroys-every-university-in-the-Gaza-Strip. Accessed 26 Jan. 2024. "GAZA: Inauguration of Hassan II Faculty Financed by King Mohammed VI." Morocco World News, Aug. 2015. https://www.moroccoworldnews.com/2015/08/166428/gaza-inauguration-of-hassan-ii-faculty-financed-by-king-mohammed-vi. Accessed 26 Jan. 2024. "ISRAEL-PALESTINIANS/GAZA-EMBED." Reuters Pictures, Nov. 22, 2023. https://pictures.reuters.com/CS.aspx?VP3=SearchResult&VBID=2C0FCIXDNCBY70&SMLS=1&RW=1437&RH=685&POPUPPN=1&POPUPIID=2C0FQEP2VUCPS. Accessed 26 Jan. 2024. Upon Kings Order, Islamic Affairs Minister Takes Part in Inauguration of Hassan II Faculty in Gaza. Kingdom of Morocco, 24 Aug. 2015, https://www.maroc.ma/en/news/upon-kings-order-islamic-affairs-minister-takes-part-inauguration-hassan-ii-faculty-gaza.Accessed 26 Jan. 2024. Weapons Found in Al-Azhar University. Israeli Defense Forces, 8 Dec. 2023, https://www.idf.il/en/mini-sites/hamas-israel-war-24/war-on-hamas-2023-resources/weapons-found-in-al-azhar-university/.Accessed 26 Jan. 2024.

['asset']

True

The protracted, often bloody Israeli-Palestinian conflict exploded into a hot war on Oct. 7, 2023, when the militant Palestinian group Hamas launched a deadly attack on Israel and Israel retaliated by bombarding the Gaza Strip. More than 20,000 people, the vast majority of them Palestinians, were reportedly killed during the first two months of the war alone. The violence is driven by mutual hostilities and territorial ambitions dating back more than a century. The internet has become an unofficial front in that war and is rife with misinformation, which Snopes is dedicated to countering with facts and context. You can help. Read the latest fact checks. Submit questionable claims. Become a Snopes Member to support our work. We welcome your participation and feedback.In January 2024, as Israels bombardment of Gaza continued, a pair of photographs went viral showing the apparent impact of the violence on Gazas universities.Al-Azhar University in the north of the Gaza Strip was targeted by Israeli forces in particular, and since late 2023, a number of posts on Reddit, TikTok and X appeared to show what the educational institution looked like "before" and "after" it was hit by Israeli strikes.In November 2023, Al-Azhar University shared the before and after images in a Facebook post detailing the destruction that took place on the university campus after bombardment from Israel. One picture in particular showed the "before" version of the untouched building for the Faculty of King Hassan II For Environmental Sciences and Agriculture.We found images of this particular building from different angles in years prior including from the Moroccan press agency in 2021 that detailed a new specialty for Veterinary Medicine had been made available at the university. A news release from the Kingdom of Morocco noted that the facility had been reconstructed with Moroccos help and was inaugurated in 2015.On Nov. 22, 2023, Reuters published the photograph of the same building after it was destroyed, with the caption: The remains of Al-Azhar University of Gaza is seen, amid the ongoing ground operation of the Israeli army against Palestinian Islamist group Hamas, in the Gaza Strip, November 22, 2023. [...] EDITOR'S NOTE: REUTERS PHOTOGRAPHS WERE REVIEWED BY THE IDF AS PART OF THE CONDITIONS OF THE EMBED. NO PHOTOS WERE REMOVED.Geneva-based Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor, an independent nonprofit organization, said Israel was systematically destroying universities in Gaza in stages, with the first stage including the bombing of the Islamic and Al-Azhar universities.Getty Images also published photographs of other Al-Azhar University buildings that had been destroyed by the bombardment. A New York Times interactive from Dec. 12, 2023, mapped out all the neighborhoods with satellite imagery that lay in ruins from thousands of Israeli strikes and the ground invasion. Switching between the Before and Now tabs in the interactive, visible damage can be seen on Al-Azhar Universitys campus, as well as the noticeable Israeli tanks in the courtyard.The Israeli military said they had destroyed buildings on Al-Azhar Universitys campus because the Hamas terror organization used the university building for the purpose of fighting against our forces.They claimed to find: terror infrastructure, including an underground tunnel that ran from the university's yard and [continued] to a school one kilometer away. Furthermore, numerous weapons, including explosive devices, rocket parts, launchers, explosive device detonation systems, and several technological assets were located and taken for an intelligence analysis and investigation.According to an Al Jazeera report, in more than 100 days of Israeli bombardment, hundreds of schools, including those run by the United Nations, had been bombed and students and teachers killed. Centers of higher education, including universities, have been completely paralyzed and according to Wafa, a Palestinian news agency, 12 institutions of higher learning have been either damaged or destroyed.Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor said the Israeli army killed 94 university professors along with hundreds of teachers, and called the attacks an intentional destruction of Palestinian cultural and historical properties including universities, schools, libraries, and archives.

Over the past five years the federal government has paid out $601 million in retirement and disability benefits to deceased former federal employees.

[]

Brendan Doherty, like many candidates, says that if he's elected to Congress in November, he will put a stop to rampant fraud and waste in government spending. On his campaign website, the Republican candidate for the First District seat and former head of the Rhode Island State Police states that he will use his years in law enforcement to shine a light on the unconscionable abuse of hard-earned taxpayer funds. Among the examples of abuse he lists are the purported millions of dollars in pension benefits the federal government distributes each year to federal retirees who are, well, dead. Over the past five years, the federal government has paid out $601 million in retirement and disability benefits to deceased former federal employees. We've heard stories of dead people voting before, but are they also receiving hundreds of millions in pension payments? We called Doherty's campaign to find out where the candidate got his information. Spokesman Robert Coupe told us he thought the $601 million figure was pretty large when he first heard it from campaign staffers. He said it came from Wastebook 2011, the latest edition of an annual compilation of questionable government spending put out by Sen. Tom A. Coburn, R-Oklahoma. We checked Wastebook 2011, which indeed mentions over $601 million paid out to deceased federal workers in the last five years, with footnotes citing the source: a report issued by the U.S. Office of Personnel Management's Office of the Inspector General, titled, appropriately enough, Stopping Improper Payments to Deceased Annuitants. According to the Office of Personnel Management's report, the amount of post-death improper payments is consistently $100-$150 million annually. Some of what the federal government calls improper payments is outright fraud—people with electronic access to the deceased's bank accounts taking the money. Some of it occurs because the money was electronically transferred into what are now inactive bank accounts. The money can sit there piling up for years before anyone notices. Special efforts have been underway since at least 2005 to reduce payments going to dead retirees and their survivors, the report states. Those efforts have included matching the rolls of eligible recipients with the Social Security Administration's death records on a weekly and annual basis, conducting similar checks with the IRS to see who is still filing returns, and making random phone calls to retirees over 90 years old just to ensure they are still alive. Those steps have helped identify the scope of the problem, Susan L. Ruge, a spokeswoman in the Office of Personnel Management's inspector general's office, said in an email. In fiscal year 2010, for instance, the office identified $116.8 million in improper payments going to dead retirees or survivors. But solving the problem is another matter. According to the Personnel Management's report, there remains a high probability that egregious loss of funds from the civil service fund will continue and require strategic corrective actions. It notes one case of a man illegally pocketing more than $515,000 by cashing in his dead father's monthly retirement checks for 37 years. Ruge said 94 percent of annuity payments are transferred electronically into bank accounts, as opposed to the older method of mailing checks. The office of inspector general, she said, has no breakdown of payments stolen by others with access to those accounts and money lost by languishing in those unattended accounts. In overpayment cases where no theft has occurred, there is a greater potential for electronic fund transfer (EFT) overpayments to continue undetected, simply because no one is monitoring the deceased annuitant's bank account, said Ruge. If there is good news in any of this, it is that while $601 million going to dead people in the last five years sounds like a lot of money, it represents less than 2.5 percent of all civil service retirement disbursements, the report claims. Our Ruling: Doherty's website states, "Over the past five years, the federal government has paid out $601 million in retirement and disability benefits to deceased former federal employees." The campaign accurately quoted a figure whose source is a report issued by the U.S. Office of Personnel Management's Office of the Inspector General. We rate his statement True. Rhode Island's former top cop is setting his expectations pretty high if he's promising to curb this kind of rampant fraud and waste. We'll be watching. Get updates from PolitiFactRI on Twitter. To comment or offer your ruling, visit us on our PolitiFact Rhode Island Facebook page.

['Rhode Island', 'Federal Budget', 'Pensions', 'Retirement']

True

Brendan Doherty, like a lot of candidates, says if hes elected to Congress in November hell put a stop to rampant fraud and waste in government spending.On his campaign website, the Republican candidate for the First District seat and former head of the Rhode Island State Police, says hell use his years in law enforcement to shine a light on the unconscionable abuse of hard-earned taxpayer funds.Among examples of abuse he lists are the purported millions of dollars in pension benefits the federal government distributes each year to federal retirees who are, well, dead:Over the past five years the federal government has paid out $601 million in retirement and disability benefits to deceased former federal employees.Weve heard stories of dead people voting before, but are they also getting hundreds of millions in pension payments? We called Dohertys campaign to find out where the candidate got his information.Spokesman Robert Coupe told us he thought the $601 million figure was pretty large when he first heard it from campaign staffers. He said it came from Wastebook 2011, the latest edition of an annual compilation of questionable government spending put out by Sen. Tom A. Coburn, R-Oklahoma.We checked Wastebook 2011, which indeed mentions over $601 million paid out to deceased federal workers in the last five years, with footnotes citing the source: a report issued by the U.S. Office of Personnel Managements Office of the Inspector General, titled, appropriately enough, Stopping Improper Payments to Deceased Annuitants.According to the Office of Personnel Managements report, the amount of post-death improper payments is consistently $100-$150 million annually.Some of what the federal government calls improper payments is outright fraud -- people with electronic access to the deceaseds bank accounts taking the money. And some of it is because the money was electronically transferred into what are now inactive bank accounts. The money can sit there piling up for years before anyone notices.Special efforts have been under way since at least 2005 to reduce payments going to dead retirees and their survivors, the report says. Those efforts have included matching the rolls of eligible recipients with the Social Security Administrations death records on a weekly and annual basis, doing similar checks with the IRS to see whos still filing returns, and random phone calls to retirees over 90 years old just to make sure theyre still around.Those steps have helped identify the scope of the problem, Susan L. Ruge, a spokeswoman in the Office of Personnel Managements inspector generals office, said in an e-mail. In fiscal year 2010, for instance, the office identified $116.8 million in improper payments going to dead retirees or survivors.But solving the problem is another matter.According to the Personnel Managements report: There remains a high probability that egregious loss of monies from the [civil service] fund will continue and require strategic corrective actions. It notes one case of a man illegally pocketing more than $515,000 by cashing in his dead fathers monthly retirement checks -- for 37 years.Ruge said 94 percent of annuity payments are transferred electronically into bank accounts as opposed to the older method of mailing checks. The office of inspector general, she said, has no breakdown as to payments stolen by others with access to those accounts and money lost by languishing into those unattended accounts.In overpayment cases where no theft has occurred, there is greater potential for EFT (electronic fund transfer) overpayments to continue undetected, simply because no one is monitoring the deceased annuitants bank account, said Ruge.If there is good news in any of this it is this: while $601 million going to dead people in the last five years sounds like a lot of money, it represents less than 2.5 percent of all civil service retirement disbursements, the report claims.Our RulingDohertys website says Over the past five years the federal government has paid out $601 million in retirement and disability benefits to deceased former federal employees.The campaign accurately quoted a figure whose source is a report issued by the U.S. Office of Personnel Managements Office of the Inspector General.We rate his statement True.Rhode Islands former top cop is setting his bar of expectation pretty high if hes promising to curb this kind of rampant fraud and waste. Well be watching.Get updates fromPolitiFactRI on Twitter. To comment or offer your ruling, visit us on ourPolitiFact Rhode Island Facebookpage.

Says President Donald Trump took more than a month to allocate Congress emergency funding to tribes and only did so after tribes sued.

['The $2.2 trillion CARES Act included $8 billion for tribal governments.', 'The law said funds had to be disbursed within 30 days., More than a month after the CARES Act, the Trump administration said it would begin giving tribes part of the funds., A judge presiding over a lawsuit on the delay said the administration should have made more progress, but did not find that the delay was egregious.']

Native American tribes have beenamong the hardest hitby the coronavirus pandemic, and Joe Biden claims that President Donald Trump has not done enough to help. Donald Trump has failed to live up to our trust and treaty obligations to Native Americans,Biden told The Arizona RepublicMay 21. He took more than a month to allocate Congress emergency funding to tribes and only did so after tribes sued. He has failed to provide tribes with adequate protective personal equipment and medical supplies. Its unacceptable. Indian treaty rightsrecognized and established rights, benefits, and conditions for tribes who agreed to cede millions of acres of land to the United States and to accept the United States protection. Under a trust responsibility legal principle, the United States federal government is obligated to ensure the survival and welfare of Indian tribes. Is Biden, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, right that it took more than a month for tribes to get funding allocated by Congress, and that it happened only after suing the Trump administration? The chronology lines up, but omits important context. The Treasury Department has argued that payments were delayed because it is required to consult with tribes and the Interior Department regarding how much money to allocate to tribes.That consultation processstartedbefore the lawsuit over the delay in payments.A separate lawsuit filed by tribes to prevent corporations in Alaska from receiving aid has also affected the process. Congress passed theCoronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, or CARES Act, and Trump signed it into law March 27. The $2.2 trillion measure included a $150 billion Coronavirus Relief Fund for states, local governments, and tribal governments. The law set aside $8 billion for tribal governments. The law said the Treasury secretary had to make the payments within 30 days; so by April 26, all entities were supposed to have received funds. It wasnt until May 5 that the Treasury Departmentsaidit would begin making funds available to tribal governments. So that part of Bidens claim adds up. By May 5, the Trump administration was facing several lawsuits by multiple tribes: for delay of payment. The lawsuits also challenged the administration for intending to direct some of the funds to theAlaska Native Corporations, which are regional and village corporations recognized under Alaska law and created by Congress as part of theAlaska Native Claims Settlement Act of 1971. In the lawsuit to stop the corporations from getting a share of the $8 billion, tribes argued that corporations do not meet the statutory definition of tribal government, or Indian tribe and therefore did not qualify for the relief. A federal district judge on April 27 issued apreliminary injunctionto prevent the Treasury from giving money to the corporations. Pending a final determination, the judge did not direct the Treasury secretary to immediately disburse the entire $8 billion to the tribes. In its May 5 announcement, the Trump administration said it would begin paying tribes 60% of the $8 billion, or $4.8 billion, based on population data. The remaining 40% would be paid at a later date based on employment data and tribe expenses related to COVID-19. Amounts calculated for corporations would be held back until pending litigation relating to their eligibility is resolved. The Navajo Nation, which joined tribes in the lawsuit, on May 5saidthe judges April 27 ruling led to the (Treasury) Departments announcement to begin distributing funds to federally-recognized tribes. In a separate lawsuit over the delay in the disbursement of funds, lawyers for the Trump administrationarguedthat providing funds to tribal governments required a more involved and difficult process than the one for states and local governments. While the CARES Act imposed a 30-day deadline for funds disbursement, it also called for a consultation process among tribes and the Treasury and Interior departments. According to the Trump administration, Treasury staff spent about 2,200 hours on efforts to get tribes the appropriated money. The same federal district judge from the corporations case said that those hours of labor arguably should have produced better results, but a court intervention was not warranted. Egregious delay is the governing standard, and the Secretary is not there quite yet, even in the midst of a public health crisis, U.S. District Court Judge Amit P. Mehta wrote in a May 11opinion. Mehta did not find that the Treasury secretary was lagging unreasonably behind in delivering the funds. The Secretary has not been twiddling his thumbs, he said, citing language from a precedent. Mehta said he would not give the Treasury department a deadline for disbursing the rest of the funds, but if it took the department double the amount of time Congress directed for the disbursement, then the question of egregiousness becomes a closer one than it is today. Biden said Trump took more than a month to allocate Congress emergency funding to tribes and only did so after tribes sued. It did take more than a month for tribes to begin receiving funds appropriated by Congress, and they began to flow after lawsuits were filed against the Trump administration. But a consultation process for disbursing the funds began before the administration was sued. We rate Bidens statement Mostly True.

['Economy', 'Health Care', 'Public Health', 'Coronavirus']

True

Native American tribes have beenamong the hardest hitby the coronavirus pandemic, and Joe Biden claims that President Donald Trump has not done enough to help.Donald Trump has failed to live up to our trust and treaty obligations to Native Americans,Biden told The Arizona RepublicMay 21. He took more than a month to allocate Congress emergency funding to tribes and only did so after tribes sued. He has failed to provide tribes with adequate protective personal equipment and medical supplies. Its unacceptable.Indian treaty rightsrecognized and established rights, benefits, and conditions for tribes who agreed to cede millions of acres of land to the United States and to accept the United States protection. Under a trust responsibility legal principle, the United States federal government is obligated to ensure the survival and welfare of Indian tribes.The Treasury Department has argued that payments were delayed because it is required to consult with tribes and the Interior Department regarding how much money to allocate to tribes.That consultation processstartedbefore the lawsuit over the delay in payments.A separate lawsuit filed by tribes to prevent corporations in Alaska from receiving aid has also affected the process.Congress passed theCoronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, or CARES Act, and Trump signed it into law March 27. The $2.2 trillion measure included a $150 billion Coronavirus Relief Fund for states, local governments, and tribal governments.The law set aside $8 billion for tribal governments. The law said the Treasury secretary had to make the payments within 30 days; so by April 26, all entities were supposed to have received funds. It wasnt until May 5 that the Treasury Departmentsaidit would begin making funds available to tribal governments. So that part of Bidens claim adds up.By May 5, the Trump administration was facing several lawsuits by multiple tribes: for delay of payment. The lawsuits also challenged the administration for intending to direct some of the funds to theAlaska Native Corporations, which are regional and village corporations recognized under Alaska law and created by Congress as part of theAlaska Native Claims Settlement Act of 1971.In the lawsuit to stop the corporations from getting a share of the $8 billion, tribes argued that corporations do not meet the statutory definition of tribal government, or Indian tribe and therefore did not qualify for the relief. A federal district judge on April 27 issued apreliminary injunctionto prevent the Treasury from giving money to the corporations. Pending a final determination, the judge did not direct the Treasury secretary to immediately disburse the entire $8 billion to the tribes.The Navajo Nation, which joined tribes in the lawsuit, on May 5saidthe judges April 27 ruling led to the (Treasury) Departments announcement to begin distributing funds to federally-recognized tribes.In a separate lawsuit over the delay in the disbursement of funds, lawyers for the Trump administrationarguedthat providing funds to tribal governments required a more involved and difficult process than the one for states and local governments.Egregious delay is the governing standard, and the Secretary is not there quite yet, even in the midst of a public health crisis, U.S. District Court Judge Amit P. Mehta wrote in a May 11opinion.

Trombone Death

['Was a band musician killed by a slide trombone?']

Claim: A band musician received a fatal head injury from a trombone slide. Example: Bocholt, Germany. A band musician died of a brain injury when the trombonist behind him jerked the slide of his trombone forward and struck the trumpeter in the back of the head. Police say the tragedy occurred as the Gratzfeld College band was rehearsing the spirited American jazz classic, "When the Saints Go Marching In." According to other band members, trombonist Peter Niemeyer, 19, "got carried away" with the music. He started gyrating and thrashing around as he played. At one point, he jerked forward, and the rounded metal slide on his instrument hit trumpet player Dolph Mohr, 20, dropping him instantly to the floor. "Niemeyer was pumping the slide very hard," said medical examiner Dr. Max Krause. "But it wasn't just the force of the blow that killed Mohr. The slide struck him in the worst possible place—the vulnerable spot just behind and below the left ear. Bone fragments pierced his brain, killing him instantly." The incident has provoked a storm of controversy over whether or not American jazz should be played in German colleges. "I believe the music is to blame," said Gratzfeld band director Heinrich Sommer. "I was pressured to play that selection by school administrators. But I've always said jazz is dangerous music. Our musicians can't control themselves when they play it. They move and rock back and forth, creating chaos. If I had my way, American Dixieland would be outlawed in Germany. I've been directing bands for 30 years, and I've never heard of anyone dying while playing a German march." Origins: If there were competition for the title of "America's wackiest newspaper," the Weekly World News would probably win the award hands down. Unlike other supermarket tabloids, which primarily offer a mixture of celebrity news and gossip, shocking scandals, and health and diet tips, the WWN's stock in trade is the bizarre. Extraterrestrials, ghosts, cannibals, vampires, and half-human animals populate the pages of the WWN; articles about alien visitations, unusual deaths, Bigfoot, and impending planetary doom can generally be found in every issue. Facts are infrequent visitors to the WWN, rude party-crashers who occasionally succeed at sneaking in through the back door and are quickly hustled off the premises. Despite the mostly playful, tongue-in-cheek style of WWN articles, occasionally a WWN story will "escape" into the wild and be circulated on the Internet as a genuine news article (because it has been stripped of its attribution, or because a forwarder wasn't familiar with the essence of the Weekly World News); on rare occasions, a WWN piece will even resurface in the "legitimate" news media, reported as a factual account of a real-life event. In the last several years, all of the following topics, which originally appeared in the Weekly World News, were widely circulated as true: a scientist's plot to blow up the sun, a time-traveling trader who made a killing in the stock market, a tree that produces meat rather than fruit, the revelation that Saddam Hussein once starred in gay porn films, a medical study that found ogling women's breasts is good for a man's health, a woman who sued a pharmacy after she became pregnant despite her consumption of contraceptive jelly, and a chess player whose head exploded during a match. The story reproduced above, of a trumpeter who died when struck in the head by the slide of an overenthusiastic trombonist, is another entry from the Weekly World News fiction collection, originally published in the tabloid on 23 January 1996. It was quickly posted to a variety of USENET newsgroups, and even though its attribution has largely remained intact as it has been republished on various Internet sites over the years, it regularly surfaces in our inbox as the subject of "Is this true?" queries. Last updated: 10 November 2004. Sources: Jeffries, Randy. "Man Slides His Trombone & Kills Musician in Front of Him!" Weekly World News. 23 January 1996.

['stock market']

False

Origins: If there were competition for the title of "America's wackiest newspaper," the this link Weekly World News would probably win the award hands-down. Unlike other supermarket tabloids, which primarily offer a A scientist's plot to blow up the sun. A time-traveling trader who made a killing in the stock market. A tree that produces meat rather than fruit. The revelation that Saddam Hussein once starred in gay porn films. A medical study that found ogling women's breasts is good for a man's health. A woman who sued a pharmacy after she became pregnant despite her consumption of contraceptive jelly. A chess player whose head exploded during a match. A worker who died at his desk and went unnoticed by his co-workers for five days.

Is iPhone AirDrop Feature 'NameDrop' Dangerous, as Facebook Posts Claim?

["Here's the lowdown about the Facebook warnings regarding NameDrop, an iPhone feature that debuted with the September 2023 release of iOS 17."]

In late November 2023, Facebook users shared variations of a viral warning about a relatively new iPhone feature called NameDrop, also known as "Bringing Devices Together." The posts hinted that NameDrop, dubbed by Apple as "a new AirDrop experience," was dangerous and suggested that users needed to take action to protect their privacy and security. Multiple U.S. police department Facebook pages also shared the warnings, which may have contributed to the numerous reader emails we received about this rumor. We reviewed multiple versions of the same warning about NameDrop on iPhone devices. One such warning read as follows: "IMPORTANT PRIVACY UPDATE: If you have an iPhone and have done the recent iOS 17 update, a new feature called NameDrop has been set to ON by default. This feature allows the sharing of your contact info just by bringing your phones close together. While you do need to accept the transfer, if you would prefer to shut this off, go to: Settings, General, AirDrop, Bringing Devices Together. Change to OFF. PARENTS: You may consider changing these settings after the update on your children's phones to help keep them safe as well!" Despite the virality of these warnings, the truth is that these posts are based on a misunderstanding of how the NameDrop feature works with an iPhone, similar to many other technological scares that have been virally shared on Facebook in past years. Barring the possibility of any future security holes being uncovered by users, the NameDrop feature was designed with multiple layers of protection. NameDrop allows two users to hold their iPhone devices very close to each other in order to share a phone number or email address. This also works with an iPhone and an Apple Watch or two Apple Watches. Instead of asking a friend for their contact details or handing your device to a friend to input their information, NameDrop allows this exchange of basic data to happen in a much easier, yet still secure, manner. The feature was first included in the software update known as iOS 17, which was released in September 2023 after being announced in June. Apple states that for NameDrop to work, users' devices must be "within a few centimeters" of each other to initiate the first step of the process. Additionally, both users must be signed into iCloud. Users can then select whether they want to share their phone number or email address and must tap a "Share" button to complete the exchange of one of the two pieces of basic contact data. To be clear, no contact information is automatically shared when two devices are brought together without a user taking action. Furthermore, NameDrop does not work unless the devices are already unlocked. Consider the following scenario: You sit down in a cozy coffee shop with your phone in your purse or on the table. Another customer is sitting several tables away. That customer won't be able to initiate the NameDrop feature on your phone because the devices are further apart than the "within a few centimeters" proximity specified by Apple. Even if that customer walks by and bumps into your purse or phone on the table, if your phone is locked with a passcode or other security feature, they couldn't even begin to initiate the NameDrop feature. Moreover, even if your phone is unlocked, you would still have to tap some buttons for the person to receive your contact details. In other words, there are multiple layers of security implemented for the NameDrop feature that are meant to protect users. The only way a person could misuse the NameDrop feature on your phone is if they take your unlocked phone away from you without your permission and initiate the sharing of contact information. However, this does not make the NameDrop feature unsafe; it simply means that you should not allow strangers to take your unlocked phone away from you. All of the data we've detailed above led us to our rating of False, meaning that, as the authoritative tech blog Wired.com put it in the headline of their article, "No, You Don't Need to Turn Off Apple's NameDrop Feature in iOS 17." If users, including parents, still wish to turn off the NameDrop feature, they can simply navigate on an iPhone to "Settings," "General," and then "AirDrop." To disable NameDrop, toggle the "Bringing Devices Together" feature to off. Parents can learn more about parental controls for Apple devices on the company's website.

['share']

False

Multiple U.S. police department Facebook pages also shared the warnings, which perhaps was one of the reasons that we received so many reader emails about this rumor.We reviewed multiple versions of the same warning about NameDrop on iPhone devices. One such warning read as follows:NameDrop is a feature that allows two users to hold their iPhone devices very close to each other in order to share a phone number or email address. This also works with an iPhone and an Apple Watch or two Apple Watches.Basically, instead of asking a friend for their contact details or handing your device to a friend to have them input their information, NameDrop allows this exchange of basic data to happen in a much easier, yet still secure, manner. The feature was first included in the software update known as iOS 17. It released in September 2023 after being announced in June.All of the data we have detailed above led us to our rating of False, meaning that, as the authoritative tech blog Wired.com put it in the headline of their article, "No, You Dont Need to Turn Off Apples NameDrop Feature in iOS 17."Parents can learn more about parental controls for Apple devices on the company's website.

Under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, the average American family of four will receive a $1,182 tax cut.

[]

Republicans promised that their tax overhaul would save money for the middle class, and Rep. Markwayne Mullin, R-Okla., was quick to make the case that it did. Im working alongside the White House and other members in the House to lessen the tax burden that currently weighs on so many Oklahomans, Mullin posted on hiscongressional blog. Under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, the average American family of four will receive a $1,182 tax cut. Imagine what you could do with $1,182 more in your pocket! Mullin's talking point has been popular among House Republicans trying to sell the tax plan. In the past week, we've heard House SpeakerPaul Ryanand a Georgia congressman tout the same figure. In each case, they overstated the impact of the tax cut. Mullin did, too, but less so. Here's what you need to know. The figure comes from the House Ways and Means Committee, which wrote the tax bill. That committee calculated several scenarios for how the proposals changes could affect different types of taxpayers. The key elements in the committee's calculation involve tax brackets, the standard deduction and the child tax credit. Currently, there are seven brackets; these would be consolidated into four -- 12 percent, 25 percent, 35 percent, and 39.6 percent. In the meantime, the standard deduction would be raised from $12,000 to $24,000. And the child tax credit will be increased from $1,000 to $1,600, bolstered by a new $300 credit for parents and other dependents. The example Mullin highlighted refers to a family of four making $59,000 per year. Heres the scenario outlined in the Housesfact sheet, using the fictional example of Steve and Melinda with two middle school-aged children: As a result of lower tax rates, a significantly larger standard deduction, and an enhanced Child Tax Credit and Family Flexibility Credit, Steve and Melinda will pay over $1,182 less in taxes than last year, reducing their total tax bill from $1,582 to only $400. Thats more money they can use for whatever is important to them, whether its paying bills, purchasing a new refrigerator, or putting away savings for the future. The Ways and Means Committee said they chose a household income of $59,000 because its themedian household income nationally. (Mullin talked about families and families are not identical to households, but in Oklahoma, the median family income is about $58,000, so the distinction makes little difference in his state.) For that amount of income, a family today would get $12,700 from the standard deduction, $16,200 in personal exemptions, leaving $30,100 in taxable income. Of that, $18,650 would be taxed at 10 percent and $11,450 would be taxed at 15 percent, meaning the preliminary tax liability would be $3,582.50. That would be adjusted with $2,000 in child tax credits, producing a final tax liability of $1,582.50. Under the new tax bill, the family would take a larger $24,000 standard deduction (the proposal eliminates personal exemptions), leaving $35,000 in taxable income. At the 12 percent rate, that would mean $4,200 in preliminary liability. This would be offset by $3,200 in child tax credits and $600 in family credits, leaving a final tax liability of $400. Thats a $1,182.50 tax cut. So the number adds up, but there are some caveats that show it might not work out this way for all families like Steve and Melindas. The GOP bill eliminates or shrinks a number of widely used itemized deductions, and those factors arent taken into account in the figure House estimate. The deductions eliminated or pared back in the bill include the mortgage interest deduction (for future mortgages, it would be capped at half its previous maximum); the state and local tax deduction (only $10,000 in property tax deductions would be allowed); the medical expense deduction; the casualty loss deduction; and the student loan interest deduction. For example, nearly 9 million people with high medical bills deduct them on the taxes. Exchanging these changes for a higher standard deduction may benefit many taxpayers, particularly those who choose not to itemize today. But some taxpayers who depend on these itemized deductions today may end up worse off if the bill is passed as is, even with the higher standard deduction. For this type of taxpayer, the loss of even one of those deductions could conceivably wipe out that $1,182 gain for certain types of families. David Kamin, a tax and budget specialist at the New York University law school, told us that the bill has some wrinkles that can turn a tax cut into a tax hike. Kamin cited a combination of factors, including the sunsetting of the $300 per parent tax credit; the lack of inflation adjustments for the child tax credit, which effectively replace personal exemptions that were indexed to inflation; and the new use of an inflation adjustment measure known as chained CPI, which grows more slowly than the yardstick in current use. According toKamins calculations, the initial tax cut for the family making $59,000 becomes about a $450 tax increase by 2024 compared to the status quo. Heres the graph he put together: Mullin didnt promise that the initial tax cut would last, as other Republicans have. After Mullin made his statement, the congressional Joint Committee on Taxation analyzed the tax plan using a different approach. The committee found that while tax collections from people making under $40,000 would fall at first, they would go up in 2023. The groups that would do the best under the plan would be people making between $100,000 and $200,000, and those making over $1 million a year. Mullin said that the average American family of four would get a tax cut of $1,182. The number is a reasonable estimate, based on certain assumptions. What might not be obvious is that families who take advantage of deductions today might see their taxes rise. And even those who benefit immediately might see those gains turn into losses after 2023. So if you think this tax cut would be ongoing, or every year, you'd be wrong. Unlike his colleagues, however, Mullin didnt outright promise that the initial tax cut would last for more than one year. Mullin's statement therefore is accurate but needs additional information. We rate it Mostly True.

['National', 'Taxes']

True

Im working alongside the White House and other members in the House to lessen the tax burden that currently weighs on so many Oklahomans, Mullin posted on hiscongressional blog. Under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, the average American family of four will receive a $1,182 tax cut. Imagine what you could do with $1,182 more in your pocket!Mullin's talking point has been popular among House Republicans trying to sell the tax plan. In the past week, we've heard House SpeakerPaul Ryanand a Georgia congressman tout the same figure. In each case, they overstated the impact of the tax cut. Mullin did, too, but less so.The example Mullin highlighted refers to a family of four making $59,000 per year. Heres the scenario outlined in the Housesfact sheet, using the fictional example of Steve and Melinda with two middle school-aged children:The Ways and Means Committee said they chose a household income of $59,000 because its themedian household income nationally. (Mullin talked about families and families are not identical to households, but in Oklahoma, the median family income is about $58,000, so the distinction makes little difference in his state.)According toKamins calculations, the initial tax cut for the family making $59,000 becomes about a $450 tax increase by 2024 compared to the status quo. Heres the graph he put together:

The typical white male worker in this country is making in real terms what he was making in 1973 and the average worker is making what they were making in 1996.

[]

As the 2012 elections loom and President Barack Obama pushes for his jobs plan, a key issue is how middle-class families have fared over the past generation. Obama and other Democrats would like to see the Bush-era tax cuts expire for couples making more than $250,000 and also raise taxes on hedge-fund millionaires who pay relatively low capital gains tax rates. For their part, Republicans claim Obama is engaging in class warfare against job creators. In a Sept. 27, 2011 speech at St. Anselm College's New Hampshire Institute of Politics in Manchester, David Axelrod, one of Obama's top strategists, said there has been a hollowing out of the middle class in this country in recent decades as wages have essentially flatlined for many workers. "There was a census report just a couple of weeks ago, and what it said was that the average white male worker, the typical white male worker in this country, is making in real terms what he was making in 1973," said Axelrod, a former White House aide and now a senior adviser to Obama's political campaign. In total, the average worker is making what they were making in 1996, but we know prices haven't gone along accordingly. If true, that's quite a ride back in time. Asked for substantiation, Katie Hogan of the Obama campaign referred us to a U.S. Census report released last month, and articles in the New York Times and the New Yorker website crunching some of the numbers. The report itself didn't have the precise numbers to back up Axelrod's first claim—that the typical white male worker made the same amount—adjusted for inflation—in 1973, when Richard Nixon occupied the White House. But a related census spreadsheet shows that real wages have not only failed to grow but have actually declined slightly for white males working year-round and full-time. But first, a semantic point near and dear to the heart of economists. Even though Axelrod said "average" in his statement, it's clear by his subsequent use of the word "typical" and the reports to which we were referred that median income, not the mean, is what applies here. In 2010, according to census data, the median earnings for a full-time white male worker were $50,074. By comparison, in 1973, the median for that category, in 2010 dollars, was $50,513. So Axelrod was correct that white men were no better off, adjusted for inflation, in 2010 than they were 37 years ago; they were taking home about $8.44 less per week. And when measured by the purchasing power of those dollars, the gap is even bigger. Because wages haven't kept up with prices, as Axelrod asserted, the typical white male worker's purchasing power has eroded by almost 11.5 percent in 37 years. Heidi Shierholz, a labor market economist for the Economic Policy Institute, a liberal think tank in Washington, said Axelrod's statement about white male workers is unambiguously true, and that wages haven't kept up with major gains in productivity. "The growing wealth of the country actually didn't translate into higher standards of living or wages for typical workers," she said. "Where it [the wealth] went was to the top." In the second part of Axelrod's statement—that the average worker is making what they were making in 1996—it appears that the Obama strategist got some numbers mixed up. A census table shows that median earnings for all full-time workers who clocked at least 50 weeks of labor increased by about 7 percent in real terms between 1996 and 2010, to $41,919. This came as earnings by women, and their participation in the labor force, grew at a faster rate than that of men, though the female-to-male earnings ratio was still 77.4 cents to the dollar in 2010. Given the report Hogan, the Obama campaign press aide, cited, however, along with a number widely reported in the press last month, what Axelrod apparently was referring to when he spoke of average workers making what they did in 1996 were census numbers that showed total household income, adjusted for inflation, has barely increased. Median household income in 2010 was $49,445, only a $333 increase, or 0.7 percent, in inflation-adjusted dollars from 1996. Some important factors are at play in household income numbers. For starters, households are smaller now, meaning there are fewer wage-earners to be counted. But women's participation in the labor market has also increased. What that means, essentially, is that wage-earners in middle-class American households are working more to maintain the same level of income. "One of the ways families made up the difference was more work," Shierholz said of the stagnant wage issue. "It's largely an hours story." A paper Shierholz co-authored after the new census numbers were released also showed that median income for working-age households fell by more than 10 percent in the past decade, to $55,276. Given such factors, she said the second half of Axelrod's statement captures the flavor of what the EPI and others have labeled a lost decade in terms of income. Our ruling: Axelrod was on the money in talking about the erosion of earnings for white male workers since the early 1970s, and basically on track in comparing how things stand today for the typical American family compared to 1996. We rate his statement Mostly True.

['National', 'Economy', 'New Hampshire 2012', 'Workers']

True

As the 2012 elections loom and President Barack Obama pushes for his jobs plan, a key issue is how middle-class families have fared over the past generation.Obama and other Democrats would like to see the Bush-era tax cuts expire for couples making more than $250,000 and also raise taxes on hedge-fund millionaires paying relatively low capital gains tax rates. For their part, Republicans claim Obama is engaging in class warfare against job creators.In a Sept. 27, 2011 speech at St. Anselm Colleges New Hampshire Institute of Politics in Manchester, David Axelrod, one of Obamas top strategists, said there has been a hollowing out of the middle class in this country in recent decades as wages have essentially flat-lined for many workers.There was a census report just a couple of weeks ago, and what it said was that the average white male worker, the typical white male worker in this country, is making in real terms what he was making in 1973, said Axelrod, a former White House aide and now a senior adviser to Obamas political campaign. In total, the average worker is making what they were making in 1996, but we know prices havent gone along accordingly.If true, thats quite a ride back in time. Asked for substantiation, Katie Hogan of the Obama campaign referred us to a U.S. Censusreportreleased last month, and articles in theNew York Timesand theNew Yorkerwebsite crunching some of the numbers.The report itself didnt have the precise numbers to back up Axelrods first claim -- that the typical white male worker made the same amount -- adjusted for inflation -- in 1973, when Richard Nixon occupied the White House.But a related censusspreadsheetshows that real wages have not only failed to grow but have actually declined slightly for white males working year-round and full time.But first, a semantic point near and dear to the heart of economists. Even though Axelrod said average in his statement, its clear by his subsequent use of the word typical and the reports to which we were referred that median income, not the mean, is what applies here.In 2010, according to census data, the median earnings for a full-time white male worker were $50,074. By comparison, in 1973, the median for that category, in 2010 dollars, was $50,513. So Axelrod not only was correct that white men were no better off, adjusted for inflation, in 2010 than they were 37 years ago, they were taking home about $8.44 less per week.And when measured by the purchasing power of those dollars, the gap is even bigger. Because wages havent kept up with prices, as Axelrod asserted, the typical white male worker's purchasing power has eroded by almost 11.5 percent in 37 years.Heidi Shierholz, a labor market economist for the Economic Policy Institute, a liberal think tank in Washington, said Axelrods statement about white male workers is unambiguously true, and that wages havent kept up with major gains in productivity.The growing wealth of the country actually didnt translate into higher standards of living or wages for typical workers, she said. Where it [the wealth] went was to the top.In the second part of Axelrods statement -- that the average worker is making what they were making in 1996 -- it appears that the Obama strategist got some numbers mixed up.A censustableshows that median earnings for all full-time workers who clocked at least 50 weeks of labor increased by about 7 percent in real terms between 1996 and 2010, to $41,919. This came as earnings by women, and their participation in the labor force, grew at a faster rate than that of men, though the female-to-male earnings ratio was still 77.4 cents to the dollar in 2010.Given the report Hogan, the Obama campaign press aide, cited, however, along with a number widely reported in the press last month, what Axelrod apparently was referring to when he spoke of average workers making what they did in 1996 were census numbers that showed total household income, adjusted for inflation, has barely increased. Median household income in 2010 was $49,445, only a $333 increase, or 0.7 percent, in inflation-adjusted dollars from 1996.Some important factors are at play in household income numbers. For starters, households are smaller now, meaning there are fewer wage-earners to be counted. But womens participation in the labor market has also increased. What that means, essentially, is that wage-earners in middle-class American households are working more to maintain the same level of income.One of the ways families made up the difference was more work, Shierholz said of the stagnant wage issue. Its largely an hours story.A paper Shierholz co-authored after the new census numbers were released also showed that median income for working-age households fell by more than 10 percent in the past decade, to $55,276.Given such factors, she said the second half of Axelrods statement captures the flavor of what the EPI and others have labeled a lost decade in terms of income.Our ruling

Black Like Ike?

["President Dwight D. Eisenhower's racial background has sparked a number of long-circulating rumors, but there's no compelling evidence behind such claims."]

In 2015, a number of social media posts and email forwards made their way to Snopes HQ: This has been on Facebook since at least August 2015, claiming Eisenhower's mother was of mixed ancestry (using offensive term "mulatto"). A brief review of some sources turned up no evidence, though her family was mixed generations before. Strictly speaking, this would not make her a "mulatto" woman as claimed. There is a post on facebook that says Dwight Eisenhower's (34th President)mother was a mulatto named Ida Stover. Ida Stover is his mother but was she a mulatto? There for Obama is not the first Black president. Was shemulato? Hey did you guys know our 34th President Dwight Eisenhower's mother was "mulatto" #FunFact #FunFact spicy mayo (@wo0ski) August 28, 2015 August 28, 2015 On 27 August 2015 a Facebook user shared the above-reproduced image, claiming that the mother of President Dwight D. Eisenhower was an "orphaned mulatto woman named Ida Stover." Although the claim was novel to many social media users, questions about Eisenhower's racial background were not: for example, an 8 January 2004New York Times article titled "Surprises in the Family Tree" examined why the topic of race and ancestry is sometimes complicated across American history: shared article "Most of the workers in colonial America in the 17th and early 18th centuries were indentured servants, white and black," said Dr. John B. Boles, a professor of history at Rice University in Houston and the editor of "The Blackwell Companion to the American South" (2001). Since there was not a clear distinction between slavery and servitude at the time, he said, "biracial camaraderie" often resulted in children. The idea that blacks were property did not harden until around 1715 with the rise of the tobacco economy, by which time there was a small but growing population of free families of color. Dr. Boles estimated that by 1860 there were 250,000 free black or mixed-race individuals The article only briefly mentioned Eisenhower and Stover, in a manner that referenced the rumor without providing conclusivedetail: It is incontrovertible that America is a multiracial society, from the founding father Alexander Hamilton (the son of a mixed-race woman from the British West Indies) to Essie Mae Washington-Williams, 78, a retired schoolteacher, who, the late Senator Strom Thurmond's family [has] acknowledged, is his daughter. And for decades there have been questions about the possible mixed-race ancestry of Ida Stover, Dwight D. Eisenhower's mother. According to that article, there were merely "questions" about Stover's racial ancestry (which had lingered for "decades," seemingly without answer). Wikipedia also addresses the rumor on a page titled "African-American heritage of United States presidents," where Eisenhower is listed under presidents with unverified claims of African ancestry, alongsideThomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, Abraham Lincoln, Warren G. Harding, and Calvin Coolidge. The page is prefaced with a note that the claims originated primarily with "amateur historians," were not "verified by reliable sources in peer-reviewed publications," and that "[m]ainline historians do not support these claims": Wikipedia The academic consensus of historians is that no president other than Obama has had recent (from the colonial period in U.S. history or after) African ancestry; it rejects claims to the contrary. TheTimes' 2004 article was published well before the candidacy of Barack Obama, but rumors of Eisenhower's purported African roots predictably surfaced alongsideObama's then-burgeoning campaign. A 5 February 2008 Pittsburgh-Post Gazette article emphasized that such claims were not considered credible by historians and geneologists: article In addition to Jefferson, the books, magazines and newspaper articles found on the Web name five other U.S. presidents who may have had black ancestry, but never publicly acknowledged it: Andrew Jackson, Abraham Lincoln, Warren Harding, Calvin Coolidge and Dwight D. Eisenhower.Van Hall, associate professor of history at the University of Pittsburgh, said it is unlikely that most of the men on the list had black ancestry because historians know their genealogy pretty well. While he concedes he hasn't researched the issue, Larry Glasco, also an associate professor of history at Pitt, is also skeptical of the stories. "I would guess if [the stories] were really true we'd have heard a lot more about them," Dr. Glasco said. "There would have been a lot more written about them in professional research literature." Another portion of that 2008 article notedthat the claimsshould be simpleto resolve, given recent advances in genetic mapping technology: [Russell Riley, presidential scholar at the University of Virginia's Miller Center of Public Affairs] said with today's DNA mapping techniques it would be easy to prove or disprove these claims. There was no such thing as DNA mapping when the late historian J.A. Rogers wrote his book, "Five Black Presidents," self-published in 1965, which serves as the basis for most of the more recently published works on the subject. The set of larger rumors (mentioning but not focusing on Eisenhower) were addressed again byNPR in a June 2008 segment titled "Has America Already Had a Black President?" which primarily explored the reasons behind (and not the credibility of) such rumors. The election of President Obama predictably reinvigorated the rumors, and a 5 November 2008Emporia Gazette article described the claims ascomprising mostly visual evidence (i.e., photographs of Ida Stover) and gaps in her family tree: addressed article The rumor was his dad was mixed, coming out of Africa, [Emporia State University sociology professor Nate] Terrell said. "But his mother, Ida (Elizabeth) Stover Eisenhower, was mulatto. And when I show people pictures of her they say, 'Oh well, we can tell. Just by looking at mom, we can tell she was mixed.'" The photograph reputed to be of Eisenhowers mother and father was published by the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, in conjunction with several articles run on the subject of black presidents. Although [Dr. Leroy] Vaughn does not assert that Eisenhower was of mixed ancestry, his 2006 book, "Black People and Their Place in World History" states there may have been five black U.S. Presidents, according to the online news, The Daily Voice, Black America's Daily News Source. Elsewhere on the internet, an undated page on the web site FrenchCreoles.com presented the same shallow reasoning: that Ida Stover visually appeared to be biracial, and her ancestry was not well-documented. Moreover, the site asserted that one family name (Link, which is not an uncommon surname) was common among both white and black families: page While the more "mainstream" historians remain skeptical, these type of allegations garner the most interest among African Americans primarily because they recognize all the possibilities of truth in the assertions. Most all seem to agree that our nation's 34th president Dwight Eisenhower and Warren G. Harding, our 29th U.S. president, are the most likely candidates. It is said that Eisenhower's mother, Ida Elizabeth Stover Eisenhower was a woman of color. Something about a mysterious maternal grandfather who carried the surname of Link, and there being only two Links families in the Virginia town they originated in a black one and a white one. And something about interviews conducted with elderly area blacks during the 1950's who long remembered the references to Eisenhower's mother as "that black Links gal". But perhaps the evidence that raised the proverbial eyebrow was the 1885 wedding day photograph of the president's parents which many say is all the evidence they need A site calledRasta Livewire made similar,rumor-based assertions about Ida Stover's racial ancestry: assertions Here's the problem: In Mount Sidney to this day there are both black families and white families with the surname "Link." Many years ago, a black researcher discovered that Ida's mother was from the black Links, a fact washed away in time by two things: 1. Her mother died when she was five years old. 2. She went to live with a white family after. 3. She moved to Kansas while in her teens. 4. She married a white man. While rumors about President Eisenhower's purportedly mixed-race maternal lineage became more popular during and after the election of President Obama, the claims remain unsupported and unsubtantiated. The primary sources for the claim werea 50-year-old self-published book and many decades of repetition, while substantive evidence for the assertion hinged largely on Ida Stover's 1885 wedding photograph (which many viewers believed hinted at a mixed racial lineage) as well as the concurrent existence of black and white families with the surname Link in her hometown during her youth. Neither source was a convincing evidentiary finding, and in the time since the rumors began, the advancement of DNA research has made itfairly easy to resolve such questions. To date, no one has conclusively proved President Eisenhower wasn't part black, but neither has anyone presented any clear evidence affirming he was.

['economy']

NEI

Hey did you guys know our 34th President Dwight Eisenhower's mother was "mulatto" #FunFact spicy mayo (@wo0ski) August 28, 2015On 27 August 2015 a Facebook user shared the above-reproduced image, claiming that the mother of President Dwight D. Eisenhower was an "orphaned mulatto woman named Ida Stover." Although the claim was novel to many social media users, questions about Eisenhower's racial background were not: for example, an 8 January 2004New York Times article titled "Surprises in the Family Tree" examined why the topic of race and ancestry is sometimes complicated across American history:According to that article, there were merely "questions" about Stover's racial ancestry (which had lingered for "decades," seemingly without answer). Wikipedia also addresses the rumor on a page titled "African-American heritage of United States presidents," where Eisenhower is listed under presidents with unverified claims of African ancestry, alongsideThomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, Abraham Lincoln, Warren G. Harding, and Calvin Coolidge. The page is prefaced with a note that the claims originated primarily with "amateur historians," were not "verified by reliable sources in peer-reviewed publications," and that "[m]ainline historians do not support these claims":TheTimes' 2004 article was published well before the candidacy of Barack Obama, but rumors of Eisenhower's purported African roots predictably surfaced alongsideObama's then-burgeoning campaign. A 5 February 2008 Pittsburgh-Post Gazette article emphasized that such claims were not considered credible by historians and geneologists:The set of larger rumors (mentioning but not focusing on Eisenhower) were addressed again byNPR in a June 2008 segment titled "Has America Already Had a Black President?" which primarily explored the reasons behind (and not the credibility of) such rumors. The election of President Obama predictably reinvigorated the rumors, and a 5 November 2008Emporia Gazette article described the claims ascomprising mostly visual evidence (i.e., photographs of Ida Stover) and gaps in her family tree:Elsewhere on the internet, an undated page on the web site FrenchCreoles.com presented the same shallow reasoning: that Ida Stover visually appeared to be biracial, and her ancestry was not well-documented. Moreover, the site asserted that one family name (Link, which is not an uncommon surname) was common among both white and black families:A site calledRasta Livewire made similar,rumor-based assertions about Ida Stover's racial ancestry:

No, the Make-A-Wish Foundation Isn't Denying Wishes to Unvaccinated Children

['A copypasta meme spread misinformation about critically ill children.']

Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And, please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease. fighting Find out Read Submit Become a Founding Member CDC WHO In August 2021, readers searched the Snopes website and sent emailed questions in regards to a false internet rumor that the Make-A-Wish Foundation, a non-profit organization that grants wishes to critically ill children, would only grant wishes to children who have been vaccinated against COVID-19. The rumor was spread via a copypasta meme that circulated on social media. Here is an example of a misleading post on Facebook that went viral: "This is literally a new low for humanity," the text of the above meme reads. "Terminally ill children will not be granted a wish.. from the make a wish foundation unless.. you guessed it.. theyre fully vaccinated." The source for this rumor is the misrepresentation of a video announcement posted on June 9, 2021, by Make-A-Wish, in which the organization's CEO, Richard Davis, announced that it was loosening some of the safety measures undertaken amid the COVID-19 pandemic. This included resuming, as of Sept. 15, 2021, the fulfillment of wishes that require air travel and large gatherings, in consultation with public health and medical professionals. video The resumption of these activities, for the time being, includes requiring those participating to be vaccinated against COVID-19. "All wish participants, including your wish kid and any siblings, will need to be two weeks past completion of either a one-dose or a two-dose vaccine," Davis stated. "While we won't ask for proof of vaccination, we'll ask that any adult participant to sign a letter of understanding that certifies that they and any minors participating in the wish are vaccinated and understand the risks of traveling at this time." Davis acknowledged that the situation isn't ideal. As of this writing, only children aged 12 years and older are eligible for the vaccine. eligible "We understand that this change affects many families whose children aren't eligible for the vaccine yet, and also know that there are families who aren't ready to get the vaccine, and we'll respect everyone's freedom of choice," Davis said in the video. Davis also said that the steps being taken "represent the start of our return to normal, and that because of the pandemic, international travel and cruises are still on hold. In other words, Davis said that in the midst of the pandemic, the foundation, which serves critically ill children, has been taking safety measures to protect those children. While that means some children won't be able to travel or participate in events or activities that involve crowds, that doesn't mean unvaccinated children won't be granted wishes. The Make-A-Wish Foundation published a statement countering viral rumors. The key portion of the statement reads: statement Make-A-Wish has not, does not and will not deny wishes to children who are not vaccinated. Since the beginning of the pandemic, Make-A-Wish has safely granted over 6,500 wishes to children and families regardless of vaccination status. Make-A-Wish will continue to grant wishes to children who are not vaccinated. It is important to note that Make-A-Wish serves children with critical illnesses. Children do not need to have an end-of-life diagnosis to be eligible for a wish. In fact, most children we serve are able to manage, and even overcome, their illnesses and view the wish as an important part of the healing process. Spreading misinformation around the types of children who are eligible for a wish is harmful and hurtful to wish children and families. The vaccination policy does not apply to any child who has received an end-of-life prognosis. Make-A-Wish will not require anyone to get vaccinated to get a wish. We respect everyone's freedom of choice. We understand that there are many families whose children aren't eligible for the vaccine yet, and we also know that there are families who are choosing not to get the vaccine. There are many other wish options for children who do not currently meet the requirements for air travel and events involving large gatherings. The list of wish possibilities is as expansive as a creative child's imagination, and it includes road trips to national parks, spending time with celebrities, outdoor playhouses, shopping sprees, staycations, wishes for pets, computers, and room redecorations. CDC. COVID-19 Vaccination. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 11 Feb. 2020, https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/recommendations/adolescents.html. COVID-19 Wish Updates: Air, Train, Bus Travel & Large Gatherings. www.youtube.com, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3T8eCqsgzxs. Accessed 31 Aug. 2021. Make-A-Wish Counters Misinformation: Vaccine Policy. https://wish.org/news-releases/vaccine-policy. Accessed 31 Aug. 2021.

['profit']

False

Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And, please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease. The source for this rumor is the misrepresentation of a video announcement posted on June 9, 2021, by Make-A-Wish, in which the organization's CEO, Richard Davis, announced that it was loosening some of the safety measures undertaken amid the COVID-19 pandemic. This included resuming, as of Sept. 15, 2021, the fulfillment of wishes that require air travel and large gatherings, in consultation with public health and medical professionals.Davis acknowledged that the situation isn't ideal. As of this writing, only children aged 12 years and older are eligible for the vaccine.The Make-A-Wish Foundation published a statement countering viral rumors. The key portion of the statement reads:

Rephrase this as "Macy Neighs"

['']

FACT CHECK: Did Macy's refuse to hire an applicant because she was a veteran who had served in Afghanistan? Claim: Macy's refused to hire an applicant because she was a veteran who had served in Afghanistan. Example: [Collected via e-mail, August 2015] I just saw a post on Facebook stating that a veteran had applied to Macy's for a sales position and was told that because of her experience as a veteran she would not be hired. Origins: On 6 August 2015, the Facebook page of "Joe the Plumber" published the following status update and photograph: status update Someone at Macy's needs an attitude adjustment... Like if you agree. Share if you have more respect for our vets than Macy's does. No additional information was supplied by that Facebook page about the woman pictured (such as the specific Macy's involved, the date of the purported interview, or any other corroboration of the claim). Furthermore, the claim's appearance in August 2015 led people to believe that the individual depicted had been recently considered and presumably denied employment by the Macy's department store chain. This item was one of several "shunned serviceman" rumors that circulated in mid-2015, but it was over a year old at that point. A March 2014 article identified the woman as Army Specialist Kayla Reyes (then 21), and the Macy's location as one in Fresno, California, and according to the article, Reyes merely speculated on Instagram that her history of military service had adversely impacted her employment prospects, a claim she later appeared to downplay: shunned serviceman circulated article She says she interviewed for a sales associate position on Feb. 20. Reyes says once she told the hiring manager about her service overseas, the questions came back to Reyes's time at war. "Being that you've been over there, you wouldn't really know how to approach people," Reyes says that's what the manager told her. She continues, "Once a customer's in your face, you wouldn't know how to do it. You wouldn't know how to react." Reyes says she left the interview wondering if her military service did her a disservice when applying for a civilian job. A spokesperson for Macy's provided a comment for the March 2014 article (published less than a month after Reyes' Instagram post initially circulated) indicating that Reyes' application was still under active consideration at that time. By that point, Reyes maintained that she had accepted an alternate offer with the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. After the claim recirculated in August 2015, the Facebook page of Macy's was deluged in angry comments from users over the more than year-old allegation. In response to one of those comments, a representative for Macy's stated that Reyes had in fact been offered (but declined) the position for which she interviewed: stated Thank you for reaching out to Macy's and giving us the chance to hear from us directly. Macy's commitment to our veterans is sincere and strong. As a company that stands for inclusion in the workplace and our stores, we do not tolerate discrimination of any kind. We proudly employ thousands of veterans within our organization, as we know that veterans possess leadership skills that are an asset in a dynamic department store environment. As with any prospective employee, we actively looked for appropriate and available positions that would be best suited for Ms. Reyes' skills and experience level, and, in fact, identified and offered her a job at our store. We were disappointed when she declined. At Macy's, we have created a special Military Executive Development Program where we train veterans for key executive roles, giving them the tools and industry training to position them for success. In addition, Macy's has partnered with the Got Your 6 organization for a campaign in our stores to raise funds and awareness to assist veterans as they return to civilian life. Last year, we raised over $3.4 million with our customers and look forward to raising more funds this year. Thank you. -Carlos at Macy's Last updated: 6August 2015 Originally published: 6August 2015

['asset']

True

Origins: On 6 August 2015, the Facebook page of "Joe the Plumber" published the following status update and photograph:This item was one of several "shunned serviceman" rumors that circulated in mid-2015, but it was over a year old at that point. A March 2014 article identified the woman as Army Specialist Kayla Reyes (then 21), and the Macy's location as one in Fresno, California, and according to the article, Reyes merely speculated on Instagram that her history of military service had adversely impacted her employment prospects, a claim she later appeared to downplay:After the claim recirculated in August 2015, the Facebook page of Macy's was deluged in angry comments from users over the more than year-old allegation. In response to one of those comments, a representative for Macy's stated that Reyes had in fact been offered (but declined) the position for which she interviewed:

I took over the school district when it had a $1 billion structural deficit and left them with $1 billion in cash and 70,000 more students than they have today.

[]

A big part of the mayoral campaign of Paul Vallas relies on his six-year record as CEO of the Chicago Public Schools under former Mayor Richard Daley. And the theme that Vallas often falls back on is that he was a turnaround specialist who revived a very troubled school system and left it in better financial and academic shape than he found it. I took over the school district when it had a $1 billion structural deficit and left them with $1 billion in cash and 70,000 more students than they have today, Vallas declared in a New Years Eve interviewon WGN radio. Ive always been a problem-solver. My approach has always been to go in, bring financial stability to the systems that Ive taken responsibility for, design budgets that are long-term financial plans that actually invest in the community to generate growth. Vallas is facing a crowded field of contenders in next months city elections to replace the retiring Rahm Emanuel as mayor, and the flagging condition of the citys public schools will be sure to present a major test for whichever candidate prevails. Having a proven track record as a school fix-it specialist could be a big plus for Vallas. But how valid are his claims? We decided to take a look. Vallas claims raise two questions. First, whether his basic facts check out. Second, whether they can be credited to his leadership. News clips and columns from the Vallas era at CPS, which began in 1995, back up the first beat of his claim. They note that district leaders had projected before he took over that CPS was on track to run a deficit of more than $1 billion by 1999. Under Vallas, that huge deficit never materialized, and district financial records he pointed to show that by his last year at the helm in 2001 CPS claimed a positive balance of nearly $1 billion in all of its financial accounts. But can Vallas credit his policy decisions entirely for that transformation? Not exactly. In 1995, lawmakers in Springfield turned over control of the district, which was facing one of many financial crises, to Mayor Richard M. Daley. He named Vallas, who had been serving as his budget director, chief executive officer. Daley also appointed Gery Chico, now a mayoral opponent of Vallas, as school board president. But the new guard at CPS also got to play by a different set of financial rules. Instead of receiving state aid earmarked for specific purposes, for example, the district started getting a significant amount of funding in the form of a block grant. Another big change that helped un-tie its fiscal hands: Lawmakers allowed property tax dollars, which had previously flowed directly into the pension fund for teachers, to go to CPS instead. And in 1997, legislators permitted the district to forego payments into the pension fund provided it hit benchmarks signifying sound fiscal health. He was not operating under the same conditions as the CEO that existed prior to 1995, said Amanda Kass, associate director of the Government Finance Research Center at the University of Illinois-Chicago. During Vallas six years with the district, and for several years following his tenure, CPS paid next to nothing toward teacher pension costs. The Vallas era at CPS coincided with the dot.com bubble that sent markets soaring, helping the pension fund stay healthy even without the annual injections of cash it began missing out on. Had Springfield not changed the law, the CPS teacher pension fund would have been paid$90millionin 1995 to cover the employer share of pension costs that year. Instead, it got $10 million. Over the next decade, the fund was out$2billion. We asked Vallas in a phone interview why he opted to stop pension payments. The system was earning such strong returns, it didnt require that we make contributions during those few years, he explained. Kass said its considered best practice for local governments to continue employer share contributions regardless of the financial health of pension funds something the 1997 law did not require. Had CPS continued contributions during the Vallas years, the pension fund would have had more cushion to weather the financial recessions that hit in 2001 and again in 2008, she explained. That said, Kass added that her observations come with the benefit of hindsight after watching the pension fund balance worsen dramatically after Vallas left and his successors continued to put off payments even as the funds fiscal viability declined. I do think that Vallas inherited a challenging situation, Kass said, noting that ratings of CPS bonds improved significantly during his tenure and enabled a system all but shut out of the credit markets to begin borrowing again. In short, CPS was on the financial ropes before Vallas took over but made significant fiscal strides under him. Changes in state law, however, gave him far more financial flexibility to operate than his predecessors. In touting his success as CEO, Vallas also pointed to the size of the district under his watch compared with much-diminished enrollment figures of today. Enrollment is important as a symbol of how attractive CPS is to families of school age children, but it also carries real financial weight because the fewer students attending classes the less state aid the district gets. Vallas numbers are roughly accurate. CPS enrollment stood at nearly 425,000 when he left the district, but now sits at about 361,000,stateandCPS figuresshow. But in using enrollment data as a measuring stick of his success, Vallas ignores significant demographic changes in the city since his time at CPS that render such a comparison misleading. Chicago saw a period of population growth in the 1990s due in large part to a substantial increase in immigrants, largely from Mexico. With that increase in immigration came an influx of students into CPS, said Chicago demographer Rob Paral. The stuff going on demographically today is quite different than the forces that were in play in the 90s, he said. Chicago was a huge magnet for all that 90s immigration. In the years after Vallas left CPS, the immigrant population of the city stopped growing and the African-American population began a significant decline. Minority students make up about 90 percent of CPS enrollment, so the changing demographics had a significant impact at the schools. Vallas said, I took over the school district when it had a $1 billion structural deficit and left them with $1 billion in cash and 70,000 more students than they have today. The bond rating and bottom line at CPS did improve significantly under Vallas, but new laws passed in Springfield also removed fiscal handcuffs which gave him more flexibility to manage the districts finances than his predecessors enjoyed. And he is correct that CPS has nearly 70,000 fewer students today than in 2001 when he departed. But that is due at least in part to significant demographic changes in Chicago outside the control of any schools chief. His claim is accurate but requires additional information to understand the context. We rate it Mostly True. MOSTLY TRUE The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information. Click herefor moreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check.

['City Budget', 'Education', 'Illinois']

True

I took over the school district when it had a $1 billion structural deficit and left them with $1 billion in cash and 70,000 more students than they have today, Vallas declared in a New Years Eve interviewon WGN radio. Ive always been a problem-solver. My approach has always been to go in, bring financial stability to the systems that Ive taken responsibility for, design budgets that are long-term financial plans that actually invest in the community to generate growth.Had Springfield not changed the law, the CPS teacher pension fund would have been paid$90millionin 1995 to cover the employer share of pension costs that year. Instead, it got $10 million. Over the next decade, the fund was out$2billion.Vallas numbers are roughly accurate. CPS enrollment stood at nearly 425,000 when he left the district, but now sits at about 361,000,stateandCPS figuresshow.Click herefor moreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check.

Was President Trump accused of pressuring Qatar to financially assist Jared Kushner?

["The president's son-in-law reportedly owes a $1 billion-plus mortgage on a building he purchased on Fifth Avenue in 2007."]

In October 2018, social media users shared a meme posted by the liberal Facebook page Occupy Democrats reporting a series of events involving Gulf states were the result of President Donald Trump and his son-in-law and adviser Jared Kushner "using American foreign policy to enrich themselves": Although the sequence of events referenced in the meme is described accurately according to reputable news reports, the motives, connections, and causality the meme ascribes to those events have not been proved. It is true that Jared Kushner, who is married to President Trump's eldest daughter Ivanka, was in need of over a billion dollars to cover the mortgage on 666 Fifth Avenue, a 41-story Manhattan building he purchased for $1.8 billion in 2007, as the New Yorker reported on 2 March 2018: reported Kushner Companies co-owns 666 Fifth Avenue with another developer, Vornado Realty. In 2007, at Jared Kushners urging, the company paid $1.8 billion for the building -- at the time, the highest price ever paid for a New York office tower. The property occupies a prime spot between Fifty-second and Fifty-third streets, but it was built in 1957 and needed extensive upgrades. It still has many vacancies, and the $1.2 billion mortgage, which reportedly has ballooned to almost $1.5 billion, is due in February, 2019. Right now, it is not entirely clear whether Kushner Companies is in a position to repay or refinance the loan. The company hoped to knock the building down and put up another, twice as tall and far more luxurious, in its place, Bloomberg reported. It sought funds from investors in Saudi Arabia, Qatar, China, South Korea, Israel and France. No investors were announced for the plan, described by many as prohibitively expensive. That same day, The Intercept reported that in April 2017, Kushner's father Charles, who runs the family's real estate firm Kushner Companies, had made a direct appeal for financing to Qatari Finance Minister Ali Sharif Al Emadi, which was followed shortly afterwards by the Saudi-led blockade of Qatar: reported The 30-minute meeting, according to two sources in the financial industry who asked not to be named because of the sensitivity of the potential transaction, included aides to both parties, and was held at a suite at the St. Regis Hotel in New York. A follow-up meeting was held the next day in a glass-walled conference room at the Kushner property itself, though Al Emadi did not attend the second gathering in person. The failure to broker the deal would be followed only a month later by a Middle Eastern diplomatic row in which Jared Kushner provided critical support to Qatars neighbors. Led by Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, a group of Middle Eastern countries, with Kushners backing, led a diplomatic assault that culminated in a blockade of Qatar. Kushner, according to reports at the time, subsequently undermined efforts by Secretary of State Rex Tillerson to bring an end to the standoff. Middle Eastern diplomatic row subsequently undermined In May 2017, Qatar's Gulf neighbors commenced a blockade of that country, and within days President Trump tweeted his support of the blockage despite the fact that Qatar is home to Al Udeid Air Base, a key U.S. military installation: commenced tweeted During my recent trip to the Middle East I stated that there can no longer be funding of Radical Ideology. Leaders pointed to Qatar - look! Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 6, 2017 June 6, 2017 In May 2018, the New York Times reported that the Kushner family was close to reaching a bailout deal for 666 Fifth Avenue with a company possessing Qatari government ties: reported Charles Kushner, head of the Kushner Companies, is in advanced talks with Brookfield Asset Management over a partnership to take control of the 41-story aluminum-clad tower in Midtown Manhattan, 666 Fifth Avenue, according to two real estate executives who have been briefed on the pending deal but were not authorized to discuss it. Brookfield is a publicly traded company, and its real estate arm, Brookfield Property Partners, is partly owned by the Qatari government, through the Qatar Investment Authority. And, the Trump administration around that time reversed course with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo telling the Saudis in April 2018 that it was time to end the blockade against Qatar. telling It's likely the meme gained momentum on social media in October 2018 due to scrutiny over Kushner and Trump's relationship with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman in light of the gruesome murder of Jamal Kashoggi. scrutiny Kashoggi, a Saudi national and columnist for the Washington Post, went missing on 2 October 2018 after entering the Saudi consulate in Istanbul seeking documents he needed to get married. According to reports citing Turkish government and U.S. intelligence sources, the Virginia resident never left the consulate, where he was ambushed by Saudi agents, tortured and murdered, and his body dismembered. ambushed Trump has resisted calls by U.S. lawmakers to impose sanctions on Saudi Arabia in retaliation for the journalist's apparent death, comparing global condemnation of the Gulf kingdom to accusations of sexual misconduct leveled against U.S. Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh. Trump told the Associated Press: "Here we go again with, you know, you're guilty until proven innocent. I don't like that. We just went through that with Justice Kavanaugh and he was innocent all the way as far as I'm concerned." calls told Cassidy, John. "Jared Kushners Conflicts of Interest Reach a Crisis Point." The New Yorker. 2 March 2018. Swisher, Clayton and Ryan Grim. "Jared Kushner's Real Estate Firm Sought Money Directly from Qatar Government Weeks Before Blockade." The Intercept. 2 March 2018. Bagli, Charles V. and Jesse Drucker. "Kushners Near Deal with Qatar-Linked Company for Troubled Tower." The New York Times. 17 May 2018. Kirkpatrick, David D. and Carlotta Gall. "Audio Offers Gruesome Details of Jamal Khashoggi Killing, Turkish Official Says." The New York Times. 17 October 2018.

['funds']

NEI

It is true that Jared Kushner, who is married to President Trump's eldest daughter Ivanka, was in need of over a billion dollars to cover the mortgage on 666 Fifth Avenue, a 41-story Manhattan building he purchased for $1.8 billion in 2007, as the New Yorker reported on 2 March 2018:That same day, The Intercept reported that in April 2017, Kushner's father Charles, who runs the family's real estate firm Kushner Companies, had made a direct appeal for financing to Qatari Finance Minister Ali Sharif Al Emadi, which was followed shortly afterwards by the Saudi-led blockade of Qatar:The failure to broker the deal would be followed only a month later by a Middle Eastern diplomatic row in which Jared Kushner provided critical support to Qatars neighbors. Led by Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, a group of Middle Eastern countries, with Kushners backing, led a diplomatic assault that culminated in a blockade of Qatar. Kushner, according to reports at the time, subsequently undermined efforts by Secretary of State Rex Tillerson to bring an end to the standoff.In May 2017, Qatar's Gulf neighbors commenced a blockade of that country, and within days President Trump tweeted his support of the blockage despite the fact that Qatar is home to Al Udeid Air Base, a key U.S. military installation: Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 6, 2017In May 2018, the New York Times reported that the Kushner family was close to reaching a bailout deal for 666 Fifth Avenue with a company possessing Qatari government ties:And, the Trump administration around that time reversed course with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo telling the Saudis in April 2018 that it was time to end the blockade against Qatar.It's likely the meme gained momentum on social media in October 2018 due to scrutiny over Kushner and Trump's relationship with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman in light of the gruesome murder of Jamal Kashoggi. Kashoggi, a Saudi national and columnist for the Washington Post, went missing on 2 October 2018 after entering the Saudi consulate in Istanbul seeking documents he needed to get married. According to reports citing Turkish government and U.S. intelligence sources, the Virginia resident never left the consulate, where he was ambushed by Saudi agents, tortured and murdered, and his body dismembered.Trump has resisted calls by U.S. lawmakers to impose sanctions on Saudi Arabia in retaliation for the journalist's apparent death, comparing global condemnation of the Gulf kingdom to accusations of sexual misconduct leveled against U.S. Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh. Trump told the Associated Press: "Here we go again with, you know, you're guilty until proven innocent. I don't like that. We just went through that with Justice Kavanaugh and he was innocent all the way as far as I'm concerned."

Fraudulent promotion circulating on Facebook offering fake coupons for Home Depot.

['Rumor: Home Depot is giving out coupons to Facebook users.']

In May 2015, a fraudulent offer for $200 Home Depot coupons began circulating on Facebook. The message contained a link that redirected bargain hunters to a website adorned with Home Depot's logo, which had nothing to do with the real Home Depot. The $200 Home Depot coupon scam is very similar to other schemes that targeted Costco, Amazon, 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 across the Internet. Second, they direct people to complete a survey that extracts personal information such as email addresses, telephone numbers, dates of birth, and credit card numbers. Lastly, these scams never end with "free" rewards, because users must first agree to sign up for several costly, difficult-to-cancel "Reward Offers" hidden in the fine print to claim their coupons. In April 2017, another Facebook coupon scam targeted Home Depot. In that iteration, the chain was purportedly doling out $50 coupons "to celebrate Mother's Day," and links directed users to www.homedepot.com-grabitnow.us (a URL clearly unaffiliated with the legitimate Home Depot website). Home Depot did not address the 2017 Facebook coupon scam on their social media channels as of April 24, 2017, but it was nevertheless clearly not a legitimate promotion affiliated with the chain. The Better Business Bureau provided these three tips to identify scams on Facebook: Don't believe what you see. It's easy to steal the colors, logos, and headers 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.

['banking']

False

The $200 Home Depot coupon scam is very similar to other schemes that targeted Costco, Amazon, 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 survey that extracts personal information such as email addresses, telephone numbers, dates of birth and credit card numbers. Lastly, these scams never end with a "free" rewards, because users must first agree to sign up for several costly, difficult-to-cancel "Reward Offers" hidden in the fine print to claim their coupons.In April 2017, another Facebook coupon scam targeted Home Depot. In that iteration the chain was purportedly doling out $50 coupons "to celebrate Mother's Day, and links directed users to www.homedepot.com-grabitnow.us (a URL clearly unaffiliated with the legitimate Home Depot website):Home Depot didn't address the 2017 Facebook coupon scam on their social media channels as of 24 April 2017, but it was nevertheless clearly not a legitimate promotion affiliated with the chain. The Better Business Bureau gave these three tips to identify scams on Facebook:

Hulk Hogan Death Hoax

["Wrestler Hulk Hogan is not dead; he's the target of yet another celebrity death hoax."]

In August 2014, Facebook users begin seeing posts that featured what looked to be an image from a video of pro wrestler Hulk Hogan bloody and prone, with text indicating that "Hulk Hogan died after having a deadly head shot today as revenge": Is this true? R.I.P Hulk Hogan died after having a deadly head shot today as revenge However, no matter how often this hoax is recirculated on social media, Hulk Hogan remains alive, and no such bloody video of him exists to be seen. As of 20 November 2017, Hogan was still well enough to be commenting on that day's destruction of the Georgia Dome: Georgia Dome The first time the Georgia Dome exploded was Hollywood Hogan vs @goldberg. Now they had to implode it. They should have just called me and Bill again brother. HH pic.twitter.com/A9n3hr18Jl @goldberg pic.twitter.com/A9n3hr18Jl Hulk Hogan (@HulkHogan) November 20, 2017 November 20, 2017 (The bloodied photo of Hulk Hogan actually came from a 2009 promotional 'incident' in Australia when Hogan was 'attacked' by fellow wrestler Ric Flair.) incident Users who did click through on such links were taken to a faux Facebook page which eventually led them down the trail of the usual survey scam, directing them to "like" or "share" links with their Facebook friends and complete online surveys, all with the goal of getting them to enrich scammers by disclosing sensitive personal information, spreading malware, buying products, and signing up for costly, difficult-to-cancel services. survey scam

['share']

False

However, no matter how often this hoax is recirculated on social media, Hulk Hogan remains alive, and no such bloody video of him exists to be seen. As of 20 November 2017, Hogan was still well enough to be commenting on that day's destruction of the Georgia Dome:The first time the Georgia Dome exploded was Hollywood Hogan vs @goldberg. Now they had to implode it. They should have just called me and Bill again brother. HH pic.twitter.com/A9n3hr18Jl Hulk Hogan (@HulkHogan) November 20, 2017

Was there an alleged increase in U.S. Sen. Mitch McConnell's net worth by approximately $2.4 million annually over the span of ten years?

['A meme based on a 2014 campaign ad has continued to make the online rounds years later.']

In late February 2019, a misleading meme was circulated on Facebook that led viewers to ask whether U.S. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky had mysteriously amassed vast wealth in yearly increments to the tune of $2.4 million while in office: As Senate Majority Leader, McConnell received an annual salary of $193,400, but the Kentucky Republican reported an influx of family wealth between $5 million and $25 million in 2008, according to his financial disclosures. That influx was the result of an inheritance his wife received upon the death of her mother, and that information has been part of public discourse since 2014, when it became campaign fodder for McConnell's Democratic opponent, Allison Lundergan Grimes: salary Although the meme and the campaign ad upon which it was likely based were set up to make it seem as if McConnell's wealth increase were the result of his role in the Senate and thus involved unethical or illegal activities, most of his net worth actually derives from his wife, Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao, who hails from a wealthy business family and married McConnell in 1993. Chao is the daughter of James S.C. and Ruth Mulan Chu Chao. Her father is the founder of the New York-based international shipping and trading company Foremost Group, an organization her sister, Angela, chairs. How wealthy is the Chao family? Wealthy enough to have bestowed Harvard Business School with a $40 million gift in 2012. chairs gift According to the non-profit government transparency organization Center for Responsive Politics, McConnell's net worth jumped from an estimated $7.8 million in 2007 to $17 million in 2008, owing entirely to a tax-exempt, money market fund in an account he held jointly with his wife: 2008 As the Washington Post reported in 2014, McConnell's increase in wealth reflected inheritance mone Chao received when her mother passed away in 2007: reported Thats almost a sevenfold increase in 10 years. McConnell has quadrupled his net worth since 2007, when it was $7.8 million. So what happened in 2008? His financial disclosure form tells the storysuddenly there appeared a tax-exempt money market fund, valued at between $5 million and $25 million, listed as a gift from a filers relative. (Look at Line 2 and then Line 3.) Indeed, a McConnell spokesman confirms that this was an inheritance for McConnells wife, former Labor Secretary Elaine Chao, after her mother died in 2007. Chao, who married McConnell in 1993, earns significant income on her own, serving on corporate boards, and has at least $1 million in a Vanguard 500 Index Fund. (Since these shares are in her name, McConnell only needs to report they have a minimum value of $1 million.) The Center for Responsive Politics estimated McConnell's net worth in 2015, the most recent figure available, to be nearly $27 million. 2015 Kessler, Glenn. "How Did Mitch McConnells Net Worth Soar?" The Washington Post. 22 May 2014. Newmyer, Tory. "The Secret to Mitch McConnell's Millions." Fortune. 20 March 2014.

['profit']

NEI

As Senate Majority Leader, McConnell received an annual salary of $193,400, but the Kentucky Republican reported an influx of family wealth between $5 million and $25 million in 2008, according to his financial disclosures. That influx was the result of an inheritance his wife received upon the death of her mother, and that information has been part of public discourse since 2014, when it became campaign fodder for McConnell's Democratic opponent, Allison Lundergan Grimes:Chao is the daughter of James S.C. and Ruth Mulan Chu Chao. Her father is the founder of the New York-based international shipping and trading company Foremost Group, an organization her sister, Angela, chairs. How wealthy is the Chao family? Wealthy enough to have bestowed Harvard Business School with a $40 million gift in 2012.According to the non-profit government transparency organization Center for Responsive Politics, McConnell's net worth jumped from an estimated $7.8 million in 2007 to $17 million in 2008, owing entirely to a tax-exempt, money market fund in an account he held jointly with his wife:As the Washington Post reported in 2014, McConnell's increase in wealth reflected inheritance mone Chao received when her mother passed away in 2007:The Center for Responsive Politics estimated McConnell's net worth in 2015, the most recent figure available, to be nearly $27 million.

Will U.S. Citizens Need a New Visa to Visit Europe Starting in 2021?

['What exactly is the European Union planning? And what, if anything, did they announce in March 2019?']

In March 2019, news reports emerged warning readers in the United States that they would need a new kind of visa to visit Europe beginning in 2021, prompting inquiries from our readers about the veracity of those claims. On 9 March, CNN published an article with the headline, "United States citizens will need a visa to visit Europe starting in 2021," which went on: article "U.S. citizens traveling to Europe without a visa will be a thing of the past come 2021. The European Union announced on Friday that American travelers will need a new type of visa a European Travel Information and Authorization System or ETIAS to visit the European Schengen Area. The Schengen Area is a zone of 26 European countries that do not have internal borders and allow people to move between them freely, including countries like Spain, France, Greece, Germany, Italy and Poland. Currently, U.S. citizens can travel to Europe for up to 90 days without a visa." That article was subsequently syndicated by other news websites, as part of CNN's wire service. other news websites In fact, the European Travel Information and Authorization System is not a visa. It is a new kind of travel authorization similar to the ESTA program available to visitors to the United States that citizens of certain non-European countries will need in order to make short visits to some European countries. ESTA CNN quickly corrected the errors in its original article, but some versions published by other websites remained uncorrected, as of 15 March 2019. corrected The European Travel Information and Authorization System was first announced in September 2016, not on 8 March 2019 as CNN's article originally claimed, by Jean-Claude Juncker, president of the European Commission, a body that is akin to the executive branch of the European Union (E.U.) In his 2016 "State of the Union" speech, Juncker said: speech "We will defend our borders, as well, with strict controls, adopted by the end of the year, on everyone crossing them. Every time someone enters or exits the E.U., there will be a record of when, where and why. By November, we will propose a European Travel Information System an automated system to determine who will be allowed to travel to Europe. This way we will know who is traveling to Europe before they even get here. And we all need that information. How many times have we heard stories over the last months that the information existed in one database in one country, but it never found its way to the authority in another that could have made the difference?" Over the following two years, the proposal went through the E.U.'s somewhat complicated ratification processes, ultimately gaining the approval of the European Parliament in July 2018 and the European Council in September 2018. On 19 September 2018, the regulations establishing ETIAS were published in the Official Journal of the E.U. ratification published In response to our inquiries, a spokesperson for Frontex, the E.U.'s Border and Coast Guard Agency that oversees ETIAS, told us that since September 2018, "no significant new developments" emerged in relation to the program, which the spokesperson said is still on track to be launched in 2021. For that reason, it's not clear what prompted the March 2019 news reports about ETIAS. CNN's original article claimed that the E.U. had "announced" what the article mistakenly called a "new type of visa" on 8 March, linking to a post on the website Etiasvisa.com, which bore the headline "ETIAS Visa Waiver for Americans." original article post However, as we have explained, the ETIAS program was first announced in 2016 and officially ratified in 2018. Furthermore, the spokesperson for Frontex confirmed that Etiasvisa.com is not operated by the European Commission or any other E.U. agency or body. Along with the website Etias.com, it is an unofficial, privately run site. As of March 2019, the citizens of 60 non-European countries do not need a visa for short visits to a group of 26 European countries known as the "Schengen Area" (named after the town of Schengen, Luxembourg, where the 1985 agreement that formed the Schengen Area was signed). agreement Historically and in principle, travelers moving between Schengen states saw no internal border checks, although in recent years some Schengen countries have availed themselves of a controversial, temporary reinstatement of internal Schengen border controls. reinstatement The 60 "visa-exempt" countries include the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Mexico and several Asian, Pacific and South American nations. The full list is available here. here The Schengen Area is composed of 22 E.U. member states (including Germany, France, Spain, and Italy) as well as four non-E.U. countries: Norway, Iceland, Switzerland and Liechtenstein. Two E.U. member states, Ireland and the U.K., have opted out of the Schengen agreement. Four other E.U. member states Bulgaria, Romania, Cyprus and Croatia have not yet joined the Schengen Area, although Bulgaria and Romania are currently in the process of being admitted. This official map outlines the Schengen Area: admitted official map Travelers from one of the 60 visa-exempt countries can enter and move throughout the Schengen Area for a maximum of 90 days in any 180-day period, provided they have a valid passport and border agents don't determine that they present a threat to public safety and security. Those traveling from one of the roughly 100 "visa-obliged" countries (largely in Africa and the Middle East) must obtain a visa in advance. This "short stay" visa system allows the holder to enter and move throughout the Schengen Area (again, for a maximum of 90 days in any 180-day period). However, it also allows E.U. member states to obtain advance information about would-be visitors and make a case-by-case decision on whether to admit them into their country (and thereby, into the Schengen Area), a capability that is inherently advantageous from a security point of view. By contrast, E.U. member states and E.U. authorities generally gain little advance knowledge about the arrival of visitors from visa-exempt nations, presenting a security liability that the ETIAS program was designed to address. A European Parliament briefing document explains the impetus behind ETIAS: document "For the purposes of combating serious crime and terrorism, law enforcement authorities can obtain information on visa holders from the visa information system (VIS). For visa-exempt travelers, this is only possible if they arrive by air, as, according to the PNR Directive, data on such travelers are transferred to the Member States law enforcement authorities to process for the purpose of preventing, detecting, investigating and prosecuting terrorist offences and serious crime. However, for visa-exempt passengers arriving on foot or by car, bus or train, no such comparable information exists prior to their arrival." According to a fact sheet published by the European Commission, the basic process of applying for travel authorization under ETIAS should work as follows: fact sheet Further details about the planned workings of the ETIAS program can be found on this European Commission fact sheet. fact sheet Johnson, Lauren M.; Holcombe, Madeline. "United States Citizens Will Need a Visa to Visit Europe Starting in 2021." CNN. 9 March 2019. Juncker, Jean-Claude. "State of the Union 2016: Towards a Better Europe -- a Europe That Protects, Empowers and Defends." European Commission. 14 September 2016. Radjenovic, Anja. "European Travel Information and Authorization System (ETIAS)." European Parliamentary Research Service. 18 October 2018. Official Journal of the European Union. "Regulation (EU) 2018/1240, Regulation (EU) 2018/1241." 19 September 2018. Directorate-General for Migration and Home Affairs. "Temporary Reintroduction of Border Control." European Commission. 15 March 2019. Directorate-General for Migration and Home Affairs. "SchengenArea." European Commission. 15 March 2019. European Commission. "Fact Sheet -- Security Union: A European Travel Information and Authorization System." 5 July 2018.

['liability']

NEI

On 9 March, CNN published an article with the headline, "United States citizens will need a visa to visit Europe starting in 2021," which went on:That article was subsequently syndicated by other news websites, as part of CNN's wire service.In fact, the European Travel Information and Authorization System is not a visa. It is a new kind of travel authorization similar to the ESTA program available to visitors to the United States that citizens of certain non-European countries will need in order to make short visits to some European countries.CNN quickly corrected the errors in its original article, but some versions published by other websites remained uncorrected, as of 15 March 2019. In his 2016 "State of the Union" speech, Juncker said:Over the following two years, the proposal went through the E.U.'s somewhat complicated ratification processes, ultimately gaining the approval of the European Parliament in July 2018 and the European Council in September 2018. On 19 September 2018, the regulations establishing ETIAS were published in the Official Journal of the E.U.For that reason, it's not clear what prompted the March 2019 news reports about ETIAS. CNN's original article claimed that the E.U. had "announced" what the article mistakenly called a "new type of visa" on 8 March, linking to a post on the website Etiasvisa.com, which bore the headline "ETIAS Visa Waiver for Americans."As of March 2019, the citizens of 60 non-European countries do not need a visa for short visits to a group of 26 European countries known as the "Schengen Area" (named after the town of Schengen, Luxembourg, where the 1985 agreement that formed the Schengen Area was signed). Historically and in principle, travelers moving between Schengen states saw no internal border checks, although in recent years some Schengen countries have availed themselves of a controversial, temporary reinstatement of internal Schengen border controls. The 60 "visa-exempt" countries include the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Mexico and several Asian, Pacific and South American nations. The full list is available here. Four other E.U. member states Bulgaria, Romania, Cyprus and Croatia have not yet joined the Schengen Area, although Bulgaria and Romania are currently in the process of being admitted. This official map outlines the Schengen Area:By contrast, E.U. member states and E.U. authorities generally gain little advance knowledge about the arrival of visitors from visa-exempt nations, presenting a security liability that the ETIAS program was designed to address. A European Parliament briefing document explains the impetus behind ETIAS:According to a fact sheet published by the European Commission, the basic process of applying for travel authorization under ETIAS should work as follows:Further details about the planned workings of the ETIAS program can be found on this European Commission fact sheet.

Is Elon Musk in possession of a Bachelor's degree in Physics?

["The truthfulness of Musk's claim that he received a bachelor's degree in physics from the University of Pennsylvania has been challenged by critics."]

A thread authored by the Twitter account "Capitol Hunters" went viral in December 2022 when it alleged that billionaire Elon Musk lied about his educational background, specifically regarding a Bachelor of Arts degree in physics from the University of Pennsylvania, as well as his claim of briefly attending a Ph.D. program at Stanford. This article explores the controversy surrounding the physics degree. In early biographies, Musk stated he received degrees in economics and physics from the University of Pennsylvania in 1995. In a 2002 SEC filing for the company PayPal, for example, Musk provided information regarding his educational and professional background: Mr. Musk co-founded Zip2 Corp. in 1995, where he worked in various roles, including Chairman, CEO, and CTO from 1995 to February 1999. Mr. Musk received a B.S. in Physics from the University of Pennsylvania and a B.S. in Economics from The Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania in 1995. In a 2007 lawsuit alleging that Musk stole business secrets, internet advertising entrepreneur John O'Reilly sued Musk over allegedly false statements Musk made to secure a business meeting with him in 1995. In that filing, O'Reilly claimed that Musk falsely claimed to have a degree in Physics from the University of Pennsylvania that he obtained in 1995, when in fact he had no such degree and the only degree he held was obtained later. Upon information and belief, Musk's only known undergraduate degree is a Bachelor of Science in Economics, obtained from the University of Pennsylvania in 1997. The suit, which ended with a ruling in Musk's favor, entered into the public record copies of Musk's diplomas. These documents were then used in a 2009 lawsuit filed by Tesla founder Martin Eberhard, who accused Musk of "taking control of the company [Tesla], orchestrating his ouster in 2007, and attempting to 'rewrite history' to take credit for developing the pioneering electric Roadster that the two men worked together to create." The case was settled out of court, but Musk spoke about his academic background during a deposition compelled by this case. Musk, in that instance, equivocated about the timing of when he actually received these degrees. Musk stated, "I should be clear about that. So, I obtained one graduate degree in Business and Physics but had an agreement with the University of Pennsylvania. They said that I could complete the English and History credit when I was no longer a student at Stanford. So they would delay transmitting the degree until I had done that." This explanation also appears in an early edition of a biography of Musk written by reporter Ashlee Vance. Vance was unable to confirm the specific academic timeline in Musk's early biographies. In an appendix, however, Vance explained his research on the topic and included Musk's explanation for the discrepancy in dates and degrees. While playing detective, O'Reilly unearthed some information about Musk's past that is arguably more interesting than the allegations in the lawsuit. He found that the University of Pennsylvania granted Musk's degrees in 1997, two years later than what Musk had cited. I called Penn's registrar and verified these findings. Copies of Musk's records show that he received a dual degree in economics and physics in May 1997. Musk had an explanation for the unusual timing of his degrees from Penn. "I had a History and an English credit that I agreed with Penn I would do at Stanford," he said. "Then I put Stanford on deferment. Later, Penn's requirements changed so that you don't need the English and History credit. So then they awarded me the degree in '97 when it was clear I was not going to go to grad school, and their requirement was no longer there." "I finished everything that was needed for a Wharton degree in '94. They'd actually mailed me a Wharton degree. I decided to spend another year and finished the physics degree, but then there was that History and English credit issue. I was only reminded about the History and English requirement when I tried to get an H-1B visa and called the school to get a copy of my graduation certificate, and they said I hadn't graduated. Then they looked into the new requirements and said it was fine." The explanations for the delay in degree granting are not entirely consistent, the Capitol Hunters Twitter account noted, and that account has also called into question the existence of the "new requirements" regarding History and English that would have facilitated Musk's being granted a degree after the fact. Another area of controversy concerns the appearance and nature of the physics degree. Certificates of both a Penn economics degree and an alleged physics degree are included in documents filed as part of the O'Reilly and Eberhard lawsuits. While the economics diploma filed as evidence specifically indicates the academic discipline, name, and other details involved in the degree, the physics diploma appears to be largely blank and indicates no specific concentration. The University of Pennsylvania Department of Physics and Astronomy does describe Musk as an alumnus. In 2009, the same year the dispute with Eberhard was litigated, Musk gave Penn's Center for Particle Cosmology a "generous endowment," allowing for an annual "Elon Musk Public Lecture." The Elon Musk Public Lecture is made possible through a generous endowment gifted to the Center for Particle Cosmology in 2009 - its inaugural year. Mr. Musk is an alumnus of the Department of Physics and Astronomy at Penn and a proud advocate for the preparation that a physics education provides in many different careers. In 2019, Aaron Greenspan, owner of the legal website Plainsite, as well as a frequent critic of and litigant against Elon Musk, asked Penn for a statement on Musk's degrees. In response, the university's public affairs office stated that Elon Musk earned a B.A. in physics and a B.S. in economics (concentrations: finance and entrepreneurial management) from the University of Pennsylvania. The degrees were awarded on May 19, 1997. The University of Pennsylvania considers Musk to be a graduate of both the economics department and the physics department. Musk's past statements about his educational background, however, have been, at best, imprecise. He has claimed on several occasions to have received a physics degree in 1995, a claim that was never fully true but which may have aided Musk's early business career.

['credit']

True

A thread authored by the Twitter account "Capitol Hunters" went viral in December 2022 when it alleged that billionaire Elon Musk lied about his educational background, specifically regarding a bachelor of arts degree in physics from the University of Pennsylvania, as well as his claim of attending, briefly, a Ph.D. program at Stanford. This article explores the controversy around the physics degree.In early biographies, Musk stated he received degrees in economics and physics from the University of Pennsylvania in 1995. In a 2002 SEC filing for the company PayPal, for example, Musk provided this information regarding his educational and professional background:In a 2007 lawsuit alleging that Musk stole business secrets, internet advertising entrepreneur John O'Reilly sued Musk over allegedly false statements Musk made to secure a business meeting with him in 1995. In that filing, O'Reilly claimed:The suit, which ended with a ruling in Musk's favor, entered into the public record copies of Musk's diplomas. These documents were then used in a 2009 lawsuit filed by Tesla founder Martin Eberhard, who accused Musk of "taking control of the company [Tesla], orchestrating his ouster in 2007 and attempting to 'rewrite history' to take credit for developing the pioneering electric Roadster the two men worked together to create."The case was settled out of court, but Musk spoke about his academic background during a deposition compelled by this case. Musk, in that instance, equivocated about the timing of when he actually received these degrees.This explanation also comes up in an early edition of a biography of Musk written by reporter Ashlee Vance. Vance was unable to confirm the specific academic timeline in Musk's early biographies. In an appendix, however, Vance explained his research on the topic and included Musk's explanation for the discrepancy in dates and degrees :The explanations for the delay in degree granting are not entirely consistent, the Capitol Hunters Twitter account noted, and that account has also called into question the existence of the "new requirements" regarding History and English that would have facilitated Musk's being granted a degree after the fact.Another area of controversy concerns the appearance and nature of the physics degree, specifically. Certificates of both a Penn economics degree and an alleged physics degree are included in documents filed as part of the O'Reilly and Eberhard lawsuits. While the economics diploma filed as evidence specifically indicates the academic discipline, name, and other details involved in the degree, the physics diploma appears to be a largely blank diploma and indicates no specific concentration:The University of Pennsylvania Department of Physics and Astronomy does describe Musk as an alumnus. In 2009 the same year the dispute with Eberhard was litigated Musk gave Penn's Center for Particle Cosmology a "generous endowment" allowing for an annual "Elon Musk Public Lecture":In 2019, Aaron Greenspan, owner of the legal website Plainsite, as well as a frequent critic of, and litigant against, Elon Musk, asked Penn for a statement on Musk's degrees. In response, the university's public affairs office stated that:

No, This Wind Turbine Didn't Melt in Texas Heat

["It's certainly hot in Texas, but not quite that hot."]

In mid-June 2021, Snopes readers inquired about memes posted on social media that purportedly showed a wind turbine that had melted in the scorching Texas heat (some versions sent in by readers claimed the turbine had melted in Nebraska). The National Weather Service in Houston tweeted an image of the turbine in question on June 14, 2021. The turbine, located in Wadsworth, a community southwest of Houston, was damaged by powerful winds during a storm in the area. Claims about turbines failing during extreme weather events in Texas have been a topic of interest in the past. In February 2021, conservative commentators and legislators falsely claimed that frozen turbines played a major role in the loss of power to millions of Texans as they experienced record cold temperatures. As we reported at that time, half of Texas' wind turbines went offline during the cold snap, but they accounted for only a small fraction of the power outage, which was mostly caused by the failure of systems producing power from natural gas, coal, and nuclear sources.

['interest']

False

In mid-June 2021, Snopes readers inquired about memes posted to social media that purportedly showed a wind turbine that had melted in scorching Texas heat (some versions sent in by readers claimed the turbine was melted in Nebraska).Claims about turbines failing during extreme weather events in Texas have been a topic of interest in the past. In February 2021, conservative commentators and legislators falsely claimed that frozen turbines played a major role in the loss of power to millions of Texans as they experienced record cold temperatures.

Facebook Listens?

["The Facebook 'Identify TV and Music' app uses your phone's microphone to listen, but it doesn't record your personal conversations."]

In May 2014, Facebook announced that they would be rolling out an "Identify TV and Music" feature that would allow users accessing the social media platform through their cell phones to identify and tag music or television programs playing in their area. When a user begins to compose a status update, Facebook activates the phone's microphone, filters out live conversations, and attempts to detect and identify audio programming. If a matching song is found, Facebook includes a sample of the music in the status; if a matching television program is found, Facebook labels the specific season and episode "so you can avoid any spoilers." When writing a status update, if you choose to turn the feature on, you'll have the option to use your phone's microphone to identify what song is playing or what show or movie is on TV. This means that if you want to share that you're listening to your favorite Beyoncé track or watching the season premiere of Game of Thrones, you can do it quickly and easily, without typing. If you share music, your friends can see a 30-second preview of the song. For TV shows, the story in the News Feed will highlight the specific season and episode you're watching, so you can avoid any spoilers and join in conversations with your friends after you've caught up. Facebook stated that the digital fingerprinting feature would be opt-in only, meaning users would have to give the program permission to start. Once activated, an icon on the face of the phone would indicate that the microphone was active and the phone was listening. Users who opted in could still choose to turn off the feature on a post-by-post basis. (Audio fingerprinting would only be available in the United States and only via iOS and Android mobile apps; it would not function if Facebook were accessed through a browser.) Facebook's announcement was later updated to address rumors that the new app would listen in on and store user conversations: Myth: The feature listens to and stores your conversations. Fact: Nope, no matter how interesting your conversation, this feature does not store sound or recordings. Facebook isn't listening to or storing your conversations. Here's how it works: if you choose to turn the feature on, when you write a status update, the app converts any sound into an audio fingerprint on your phone. This fingerprint is sent to our servers to try and match it against our database of audio and TV fingerprints. By design, we do not store fingerprints from your device for any amount of time. In any event, the fingerprints can't be reversed into the original audio because they don't contain enough information. Myth: Facebook is always listening using your microphone. Fact: Nope, if you choose to turn this feature on, it will only use your microphone (for 15 seconds) when you're actually writing a status update to try and match music and TV. Two years later, a similar rumor erupted, holding that Facebook was listening to user conversations in order to better target advertising and content to them.

['share']

False

In May 2014 Facebook announced they would be rolling out an "Identify TV and Music" feature that would allow users who access the social media platform through their cell phones to identify and tag music or television programs playing in their area. When a user begins to compose a status update, Facebook will activate the phone's microphone, filter out live conversations, and try to detect and identify audio programming. If a matching song is found, Facebook will include a sample of the music in the status; if a matching television program is found, Facebook will label the specific season and episode "so you can avoid any spoilers":Two years later, a similar rumor erupted, holding that Facebook was listening to user conversations in order to better target advertising and content to them.

Is Snapchat creating a database of facial recognition for the government?

['Online conspiracy theorists claim Snapchat\'s image filter feature called "Lenses" is covertly amassing a database of users\' faces to share with law enforcement agencies.']

One of the more whimsical messaging options offered by Snapchat a social media app for mobile devices introduced in 2011 is the ability to personalize selfies in real time and share them instantly with other users, a feature that has at once contributed to the app's immense popularity (Snapchat boasts an estimated 166 million users daily) and raised privacy concerns among some of its customers. Snapchat's rotating toolbox of image filters, called Lenses, enables users to manipulate photos and videos to humorous effect, as seen in these examples shared publicly on Instagram by celebrity Snapchatter Chrissy Teigen: Cute and innocent though it may appear, the feature has become the target of conspiracy theorists claiming that Snapchat's corporate owner, Snap Inc., uses it to collect facial recognition data which it allegedly stores and shares with law enforcement agencies such as the FBI and CIA. We've found examples of such rumors dating back to Fall 2015 (soon after the Lenses feature was officially rolled out): you guys are all swooning over the snapchat filters... And The FBI is getting the most extensive facial recognition library ever TEENWOLF (@TEENWOLFREMIX) October 3, 2015 October 3, 2015 It wasn't until April of the following year that the rumors reached takeoff speed, however, thanks largely to a tweet composed by hip hop artist, songwriter, and unabashed flat-earth theorist B.o.B to his roughly two million followers: tweet flat-earth when you realize all the snap chat filters are really building a facial recognition database ? B.o.B (@bobatl) April 16, 2016 April 16, 2016 In May 2016, with civil cases already pending against Facebook and Google alleging unauthorized use of facial recognition technology, a class action lawsuit was filed by two Snapchat users in Illinois complaining that the app violated their rights under the state's Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA) by failing to obtain adequate permission before gathering and storing their "biometric identifiers and biometric information". lawsuit BIPA The company flatly denied it: denied Contrary to the claims of this frivolous lawsuit, we are very careful not to collect, store, or obtain any biometric information or identifiers about our community. The class action suit was eventually dismissed in favor of arbitration in September 2016, but as of this writing the case remains unresolved. Crucial to Snapchat's defense is their position, as stated in the Privacy Center of the company's web site, that the app relies on object recognition, not facial recognition, to make Lenses work: arbitration stated Have you ever wondered how Lenses make your eyes well up with tears or rainbows come out your mouth? Some of the magic behind Lenses is object recognition. Object recognition is an algorithm designed to understand the general nature of things that appear in an image. It lets us know that a nose is a nose or an eye is an eye. But object recognition isnt the same as facial recognition. While Lenses can recognize faces in general, they can't recognize a specific face. If it's true that Lenses can't recognize (i.e., identify) specific faces, then the claim that the app produces anything qualifying as a "biometric identifier" under Illinois law is seriously in doubt. (The district judge in Illinois overseeing the Google facial recognition case previously defined "biometric identifier" as "a set of biology-based measurements ... used to identify a person.) case As to the wider claim that Snapchat is building a "facial recognition database," the distinction between object and facial recognition, at minimum, places a burden of proof on those trumpeting the claim to show that the app is capable of identifying specific faces in the first place. If this explanation (provided by the web site Vox) of how the software works is accurate, Snapchat doesn't need to be able to identify specific faces to accomplish the task. It has to recognize a face as a face, and identify the parts of a face as the nose, eyes, ears, chin, etc., but it doesn't have to recognize who the face belongs to: this Moreover, Snapchat's Privacy Policy states that the company neither collects nor permanently stores user-created content (meaning photos and videos) let alone preserves such items in a database: states Snapchat lets you capture what its like to live in the moment. On our end, that means that we automatically delete the content of your Snaps (the photo and video messages that you send your friends) from our servers after we detect that a Snap has been opened by all recipients or has expired. And although the policy further acknowledges that Snap Inc. may share users' personal information "to comply with any valid legal process, governmental request, or applicable law, rule, or regulation" (and transparency reports show that the company has indeed complied with such requests in the past), they can't grant the FBI (or any other agency) access to a "facial recognition database" that doesn't exist. reports Some rumors die hard, however. An updated variant that cropped up in early 2017 brought two new claims to the mix: one, that the FBI literally created Snapchat's image filtering software (and alleged facial recognition database); and two, that there is a smoking gun to prove it namely U.S. patent #9396354: granted According to an analysis by Sophos' Naked Security blogger Alison Booth, the patent proposes using facial recognition software to identify individual subjects in photos, whereupon the latter would be modified and/or their distribution restricted in accordance with the subjects' pre-established privacy settings. analysis There is a catch. Implementation of the process would, of course, require amassing a facial recognition database. "For facial recognition to work," writes Booth, "Snapchat would need to store images of all users that sign up to the feature as a reference image to compare photos against." So, there it is a "facial recognition database" of the sort conspiracy theorists have been going on about since 2015, except that Snapchat has not, to date, implemented such a feature (a fact we were able to confirm with the company), nor is there evidence that the FBI (or any other law enforcement agency) was involved in creating it, nor does the patent itself mention sharing facial recognition data with government entities. Despite finding no legitimate basis for the claim that Snapchat is currently engaged in collecting, storing, or sharing facial recognition data on its users, we do not wish to downplay the increasing prevalence of facial recognition technology in both commercial and government applications, nor the privacy issues this raises. Sen. Al Franken (D-Minnesota) articulated some of these issues in a statement announcing the release of a 2015 Government Accountability Office (GAO) report on the privacy implications of the technology: report The newly released report raises serious concerns about how companies are collecting, using, and storing our most sensitive personal information. I believe that all Americans have a fundamental right to privacy, which is why it's important that, at the very least, the tech industry adopts strong, industry-wide standards for facial recognition technology. But what we really need are federal standards that address facial recognition privacy by enhancing our consumer privacy framework. The tech industry has yet to address these concerns to the satisfaction of consumer privacy watchdogs, however, nor has Congress made progress toward establishing the federal standards Franken called for. Thus far, issue has been dealt with primarily in the court system via cases such as the aforementioned BIPA class action lawsuits against Facebook and Google. watchdogs lawsuits One of the ironies of the false alarms about Snapchat's alleged sharing of facial recognition data with the FBI is that the agency already maintains a biometric data network comprising the facial images of more than 117 million Americans (about half the U.S. adult population, and growing), mostly drawn from state DMV databases and other non-criminal sources. A 2016 report by the Georgetown Law Center for Privacy and Technology warned that the technology is both error-prone, with a disproportionate impact on communities of color, and almost totally unregulated. already report disproportionate In testimony before a Senate Judiciary subcommittee hearing chaired by Sen. Franken in 2012, Electronic Frontier Foundation attorney Jennifer Lynch urged Congress to act sooner rather than later to protect the biometric privacy of all Americans: testimony Face recognition and its accompanying privacy concerns are not going away. Given this, it is imperative that government act now to limit unnecessary biometrics collection; instill proper protections on data collection, transfer, and search; ensure accountability; mandate independent oversight; require appropriate legal process before government collection; and define clear rules for data sharing at all levels. This is important to preserve the democratic and constitutional values that are bedrock to American society. Booth, Alison. "Snapchat Turns Facial Recognition Technology on Its Head." Naked Security. 20 July 2016. Danley-Greiner, Kristin. "Snapchat Defends Procedures After Facial Recognition Class Action." Legal Newsline. 2 September 2016. Garvie, Clare et al. "The Perpetual Line-up: Unregulated Police Face Recognition in America." Georgetown Law Center on Privacy & Technology. 18 October 2016. Graham, Meg. "Illinois Biometrics Lawsuits May Help Define Rules for Facebook, Google." Chicago Tribune. 13 January 2017. Korte, Amy. "Federal Court in Illinois Rules Biometric Privacy Lawsuit Against Google Can Proceed." Illinois Policy. 8 March 2017. Maass, Dave. "Memo to the DOJ: Facial Recognition's Threat to Privacy Is Worse than Anyone Thought." Electronic Frontier Foundation. 18 October 2016. Mathies, Daven. "The Incredible Underlying Technology of Snapchat's Selfie Lenses." Digital Trends. 1 July 2016. Nelson, Steven. "Half of U.S. Adults Are in Police Facial Recognition Networks." US News & World Report. 18 October 2016. Roberts, Jeff John. "Tech Industry's Facial Recognition Plan Bashed by Privacy Groups." Fortune. 16 June 2016. Thielman, Sam. "FBI Using Vast Public Photo Data and Iffy Facial Recognition Tech to Find Criminals." The Guardian. 15 June 2016. Trujillo, Mario. "Facial Recognition Quietly Taking Hold." The Hill. 1 August 2015. Welinder, Yana. "EFF Urges Congress to Protect Privacy in Face Recognition." Electronic Frontier Foundation. 18 July 2012. Yakowicz, Will. "Snapchat Sued Under Illinois Biometric Information Usage Law." Inc. 18 July 2016. Electronic Frontier Foundation. "Testimony of Jennifer Lynch to the Senate Committee on the Judiciary Subcommittee on Privacy, Technology, and the Law." 18 July 2012. Google. "Patent: Apparatus and Method for Automated Privacy Protection in Distributed Images - US 9396354 B1." 19 July 2016. Government Accounting Office. "Facial Recognition Technology: Commercial Uses, Privacy Issues, and Applicable Federal Law." 20 June 2015. U.S. Senate. "Sen. Franken: New Report on Facial Recognition Technology Highlights Lack of Privacy Standards." 30 July 2015. U.S. Senate. "Sen. Franken Releases Extensive Report Detailing Concerns with FBI Facial Recognition Program." 15 June 2016.

['share']

False

TEENWOLF (@TEENWOLFREMIX) October 3, 2015It wasn't until April of the following year that the rumors reached takeoff speed, however, thanks largely to a tweet composed by hip hop artist, songwriter, and unabashed flat-earth theorist B.o.B to his roughly two million followers: B.o.B (@bobatl) April 16, 2016In May 2016, with civil cases already pending against Facebook and Google alleging unauthorized use of facial recognition technology, a class action lawsuit was filed by two Snapchat users in Illinois complaining that the app violated their rights under the state's Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA) by failing to obtain adequate permission before gathering and storing their "biometric identifiers and biometric information".The company flatly denied it:The class action suit was eventually dismissed in favor of arbitration in September 2016, but as of this writing the case remains unresolved. Crucial to Snapchat's defense is their position, as stated in the Privacy Center of the company's web site, that the app relies on object recognition, not facial recognition, to make Lenses work:If it's true that Lenses can't recognize (i.e., identify) specific faces, then the claim that the app produces anything qualifying as a "biometric identifier" under Illinois law is seriously in doubt. (The district judge in Illinois overseeing the Google facial recognition case previously defined "biometric identifier" as "a set of biology-based measurements ... used to identify a person.)As to the wider claim that Snapchat is building a "facial recognition database," the distinction between object and facial recognition, at minimum, places a burden of proof on those trumpeting the claim to show that the app is capable of identifying specific faces in the first place. If this explanation (provided by the web site Vox) of how the software works is accurate, Snapchat doesn't need to be able to identify specific faces to accomplish the task. It has to recognize a face as a face, and identify the parts of a face as the nose, eyes, ears, chin, etc., but it doesn't have to recognize who the face belongs to:Moreover, Snapchat's Privacy Policy states that the company neither collects nor permanently stores user-created content (meaning photos and videos) let alone preserves such items in a database:And although the policy further acknowledges that Snap Inc. may share users' personal information "to comply with any valid legal process, governmental request, or applicable law, rule, or regulation" (and transparency reports show that the company has indeed complied with such requests in the past), they can't grant the FBI (or any other agency) access to a "facial recognition database" that doesn't exist.According to an analysis by Sophos' Naked Security blogger Alison Booth, the patent proposes using facial recognition software to identify individual subjects in photos, whereupon the latter would be modified and/or their distribution restricted in accordance with the subjects' pre-established privacy settings.Sen. Al Franken (D-Minnesota) articulated some of these issues in a statement announcing the release of a 2015 Government Accountability Office (GAO) report on the privacy implications of the technology:The tech industry has yet to address these concerns to the satisfaction of consumer privacy watchdogs, however, nor has Congress made progress toward establishing the federal standards Franken called for. Thus far, issue has been dealt with primarily in the court system via cases such as the aforementioned BIPA class action lawsuits against Facebook and Google.One of the ironies of the false alarms about Snapchat's alleged sharing of facial recognition data with the FBI is that the agency already maintains a biometric data network comprising the facial images of more than 117 million Americans (about half the U.S. adult population, and growing), mostly drawn from state DMV databases and other non-criminal sources. A 2016 report by the Georgetown Law Center for Privacy and Technology warned that the technology is both error-prone, with a disproportionate impact on communities of color, and almost totally unregulated.In testimony before a Senate Judiciary subcommittee hearing chaired by Sen. Franken in 2012, Electronic Frontier Foundation attorney Jennifer Lynch urged Congress to act sooner rather than later to protect the biometric privacy of all Americans:

Because of the 2011 debt ceiling fight, the stock market lost 2,000 points.

[]

If the nation hits the debt ceiling later this month without it being raised by Congress, economists predict a wide spread of economic harm: higher interest rates, lower economic growth and plunging consumer confidence in the United States and overseas. One particularly high-profile sign of economic distress would be a plummeting Dow Jones Industrial Average. During anappearanceon ABCsThis Week With George Stephanopoulos, Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., cited that scenario as one of the reasons why Congress should take action soon. Stephanopoulos asked Schumer whether both sides were posturing and playing with fire on the debt ceiling, which is the legal limit to how much debt the government can shoulder. Schumer said, You don't negotiate over something like the debt ceiling because -- at which point Stephanopoulos interjected, Other presidents have done it. Schumer responded, No. The one time that it was really done in this kind of way, (when it wasnt just) a deadline and you had to decide (on) abortion or something else, was in 2011. We went right up to the deadline. The stock market lost 2,000 points, $18 billion was lost by the American people. We wondered whether Schumer was right about the stock market losing 2,000 points. So we looked at historical data for the Dow Jones Industrial Average, the most popular measure of the stock market. On July 21, 2011, the Dowreached12,724 -- its high point in the months immediately preceding the debt ceiling fight. For the next 10 days, Congress squabbled over raising the debt ceiling. Then, between July 31 and Aug. 2, the White House and congressional leaders reached and implemented a deal that became known as the Budget Control Act of 2011. By Aug. 2, when the crisis was effectively over, the Dow stood at 11,866, a drop of 858 points. Thats less than the 2,000 points Schumer cited. However, the Dow continued to tumble for another two months, due in large part to repercussions of the debt ceiling debate, particularly the downgrading of the United States credit rating byStandard & Poorson Aug. 5. By Oct. 3, the Dow had bottomed out at 10,655 -- a decline of 2,069 points from its pre-debt ceiling peak, and its lowest level in about a year. So if you include the aftershocks of the debt ceiling fight, Schumer is correct that the Dow fell by 2,000 points. (You can see the decline as a line charthere.) That said, its also worth noting that the recovery was almost as quick as the decline. It took only until Jan. 25, 2012 -- about three and a half months after the low point -- for all of the pre-debt ceiling losses to be recouped. By Jan. 25, the Dow hit 12,758. And as Schumer was speaking onThis Week, the most recent Dow close was 15,072 -- an 18 percent increase over the pre-debt ceiling high, which had been about two years and three months earlier. Matt House, a spokesman for Schumer, said the Dows subsequent recovery is irrelevant. Of course (the Dow) came back, but that is of little comfort to anyone who was at or nearing retirement during those several months, he said. With 10,000 baby boomers retiring a day, that drop is incredibly important, and not to be trivialized.... And this is all from a default that didnt happen. Still, we think its important to note that the 2,000 points the Dow lost didnt stay off for years, or even permanently, as some viewers might assume. Our rating Schumer said that because of the 2011 debt ceiling fight, the stock market lost 2,000 points. If you count the aftermath of the deal that avoided a debt ceiling breach, which included a historic downgrade of the United States creditworthiness rating, then Schumer is right that the Dow fell by 2,000 points. Still, Schumer makes it sound as if the drop happened right away. Actually, it dropped at the time of fight and continued to drop for another two months after the United States' credit rating was downgraded. We rate Schumers claim Mostly True.

['National', 'Economy']

True

One particularly high-profile sign of economic distress would be a plummeting Dow Jones Industrial Average. During anappearanceon ABCsThis Week With George Stephanopoulos, Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., cited that scenario as one of the reasons why Congress should take action soon.On July 21, 2011, the Dowreached12,724 -- its high point in the months immediately preceding the debt ceiling fight. For the next 10 days, Congress squabbled over raising the debt ceiling. Then, between July 31 and Aug. 2, the White House and congressional leaders reached and implemented a deal that became known as the Budget Control Act of 2011. By Aug. 2, when the crisis was effectively over, the Dow stood at 11,866, a drop of 858 points.Thats less than the 2,000 points Schumer cited. However, the Dow continued to tumble for another two months, due in large part to repercussions of the debt ceiling debate, particularly the downgrading of the United States credit rating byStandard & Poorson Aug. 5.By Oct. 3, the Dow had bottomed out at 10,655 -- a decline of 2,069 points from its pre-debt ceiling peak, and its lowest level in about a year. So if you include the aftershocks of the debt ceiling fight, Schumer is correct that the Dow fell by 2,000 points. (You can see the decline as a line charthere.)

iCloud Storage Scam Email Falsely Claims Your Payment Failed and 'All Your Photos Will Be Deleted'

["Scammers pretending to be iCloud in emails claimed that a user's photos and videos would be deleted if their credit card details weren't updated."]

In late October 2023, the latest iteration of iCloud storage scam email messages circulated in users' inboxes. The subject line of one message that we reviewed read, "LAST ALERT: ALL YOUR PHOTOS WILL BE DELETED!" The message came from a dubious email address that did not end in @apple.com or @icloud.com. The email address showed the display name of "iCloud Storage." The message began as follows: iCloudFailed to attempt payment when renewing yourCloud storage subscription0 GB 48.9GB /50 GB We failed to renew your iCloud storageYour photos and videos will be deleted!! Your payment method has expired: Update your payment information!If you don't have enough iCloud space, you can upgrade storage plan The link in the message led to a page on menoshold.com, a scam website without a homepage. The page read as follows: Your iCloud Storage Is Full! Your photos, videos, files and private data will be lost. As part of our loyalty program, you can receive an additional 50GB storage by paying $1.95 one time only before all the files are deleted. Answer the following 3 simple questions to claim your special offer now. After filling out a brief survey, the page then displayed the following text: You will be redirected to the next page to claim the 50GB iCloud Storage with $1.95 only. Fill in your basic information and pay $1.95 with credit card or debit card. The 50GB iCloud storage will be added to your current device. The scam then led to a final page on hyperimmunizing.com, also a scam website with no homepage. On the page, we noted that the terms and conditions indicated the entire ruse was a hidden subscription scam, meaning that scammers were attempting to fool users into signing up for recurring monthly fees for services they did not choose. The terms did not mention a specific monthly cost or the types of services that would be provided, but did say at least some users would be "automatically billed every thirty (30) days to the credit card you provided." For readers who might be looking for customer support information, the hyperimmunizing.com website showed the phone number (833) 282-4266 and the email address [email protected]. A representative reached by the phone number only told Snopes that they were a third-party company that was located in Southeast Asia and that they provide services for U.S.-based firms. We advise users who submitted their credit card information to contact their credit card companies to alert them of this activity. If iCloud users have questions for Apple about their storage subscriptions, we recommend visiting the official website for iCloud Support. Apple also published a page about how to recognize scams that impersonate the company. the official website for iCloud Support page Recognize and Avoid Phishing Messages, Phony Support Calls, and Other Scams. Apple Support, https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT204759.

['credit']

False

If iCloud users have questions for Apple about their storage subscriptions, we recommend visiting the official website for iCloud Support. Apple also published a page about how to recognize scams that impersonate the company.

When this campaign began, I said that weve got to end the starvation minimum wage of $7.25, raise it to $15. Secretary Clinton said let's raise it to $12.

[]

Does Hillary Clinton think the federal minimum wage should be $12 an hour or $15? This question produced one of the more heated exchanges in an April 14 Democratic presidential debate between Clinton and her opponent, Sen. Bernie Sanders, starting when Clinton asserted that she has continuously supported the Fight for $15 advocacy campaign. "I have supported the Fight for $15," Clinton said. "I am proud to have the endorsement of most of the unions that have led the Fight for $15." To Sanders, that was news. "I am sure a lot of people are very surprised to learn that you supported raising the minimum wage to 15 bucks an hour," Sanders said. "When this campaign began, I said that we've got to end the starvation minimum wage of $7.25 and raise it to $15. Secretary Clinton said let's raise it to $12." An extended back-and-forth followed. We are putting Sanders' claim on the Truth-O-Meter. He is correct that Clinton's official position is to raise the national minimum wage to $12 as a floor. However, she has also shown support for the Fight for $15 campaign, which pushes for higher minimums in individual states and cities. Here’s what Clinton's website says on that point: "Hillary believes we are long overdue in raising the minimum wage. She has supported raising the federal minimum wage to $12 and believes that we should go further than the federal minimum through state and local efforts, and workers organizing and bargaining for higher wages, such as the Fight for $15 and recent efforts in Los Angeles and New York to raise their minimum wage to $15." In June 2015, early in her campaign, Clinton spoke with a gathering of Fight for $15 members via phone and told them she supported their campaign. "All of you should not have to march in the streets to get a living wage, but thank you for marching in the streets to get that living wage," she said, according to the Washington Post. A few days later, Clinton delivered a campaign kickoff speech in which she called for raising the minimum wage, but she did not specify a number. Her support for the $12 minimum wage proposal seems to have emerged around July 2015, when she praised legislation proposed by Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., arguing that it would be more politically feasible. "Let's not just do it for the sake of having a higher number out there," she said, according to the New York Times. "But let's get behind a proposal that actually has a chance of succeeding." By November, Clinton had started to say plainly that she prefers a $12 federal minimum wage. In the same month, though, she tweeted with the hashtag #FightFor15. What about Sanders? He is correct that he has advocated specifically for a $15 minimum wage since his campaign began. "Let us be honest and acknowledge that millions of Americans are now working for totally inadequate wages," he said as part of his May 2015 announcement. "The current federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour is a starvation wage and must be raised. The minimum wage must become a living wage, which means raising it to $15 an hour over the next few years." A couple of months earlier, in March 2015, he put forward an amendment to eventually raise the minimum wage to $15. He also put forth legislation in July 2015. Our ruling: Sanders said, "When this campaign began, I said that we've got to end the starvation minimum wage of $7.25 and raise it to $15. Secretary Clinton said let's raise it to $12." Since the start of his campaign, Sanders has advocated for a $15 minimum wage. Since early on in her campaign, Clinton has supported the Fight for $15's efforts in individual cities and states. But her official position is that she prefers a $12 federal minimum wage as a floor, allowing cities and states to go further. Sanders has a point that he is calling for a federal minimum wage that would be $3 more an hour than what Clinton says she favors. However, he misses the nuance that Clinton is also supportive of local efforts to raise the minimum wage to $15. We rate his claim Mostly True.

['National', 'Economy', 'Income']

True

Heres whatClintons website sayson that point:In June 2015, early on in her campaign, Clinton spoke with a gathering ofFight for $15members via phone and told them she supported their campaign.All of you should not have to march in the streets to get a living wage, but thank you for marching in the streets to get that living wage, she said,according to theWashington Post.A few days later, Clinton delivered acampaign kickoff speechin which she called for raising the minimum wage, but she did not specify a number.Lets not just do it for the sake of having a higher number out there, she said, according to theNew York Times. But lets get behind a proposal that actually has a chance of succeeding.By November,Clinton had started to say plainly that she prefers a $12 federal minimum wage. In the same month, though,she tweetedwith the hashtag #FightFor15.Let us be honest and acknowledge that millions of Americans are now working for totally inadequate wages, he said as part of hisMay 2015 announcement. The current federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour is a starvation wage and must be raised. The minimum wage must become a living wage, which means raising it to $15 an hour over the next few years.A couple months earlier, in March 2015,he put forward an amendmentto eventually raise the minimum wage to $15. He also put forth legislation inJuly 2015.

Gas Pump Icon and Fuel Doors

["Does an automobile's dashboard fuel level icon indicate which side the vehicle's gas cap is on?"]

Way back in the olden days of 2007, readers were asking us about a much-circulated piece of helpful advice concerning automobile fuel level displays: I have been driving for many years. One would think I would have noticed the little secret on my dash that was staring me right in the face the whole time. I didn't, and I bet you probably haven't either. Quick question: what side of your car is your gas tank on? You probably can't remember right away, especially if you drive more than one car or if you rent a car while on vacation. My solution was to uncomfortably stick my head out the window, strain my neck, and look. If you don't do this in your own car, you definitely have done it in a borrowed or rental car. If you look at your gas gauge, you will see a small icon of a gas pump. The handle of the gas pump will extend out on either the left or right side of the pump. If your tank is on the left, the handle will be on the left. If your tank is on the right, the handle will be on the right (see attached images). It is that simple! Why don't the dealers share such important information with car buyers? I have purposely asked many car salesmen since I found this out, and they don't even know this—not one did. As anyone who has driven a rental car well knows, it is indeed useful to have some sort of indicator on the instrument panel that reveals which side to refuel on. Sadly, "The World's Best Kept Auto Secret" (as the email was often titled) was a bit of misinformation or misunderstanding: while the indicator it described was real, the message misidentified its nature. The nozzle-and-hose side of the fuel level (or "low fuel") indicator, which is usually presented as an icon depicting a gas pump, doesn't consistently correspond with the side of the car where the fuel door is located, nor does its placement on the instrument array (left side versus right side) indicate whether you should bring the passenger's or driver's side up next to the pumps at your local gas station. There's no magic to it. Although "The World's Best Kept Auto Secret" will prove true for some vehicles, it won't for others. It's akin to the many folkloric "tests" for determining an unborn child's sex; it has only two outcomes (the icon's nozzle-and-hose side and the side the vehicle's fuel door is on match or they don't), so this "secret" will work sometimes but not always. (Yes, we know that some vehicles have their fuel doors in the back, but there are so few of them that for the purpose of this discussion we might as well ignore that possibility.) The fuel icons in modern cars do inform drivers which side to refuel on, but it's not the placement or shape of the fuel icon that carries that information: nearly all newer models of automobiles include a small arrow or triangle next to the fuel icon that indicates which side of the vehicle bears the fuel door. As seen in the graphic example displayed below, sometimes the arrow and fuel handle are on opposite sides of the icon; it's the former, not the latter, that signifies where the gas cap is. There's no agreement among auto manufacturers as to which side the gas cap should be on, which, if they would just choose one side or the other, would solve the whole problem right there: you'd then always know which side of your vehicle to park closest to the pump. It would make more sense to consistently position the aperture on the passenger's side, both because it's easier to get out of your vehicle when you don't have to maneuver past the gas pump you've just parked next to, and because should you run out of gas on the highway, it's a lot safer to pour more in when you're not standing next to the traffic whizzing by you. An argument can also be made for placing the gas cap on the rear of vehicles. Were it there, you would no longer need to be concerned about getting any particular side of your car next to the pump: provided the rear of the vehicle were somewhat close to the refueling array, it wouldn't matter if the gas pump island were to the left or the right. Yet another solution would be to have two fuel entry doors, one on each side. That notion, however, fails on cost. According to Rick Asher, a spokesman for General Motors, the cost of putting a gas cap on both sides of a vehicle would far exceed the value of the added convenience for the vast majority of people. Which leaves us right back where we started: having to make a mental note of which side a vehicle's fuel door is on when driving rentals or other cars unfamiliar to us (or trying to check the side-view mirrors to see where it is before pulling up to the pumps). Cichowski, John. "An Idea on Gas-Cap Issue We Can All Get Behind." The [Bergen County] Record. 20 January 2006 (p. A3). Huntsville Times. "Gas Cap Adaptation Not Worth the Cost." 4 December 2005 (p. A2).

['share']

NEI

There's no magic to it. Although "The World's Best Kept Auto Secret" will prove true for some vehicles, it won't for others, it's akin to the many folkloric "tests" for determining an unborn child's sex, it has only two outcomes (the icon's nozzle-and-hose side and the side the vehicle's fuel door is on match or they don't), so this "secret" will work sometimes but not always. (Yes, we know that some vehicles have their fuel doors in the back, but there are so few of them that for the purpose of this discussion we might as well ignore that possibility.)

What We Know About the Cancer-Detecting Blood Test

['The revolutionary large-scale trial is a world first. ']

In September 2021, British health officials announced the launch of the worlds largest trial of a blood test capable of detecting more than 50 types of cancer before symptoms appear. 50 types of cancer Headed by The Cancer Research UK, the National Health Service (NHS) in England, and Kings College London, the so-named Galleri trial aims to recruit 140,000 volunteers across eight areas of England. Galleri checks for the earliest signs of cancer. If it's successful, its ability to catch cancer during its earliest stages could be a game-changer in the fight against the disease. NHS Kings College London This quick and simple blood test could mark the beginning of a revolution in cancer detection and treatment here and around the world, said NHS Chief Executive Amanda Pritchard in a news release. By finding cancer before signs and symptoms even appear, we have the best chance of treating it and we can give people the best possible chance of survival. news release While its early cancer detection ability holds promise, Galleri does not diagnose cancer and does not detect all forms of the disease. Blood drawn from a participant is tested for chemical changes in fragments of the bloods genetic code known as cell-free DNA (cfDNA), which leaks from tumors into the bloodstream. Previous research conducted by Galleri founding company Grail showed that the test was effective at finding cancers that are difficult to identify early on, like head and neck, bowel, lung, pancreatic, and throat cancers. As of this writing, Galleri is not approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) but was granted a breakthrough device designation in 2019 under a government-led voluntary program for certain medical devices "that provide for more effective treatment or diagnosis of life-threatening or irreversibly debilitating diseases or conditions." The test joins two other similar tumor-testing tests that were approved in the U.S., according to the consumer publication Evaluate. Galleri is available in the U.S. for $949, and is available for prescription only. Because it is new to the market and does not have FDA approval, the test is not covered by health insurance. Galleri granted breakthrough device Evaluate prescription only Galleri is designed to detect more than 50 types of cancer. Grail Grail Galleri doesnt rule out cancer, but instead helps providers to evaluate and confirm whether and where cancer may exist. It is intended to be used in coordination with other screening practices and is not a replacement but rather a method to inform the next steps of diagnosis. For the British trial, tens of thousands of recruitments between the ages of 50 and 77 those most at risk for cancer will be asked to give blood samples at mobile testing clinics across the country. Regardless of their results, the test is designed to detect cancer signals such as cfDNA and predict where in the body those signals exist. Half of the participants in the randomized control trial will have blood samples screened with the test right away, while the other half will have their sample stored and tested in the future. This will allow researchers to compare the stage at which cancer is detected between the two groups. Regardless, study participants will be notified if their test signals potential cancer. Early cancer detection during stage one or two allows for more treatment options, some of which can be less aggressive and harmful. Patients whose cancer is identified at the earliest stage may see up to ten times the survival rate compared to a person who learned of cancer at stage four. Those who give blood as part of the British trial will be invited to participate in later stages of the trial one and two years later. Initial results are expected by 2021 and if successful, researchers plan to extend the rollout to 1 million people by 2025. Sources GRAIL Announces Significant Progress with Multi-Cancer Early Detection Test Including FDA Breakthrough Device Designation. GRAIL, https://grail.com/press-releases/grail-announces-significant-progress-with-multi-cancer-early-detection-test-including-fda-breakthrough-device-designation/. Accessed 13 Sept. 2021. Grail Launches Pan-Cancer Screen for Those Who Can Pay out of Pocket. Evaluate.Com, 4 June 2021, https://www.evaluate.com/vantage/articles/news/snippets/grail-launches-pan-cancer-screen-those-who-can-pay-out-pocket. Health, Center for Devices and Radiological. Breakthrough Devices Program. FDA, Jan. 2021. www.fda.gov, https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/how-study-and-market-your-device/breakthrough-devices-program. Kings Leads the Worlds Largest Trial of Cancer Blood Test. https://www.kcl.ac.uk/news/kings-leads-the-worlds-largest-trial-of-cancer-blood-test. Accessed 13 Sept. 2021. NHS England NHS Launches World First Trial for New Cancer Test. https://www.england.nhs.uk/2021/09/nhs-launches-world-first-trial-for-new-cancer-test/. Accessed 13 Sept. 2021. https://www.england.nhs.uk/2021/09/nhs-launches-world-first-trial-for-new-cancer-test/. Accessed 13 Sept. 2021. Our Products. GRAIL, https://grail.com/our-products/. Accessed 13 Sept. 2021.

['insurance']

True

In September 2021, British health officials announced the launch of the worlds largest trial of a blood test capable of detecting more than 50 types of cancer before symptoms appear. Headed by The Cancer Research UK, the National Health Service (NHS) in England, and Kings College London, the so-named Galleri trial aims to recruit 140,000 volunteers across eight areas of England. Galleri checks for the earliest signs of cancer. If it's successful, its ability to catch cancer during its earliest stages could be a game-changer in the fight against the disease. This quick and simple blood test could mark the beginning of a revolution in cancer detection and treatment here and around the world, said NHS Chief Executive Amanda Pritchard in a news release. By finding cancer before signs and symptoms even appear, we have the best chance of treating it and we can give people the best possible chance of survival.As of this writing, Galleri is not approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) but was granted a breakthrough device designation in 2019 under a government-led voluntary program for certain medical devices "that provide for more effective treatment or diagnosis of life-threatening or irreversibly debilitating diseases or conditions." The test joins two other similar tumor-testing tests that were approved in the U.S., according to the consumer publication Evaluate. Galleri is available in the U.S. for $949, and is available for prescription only. Because it is new to the market and does not have FDA approval, the test is not covered by health insurance. Galleri is designed to detect more than 50 types of cancer. Grail

Were These Electric Cars Abandoned Because Their Batteries Failed?

['An anti-electric car post shows the results of a failed business model rather than a failed technology.']

In 2021, social media users began circulating photographs purporting to show "electric powered cars in boneyard" near Paris, France, that supposedly housed hundreds of derelict electric vehicles, the automobiles supposedly having been abandoned and left to decay because their battery storage cells had "given out" and were too expensive to replace: Although the photographs are real; the accompanying description is misleading in multiple ways. This item is, in effect, an example of a failed business model rather than a failed technology. Back in 2011, the Autolib program offered the service of providing thousands of electric vehicles in the Paris area under a car-sharing program. Subscribes to the service were able to use the any of the fleet of 4,000 BlueCar cars as they wished, paying a fee each time depending upon how long they used the vehicle. At its peak in 2016, the program boasted 110,000 subscribers. However, Autolib slid from that peak into decline, due to a number of factors: Four thousand cars for over 100,000 subscribers meant many users were unable to find vehicles when they wanted them; users frequently left the cars dirty inside and damaged; and competition from ride-hailing apps such Uber eroded the customer base. By 2018, Autolib was running debts of tens of millions of euros and the program was discontinued in June of that year. running debts of tens of millions of euros program was discontinued in June In the end, most of the BlueCars in better condition were purchased and re-sold to new users or scrapped for parts. But a private company eventually stored some of the cars in not-so-good condition in a lot in an industrial area near Romorantin in Loir-et-Cher, as seen above -- not because the vehicles' storage cells had failed, but because the Autolib car-sharing program proved not to be a viable long-term business model. purchased and re-sold to new users or scrapped for parts It is also not the case that the abandoned Autolib BlueCars' batteries are "draining toxins into the ground." As noted in reports on the subject, the batteries have been removed from the pictured vehicles: reports Despite protests from the Bollor group, the multinational had to evacuate the 4,000 unwanted autolibs from the Paris region and urgently store them. They were then sold in several batches and two companies now hold most of the remaining fleet: the Breton company Autopuzz, former subcontractor of Bollor, which resells these vehicles throughout France, and the company Atis Production, whose manager Paul Aouizerate does not want to reveal his plans for the Autolib parked in Loir-et-Cher. The businessman also regrets the publication of photos of his vehicles in early March, shared by a blogger passionate about electric cars, who was amazed at such a landscape. The images became widespread on Facebook and Twitter, with internet users questioning how these cars can be reused and wondering about the potential risk of soil pollution they pose. Our vehicles are properly stored. The firefighters are aware that the construction site is well organized. All batteries have been removed, [and] the connections are isolated [said Paul Aouizerate, Atis Production Manager].

['debt']

False

However, Autolib slid from that peak into decline, due to a number of factors: Four thousand cars for over 100,000 subscribers meant many users were unable to find vehicles when they wanted them; users frequently left the cars dirty inside and damaged; and competition from ride-hailing apps such Uber eroded the customer base. By 2018, Autolib was running debts of tens of millions of euros and the program was discontinued in June of that year.In the end, most of the BlueCars in better condition were purchased and re-sold to new users or scrapped for parts. But a private company eventually stored some of the cars in not-so-good condition in a lot in an industrial area near Romorantin in Loir-et-Cher, as seen above -- not because the vehicles' storage cells had failed, but because the Autolib car-sharing program proved not to be a viable long-term business model.It is also not the case that the abandoned Autolib BlueCars' batteries are "draining toxins into the ground." As noted in reports on the subject, the batteries have been removed from the pictured vehicles:

Did a 1922 Article Warn of Oceans Warming?

['A newspaper article warning that climate change was melting Arctic ice and disrupting wildlife was published nearly a century ago.']

One of the key issues in the global warming debate is whether modern scientists have sufficient data and tools to determine if current warming trends are indicative of long-term climatic changes rather than relatively short-term weather pattern variability. A text widely shared online seemingly provides an example of the pitfalls of mistaking the latter for the former, purportedly reproducing a 1922 newspaper article warning that the Arctic Ocean was experiencing a radical change in climatic conditions, which was warming its waters, melting ice, and disrupting wildlife: "The Arctic Ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer, and in some places the seals are finding the water too hot," according to a report to the Commerce Department yesterday from Consulafft, at Bergen, Norway. Reports from fishermen, seal hunters, and explorers all point to a radical change in climate conditions and hitherto unheard-of temperatures in the Arctic zone. Exploration expeditions report that scarcely any ice has been met as far north as 81 degrees 29 minutes. Soundings to a depth of 3,100 meters showed the Gulf Stream still very warm. Great masses of ice have been replaced by moraines of earth and stones, the report continued, while at many points well-known glaciers have entirely disappeared. Very few seals and no white fish are found in the eastern Arctic, while vast shoals of herring and smelts, which have never before ventured so far north, are being encountered in the old seal fishing grounds. I apologize; I neglected to mention that this report was from November 2, 1922, as reported by the AP and published in The Washington Post 88 years ago! The text in the above example is a genuine transcription of a 1922 newspaper article, an Associated Press account that appeared on page 2 of The Washington Post on November 2 of that year. That article, in turn, was based on information relayed by the American consul in Norway to the U.S. State Department in October 1922 and published in the Monthly Weather Review: "The Arctic seems to be warming up. Reports from fishermen, seal hunters, and explorers who sail the seas about Spitzbergen and the eastern Arctic all point to a radical change in climatic conditions and hitherto unheard-of high temperatures in that part of the Earth's surface." In August 1922, the Norwegian Department of Commerce sent an expedition to Spitzbergen and Bear Island under the leadership of Dr. Adolf Hoel, a lecturer on geology at the University of Christiania. Its purpose was to survey and chart the lands adjacent to the Norwegian mines on those islands, take soundings of the adjacent waters, and make other oceanographic investigations. Ice conditions were exceptional; in fact, so little ice had never before been noted. The expedition all but established a record, sailing as far north as 81 degrees 29 minutes in ice-free water. This is the farthest north ever reached with modern oceanographic apparatus. The character of the waters of the great polar basin has heretofore been practically unknown. Dr. Hoel reports that he made a section of the Gulf Stream at 81 degrees north latitude and took soundings to a depth of 3,100 meters. These show the Gulf Stream to be very warm, and it could be traced as a surface current until beyond the 81st parallel. The warmth of the waters makes it probable that the favorable ice conditions will continue for some time. In connection with Dr. Hoel's report, it is of interest to note the unusually warm summer in Arctic Norway and the observations of Capt. Martin Ingebrigsten, who has sailed the eastern Arctic for 54 years. He says that he first noted warmer conditions in 1918, that since that time it has steadily gotten warmer, and that today the Arctic of that region is not recognizable as the same region of 1868 to 1917. Many old landmarks are so changed as to be unrecognizable. Where formerly great masses of ice were found, there are now often moraines, accumulations of earth and stones. At many points where glaciers formerly extended far into the sea, they have entirely disappeared. As interesting as this nearly century-old article might be from a modern perspective, however, it isn't substantive evidence either for or against the concept of anthropogenic global warming. As documented elsewhere, the warming phenomena observed in 1922 proved to be indicative only of a local event in Spitzbergen, not a trend applicable to the Arctic as a whole.

['interest']

True

That article in turn was based on information relayed by the American consul in Norway to the U.S. State Department in October 1922 and published in the Monthly Weather Review:As interesting as this nearly century-old article might be from a modern perspective, however, it isn't substantive evidence either for or against the concept of anthropogenic global warming. As documented elsewhere, the warming phenomena observed in 1922 proved to be indicative only of a local event in Spitzbergen, not a trend applicable to the Arctic as a whole.

Walmart 'GALE' Receipts Are Outdated

["Isolated cashiers' errors in 2019 continue to stir up concerns in 2021. "]

In August 2021, an image supposedly showing a receipt from Walmart with an erroneous $30 charge for "GALE" was circulated online. Many of these posts included a "public service announcement" warning other customers about this "glitch," while some claimed that Walmart was purposefully adding this phantom charge to bilk customers out of $30. PSAHolly and I grocery shop every Saturday, splitting our purchases between Walmart and Kroger. After all these years, I know we typically spend between $90 and $110 at Walmart. Today, however, our total was $144.02. I told Holly this was too high, and after reviewing the receipt, I went to Customer Service and asked, "What is GALE for $32.00?" I was informed that there is a glitch in the Walmart system and that "GALE" pops up randomly. After tax, I was overcharged by $34.24. Check your receipts! While this appears to be a genuine picture of a receipt with an erroneous charge, it is not a widespread issue. Furthermore, this receipt is from 2019, not 2021. We found a couple of other reports from 2018 and 2019 of people seeing an erroneous charge for "GALE" on their receipts. These reports all included a $32 charge and the same 12-digit serial code (00000000003k). In all three examples we found, the posters included anecdotes about how they quickly received a refund after bringing this error to the cashier's attention. Facebook user Rhea Azure wrote in 2019: "Always check your receipts!!! This was at the Walmart in Bottineau. I went to spend a certain amount of money and couldn't figure out why I didn't have enough for all my items when I added everything up, including taxes. After paying, I looked through my receipt and found GALE for $32.00. I had no idea what that was, and neither did the cashier/supervisor. She immediately reimbursed me for it. ALWAYS check your receipts!!" A December 2018 Reddit post provided more information. That person said that the customer service representative indicated the cashier likely entered a wrong number by mistake: "After a 32-minute wait in the customer service line, the representative said, 'Nah. That's not something we sell.' The immediate response was somewhat suspicious. They told me, 'That's not a legitimate item code.' I knew I was on to something. She called over a more senior representative of Customer Service, who told me, 'Yeah, we see that sometimes. The cashier accidentally hits a number and then 'Enter,' and a phantom item is rung up.' Without complaint, they refunded my $32.34. (I even had to pay tax on my phantom item.) We reached out to Walmart for more information but have not yet heard back. The above explanation, however, mirrors what we heard from a Walmart spokesperson in 2019 when we examined a similar rumor. Around the same time that these "GALE" receipts started circulating on social media, a similar claim was made about a $10 "phantom" charge for JAJKET. In this case, too, it seemed like social media users were exaggerating the impact of an individual's mistake into a nationwide issue. A spokesperson for Walmart told us at the time: "We immediately began looking into this issue when it was brought to our attention and want to assure customers at our Clinton store that they are only being charged for items they purchase. We isolated the problem our customer experienced to an incorrect product barcode that one of our cashiers entered as she was checking out. The issue was immediately resolved, and as a precaution, we are training the store associates on what to look for should anything like that happen again, ensuring none of our other stores are affected. We reimbursed the customer for the incorrect charge, apologized to her, and appreciate that she brought this to our attention." While the images of a Walmart receipt with a "GALE" charge are real, these were isolated incidents involving human error and not a widespread systematic glitch. Furthermore, these receipts all date back to 2019 or earlier.

['taxes']

NEI

Facebook user Rhea Azure wrote in 2019:A December 2018 Reddit post provided more information. That person said that the customer service representative said that the cashier likely entered a wrong number by mistake:Around the same time that these "GALE" receipts started circulating on social media, a similar claim was circulated about a $10 "phantom" charge for JAJKET. In this case, too, it seemed like social media users were exaggerating the impact of an individual's mistake into a nationwide issue.

Return to Offender

['Rumor: The father of a fallen Marine returned a condolence letter from President Obama with a stinging handwritten rebuke.']

Claim: The father of a fallen Marine returned a condolence letter from President Obama with a cutting handwritten response. Example: [Collected via e-mail, January 2015] Fallen Marine's father, Steve Hogan, returns letter of condolence to President Obama. Origins: On January 3, 2014, the website IJReview published an article titled "While Obama Boasts of Ending War in Afghanistan, Marine Family's Letter Puts It In Perspective." The piece was a commentary on President Obama's December 2014 written statement about the end of combat operations in Afghanistan: "For more than 13 years, ever since nearly 3,000 innocent lives were taken from us on 9/11, our nation has been at war in Afghanistan. Now, thanks to the extraordinary sacrifices of our men and women in uniform, our combat mission in Afghanistan is ending, and the longest war in American history is coming to a responsible conclusion." The site highlighted a July 2012 letter of condolence sent by President Obama to Steve Hogan, the father of Lance Corporal Hunter D. Hogan, and the elder Hogan's purported reply. Below the letter sent by the President to Mr. Hogan was a handwritten response that read: "Mr. Barack Hussein Obama, I am deeply saddened that you are the President of the United States. You, sir, are an embarrassment to the Oval Office. My son, as well as most Marines I know, despise you and your lack of representation for our military. Your ridiculous rules of engagement have caused the massive amount of casualties on your watch in Afghanistan. While we watch your media pander to your administration and clearly sweep things under the rug for you, I fully understand Marines die. You have tied their hands and feet! I am thankful I did not serve under a Commander in Chief such as you. I am sickened that my son had to. I wonder... I doubt that you will see this; I hope you do, though!" Steve Hogan. Above the letter was an additional note: "I wonder how many of these get returned to you!" The site did not explain where the putative reply originated, why it had emerged more than two years after Lance Cpl. Hogan's death, or when the reply might have been written. The commentary is not fully out of line with a statement attributed to Steve Hogan and Hunter's widow, Brittany, printed on July 14, 2012, in the York News-Times. That statement read in part: "We, as family and friends of Lance Cpl. Hunter and other service members, want to know why the media in our country has coddled instead of covered this Teflon-coated administration! We listened every night on the news for eight years with the previous administration to the casualty reports. With the present administration, nothing is reported! With the news of our recent loss of HD and others in his battalion, many people have made statements like, 'I didn't think anything was going on there anymore.' 'I thought the Marines were leaving there,' etc. Here are the statistics in Afghanistan for the eight years of George Bush. The total killed in action under him is 660. Barack Obama, in three years and five months, has a total killed in action of 1,398. Wounded under George Bush is 2,637 in eight years. Wounded under Obama, up to January 31st of this year, is 11,529. Why isn't the media covering this instead of covering the protestors of these brave service men and women's funerals? The policies of this current administration and the rules of engagement are a huge factor in these casualty reports. The limited air and artillery support our men received, the limited company-level support such as mortars, as well as the approval to return fire, are hampering and adding to the danger they are in daily. Not to mention the severely limited night operations that are approved because they scare the Afghan people. Let the military run the war; they are the professionals, or get our people out of there. How many more black walls full of names are we going to build?" The response attributed to Steve Hogan circulated heavily in January 2015, but few mentions of it on the internet exist before the article linked above. Hogan criticized the Obama administration's handling of combat operations in Afghanistan in a published editorial in July 2012, but the wording is not the same as the above reply with which he has been credited. If the reply is genuine, it's not clear where the site obtained it or why it was not uncovered until more than two years after the original letter from President Obama was sent. Last updated: January 9, 2015.

['returns']

NEI

Origins: On 3 January 2014, the website IJReview published an article titled "While Obama Boasts of Ending War in Afghanistan, Marine Family's Letter Puts It In Perspective." The piece was a commentary on President Obama's December 2014 written statement about the end of combat operations in Afghanistan:Above the letter was an additional note: "I wonder how many of these get returned to you!" The site did not explain where the putative reply originated, why it had emerged more than two years after Lance Cpl. Hogan's death, or when the reply might have been written. The commentary is not fully out of line with a statement attributed to Steve Hogan and Hunter's widow Brittany, printed on 14 July 2012 in the York News-Times. That statement read in part:

The giveaway scam involving a Michael Kors handbag includes undisclosed subscription charges.

['Consumers should beware of offers that seem too good to be true, since they might include monthly charges that are only mentioned in the fine print.']

A genuine Michael Kors handbag for $7.95? Good luck with that. In early July 2023, we investigated the hidden catch behind a new scam originating from TikTok ads. The ads claimed that the luxury design company Michael Kors was giving away handbags for a small fee of $7.95. Users would supposedly need to answer three or four questions in a short survey to receive one of the handbags. However, this was not a giveaway managed by Michael Kors, nor was it a legitimate promotion in any way, shape, or form. The TikTok ads misleadingly stated, "Michael Kors sends out handbags. Answer 4 questions and get a handbag." Users who clicked on the ads were directed to a page on 20mccsd.tech, a website that displayed registration information for a domain registrar in Russia, which may have been the country from which the scam originated. The 20mccsd.tech website was designed to deceive users into believing they were on the official website for Nordstrom, nordstrom.com. The scammers ensured that anyone trying to visit the website with a copied link, rather than through a TikTok ad, would encounter a strange facade that cloaked the fake Nordstrom website. For users who did click on the ads, they saw the Nordstrom logo and the following text: "Congratulations! You have been selected to participate in the Nordstrom campaign. You could win a Michael Kors handbag!" After answering three questions, users were redirected to exclusiveluckyshop.com. This website then claimed users would be eligible to enter a supposed giveaway for a Michael Kors Voyager Medium Crossgrain Leather Tote Bag, which normally retails for $298, according to Michael Kors' official website. The scam shifted from promising handbags for $7.95 in the TikTok ads to stating that users would be paying the small fee simply to enter a suspicious giveaway. At the very bottom of exclusiveluckyshop.com, in a small font size, we found the terms and conditions. The terms included the catch behind the entire scam: any users who paid the fee of $7.95 would later be billed $67.32 per month until they found a way to cancel. This monthly charge was purportedly meant to fund a $125 gift card for customers to use in what was referred to as a "best consumer gadget club." In other words, this was a hidden subscription scam, a topic we had previously reported on with another scam. The terms also displayed the phone number (866) 877-1602. In a call we placed to this number, an automated voice message thanked us for calling "customer support." Just as we had seen in past years with other scams involving CBD and keto weight loss gummies, no specific company name was announced, as would be the case when placing calls to legitimate businesses. If any readers fell victim to this scam, we recommend calling your credit card company or the phone number for whatever payment method you used to make the purchase. Always bear in mind that if an online offer seems too good to be true, it probably is.

['loss']

False

Users who clicked on the ads were led to a page on 20mccsd.tech, a website that showedregistration information for a domain registrar in Russia. This may have been the country from which the scam was originating.After answering three questions, users were redirected to exclusiveluckyshop.com. This website then claimed users would be eligible to enter into a supposed giveaway for a Michael Kors Voyager Medium Crossgrain Leather Tote Bag. This product normally retails for $298, according to Michael Kors' official website.In other words, this was a hidden subscription scam, a topic that we previously reported about with another scam.

Do Eddie Bauer Stores Destroy Leftover Clothes Instead of Donating Them?

['While the company confirmed that photographs taken outside its New York City store are real, there is no indication that cutting up clothes before dumping them is a common practice.']

In December 2017, a set of photographs posted to Facebook led to accusations that Eddie Bauer clothing stores destroyed leftover clothing instead of offering it for donations or leaving them intact so that they could be worn or resold. The post described several Eddie Bauer-brand clothing items left damaged and discarded outside the manufacturer's store in New York City: post Eddie Bauer in NYC threw out blankets and coats and CUT THEM UP SO NOBODY COULD TAKE THEM! This is capitalism! Imagine a system where you DESTROY excess goods instead of distribute them. This happens while thousands in NYC will sleep on the streets tonight. The post's author, Dakotah Lilly an organizer with the advocacy group Students and Youth for a New America also provided us with a separate picture of a damaged jacket bearing the logo of Eddie Bauer's First Ascent line: group line Regarding the attention the post has generated, Lilly told us: I didn't think people would be so surprised that a corporation would do something like this in pursuit of profit. But obviously I'm not surprised that people are upset by it. They should be! But they should know that this is routine, and we need to change the way the system works, not just one company. Lilly also said that Eddie Bauer had contacted him regarding his photographs, but he was not confident they would respond to the apparent issue: The way things are, it wouldn't make sense for them to. Our economic system rewards people based on who can screw the little guy the best. A spokesperson for Eddie Bauer told us that the company was aware of the New York store mentioned in Lilly's post "having to dispose of some jackets," but that cutting them up and discarding them was not company policy: All Eddie Bauer products carry a lifetime guarantee; therefore, we receive returned products for various reasons ranging from a normal defect such as broken zipper or small tear, to heavily soiled and damaged items. These returned products that are deemed unsellable are shipped to our main distribution center where they are sorted. Any products that can be donated or salvaged are done so. Eddie Bauer is working with that specific store to determine why the jackets had to be disposed of, and why this seems to be an isolated occurrence at that store. The spokesperson also said that the company donates product samples to a New York City-based charitable group, Delivering Good, which distributes clothing and home-related products to people in need. We contacted Delivering Good to confirm whether there is a partnership between the two groups. group, Lilly is not the first person to accuse the clothing maker of damaging and then discarding unsold products rather than offering them to charity; in March 2010, consumer awareness blog Consumerist published an account from a reader who said she witnessed similar dumping by the company. published

['profit']

False

The post described several Eddie Bauer-brand clothing items left damaged and discarded outside the manufacturer's store in New York City:The post's author, Dakotah Lilly an organizer with the advocacy group Students and Youth for a New America also provided us with a separate picture of a damaged jacket bearing the logo of Eddie Bauer's First Ascent line:The spokesperson also said that the company donates product samples to a New York City-based charitable group, Delivering Good, which distributes clothing and home-related products to people in need. We contacted Delivering Good to confirm whether there is a partnership between the two groups.Lilly is not the first person to accuse the clothing maker of damaging and then discarding unsold products rather than offering them to charity; in March 2010, consumer awareness blog Consumerist published an account from a reader who said she witnessed similar dumping by the company.

Scam involving fake Home Depot coupons on Facebook.

['Rumor: Home Depot is giving out coupons to Facebook users.']

In May 2015, a fraudulent offer for $200 Home Depot coupons began circulating on Facebook. The message contained a link that redirected bargain hunters to a website adorned with Home Depot's logo, which had nothing to do with the real Home Depot. The $200 Home Depot coupon scam is very similar to other schemes that targeted Costco, Amazon, 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 across the Internet. Second, they direct people to complete a survey that extracts personal information such as email addresses, telephone numbers, dates of birth, and credit card numbers. Lastly, these scams never end with "free" rewards, because users must first agree to sign up for several costly, difficult-to-cancel "Reward Offers" hidden in the fine print to claim their coupons. In April 2017, another Facebook coupon scam targeted Home Depot. In that iteration, the chain was purportedly doling out $50 coupons "to celebrate Mother's Day," and links directed users to www.homedepot.com-grabitnow.us (a URL clearly unaffiliated with the legitimate Home Depot website). Home Depot did not address the 2017 Facebook coupon scam on their social media channels as of April 24, 2017, but it was nevertheless clearly not a legitimate promotion affiliated with the chain. The Better Business Bureau provided these three tips to identify scams on Facebook: Don't believe what you see. It's easy to steal the colors, logos, and headers 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 rewards that are too good to be true. If the survey is real, you may be entered in a drawing to win a gift card or receive a small discount off your next purchase. Few businesses can afford to give away $50 gift cards for completing a few questions.

['credit']

False

The $200 Home Depot coupon scam is very similar to other schemes that targeted Costco, Amazon, 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 survey that extracts personal information such as email addresses, telephone numbers, dates of birth and credit card numbers. Lastly, these scams never end with a "free" rewards, because users must first agree to sign up for several costly, difficult-to-cancel "Reward Offers" hidden in the fine print to claim their coupons.In April 2017, another Facebook coupon scam targeted Home Depot. In that iteration the chain was purportedly doling out $50 coupons "to celebrate Mother's Day, and links directed users to www.homedepot.com-grabitnow.us (a URL clearly unaffiliated with the legitimate Home Depot website):Home Depot didn't address the 2017 Facebook coupon scam on their social media channels as of 24 April 2017, but it was nevertheless clearly not a legitimate promotion affiliated with the chain. The Better Business Bureau gave these three tips to identify scams on Facebook:

Is this photograph depicting legislators playing solitaire?

['"The bills theyre passing by playing solitaire instead of voting for us are taking away our freedoms with every key stroke."']

A photograph that appears to show representatives playing solitaire on their laptops during a legislative session has certainly struck a chord among many viewers, undoubtedly because it seemingly confirms a widely held view of elected representatives as paid fat cats frittering away their time on frivolous pursuits rather than engaging in serious governmental problem-solving efforts. The photograph is real, although it has erroneously been attributed to a number of different legislative bodies, from the U.S. Congress to various state legislatures. This picture was sent to me, showing our Congress at work. It was said that this was while Congress was in session, which appears to be true, and that it was during the health care debate. Even if it wasn't during the health care debate, if this is how they spend their time while they are supposed to be deciding on important issues, then I not only want a rebate on my tax dollars, but I also want to see some new people who actually care about what is happening and are paying close attention to the matter at hand sitting in those seats. It seems we don't need to be sending them on any more expensive vacations; they're already on one. It seems to me that if all we are doing is paying these congressmen and women a gigantic salary to sit in congressional sessions and play solitaire or whatever, it's time to bring most of them back home by replacement. Democrats, Republicans, independents—it makes no difference. The bills they're passing by playing solitaire instead of voting for us are taking away our freedoms with every keystroke. Folks, we need to forward this to everyone we know to get the word out about these people who are being paid by our tax dollars. Nothing else needs to be said. This is one of their three-day work weeks that we all pay for. I am ready to start from the beginning by voting out all elected officials and not allowing any of them to stay in office for more than two terms. No more lifelong healthcare, retirement, voting in their own pay raises, or taking perks on our taxes, etc. These are the folks that can't get the budget out by October 1. Seriously! So, we've got a 30-day budget extension. Well, guess what? Thirty days from now, we will be in the same boat. I guess this makes it easy for the news reporters, as all they have to do is recycle the same headlines from this week and from two years ago. And these individuals will still be playing solitaire! The picture was actually snapped in the Connecticut House of Representatives on August 31, 2009, by photographer Jessica Hill, while Rep. Larry Cafero was delivering a lengthy speech on the state budget. The photo was captioned by the Associated Press as follows: "House Minority Leader Lawrence F. Cafero Jr., R-Norwalk, far right, speaks while colleagues play solitaire on their computers as the House convenes to vote on a new budget for the fiscal year in the Capitol, in Hartford, Conn." Ms. Hill described the reaction to her photograph as follows: "I have received a great deal of mail and even a few calls from people all over the country over the last couple of months about the photograph I have as a lead-off image on my member page. Some viewers have even gone so far as to say they believe the photograph is not authentic. I take my profession very seriously. There is nothing staged or altered in the photograph, and it is insulting to me to have been accused of otherwise by people who do not even know me." Rep. Jack Hennessy (D-Bridgeport), one of the two Connecticut legislators shown in the photo playing solitaire on a laptop computer (the other was Rep. Barbara Lambert [D-Milford]), issued a letter of apology to his constituents: "It was certainly bad judgment for me to play a computer game, even for just a few minutes, during the final House session on the budget. I am embarrassed, and I apologize to each and every person in the North End and to people across the state. My actions were inexcusable. I do want my constituents to know that my poor judgment for a few moments in no way means I ignored your interests in representing you on this very serious matter. Over the past seven months, as a member of the General Assembly's Finance Committee, I have participated fully in the budget process and have played an active role in crafting a budget that provides the necessary services that our communities so desperately need while at the same time minimizing any negative impact on the city of Bridgeport and its people. I sincerely apologize to each of you. I look forward to having the continued privilege of representing you and your interests in Hartford. I thank you in advance for your understanding and have been humbled by those of you who have already expressed your understanding and forgiveness."

['taxes']

True

The picture was actually snapped in the Connecticut House of Representatives on 31 August 2009 by photographer Jessica Hill, while Rep. Larry Cafero was delivering a lengthy speech on the state budget. The photo was captioned by the Associated Press as follows: "House Minority Leader Lawrence F. Cafero Jr., R-Norwalk, far right, speaks while colleagues play solitaire on their computers as the House convenes to vote on a new budget for the fiscal year in the Capitol, in Hartford, Conn."Rep. Jack Hennessy (D-Bridgeport), one of two Connecticut legislators shown in the photo playing solitaire on a laptop computer (the other was Rep. Barbara Lambert [D-Milford]), issued a letter of apology to his constituents:

John Kerry's security protection by the Secret Service.

["Would the Secret Service have to provide lifetime protection for all of John Kerry's homes?"]

Claim: If John Kerry were elected President, the Secret Service would have to protect him and every property he owns for the rest of his life. Example: [Collected on the Internet, 2004] You will pay upkeep/Secret Service for 5 Kerry mansions. It is good to be John F. Kerry....... The F stands for Forbes in case you ever wondered. He is one of the richest Senators in Government. When someone is elected president, it means the Secret Service has to protect the President and his family as well as his property. The Kerry's have five US properties not counting the several foreign properties they own too. The cost to run these homes are more than what the average American could afford, even if the rent was free, and all you had to pay the water, gas & electric. Including ground keepers, maintenance, pool, and house keepers. To be President would require the taxpayers to pay for all that now if elected. Including a complete staffed Secret Service security 24 hours a day. In addition to that we will have to pay for each of their homes for security improvements even if they never go to them all there is that just in case. Who do you think will pay for all this? We Pay! This takes all the expense off Kerry and puts it on us. Nevertheless, factor another major cost to Americans that Kerry does not want you to know about. Becoming president would automatically include taking care of all their properties with Secret Service Agents that includes 5 agents per 6 hour shift 4 times a day 365 days of the year for the rest of their lives so long as they own those properties. It comes with being President once you are elected. It requires us the taxpayers, to pay for this as well as his annual salary as well as his retirements including the cost of living adjustments to boot. These salaries and agents protect all their real estate property with Secret Service Agents and pay the bills for the rest of his life. In addition, feed the Secret Service Agents and rotate new ones every 6 hours for the rest of his life. Do the math. Five properties need to be protected. This requires five Secret Service Agents per shift, daily every six hours, per property! That is 20 Secret Service Agents per day per property everyday including Holidays. Wow, what does that cost? Lets say an average of 20 agents per property, each earning a about $60K per agent to survey the perimeters and protect. Now times that by five properties so far. That is if the Kerry's do not buy any more properties afterwards. This also includes the Agents vehicles and repairs, gas, meals, days off, paid vacation, and medical plan visits etc per agent. Who pays? YOU pay, the whole time they are alive after becoming President! Is this the best use of our tax money electing Kerry to take care of all their properties both foreign and domestic? On the other hand, shouldn't he pay for his own? Yet, the Presidential salary could not afford it. The more I think about paying for Kerry's properties everyday, just makes me happy keeping President Bush all the more merrier. Without raising taxes to boot. How on earth would Kerry pay for everyone to have Healthcare, increase our military, and have us pay to protect his investments, all without raising our taxes? Tax and spend Kerry is his party motto. Which really has to make you wonder why anyone with his wealth, would take a salary of that of a U.S. Senator, never mind wanna be President? Do you believe him now why he needs to be the Prez? To serve the people? On the other hand, the people serve Him and his wife! IF YOU AREN'T COMPLETELY APPALLED, THEN YOU HAVEN'T BEEN PAYING ATTENTION Origins: The fact that Senator John Kerry's middle name is "Forbes" is about the only piece of information this latest political diatribe gets right. John Kerry and his wife, Teresa Heinz Kerry, together own several homes, but since they signed a prenuptial agreement and have kept their premarital assets separate, a Boston townhouse (which John Kerry mortgaged in 2003 to finance his presidential bid) is the only one of these homes that they technically own as a couple. The government is obligated to provide Secret Service protection to the President and his immediate family, so if John Kerry were elected to that office, of course he and his family would be entitled to the same level of security detail that the Secret Service provides to every President. That protection might indeed include the use of public funds to pay the costs of installation and maintenance for security systems at some of the Kerrys' homes, because the protection of First Families is viewed as a right and proper charge upon the nation. Security measures of this level would not be specific to the Kerrys; the homes of all Presidents are treated this way, as (to a lesser extent) are the homes of all former Presidents. homes It is not true, however, that every single residence owned by the either of the Kerrys (whether it be in America or abroad) would be staffed by five Secret Service agents around the clock, and that those agents would be guarding the Kerrys and all their properties for the rest of John Kerry's life. Secret Service staffing levels vary as the situation requires, and lifetime protection for former Presidents and their spouses was eliminated by Congressional legislation in 1997. President Clinton and his wife, Hillary, are the last First Couple who will receive such a benefit; President George W. Bush and all who succeed him in the White House will be limited to receiving Secret Service protection for a period of not more than 10 years from the time they leave office. protection In any case, the idea that U.S. voters would have to pay higher taxes if John Kerry were elected President in order to "protect his investments" is just silly. The projected U.S. federal budget for 2005 is $2.4 trillion the amount of money spent to protect the President and his family (whoever that President might be) is but a teeny-tiny fraction of a drop in that vast bucket. The only thing sillier than that notion that taxes would have to be raised to protect a putative President Kerry is the suggestion that the cost of Secret Service protection should be a factor in voters' choosing who should serve as President of the United States. budget For more information about the protection afforded former Presidents, see our article about a similar rumor that was attached to the previous First Couple when President Bill Clinton left office in 2001. article Last updated: 2 October 2004 Sources: Burger, Timothy and Kenneth Bazinet. "Hil and Bill Buy 3M Home, Sweet Home in Capital." [New York] Daily News. 30 December 2000 (p. 6). DeFrank, Thomas. "1st Family's N.Y. Bunker." [New York] Daily News. 14 September 1999 (p. 5). Fuchs, Marek. "First Family's Arrival Changes the Focus of Secret Service Office." The New York Times. 29 October 2000 (Weekend Calendar; p. 5). Grove, Lloyd. "The Reliable Source." The Washington Post. 12 January 2001 (p. C3).

['taxes']

False

John Kerry and his wife, Teresa Heinz Kerry, together own several homes, but since they signed a prenuptial agreement and have kept their premarital assets separate, a Boston townhouse (which John Kerry mortgaged in 2003 to finance his presidential bid) is the only one of these homes that they technically own as a couple. The government is obligated to provide Secret Service protection to the President and his immediate family, so if John Kerry were elected to that office, of course he and his family would be entitled to the same level of security detail that the Secret Service provides to every President. That protection might indeed include the use of public funds to pay the costs of installation and maintenance for security systems at some of the Kerrys' homes, because the protection of First Families is viewed as a right and proper charge upon the nation. Security measures of this level would not be specific to the Kerrys; the homes of all Presidents are treated this way, as (to a lesser extent) are the homes of all former Presidents. It is not true, however, that every single residence owned by the either of the Kerrys (whether it be in America or abroad) would be staffed by five Secret Service agents around the clock, and that those agents would be guarding the Kerrys and all their properties for the rest of John Kerry's life. Secret Service staffing levels vary as the situation requires, and lifetime protection for former Presidents and their spouses was eliminated by Congressional legislation in 1997. President Clinton and his wife, Hillary, are the last First Couple who will receive such a benefit; President George W. Bush and all who succeed him in the White House will be limited to receiving Secret Service protection for a period of not more than 10 years from the time they leave office. In any case, the idea that U.S. voters would have to pay higher taxes if John Kerry were elected President in order to "protect his investments" is just silly. The projected U.S. federal budget for 2005 is $2.4 trillion the amount of money spent to protect the President and his family (whoever that President might be) is but a teeny-tiny fraction of a drop in that vast bucket. The only thing sillier than that notion that taxes would have to be raised to protect a putative President Kerry is the suggestion that the cost of Secret Service protection should be a factor in voters' choosing who should serve as President of the United States.For more information about the protection afforded former Presidents, see our article about a similar rumor that was attached to the previous First Couple when President Bill Clinton left office in 2001.

Did Hillary Clinton Suppress Haiti's Minimum Wage?

['Rumors that Hillary Clinton (and the Clinton Foundation) used Haiti exclusively for personal gain are a mixed bag at best.']

Haiti's relationship with the United States and Europe can most charitably be described as complicated. Haiti's earliest days were characterized by oppression and opposition: the country (once the French colony of St. Domingue) was born from a successful slave insurgency and declared its independence in 1804. This beginning characterized an often-antagonistic relationship between countries that profited handsomely from African slavery (such as the United States) and Haiti. Foremost among fears about Haiti was that slaves would learn successful uprisings were possible. insurgency profited After Haiti formally declared its independence, the United States suspended all diplomatic and trade relationships with the country. While the U.S. eventually re-opened trading routes, America didn't recognize Haiti diplomatically for nearly sixty years after that. Other countries followed the United States' example (and France demanded millions of francs in reparations for its rebellion in exchange for recognizing Haiti as a sovereign nation) plunging Haiti into debt and an economic depression that lasted for years, from which the country never fully recovered. eventually Multiple invasions and economic and political tinkering followed, leaving Haiti in a turmoil of political instability and corruption, economic crisis, and a ravaged infrastructure, historically one of the poorest countries in the Western Hemisphere, despite its fertile land and ability to grow cash crops such as sugar. tinkering poorest Today, child labor and trafficking are endemic in Haiti, particularly in the country's manufacturing sector, which is outsourced to foreign companies (many of them contractors for American companies, such as Hanes, Dockers, and Fruit of the Loom). Even when they are not trafficked, laborers in Haiti's garment industry earn a pittance by the standards of other countries: the minimum wage was $0.24 (USD) an hour for many years. trafficking In June 2009, the Haitian Parliament unanimously passed a law requiring that the minimum wage be raised to $0.61 an hour, or $5 a day. (The average cost of living is estimated to be the equivalent of about $23 a day.) This pay raise was staunchly opposed by foreign manufacturers who had set up shop in the country, and the United States Department of State and the U.S. Agency for International Development backed those manufacturers. After Haiti's government mandated the raise, the United States aggressively (and successfully) pushed Haiti's president to lower the minimum wage for garment workers to what factory owners were willing to pay: the equivalent of about $0.31 an hour (or $2.50 per eight-hour day). estimated lower In 2011, WikiLeaks released a set of previously-secret diplomatic cables. The American publication The Nation partnered with Haitian news organization Hati Libert to cover them, finding (among other things) how strongly the United States had opposed the minimum wage hike: WikiLeaks partnered Hati Libert cover among other things To resolve the impasse between the factory owners and Parliament, the State Department urged quick intervention by then Haitian President Ren Prval. A more visible and active engagement by Prval may be critical to resolving the issue of the minimum wage and its protest spin-offor risk the political environment spiraling out of control, argued US Ambassador Janet Sanderson in a June 10, 2009, cable back to Washington. Two months later Prval negotiated a deal with Parliament to create a two-tiered minimum wage increaseone for the textile industry at about $3 per day and one for all other industrial and commercial sectors at about $5 per day. Still the US Embassy wasn't pleased. A deputy chief of mission, David E. Lindwall, said the $5 per day minimum did not take economic reality into account but was a populist measure aimed at appealing to the unemployed and underpaid masses. The Obama administration (and the Bush administration before it) had been closely monitoring the situation in the garment manufacturing sector for a long time. In 2006, Congress passed the HOPE bill (which stood for the Haitian Hemispheric Opportunity through Partnership Encouragement) and provided duty-free entry to garments manufactured in Haiti for U.S. companies. That body also passed an updated version of the bill (HOPE II) in 2008, which mandated a framework for labor reform in factories. According to cables released by WikiLeaks, it was exactly these efforts that the United States claimed would be jeopardized by a higher minimum wage. HOPE HOPE II higher So it's true that the State Department (then led by Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State) strongly opposed a minimum wage increase in Haiti in 2009. However, the State Department's efforts did not occur in a political or economic vacuum, and Clinton wasn't the sole architect of efforts to quash a minimum wage hike (as the meme suggests). It was a concerted effort on the part of Haitian elites, factory owners, free trade proponents, U.S. politicians, economists, and American companies that kept the minimum wage so low, and to lay the blame squarely at the feet of any sitting Secretary of State would be an incomplete assessment, and thus inaccurate. A law establishing a new minimum wage of $5.11 per workday ($0.64 an hour) was finally approved in 2014, which still fell far short of both the demanded raise by workers (to the equivalent of $11.36 per workday, or $1.42 per hour) and the recommended daily wage of 1,006 Haitian gourdes, or USD$22.86. approved recommended gourdes Related rumors of the Clintons' relationship to Haiti appeared in October 2016, this time alleging that after the Haiti's infrastructure was devastated by a major earthquake in 2010, the State Department steered relief contracts to personal friends of the Clintons. However, while Hillary Clinton did recommend specific companies to help with the rebuilding process and e-mails have surfaced indicating that special attention was given to "FoBs" ("Friends of Bill"), there's no evidence that the United States government awarded contracts to any of those contenders. earthquake recommend e-mails evidence Alexander, Leslie. "A Pact with the Devil? The United States and the Fate of Modern Haiti." Origins: Current Events in Historical Perspective, Vol. 4, Issue 5. February 2011. Coughlin, Dan and Kim Ives. "Let Them Live on $3 a Day." The Nation. 1 June 2011. Dubois, Laurent. "Haiti: The Aftershocks of History." Metropolitan Books: Henry Holt and Company, 2012. U.S. Department of State Office of the Historian. "Milestones: 1784-1800: The United States and the Haitian Revolution." Accessed 5 April 2016. Federal Procurement Data System. "Haiti Earthquake Report." Accessed 5 April 2016. Apr. 6, 2016: Statements were added to the What's True and What's False fields of this article to better explicate its rating. Oct. 7, 2016: This article was modified to incorporate a related rumor, to adjust the wording of the subhead and claim, and to add supplementary sources. Jan. 12, 2018: The rating for this article was adjusted from true to to better reflect post-publication revisions.

['debt']

NEI

Haiti's relationship with the United States and Europe can most charitably be described as complicated. Haiti's earliest days were characterized by oppression and opposition: the country (once the French colony of St. Domingue) was born from a successful slave insurgency and declared its independence in 1804. This beginning characterized an often-antagonistic relationship between countries that profited handsomely from African slavery (such as the United States) and Haiti. Foremost among fears about Haiti was that slaves would learn successful uprisings were possible.After Haiti formally declared its independence, the United States suspended all diplomatic and trade relationships with the country. While the U.S. eventually re-opened trading routes, America didn't recognize Haiti diplomatically for nearly sixty years after that. Other countries followed the United States' example (and France demanded millions of francs in reparations for its rebellion in exchange for recognizing Haiti as a sovereign nation) plunging Haiti into debt and an economic depression that lasted for years, from which the country never fully recovered.Multiple invasions and economic and political tinkering followed, leaving Haiti in a turmoil of political instability and corruption, economic crisis, and a ravaged infrastructure, historically one of the poorest countries in the Western Hemisphere, despite its fertile land and ability to grow cash crops such as sugar.Today, child labor and trafficking are endemic in Haiti, particularly in the country's manufacturing sector, which is outsourced to foreign companies (many of them contractors for American companies, such as Hanes, Dockers, and Fruit of the Loom). Even when they are not trafficked, laborers in Haiti's garment industry earn a pittance by the standards of other countries: the minimum wage was $0.24 (USD) an hour for many years.In June 2009, the Haitian Parliament unanimously passed a law requiring that the minimum wage be raised to $0.61 an hour, or $5 a day. (The average cost of living is estimated to be the equivalent of about $23 a day.) This pay raise was staunchly opposed by foreign manufacturers who had set up shop in the country, and the United States Department of State and the U.S. Agency for International Development backed those manufacturers. After Haiti's government mandated the raise, the United States aggressively (and successfully) pushed Haiti's president to lower the minimum wage for garment workers to what factory owners were willing to pay: the equivalent of about $0.31 an hour (or $2.50 per eight-hour day).In 2011, WikiLeaks released a set of previously-secret diplomatic cables. The American publication The Nation partnered with Haitian news organization Hati Libert to cover them, finding (among other things) how strongly the United States had opposed the minimum wage hike:The Obama administration (and the Bush administration before it) had been closely monitoring the situation in the garment manufacturing sector for a long time. In 2006, Congress passed the HOPE bill (which stood for the Haitian Hemispheric Opportunity through Partnership Encouragement) and provided duty-free entry to garments manufactured in Haiti for U.S. companies. That body also passed an updated version of the bill (HOPE II) in 2008, which mandated a framework for labor reform in factories. According to cables released by WikiLeaks, it was exactly these efforts that the United States claimed would be jeopardized by a higher minimum wage.A law establishing a new minimum wage of $5.11 per workday ($0.64 an hour) was finally approved in 2014, which still fell far short of both the demanded raise by workers (to the equivalent of $11.36 per workday, or $1.42 per hour) and the recommended daily wage of 1,006 Haitian gourdes, or USD$22.86.Related rumors of the Clintons' relationship to Haiti appeared in October 2016, this time alleging that after the Haiti's infrastructure was devastated by a major earthquake in 2010, the State Department steered relief contracts to personal friends of the Clintons. However, while Hillary Clinton did recommend specific companies to help with the rebuilding process and e-mails have surfaced indicating that special attention was given to "FoBs" ("Friends of Bill"), there's no evidence that the United States government awarded contracts to any of those contenders.

Boston Marathon Bombers Tuition Fees

['Did the accused Boston Marathon bombers attend expensive private schools?']

Claim: The accused Boston Marathon bombers attended expensive private schools. Example: [Collected via e-mail, April 2013] Can you tell me where the Boston bombers and their families got their monies? There is no indication of a job (other than the father at one time being a US gov't employee) and I'm wondering how they got to an exclusive school and higher private education tuitions? Origins: A number of inquiries from our readers like the one reproduced above suggests there is a common perception that accused Boston Marathon bombers Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev attended expensive private schools, a perception which has prompted many to raise the question of where the money to fund their educations came from (since the brothers apparently had no obvious substantial source of income). Although detailed information about the Tsarnaevs' finances (and its sources) has not yet been made public, we can dispel the mistaken notion that they received costly private educations. According to various news accounts, the elder brother, 26-year-old Tamerlan (now deceased), attended high school at Cambridge Rindge and Latin School and tookaccounting classes for three semesters between 2006 and 2008 as a part-time student at Bunker Hill Community College. As the school's name indicates, Bunker Hill is a community college (i.e., a Bunker Hill publicly funded two-year institution) with relatively low tuition rates for local residents. The younger brother, 19-year-old Dzhokhar, is likewise reported to have attended high school at Cambridge Rindge and Latin School and then studied marine biology at UMass Dartmouth. Although the names of these institutions might suggest otherwise, neither of them is a private school: Cambridge Rindge and Latin School (CRLS) is a public high school (part of the Cambridge Public School District) formed from the 1977 merger of Rindge Technical School and Cambridge High and Latin School, and the University of Massachusetts Dartmouth (or UMass Dartmouth) is one of the five schools that comprise the University of Massachusetts public university system. Altogether, public high school, community college, and the University of Massachusetts is about the cheapest educational path a resident of Massachusetts could follow. CRLS University of Massachusetts This isn't to say that the Tsarnaevs' educations were either cheap or completely cost-free: the fees at UMass Dartmouth run over $10,000 per year for Massachusetts residents, and even Bunker Hill Community College's tuition costs a local resident $141 per unit. And at least one of the brothers (Tamerlan) is reported to have been receiving welfare benefits at one pointHowever, Dzhokhar won a Cambridge City Scholarship in 2011, and either or both brothers might also have received student loans or other forms of financial aid. fees tuition welfare Last updated: 24 April 2013 CNN.com. "Timeline: A Look at Tamerlan Tsarnaev's Past." 22 April 2013.

['loan']

NEI

According to various news accounts, the elder brother, 26-year-old Tamerlan (now deceased), attended high school at Cambridge Rindge and Latin School and tookaccounting classes for three semesters between 2006 and 2008 as a part-time student at Bunker Hill Community College. As the school's name indicates, Bunker Hill is a community college (i.e., a The younger brother, 19-year-old Dzhokhar, is likewise reported to have attended high school at Cambridge Rindge and Latin School and then studied marine biology at UMass Dartmouth. Although the names of these institutions might suggest otherwise, neither of them is a private school: Cambridge Rindge and Latin School (CRLS) is a public high school (part of the Cambridge Public School District) formed from the 1977 merger of Rindge Technical School and Cambridge High and Latin School, and the University of Massachusetts Dartmouth (or UMass Dartmouth) is one of the five schools that comprise the University of Massachusetts public university system. Altogether, public high school, community college, and the University of Massachusetts is about the cheapest educational path a resident of Massachusetts could follow.This isn't to say that the Tsarnaevs' educations were either cheap or completely cost-free: the fees at UMass Dartmouth run over $10,000 per year for Massachusetts residents, and even Bunker Hill Community College's tuition costs a local resident $141 per unit. And at least one of the brothers (Tamerlan) is reported to have been receiving welfare benefits at one pointHowever, Dzhokhar won a Cambridge City Scholarship in 2011, and either or both brothers might also have received student loans or other forms of financial aid.

Reductions in public broadcasting funding in 2005

['Would legislation currently under consideration substantially cut federal funding of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting?']

Claim: Legislation currently under consideration would cut $100 million in federal funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. Status: Was true; proposal has been defeated. Example: [Collected on the Internet, 2005] You know that email petition that keeps circulating about how Congress is slashing funding for NPR and PBS? Well, now it's actually true. (Really. Check at the bottom if you don't believe me.) Sign the petition telling Congress to save NPR and PBS: https://www.moveon.org/publicbroadcasting/ A House panel has voted to eliminate all public funding for NPR and PBS, starting with "Sesame Street," "Reading Rainbow," and other commercial-free children's shows. If approved, this would be the most severe cut in the history of public broadcasting, threatening to pull the plug on Big Bird, Cookie Monster, and Oscar the Grouch. The cuts would slash 25% of the federal funding this year—$100 million—and end funding altogether within two years. The loss could kill beloved children's shows like "Clifford the Big Red Dog," "Arthur," and "Postcards from Buster." Rural stations and those serving low-income communities might not survive. Other stations would have to increase corporate sponsorships. Already, 300,000 people have signed the petition. Can you help us reach 400,000 signatures today? https://www.moveon.org/publicbroadcasting/ Origins: Although a long-outdated piece decrying supposed upcoming cuts in funding for the NEA, NPR, PBS, and Sesame Street has been circulating for years (it addressed legislation already voted upon way back in 1995), recent congressional efforts have brought the issue to public attention again. In June 2005, the House Appropriations Committee voted to sharply reduce federal financial support for public broadcasting. If this budgetary plan were approved, it would eliminate within two years all federal money for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), money which currently makes up 15% of the funding for public broadcasting. As the Washington Post reported: A House subcommittee voted yesterday to sharply reduce the federal government's financial support for public broadcasting, including eliminating taxpayer funds that help underwrite such popular children's educational programs as "Sesame Street," "Reading Rainbow," "Arthur," and "Postcards From Buster." In addition, the subcommittee acted to eliminate within two years all federal money for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which passes federal funds to public broadcasters, starting with a 25 percent reduction in CPB's budget for next year, from $400 million to $300 million. In all, the cuts would represent the most drastic cutback of public broadcasting since Congress created the nonprofit CPB in 1967. The CPB funds are particularly important for small TV and radio stations and account for about 15 percent of the public broadcasting industry's total revenue. The House measure also cuts support for a variety of smaller projects, such as a $39.6 million public TV satellite distribution network and a $39.4 million program that helps public stations update their analog TV signals to digital format. Although this legislation, if approved, would not (as claimed in older petitions) affect funding for the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA), it would obviously have a significant impact on public broadcasting outlets, which would have to turn to other sources to try to make up the lost revenue. On 23 June 2005, the House of Representatives decided, by a 284-140 vote, to rescind the House Appropriations Committee's proposed $100 million cut in federal funds from the budget for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. Other areas of public broadcasting, however, may still face budget reductions if proposed funding cuts are not overturned: But Elmo and Big Bird remain at risk. The House did not restore all of the public broadcasting funding cuts proposed for 2006. Although yesterday's amendment would bump CPB's general budget back to $400 million, the 2005 funding level, an additional $102.4 million that had been cut from separate public broadcasting programs was not restored. That money underwrites the production of such PBS children's programs as "Sesame Street," "Arthur," and "Postcards From Buster." The money that would be cut also pays for satellite technology, basic equipment purchases, and a federal mandate program to convert public TV stations from analog transmission to digital signal technology. Last updated: 24 June 2005 Sources: Farhi, Paul. "Public Broadcasting Targeted by House." The Washington Post. 10 June 2005 (p. A1). Gold, Matea and Jube Shiver. "Public Broadcasting Funds May Be Halved." Los Angeles Times. 17 June 2005 (p. A28). Murray, Shailagh and Paul Farhi. "House Vote Spares Public Broadcasting Funds." The Washington Post. 24 June 2005 (p. A6). Taylor, Andrew. "House Rescinds Proposed Cut in Federal Support of Public Broadcasting." Associated Press. 23 June 2005.

['budget']

True

Is there a plan by Biden and the Democrats to engage in surveillance of individuals' bank and Cash App accounts?

['Social media posts mischaracterized how the American Rescue Plan will affect users of cash apps like Venmo.']

Various social media posts circulating in late December 2021 claimed that thanks to coronavirus stimulus legislation known as the American Rescue Plan, U.S. President Joe Biden's administration and Democratic legislators would begin "spying" or "snooping" on users of cash apps like PayPal and Venmo. Here is an example of one such post: example The truth is, unsurprisingly, more nuanced, but the bottom line is that, contrary to what the above Twitter posts state, the effect of the legislation in question isn't that the Biden administration or Democrats will be "tapping into" or "spying on" bank or cash app accounts. This is a misleading characterization. What the legislation does is significantly lower the threshold for reporting taxable transactions made using cash apps like Venmo, PayPal, or Zelle for goods and services to the IRS. And when you reach that threshold, the app companies will then be required to send a tax form called a 1099-K to both you and the IRS. A 1099-K is, according to PayPal, an "informational tax form that is used to report goods and services payments received by a business or individual in the calendar year." PayPal As of this writing, the current threshold for such reporting is $20,000 and 200 payments in goods and services. Come Jan. 1, 2022, that reporting threshold will drop down to $600. threshold This could have a significant impact on platform users' tax returns. Here's how Bloomberg Tax described how users might experience the change: Bloomberg Tax For example, a model train collector may have paid $5,000 for model train pieces over several years that they now sell for $8,000, and the marketplace that introduced the seller to the buyer and through which the sale took place may charge the seller a total fee of $800. It may cost the model train seller $200 in postage to send the pieces to its buyers. The Form 1099-K that the seller will receive from the TPSO will report $8,000 in gross proceeds paid. However, the sellers taxable gain from that sale would only be $2,000. As a result, collectors and other online sellers will need to keep extensive records of their expenses going forward to avoid over-reporting of income and overpayment of tax. Also, consider the alternativea teenager who walks dogs to earn extra money. If their income in 2022 exceeds $600, their expenses may be limited to the fees charged by the website that connects them to pet owners, but they will owe income taxand possibly self-employment taxon the income they earn. According to PayPal, which owns Venmo, the change doesn't affect people who use the apps for personal transactions, like paying a friend back for your share of dinner, gifts, or chipping in for trips. PayPal also states that its app allows users to categorize their own transactions as personal versus rendering payment for "goods and services." PayPal Business Users on Cash Apps Will Begin Receiving Tax Forms. Heres What You Need to Know. WJHL | Tri-Cities News & Weather, 14 Oct. 2021, https://www.wjhl.com/news/business-users-on-cash-apps-to-begin-receiving-tax-forms-what-you-need-to-know/. Pflieger, Deborah. "New Form 1099 Reporting Coming in 2022," Bloomberg Tax, 15 Dec. 2021, https://news.bloombergtax.com/tax-insights-and-commentary/new-form-1099-reporting-coming-in-2022. New U.S. Tax Reporting Requirements: Your Questions Answered. PayPal Newsroom, 4 Nov. 2021, https://newsroom.paypal-corp.com/2021-11-04-New-US-Tax-Reporting-Requirements-Your-Questions-Answered. "PayPal and Venmo Taxes: What You Need to Know About P2P Platforms." TurboTax, 27 Nov. 2021, https://turbotax.intuit.com/tax-tips/self-employment-taxes/paypal-and-venmo-taxes-what-you-need-to-know-about-p2p-platforms/L5DNjOUM1.

['returns']

False

Various social media posts circulating in late December 2021 claimed that thanks to coronavirus stimulus legislation known as the American Rescue Plan, U.S. President Joe Biden's administration and Democratic legislators would begin "spying" or "snooping" on users of cash apps like PayPal and Venmo. Here is an example of one such post:A 1099-K is, according to PayPal, an "informational tax form that is used to report goods and services payments received by a business or individual in the calendar year."As of this writing, the current threshold for such reporting is $20,000 and 200 payments in goods and services. Come Jan. 1, 2022, that reporting threshold will drop down to $600.This could have a significant impact on platform users' tax returns. Here's how Bloomberg Tax described how users might experience the change:According to PayPal, which owns Venmo, the change doesn't affect people who use the apps for personal transactions, like paying a friend back for your share of dinner, gifts, or chipping in for trips. PayPal also states that its app allows users to categorize their own transactions as personal versus rendering payment for "goods and services."

Justin Trudeau to Pardon All Prisoners Convicted of a Marijuana Offence

['Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has not freed from prison and expunged the record of every convicted marijuana user in Canada.']

In July 2016, a image picturing Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau was circulated with text stating that he had freed everyone imprisoned for marijuana offences and expunged their records, and that he was able to enact such a sweeping reform because Canada (unlike the U.S.) has no "prison for profit" facilities: However, the claim originated not with a news report of any such reform act, but with an article published by the Global Sun on 3 July 2016: A press conference was held last night by The Liberal Party of Canada, on behalf of newly-elected Canadian prime minister, Justin Trudeau about future marijuana laws and regulations. 30 minutes into the conference, Trudeau announced the big news that all members of the parliament have agreed to and that is pardoning all Canadian prisoners who have been convicted of a minor or major offence of marijuana. The Global Sun is a satirical publication that does not publish factual stories: The Global Sun is a satire website, articles/post on the website are all made-up stories and should not be taken seriously. Although Prime Minister Trudeau has not freed all those convicted of marijuana-related offences from prison, real news suggests Canada may be moving toward legalizing the drug in 2017: legalizing Canada's Liberal Party government will introduce a law next spring to legalize recreational marijuana, Health Minister Jane Philpott disclosed last week at the United Nations. She did not detail who would be allowed to grow or distribute cannabis products. Canada has a lot of options here, said RAND Drug Policy Research Center co-director Beau Kilmer. You have to pay attention to what's going to happen with the regulation and the taxes. That could really shape what happens in terms of people coming in from other countries. You have to decide whether you want to allow that.

['profit']

False

Although Prime Minister Trudeau has not freed all those convicted of marijuana-related offences from prison, real news suggests Canada may be moving toward legalizing the drug in 2017:

A voucher school that closed after 9 days this year collected $5.4 million in taxpayer subsidies since first opening.

[]

Less than two weeks into the 2015-16 school year, the Milwaukee voucher school Daughters of the Father Christian Academy closed its doors, leaving the families of about 150 children scrambling to find new schools. The closure, triggered by a state Department of Public Instruction order questioning the qualifications of school administrators, prompted Democratic opponents of vouchers to cite it as evidence that the program needed better oversight. Senate Minority Leader Jennifer Shilling (D-La Crosse) tweeted: "GOP voucher school that closed after 9 days this year collected $5.4 million in taxpayer subsidies since first opening." Is she right? About the program: Voucher schools are private institutions, usually religiously affiliated, that receive taxpayer dollars to cover the tuition of lower-income students. As part of the 2015-17 state budget, the Republican-controlled Legislature and Gov. Scott Walker raised the limit on how many students statewide can participate in the program. The program, which began in Milwaukee, had been extended statewide two years earlier. According to the Department of Public Instruction and the Legislative Fiscal Bureau, about 26,900 Milwaukee students are enrolled in voucher schools. Additionally, there are approximately 1,700 students in Racine and 1,000 statewide who participated in the program during the 2014-15 school year. The Milwaukee program cost about $191 million, while other schools statewide incurred an additional $22 million. Supporters argue that voucher schools provide parents with valuable choices regarding where to send their children, especially in areas where local public schools may be underperforming. Critics contend that the voucher program drains public school budgets and that private schools do not always adhere to the same educational standards. What about Daughters of the Father? Shilling's claim seems straightforward, but her tweet may imply that the school received the money and then quickly closed, suggesting that the school was new and that the $5.4 million was immediately lost to taxpayers. However, that is not exactly what happened. Daughters of the Father first opened its doors in the 2007-08 school year and had just begun its ninth year. Records indicate it had 153 students in 2014-15 and, through the state's voucher program, received about $7,200 for each student that year, totaling more than $1.1 million. The school encountered financial difficulties that led to canceled bus service at the end of the school year. In a May 14, 2015, press release, executive director Doris Pinkley attributed the issues to lower-than-expected enrollment. After a change in the school's leadership, the state Department of Public Instruction determined that the school had failed to comply with statutory and administrative rules governing participation in the voucher program. The department issued an order on Aug. 4, 2015, banning the school from participating in the voucher program because it did not have a qualified administrator on staff; the principal held only an expired substitute teacher's license. The $5.4 million represents the total amount the school has received since its inception. In total, the state has terminated 57 schools from the voucher program since the 2003-04 academic year, although some of these schools ceased operating on their own. Those schools had received a total of $176 million. Our rating: Shilling tweeted that the Daughters of the Father Christian Academy closed after 9 days this year and collected $5.4 million in taxpayer subsidies since first opening. The school did not simply open its doors, receive $5.4 million, and quickly close; it had operated for eight years, and the money represents the total received since its opening. We rate the claim Mostly True.

['State Budget', 'Wisconsin']

True

The school ran into financial trouble that led to canceled bus service at the end of the school year. In aMay 14, 2015 press releaseexecutive director Doris Pinkley blamed lower-than-expected enrollment.The department issued an orderAug. 4, 2015banning the school from participating in the voucher program because the school did not have a qualified administrator on staff. The principal had only an expired substitute teacher's license.

Do 'Illegal' Refugees Receive $3,874 Per Month from the Government?

['"This is what 1 illegal refugee gets with the federal assistance program: $3874 per month."']

As is the case for many Western democracies, the Canadian government's formal efforts to help refugees settle in the country have been the subject of much speculation, criticism, and misinformation in recent years. In the fall of 2017, a viral Facebook post spread even more misinformation about the benefits received by refugees in Canada. On September 1, 2017, Facebook user Mike Marcoux posted what appears to be a photograph of an itemized breakdown of benefits associated with the Resettlement Assistance Program, along with the message: "This is what 1 illegal refugee gets with the federal assistance program: $3,874 per month." We have modified the image to obscure the name of the recipient, which was included in the original photograph. Although this document appears to be authentic, according to the Canadian Council for Refugees, a national nonprofit organization dedicated to supporting and advocating for refugees, its representation on Facebook was highly misleading. The document details payments to a family of five (not a single person) who were refugees accepted by Canada (and therefore are not in the country "illegally"), and most of the listed payments are one-time-only resettlement assistance payments and not monthly benefits. A spokesperson for the Council told us the document showed "a start-up breakdown of costs for a newly arrived Government-Assisted Refugee (GAR) family" and that the amounts shown were consistent with benefit rates in the province of British Columbia. Despite the apparent authenticity of the document, Marcoux's post grossly misrepresents its contents. Firstly, contrary to Mike Marcoux's post, there is no such thing as an "illegal" refugee in this context. By definition, beneficiaries of the Canadian government's Resettlement Assistance Program are individuals and families formally recognized by the Canadian government as refugees before they travel to Canada. According to the Canadian Council for Refugees, Government-Assisted Refugees, such as those to whom this document appears to relate, are "referred by the [U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees] to Canada because they have been identified as being in need of resettlement." Secondly, the document does not relate to one refugee, as the Facebook post falsely claims. The document clearly shows that these benefits are for a family of five people. Third, the grand total value of the benefits ($3,874 CAD or $2,748 USD as of January 28, 2016) is not a recurring monthly payment, as the Facebook post falsely claims. The document clearly shows that the majority of benefits listed are one-off "start-up" benefits. The only regular monthly benefits are conveniently labeled "Regular Monthly Benefits," and consist of payments for food, rent, and transportation, which, because of the size of the family, total $1,399 CAD per month ($1,094 USD as of November 15, 2017). These monthly benefits work out to $16,788 CAD ($13,132 USD) a year for a family of five (in addition to "start-up" benefits). Unless there are exceptional circumstances, these Resettlement Assistance Program benefits are only payable to refugees for one year. The amounts of benefits depend on the size of the family that receives them. If this document did relate to a single individual (as the Facebook post claims), the overall monthly payments could be expected to be significantly lower. The one-off start-up benefits, which bring the total in this particular document to $3,874, also include a $375 loan for a security deposit for housing. Being a loan, that amount will have to be repaid to the federal government. Furthermore, depending on when this particular family arrived in Canada, they may be required to pay the Canadian government for the cost of their transportation into the country, which takes the form of loan debt. According to the Canadian Council for Refugees, the average loan debt between 2008 and 2012 was $3,090 CAD. So while the document in the photograph does appear to be authentic, Mike Marcoux's Facebook post constitutes a gross misrepresentation of its actual contents. The same document formed the basis of a similarly outraged post on the right-wing blog "90 Miles from Tyranny" in December 2016. That blog post cited an earlier article by the now-defunct Magafeed website, which is listed in the Fake News Codex as a "clickbait site with misleading, poorly sourced, and outright false stories." It's hardly the first time that Canada's refugee policy has been the subject of false claims. For example, a factual error in a 2004 letter to the editor of the Toronto Star spawned a chain email and online memes falsely claiming that refugees in Canada receive more benefits each month than Canadian pensioners. The rumor persisted for years. Similar false rumors have been spread in the United States, often with the headline "INSANITY IS WHEN ILLEGAL REFUGEES GET $3,874 A MONTH IN FEDERAL ASSISTANCE WHILE SOCIAL SECURITY CHECKS AVERAGE $1,200 A MONTH."

['loan']

False

On 1 September 2017, Facebook user Mike Marcoux posted what appears to be a photograph of an itemized breakdown of benefits associated with the Resettlement Assistance Program, along with the message: "This is what 1 illegal refugee gets with the federal assistance program $3874 per month."Firstly, contrary to Mike Marcoux's post, there is no such thing as an "illegal" refugee in this context. By definition, beneficiaries of the Canadian government's Resettlement Assistance Program are individuals and families formally recognized by the Canadian government as refugees before they travel to Canada. According to the Canadian Council for Refugees, Government-Assisted Refugees such as those to whom this document appears to relate are "referred by the [U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees] to Canada because they have been identified as being in need of resettlement."Furthermore, depending on when this particular family arrived in Canada, they may be required to pay the Canadian government for the cost of their transportation into the country, which takes the form of loan debt. According to the Canadian Council for Refugees, the average loan debt between 2008 and 2012 was $3,090 CAD.The same document formed the basis of a similarly-outraged post on the right-wing blog "90 Miles from Tyranny" in December 2016. That blog post cited an earlier article by the now-defunct Magafeed web site, which is listed in the Fake News Codex as a "clickbait site with misleading, poorly [sourced], and outright false stories."It's hardly the first time that Canada's refugee policy has been the subject of false claims. For example, a factual error in a 2004 letter to the editor of the Toronto Star spawned a chain email and online memes falsely claiming that refugees in Canada receive more benefits each month than do Canadian pensioners. The rumor persisted for years.Similar false rumors have been spread in the country's southern neighbor, the United States, often with the headline "INSANITY IS WHEN ILLEGAL REFUGEES GET $3,874 A MONTH IN FEDERAL ASSISTANCE WHILE SOCIAL SECURITY CHECKS AVERAGE $1,200 A MONTH."

It wasnt all women that lost jobs (in the December jobs report), it was mostly Black and Latina women. In fact, white women gained employment.

['There was a net loss in jobs from November to December.', 'Bureau of Labor Statistics data indicate that while women overall lost jobs, men overall gained jobs nationally., A separate Bureau of Labor Statistics survey indicates the number of employed white women increased, while the number of employed Hispanic or Latina women and Black women decreased.']

When the Bureau of Labor Statistics issued its latest job numbers, the Jan. 8, 2021, release revealed a jaw-dropping statistic: from November to December, the U.S. economy lost 140,000 jobs. Then came another shocking detail: only women lost jobs as a group. On Jan. 9, 2021, Wisconsin Treasurer Sarah Godlewski tweeted a link to a CNN article about the job losses among women, commenting, "This headline is hiding something from you. It wasn't all women that lost jobs; it was mostly Black and Latina women. In fact, white women gained employment. Any response we have to this pandemic and economy must also address structural inequality." When asked for a source, Godlewski's office pointed to the CNN article, dated Jan. 8, that she retweeted. That article noted that the U.S. economy lost 140,000 jobs overall, with women losing 156,000 jobs while men gained 16,000 jobs. Her office also highlighted this paragraph in the article: "Black and Latina women disproportionately work in some of the hardest-hit sectors during the pandemic, often in roles that lack paid sick leave and the ability to work from home. As schools and daycares closed, many were forced to make hard trade-offs between work and parenting. Those sectors are less likely to have flexibility, so when employers are inflexible or women can't come to work because of caregiving responsibilities, they have to exit the workforce," said Nicole C. Mason, president and CEO of the Institute for Women's Policy Research. We conducted our own check of the BLS numbers, and the preliminary November and December figures reflect what was in the CNN article. However, Godlewski's claim specifically addressed the difference in outcomes for Black and Latina women, as groups, compared to white women. The BLS conducted a separate survey known as the Current Population Survey, which measures employment for Black, Hispanic or Latina, and white women ages 20 and older. This data was part of the Jan. 8 release of the December jobs numbers. Participating households responded to the survey in the week of Dec. 6. That data, which is not seasonally adjusted, indicates that the number of employed Black women decreased by 82,000 from November to December, and the number of Hispanic or Latina women employed decreased by 31,000. Meanwhile, the number of employed white women increased by 106,000 during the same time span. The overall number of women in the labor force has been fluctuating since the March-to-April numbers, which marked the first full impact of the pandemic. There was a decrease from July to September. Laura Dresser, an economist with the Center on Wisconsin Strategy at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, noted that prior economic declines were led by male-dominated fields, such as construction and manufacturing. The pandemic-driven decline, she said, has strongly affected areas such as the restaurant and education industries, which employ a high number of women workers. "And those jobs are low-wage jobs," Dresser said. "They're held disproportionately by women. They're held disproportionately by people of color." With a link to a news article, Godlewski claimed, "It wasn't all women that lost jobs; it was mostly Black and Latina women. In fact, white women gained employment." Federal statistics show that, as a group, women accounted for all of the job loss from November to December. What's more, the number of employed white women increased during that time frame, while the numbers for Black and Hispanic or Latina women fell. We rate this claim True.

['Economy', 'Jobs', 'Women', 'Wisconsin']

True

When asked for a source, Godlewskis office pointed tothe CNN article, dated Jan. 8, that she retweeted. That article noted the U.S. economy lost 140,000 jobs overall, with women losing 156,000 jobs, while men gained 16,000 jobs.Black and Latina women disproportionately work in some of the hardest-hit sectors in the pandemic, often in roles thatlack paid sick leaveand the ability to work from home. As schools and day cares closed, many were forced to make hard trade-offs between work and parenting. Those sectors are less likely to have flexibility, so when employers are inflexible or women can't come to work because of caregiving responsibilities they have to exit the workforce, said Nicole C. Mason, president and CEO of the Institute for Womens Policy Research.Laura Dresser, an economist with the Center on Wisconsin Strategy at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, said prior economic declines were led by male-dominated fields, such as construction and manufacturing. The pandemic-driven decline, she said, has strongly affected areas such as the restaurant and education industries with a high number of women workers.

Delaware Child Support Card could be rephrased as "Card for Child Support in Delaware".

['A fake news story about a new Delaware "Child Support Card" hit the online world in January 2016.']

On 8 January 2016, the entertainment web site The Reporterz published an article reporting that Delaware had created a new "child support card" that controlled "what mothers can and cannot buy" with their child support funds: This measure was taken to prevent parents from misusing funds that are meant to help with costs associated with raising children, such as school related expenses, food, etc. This card will not be allow the parent to purchase alcohol, cigarettes or pay car payments the card will be used exactly like a food stamp card. We spoke to Tasha Brown who was upset after she couldn't purchase a bottle of Hennessy at her local liquor store. she says "Its' [sic] unfair its [sic] my money I should be able to do what i want with it how will I pay for my new weave?" The article was ambiguous about whether the card would apply to all funds received for the care of children (such as support monies paid by former spouses) or funds made available through government assistance programs. It didn't matter either way, though, as the story was a complete fabrication that originated with a fake news web site that does not publish factual stories. A disclaimer on The Reporterz states that "every article is based on a true story, only the facts have been changed." In this case, Delaware really does have a card that makes it easier for single parents and guardians to receive funds. The First State Family Card is a pre-paid debit card that does not require bank account: The First State Family Card is a pre-paid VISA card that is credited whenever a payment is posted to any/all of a client's child support case(s). Benefits to the debit VISA card include: While Delaware does have a card that makes it easier for parents to collect child support, the handbook for the First State Family Card (not the "Child Support Card") does not mention any restrictions on how the funds may be utilized. mention

['credit']

False

While Delaware does have a card that makes it easier for parents to collect child support, the handbook for the First State Family Card (not the "Child Support Card") does not mention any restrictions on how the funds may be utilized.

Killer Toilet Spider Warning

['Was a man in Ireland killed by the bite of a deadly redback spider?']

Claim: A man in Ireland killed by the bite of a deadly redback spider. Example: [Collected on the Internet, August 2014] I saw an article in a news paper about the deadly redback spider being in the uk. It was headlined with "KILLER TOILET SPIDER WARNING: Dad dies from deadly redback bite" alot of people on Facebook are freaking out so I just wanted to see if it's true or false. Origins: In August 2014 social media networks were abuzz with reprinted versions of a typically sensationalized Sun article ("Yes, the deadly redback spider is ALREADY in Britain and could be LURKING under your toilet seat") about a 48-year-old man named John Francis Kennedy in Cork, Ireland, who reportedly was bitten on the neck by a "poisonous red-back" spider while watching a movie at home and died of "massive internal bleeding": Sun John Francis Kennedy, who went by the nickname 'JFK', suffered horrifying injuries as a result of the bite, and died last month from massive internal bleeding. His wife Jeanne insists that his death was the result of a spider bite he got last year and her description matches that of the deadly redback, which is one of the few spiders that can be seriously harmful to humans. Sometimes known as the 'toilet spider', redbacks can be commonly found living under toilet seats. The redback spider (Latrodectus hasseltii, also known as the red-striped spider, red-spot spider, and jockey spider) is a species of venomous spider indigenous to Australia, that typically lives in warm, sheltered locations, often in or around human dwellings. The redback is one of the few spider species whose bite does pose a significant risk to humans, as its venom can produce pain, muscle rigidity, vomiting, and sweating, and in some cases death: redback spider Perched in its tangled web, the redback spider lies in wait. She is a relative of the black widow; only the red dorsal stripe distinguishes them. Redbacks are found everywhere throughout the Australian continent, especially alongside human habitation. Only females build webs. Their smaller, less brilliantly colored male counterparts often lurk to the side. Humans must be careful. The spider won't seek out people to sting, but should a hand stray into her web by accident, a trip to the emergency room may be in order as the venom acts directly on the nerves. Only the female bite is dangerous, and their bites have caused some human deaths. The redback possesses a potent neurotoxic venom. It does not hunt its prey, but instead waits for a tasty morsel to wander by and become entangled in its web. Once the prey-usually a walking insect-becomes enmeshed in the redback's web, it's wrapped in silk. When it's time to eat, the spider bites down on its intended victim, injecting its neurotoxic venom. The venom paralyzes the insect, and digestive enzymes begin to dissolve the prey's insides. Antivenom for redback spider bites has been available since 1956, and no known deaths directly attributable to redback bites have been documented in more than fifty years since then, which makes this latest case in Ireland quite a subject of interest. However, note that the victim's wife, Jeanne, stated her husband didn't die soon after being bitten by a spider; he had actually been bitten a year earlier, and then he experienced a long period of declining health with various symptoms before finally passing away in July 2014: Antivenom She said: "He got bitten. We found a spider with a weird red back. "But the bite he got had bled very badly. We went through a roll and a half of toilet roll to try and stop it. "Ever since his health went down. "His stomach started swelling, they said it was his liver and his pancreas. "His testicles also swelled up very bad." Jeanne, 46, went on to describe how John's eyesight deteriorated and he started vomiting BLOOD. He eventually died in hospital last month and an inquest into his death has begun but Jeanne is already convinced it was the spider. "It had to be down to that sting. "He was in perfect health before the bite happened." So there's as yet no certainty that John Francis Kennedy was actually bitten by a redback spider, which had not previously been sighted in Ireland, other than someone's year-old recollection of what the spider in question looked like. And even if that species of spider did deliver a bite to the victim, it's unproven at this point that his death was directly attributable to that bite. He may have died from something else completely coincidental to that bite, he may have been suffering from an undiagnosed medical condition that had already compromised his health and was exacerbated or compounded by the bite's effects, or he may have suffered an allergic reaction to the bite (rather than being killed by the venom itself) a host of alternative explanations are possible. Until additional (and less tabloid-sensational) details are provided about this case, it's far too early to claim this as a verified example of a redback spider bite death in Ireland. And for those locals who fear that such critters are taking up residence in the area: Adam Faulkner, reptile keeper at Drayton Manor Zoo, said: "Redbacks would probably not be able to survive the British climate but they could survive if they found a warm house to live in." Currently there are no national records of redback spider sightings. Last updated: 25 August 2014

['interest']

NEI

Origins: In August 2014 social media networks were abuzz with reprinted versions of a typically sensationalized Sun article ("Yes, the deadly redback spider is ALREADY in Britain and could be LURKING under your toilet seat") about a 48-year-old man named John Francis Kennedy in Cork, Ireland, who reportedly was bitten on the neck by a "poisonous red-back" spider while watching a movie at home and died of "massive internal bleeding":The redback spider (Latrodectus hasseltii, also known as the red-striped spider, red-spot spider, and jockey spider) is a species of venomous spider indigenous to Australia, that typically lives in warm, sheltered locations, often in or around human dwellings. The redback is one of the few spider species whose bite does pose a significant risk to humans, as its venom can produce pain, muscle rigidity, vomiting, and sweating, and in some cases death:Antivenom for redback spider bites has been available since 1956, and no known deaths directly attributable to redback bites have been documented in more than fifty years since then, which makes this latest case in Ireland quite a subject of interest. However, note that the victim's wife, Jeanne, stated her husband didn't die soon after being bitten by a spider; he had actually been bitten a year earlier, and then he experienced a long period of declining health with various symptoms before finally passing away in July 2014:

Are Wombats Inviting Animals Into Their Burrows to Escape Australia Fires?

["Gather 'round to hear the tale of the wombat hero ... or at least the wombat's big burrow."]

As wildfires raged across Australia at the start of 2020, an interesting claim about wombats, a short-legged marsupial, began to circulate on social media. According to this rumor, wombats were braving the fires to find lost animals and leading them back to their burrows for safety. Reports from Australia indicated that countless small animals had escaped death because wombats, unusually, opted to share their massive, complex burrows. There were even reports of wombats exhibiting "shepherding behavior." While this social media post claimed to be based on "reports from Australia," no documentation of these supposed hero wombats has been found. In fact, several Australian experts have expressed skepticism about the claims. Jackie French, author and director of The Wombat Foundation, told IFLScience, "Wombats are extremely short-sighted. They focus mostly on food and dirt. It would be hard for them to see well enough to shepherd, nor have I seen one do so." Scott Carver, a senior lecturer in wildlife ecology at the University of Tasmania, informed the Associated Press that no evidence exists that wombats were "sharing or encouraging other animals" to take refuge in their burrows. While wombats may not actively seek out animals in need, it is quite possible that distressed creatures have found their way into wombat burrows on their own. Wombats are efficient diggers and can create burrows stretching up to 650 feet. Associate Professor Steve Johnston from the University of Queensland also noted that wombats may abandon these underground tunnels to dig new ones, leaving opportunities for other animals to seek shelter. Johnston told the Brisbane Times, "A lot of those wombat burrows could be empty, so animals could easily make their way into those burrows to escape the fire ... Wombats will often make a burrow system and then move on, so those empty burrows become open [to other animals]." Wombats are typically very territorial and will even charge and chase away animals that invade their space. However, students at the University of Melbourne set up cameras near one wombat burrow in 2019 and found other animals, including koalas and bunnies, venturing inside these underground tunnels. Kath Handasyde, an expert in native mammal ecology and physiology, stated that the wombat was likely sleeping or in another chamber when these other animals explored the burrow. In short, wombats are not actively shepherding animals into their burrows for safety. However, it is certainly possible that animals fleeing the fires have taken refuge in the wombats' underground tunnels. In fact, the Center for Biological Diversity shared a video taken during the Australian fires in 2020 showing how one animal, the common brown butterfly, was using wombat holes to survive the flames. Greenpeace Australia, the social media account that posted the viral message recounted in this story's introduction, later updated its Instagram post to remove the "shepherding" part of the claim.

['share']

NEI

As wildfires raged across Australia at the start of 2020, an interesting claim about wombats, a short-legged marsupial, started to circulate on social media. According to this rumor, wombats were braving the fires to find lost animals and then leading them back to their burrows for safety:Jackie French, author and director of The Wombat Foundation, told IFLScience:Scott Carver, a senior lecturer in wildlife ecology at the University of Tasmania, told the Associated Press no evidence exists that wombats were "sharing or encouraging other animals" to take refuge in their burrows.While wombats may not actively be seeking out animals in need, it is quite possible that distressed creatures have found their way into wombat burrows on their own. Wombats are efficient diggers and can create burrows stretching up to 650 feet. Associate Professor Steve Johnston from the University of Queensland also noted that wombats may abandon these underground tunnels in order to dig a new one. This leaves some opportunities for other animals to seek shelter.Johnston told the Brisbane Times:Kath Handasyde, an expert in native mammal ecology and physiology, said that the wombat was likely sleeping or in another chamber when these other animals explored the burrow. Here's a video where she explains the situation.Greenpeace Australia, the social media account that posted the viral message recounted in this story's introduction, later updated its Instagram post to remove the "shepherding" part of the claim:

Illegal Alien Denied Cops Service, 'We Don't Serve Pigs'

['A fabricated article claimed an "illegal alien" employed at McDonald\'s was fired for telling cops the chain doesn\'t "serve pigs."']

On 18 July 2016 the web site Conservative Daily Post published an article reporting that an "illegal alien" had been fired after she declined to serve police officers at an Alabama McDonald's, declaring that we dont serve pigs. article The outrage-provoking article was set against the backdrop of a month of tensions between police officers and community members in July 2016. The shooting deaths of civilians Alton Sterling and Philando Castile led to national protests, and police officers were killed in ambush shootings in Dallas and Baton Rouge. Alton Sterling Philando Castile Dallas Baton Rouge In that period, several rumors of police officers "shunned" or mistreated at restaurants circulated online. A group of policemen in Pennsylvania said they paid the bill of a couple who refused to sit near them, a sheriff in Washington reported that a Chinese restaurant's owners had said law enforcement was not welcome there, and officers in Baton Rouge maintained that a server at Las Palmas restaurant had put mucus in their drinks. Pennsylvania reported Las Palmas After those claims became virally popular, Conservative Daily Post asserted: Its pretty sad to look around and see how police officers are being treated right now. They put their lives on the line every single day to defend our freedoms within the local community. We are more than thankful for our military, yet we fail to recognize the very people that keep us safe in our homes at night. Police officers dont get paid a lot either. They knowingly walk into possible gunfights almost every day. They do it because they heard the call to serve. They do it because they are true American patriots. Well, there was just another case of disrespect against cops. In Alabama, last week a cashier decided that she didnt want to serve the cops. Maria Englesia pictured above told the officers to get out of here because they didnt serve pigs. This was blatant. McDonalds stepped in as soon as they heard what happened. They immediately fired the woman and issued a formal apology to the police department of Alabama. Social media users accepted that report at face value: @McDonalds #Illegal Alien Denied Cops Service, We Dont Serve Pigs https://t.co/5n3esRSePy #BoycottMcDonalds @McDonalds #Illegal https://t.co/5n3esRSePy #BoycottMcDonalds Jan Johnson (@JanJohnsonFL) July 18, 2016 July 18, 2016 Illegal Alien McDonald's clerk tells police: "We don't serve your kind" Get the fuck out of my country, you bitch!! https://t.co/3HGU4ml3ow obamasucksballs (@obamasucksballs) July 19, 2016 https://t.co/3HGU4ml3ow July 19, 2016 Conservative Daily Post claimed McDonald's had fired the employee and apologized, but no mention of any such controversy (by the company or by commenters) was visible on the hamburger chain's Twitter account, nor on McDonald's Facebook page save for one cryptic comment: Twitter Aside from the single comment, no one appeared to be asking about any incidents involving a Maria Englesia in Alabama. Had the story been genuine, it would have generated news coverage from other outlets. Conservative Daily Post's article also waved another very large red flag: The image doesn't depict a "Maria Englesia" or anyone else recently fired from any McDonald's, anywhere, for any reason. It's a stock photograph dating to at least 2012: Conservative Daily News doesn't carry any sort of warning or disclaimer advising readers about hosting fabricated content, but this story was clearly untrue. No public apology was tendered by McDonald's over an employee's purported refusal to serve Alabama cops, no news outlets or blogs reported on the incident, and the image of the woman "pictured above" was a stock photograph swiped from Getty.

['lien']

False

On 18 July 2016 the web site Conservative Daily Post published an article reporting that an "illegal alien" had been fired after she declined to serve police officers at an Alabama McDonald's, declaring that we dont serve pigs.The outrage-provoking article was set against the backdrop of a month of tensions between police officers and community members in July 2016. The shooting deaths of civilians Alton Sterling and Philando Castile led to national protests, and police officers were killed in ambush shootings in Dallas and Baton Rouge.In that period, several rumors of police officers "shunned" or mistreated at restaurants circulated online. A group of policemen in Pennsylvania said they paid the bill of a couple who refused to sit near them, a sheriff in Washington reported that a Chinese restaurant's owners had said law enforcement was not welcome there, and officers in Baton Rouge maintained that a server at Las Palmas restaurant had put mucus in their drinks. @McDonalds #Illegal Alien Denied Cops Service, We Dont Serve Pigs https://t.co/5n3esRSePy #BoycottMcDonalds Jan Johnson (@JanJohnsonFL) July 18, 2016Illegal Alien McDonald's clerk tells police: "We don't serve your kind" Get the fuck out of my country, you bitch!! https://t.co/3HGU4ml3ow obamasucksballs (@obamasucksballs) July 19, 2016Conservative Daily Post claimed McDonald's had fired the employee and apologized, but no mention of any such controversy (by the company or by commenters) was visible on the hamburger chain's Twitter account, nor on McDonald's Facebook page save for one cryptic comment:

Did Calif. Announce It Will Pay Undocumented Residents COVID-19 Stimulus While Laying Off First Responders?

['A meme linked two separate events together to foment political controversy.']

Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And, please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease. fighting Find out Read Submit Become a Founding Member CDC WHO In late May 2020, social media users shared a meme that contained a misleading claim about the state of California. The meme said the state had announced it would give undocumented residents a stimulus payment on the same day it said it would lay off first responders due to diminished state funds resulting from the COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic, implying the two events are causally linked. California Gov. Gavin Newsom on April 15, 2020, acknowledged undocumented residents paid $2.5 billion in state and local taxes in 2019. He then announced the state would draw up a total of $125 million sourced from charitable donations and taxpayer funds to provide $500 stimulus payments to those residents. That was because they didn't qualify to receive federal stimulus checks under the CARES Act, a relief package meant to blunt the economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. acknowledged CARES Act This announcement was unrelated to another statement Newsom made more than a month later. In the latter, he urged the federal government to provide financial assistance to states and local governments struggling with economic shortfalls to their operating budgets due to forced business closures during the pandemic. In an interview on CNN on May 21, Newsom stated that without federal help, cities and counties may be forced to lay off first responders. interview "The next time they want to salute our heroes, our first responders, our police officers and firefighters, consider the fact that they are the first ones to be laid off by cities and counties," Newsom said when asked by CNN host Jake Tapper what would happen if the federal government failed to bail out states and local governments. "The folks who are out there, the true heroes of this pandemic, are health care workers and nurses. Those county health systems have been ravaged, their budgets have been devastated and depleted, the budget accounts depleted since this pandemic." Budgets that deal with first responders like police, firefighters, and paramedics are generally administered by local governments, meaning it would be cities and counties in California, not the state itself, that would have discretion over whether or when to cut those services. Furthermore, Newsom didn't "announce" such layoffs would take place; he simply suggested cuts may occur in the absence of intervention from the federal government to financially shore up local governments. As of late May, California was facing a $54 billion budget shortfall resulting from economic fallout of stay-at-home orders that forced shuttering of most commerce beginning in mid-March, in an effort to slow the spread of the COVID-19 disease. The state one year earlier had a surplus of $21 billion. $54 billion In sum, Newsom didn't "announce" layoffs for first responders but instead projected that layoffs at the local level were a looming possibility. He also didn't make the statement on the same day that he announced California would commit $125 million ($75 million of which would come from taxpayers) to give undocumented state residents $500 stimulus payments. The two events are unrelated, although the meme attempted to link them causally. We therefore rate this claim Lightman, David."Fact Check: Gavin Newsom Warns of Layoffs for Police, Firefighters. Is He Exaggerating?" Sacramento Bee.21 May 2020. CNN."Newsom Warns of Police, Fire Layoffs in California." 21 May 2020. Associated Press."California Announces $125 Million Fund for Undocumented Immigrants Impacted by Coronavirus." 15 April 2020. Associated Press."California Faces a Staggering $54 Billion Budget Deficit Due to Economic Devastation from Coronavirus." 7 May 2020.

['budget']

False

Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And, please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease. California Gov. Gavin Newsom on April 15, 2020, acknowledged undocumented residents paid $2.5 billion in state and local taxes in 2019. He then announced the state would draw up a total of $125 million sourced from charitable donations and taxpayer funds to provide $500 stimulus payments to those residents. That was because they didn't qualify to receive federal stimulus checks under the CARES Act, a relief package meant to blunt the economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.This announcement was unrelated to another statement Newsom made more than a month later. In the latter, he urged the federal government to provide financial assistance to states and local governments struggling with economic shortfalls to their operating budgets due to forced business closures during the pandemic. In an interview on CNN on May 21, Newsom stated that without federal help, cities and counties may be forced to lay off first responders.As of late May, California was facing a $54 billion budget shortfall resulting from economic fallout of stay-at-home orders that forced shuttering of most commerce beginning in mid-March, in an effort to slow the spread of the COVID-19 disease. The state one year earlier had a surplus of $21 billion.

In Japan, they take a bowling ball from 20 feet up in the air and they drop it on the hood of the car. And if the hood dents, then the car doesn't qualify...It's horrible, the way we're treated.

[]

President Donald Trump often speaks of how other countries treat American products unfairly. At a private fundraising event in Missouri, Trump singled out a particular practice in Japan known as the bowling ball test. "Do you know what that is?" Trump asked, according to a recording obtained by the Washington Post. "That's where they take a bowling ball from 20 feet up in the air and drop it on the hood of the car. If the hood dents, then the car doesn't qualify. Well, guess what? The roof dented a little bit, and they said, 'Nope, this car doesn't qualify.' It's horrible, the way we're treated. It's horrible." The Washington Post noted that it was unclear what he was talking about, so they wanted to look into it. They asked the White House press office what Trump had in mind but received no comment. In her regular press briefing, White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders stated that Trump was just joking. However, they found something that loosely fits what he described. There are no bowling balls and no 20-foot drop, but Japan's National Agency for Automotive Safety and Victim Aid conducts what is called a pedestrian head protection performance test. It's designed to measure the force someone's head would absorb if a car hit them. This involves firing a carefully calibrated hemisphere-shaped device (more like half of a bowling ball) at the hood and windshield. The device records the force. Here's a graphic from the agency's website: note that the largest head impactor is 4.5 kilograms, or about 10 pounds. So, the details about a bowling ball, including its weight and the height of the drop, are all incorrect. Moreover, Trump also misrepresented the purpose and nature of the test. When he said, "If the hood dents, then the car doesn't qualify," that would indicate a test of the strength of the hood. In contrast, the test focuses on a person's head and the force it must absorb in an accident. "It's the complete opposite," said Sean Kane, president of Safety Research and Strategy, a private firm that studies vehicle and consumer product safety. In fact, the more a hood dents or flexes, the better it is for the head of the unfortunate pedestrian. "It's akin to any other type of crash," Kane explained. "You look at cars today, and the impact damage to cars is much greater. There's a lot of crush, but that's to absorb the energy and keep it away from people." A biomedical engineering dissertation from Wayne State University made the same point: to lower head injury criteria, two main principles are necessary: provision of sufficient deformation space and provision of low stiffness in the impacted vehicle body parts. However, Trump did get one element correct. American cars sold in Japan, at least all models made this decade, must meet the Japanese safety standard. So, Trump was right that this is a hurdle for American car makers. It's worth noting that Europe has a similar standard. In the early 2000s, the problem of cars hitting pedestrians was worse in Europe and Japan than in the United States. In Japan, for example, 27 percent of all traffic fatalities were pedestrians hit by cars, while in the United States, it was 13 percent. "The head impact test is a standardized test and has been in place for many years," said Pankaj Mallick, professor of mechanical engineering at the University of Michigan-Dearborn. "Our car companies are very much aware of this, but at this time, there are no National Highway Traffic Safety Administration requirements to conduct this test for the qualification of a car hood." Kane noted that the United States stands out for having lower safety standards than Europe and Japan. "If U.S. car makers wanted to make safer cars, they could sell them in both markets," he said. "If they don't, that's a business decision." Trump claimed that in Japan, they take a bowling ball from 20 feet up in the air and drop it on the hood of the car. If the hood dents, then the car doesn't qualify. American cars must meet a Japanese standard. However, Trump misrepresented the highly controlled process, which does not involve a bowling ball dropped from 20 feet. Where Trump really goes astray is in the purpose of the test; he has it backward. It's not about determining if the hood is strong. The more a hood gives way, the better it is for the head of a pedestrian. Trump's understanding of the test is so far off the mark that we rate this claim as false.

['National', 'Public Safety', 'Trade']

False

It's called the bowling ball test. Do you know what that is? Trump said, according to a recording obtained by theWashington Post.That's where they take a bowling ball from 20 feet up in the air, and they drop it on the hood of the car. And if the hood dents, then the car doesn't qualify. Well, guess what, the roof dented a little bit, and they said, nope, this car doesn't qualify. It's horrible, the way we're treated. It's horrible.There are no bowling balls, and no 20-foot drop. But Japans National Agency for Automotive Safety and Victim Aid does whats called apedestrian head protection performance test. Its designed to measure the force someones head would absorb if a car hit them.Abiomedical engineering dissertationfrom Wayne State University made the same point: To lower head injury criterion, two main principles are necessary: provision of sufficient deformation space and provision of a low stiffness of the impacted vehicle body parts.Its worth noting that Europe has a similar standard. Inthe early 2000s, the problem of cars hitting pedestrians was worse in Europe and Japan than in the United States. In Japan, for example, 27 percent of all traffic fatalities were pedestrians hit by cars. In the United States, it was 13 percent.

That Time Chelsea Clinton Tweeted 'Happy New Year' to the Church of Satan

['How the daughter of a former president wound up in the company of a supermodel and the Church of Satan in a Twitter thread for the ages.']

Twitter threads sometimes make for strange bedfellows. With more than 2 million followers, Chelsea Clintoncertainly qualifies as an experienced tweeter, yet in January 2018 she found herself in the awkward position of having to publicly deny that she's a Satan worshiper all because she jumped into a Twitter thread to lend moral support to Chrissy Teigen. Chelsea Clinton Chrissy Teigen Our cautionary tale begins with a 30 December attack on Teigen by a "Pizzagate" conspiracy theorist bent on implicating the supermodel in an imagined pizza parlor pedophile ring run by and for highly placed Democrats (such as Chelsea Clinton's parents). Pizzagate Teigen found the smear quite disturbing, writing: Alright. I debated saying something about this but I'm pretty disturbed over here. The fact that there are people with these...thoughts...is really scary. pic.twitter.com/9OtWKHxUgR pic.twitter.com/9OtWKHxUgR christine teigen (@chrissyteigen) December 30, 2017 December 30, 2017 Yeah yeah it's "just Twitter" but I'm pretty sure this *sick* person is saying we are darksided pizzagate pedophiles who traffic our daughter. Ummmmm this is really scary shit. christine teigen (@chrissyteigen) December 30, 2017 December 30, 2017 Enter Chelsea Clinton, one of Chrissy Teigen's many Twitter followers. She sent Teigen a message of support and encouragement: Chrissy, sending you & beautiful Luna a huge hug. It is awful & never ok when people threaten or demean any child. I've lost count of the Twitter accounts who've threatened Charlotte with #FGM. While I never bother to report threats against me, I now report every one against her. #FGM Chelsea Clinton (@ChelseaClinton) December 31, 2017 December 31, 2017 Whereupon the thread turned into something of a free-for-all. A random troll using the name "Rogue Hooters Staff" (account since deleted) hurled an obscenity at Clinton: Someone who witnessed this exchange notified Hooters (a restaurant chain most notable for the skimpy attire of its female waitstaff and passable wings) of the bogus account, prompting the official (verified) Hooters account to tweet a disavowal, in turn prompting Clinton trust us, this will all make sense as you read through the rest of the thread below to tag the Church of Satan: Church of Satan There are two ways to take that last tweet ("It's been so long! Happy New Year!"). One is in the spirit in which it was obviously intended,namely as a jocular, tongue-in-cheek acknowledgment of the absurdity of sharing a Twitter thread with the likes of @Hooters and @ChurchofSatan. The other is to pretend it might actually mean Clinton is a devil worshiper. A number of scornful tweets went the latter route, stating or implying that Clinton worships Satan. One example (since deleted) said, "At least @ChelseaClinton is open about worshiping #Satan. #ChurchOfSatan If only @HillaryClinton could be as honest." Clinton replied with what amounted to a denial: Oh goodness gracious. We can be civil, cheerful, respectful to & friends with people who don't share our religious beliefs. Sometimes, we even marry them. I'm a Methodist & my husband is Jewish, thank you for asking. A very happy New Year to you Rhonda! https://t.co/8UH9SP8EWO https://t.co/8UH9SP8EWO Chelsea Clinton (@ChelseaClinton) January 3, 2018 January 3, 2018 However, the reminder that she, like her mother, is a lifelong Methodist failed to hush that rather large subset of the Twitterverse devoted to spreading Clinton hatred. A former vice presidential candidate chimed in, along with others: Nope. Sadly, this is not a joke. https://t.co/74OU4tElX5 https://t.co/74OU4tElX5 Sarah Palin (@SarahPalinUSA) January 4, 2018 January 4, 2018 If you have to deny worshiping Satan, you more than likely worship Satan. #QAnon #PizzaGate #FollowTheWhiteRabbit #Pedogate https://t.co/BeLBU9ECPu #QAnon #PizzaGate #FollowTheWhiteRabbit #Pedogate https://t.co/BeLBU9ECPu JT - MAGA ??? (@jt_maga) January 4, 2018 January 4, 2018 Chelsea upside cross sways pics for years and all, thst Chrissy who goes to spirit cooking and your mom too; just talking to these people Church of Satan and owl people is too much! #sickclubofpedos #PEDOgate #QANON #FOLLOWTHEWHITERABBIT #THESTORM pic.twitter.com/Pmm69AnmIj #sickclubofpedos #PEDOgate #QANON #FOLLOWTHEWHITERABBIT #THESTORM pic.twitter.com/Pmm69AnmIj (Jamie)J.A.L.F.T (@jametteriley) January 3, 2018 January 3, 2018 @ChelseaClinton Like mother like daughter. Caught lying and you continue lying.You tweeted a message to the Church of Satan on New Year. https://t.co/wgCl1Ob4qJ @ChelseaClinton https://t.co/wgCl1Ob4qJ mzaz (@mzaz86442) January 5, 2018 January 5, 2018 We can't help but note the concerted effort to plug Chelsea Clinton's alleged Satanic sympathies into pre-existing narratives impugning the entire Clinton family. Consider the recurring hashtags in the tweets on this subject, which include #QAnon, #Pizzagate, #FollowTheWhiteRabbit and #Pedogate. In certain circles these signify conspiracy theoriesaccusing the Clinton family of all manner of "deep-state" shenanigans, from assassination plots to election rigging to pedophile rings. theories Some of the critical tweets allude to something called "spirit cooking." This refers to a series of performance art events mentioned in WikiLeaks e-mails, which were pounced upon by conspiracy theorists as proof that the Clintons and their inner circle practice occult rituals (although in reality it was nothing of the kind). spirit cooking nothing Others revisit low-resolutionimagesfloating around the Internet for years allegedly showing Chelsea Clinton wearing a necklace with an "inverted" or "upside-down" cross supposedly a sign of Satan worship. When we asked a Clinton spokesperson about it, however, we were told that she owns no such piece of jewelry. Clinton occasionally wears a Greek (equal-sided) cross that could conceivably be mistaken for (or manipulated in images to look like) an inverted one. images We asked the spokesperson, point-blank, if Chelsea Clinton is a Satan worshiper. The answer, unsurprisingly, was no. The spokesperson confirmed that Clinton is a Methodist, and could in fact be foundas recently as New Year's Eve 2018 attending her non-Satanic Methodist church services in New York City. We also checked in with a representative of the Church of Satan, the Rev. Raul Antony, who confirmed an important piece of background information, namely that prior to the Chrissy Teigen Twitter thread there had never been any direct contact between Chelsea Clinton and the Church of Satan. As Clinton said in one of her tweets, "In 2017, @ChurchofSatan & I were put on a few threads together." Antony told us they were tagged into those threads by Pizzagate conspiracy theorists. We asked him to address the widespread assumption that members of the Church of Satanwhich, to be clear, is a 50-year-old organization distinct from all other groups and individuals purporting to identify themselves as "Satanic"actually worship the devil. organization "No," he said. "We reject all theism and recognize all gods and religions [including Satan] to be man-made social institutions. Still, we find symbols and religion to be an important part of the human experience and embrace the symbol of Satan as the representation of carnality, individualism, and rational self-interest." We thought we might as well ask him if Chelsea Clinton is a Satanist. "No," he said. "She's a Methodist." Kelly, Tiffany. "'Follow the White Rabbit' Is the Most Bonkers Conspiracy Theory You Will Ever Read." The Daily Dot. 20 November 2017. Martineau, Paris. "The Story Is the New Pizzagate - Only Worse." New York Magazine. 19 December 2017. Church of Satan. "History of the Church of Satan." Accessed 1 January 2018.

['interest']

True

With more than 2 million followers, Chelsea Clintoncertainly qualifies as an experienced tweeter, yet in January 2018 she found herself in the awkward position of having to publicly deny that she's a Satan worshiper all because she jumped into a Twitter thread to lend moral support to Chrissy Teigen.Our cautionary tale begins with a 30 December attack on Teigen by a "Pizzagate" conspiracy theorist bent on implicating the supermodel in an imagined pizza parlor pedophile ring run by and for highly placed Democrats (such as Chelsea Clinton's parents).Alright. I debated saying something about this but I'm pretty disturbed over here. The fact that there are people with these...thoughts...is really scary. pic.twitter.com/9OtWKHxUgR christine teigen (@chrissyteigen) December 30, 2017 christine teigen (@chrissyteigen) December 30, 2017Chrissy, sending you & beautiful Luna a huge hug. It is awful & never ok when people threaten or demean any child. I've lost count of the Twitter accounts who've threatened Charlotte with #FGM. While I never bother to report threats against me, I now report every one against her. Chelsea Clinton (@ChelseaClinton) December 31, 2017Someone who witnessed this exchange notified Hooters (a restaurant chain most notable for the skimpy attire of its female waitstaff and passable wings) of the bogus account, prompting the official (verified) Hooters account to tweet a disavowal, in turn prompting Clinton trust us, this will all make sense as you read through the rest of the thread below to tag the Church of Satan:Oh goodness gracious. We can be civil, cheerful, respectful to & friends with people who don't share our religious beliefs. Sometimes, we even marry them. I'm a Methodist & my husband is Jewish, thank you for asking. A very happy New Year to you Rhonda! https://t.co/8UH9SP8EWO Chelsea Clinton (@ChelseaClinton) January 3, 2018Nope. Sadly, this is not a joke. https://t.co/74OU4tElX5 Sarah Palin (@SarahPalinUSA) January 4, 2018If you have to deny worshiping Satan, you more than likely worship Satan. #QAnon #PizzaGate #FollowTheWhiteRabbit #Pedogate https://t.co/BeLBU9ECPu JT - MAGA ??? (@jt_maga) January 4, 2018Chelsea upside cross sways pics for years and all, thst Chrissy who goes to spirit cooking and your mom too; just talking to these people Church of Satan and owl people is too much! #sickclubofpedos #PEDOgate #QANON #FOLLOWTHEWHITERABBIT #THESTORM pic.twitter.com/Pmm69AnmIj (Jamie)J.A.L.F.T (@jametteriley) January 3, 2018@ChelseaClinton Like mother like daughter. Caught lying and you continue lying.You tweeted a message to the Church of Satan on New Year. https://t.co/wgCl1Ob4qJ mzaz (@mzaz86442) January 5, 2018Consider the recurring hashtags in the tweets on this subject, which include #QAnon, #Pizzagate, #FollowTheWhiteRabbit and #Pedogate. In certain circles these signify conspiracy theoriesaccusing the Clinton family of all manner of "deep-state" shenanigans, from assassination plots to election rigging to pedophile rings.Some of the critical tweets allude to something called "spirit cooking." This refers to a series of performance art events mentioned in WikiLeaks e-mails, which were pounced upon by conspiracy theorists as proof that the Clintons and their inner circle practice occult rituals (although in reality it was nothing of the kind).Others revisit low-resolutionimagesfloating around the Internet for years allegedly showing Chelsea Clinton wearing a necklace with an "inverted" or "upside-down" cross supposedly a sign of Satan worship. When we asked a Clinton spokesperson about it, however, we were told that she owns no such piece of jewelry. Clinton occasionally wears a Greek (equal-sided) cross that could conceivably be mistaken for (or manipulated in images to look like) an inverted one.We asked him to address the widespread assumption that members of the Church of Satanwhich, to be clear, is a 50-year-old organization distinct from all other groups and individuals purporting to identify themselves as "Satanic"actually worship the devil.

Half of all CEOs say that the shutdown and the threat of shutdown set back their plans to hire over the next six months.

[]

After a Senate deal brought the 16-day government shutdown to a close, President Barack Obama wanted to make sure the impact of narrowly avoiding a default wasnt lost on the nation. These last few weeks have inflicted completely unnecessary damage on our economy, he said in apublic addressThursday. As proof, he offered up specific claims including, Half of all CEOs say that the shutdown and the threat of shutdown set back their plans to hire over the next six months. PolitiFact wanted to know whether Obamas CEO statistic was accurate. The White Housepointed us to a recentBusiness Roundtable survey. Fifty percent of responding CEOs indicated that the ongoing disagreement in Washington over the 2014 budget and the debt ceiling is having a negative impact on their plans for hiring additional employees over the next six months, the report reads. On its face, thats in line with what Obama said, but we wanted to see how Business Roundtable acquired their results. They would not disclose their exact question wording to us. Their report notes, Responses were received from 134 member CEOs, 63 percent of the total Business Roundtable membership. Business Roundtables membership tends to be larger companies.Spokeswoman Amanda DeBard told us CEOs are invited based on revenue, industry and market capitalization, soits safe to say the poll responses dont reflect a random sample of U.S. businesses. Since Obama often speaks to the Business Roundtable, we wanted to see what his relationship with the group was like. University of Kansas political science professor Burdett Loomis, who specializes in lobbying, said theres not much of a connection. Many of them have long-term relationships with government (simply because of their size and the governments size), but probably only a handful have any kind of even semi-close relationship with Obama, he said. We ran the poll results by another business group,the National Federation of Independent Businesses. Senior policy analyst Holly Wade said she saw a similar sentiment among the smaller business owners that the federation represents. In September, there were more small business owners that were feeling pessimistic about business conditions six months out, she said. There wasnt much opinion voiced about delaying employment specifically, though. But Wade said that could be because small businesses were already hiring less during the economic recovery compared to bigger corporations. Why would CEOs want to delay hiring? With another possible debt ceiling default looming Feb. 7, University of Maryland finance professor David Kass said its likely that a budget dealwill lead to tighter fiscal policy, which would slow down the economy and cause CEOs to put off hiring decisions for a few months. Another factor that would contribute to CEO anxiety is consumer behavior. While day-to-day spending probably wont change post-shutdown, consumers will likely postpone higher ticket purchases, like homes and cars. On the demand side, theres uncertainty on the consumers part, which in turn will have an impact on CEOs, Kass said. Theyre trying to predict their future sales and what the environment will look like. Its a lose-lose situation for everyone. In any case, Obama is trying to communicate that the shutdown had a significantfinancial impacton the nation, and hes not wrong there. Independent forecasts agree that the shutdown was a setback for the U.S. economy, though they differ on exact figures. Our ruling Obama said 50 percent of CEOs are delaying hiring due to the shutdown, which accurately cites the results of a poll sponsored by the Business Roundtable. The surveys limited sampling, though, means the responses arent necessarily representative of all U.S. businesses. But the idea that the shutdown affects how businesses think about hiring is more broadly applicable. Experts said its reasonable that CEOs would be hesitant to hire, given that uncertainty about government fiscal policy can affect consumer confidence. We rate Obama's claim Mostly True

['National', 'Economy', 'Small Business']

True

These last few weeks have inflicted completely unnecessary damage on our economy, he said in apublic addressThursday. As proof, he offered up specific claims including, Half of all CEOs say that the shutdown and the threat of shutdown set back their plans to hire over the next six months.The White Housepointed us to a recentBusiness Roundtable survey.In any case, Obama is trying to communicate that the shutdown had a significantfinancial impacton the nation, and hes not wrong there. Independent forecasts agree that the shutdown was a setback for the U.S. economy, though they differ on exact figures.

Were Most Jobs Added in February 2021 'Waiters and Bartenders'?

['Some online observers critical of U.S. President Joe Biden sought to undercut a broadly positive employment update in March 2021.']

In March 2021, new employment figures showed that the U.S. economy added 379,000 jobs in February, the first full month of Joe Biden's presidency. The news was greeted with cautious optimism, with the Wall Street Journal reporting that the gains had "set up a stronger recovery" for the spring of 2021, and The Washington Post reporting that the figures had "surpassed analysts' estimates." Politico wrote that: Wall Street Journal Washington Post Politico U.S. employers added a robust 379,000 jobs last month, the most since October and a sign that the economy is strengthening as confirmed viral cases drop, consumers spend more and states and cities ease business restrictions.The February gain marked a sharp pickup from the 166,000 jobs that were added in January and a loss of 306,000 in December. Yet it represents just a fraction of the roughly 10 million jobs that were lost to the pandemic. On social media, other observers in particular those more broadly opposed to Biden sought to undercut the significance of the jobs figures, claiming that a large majority of the increased employment came in one sector, namely food and beverage services. On Twitter, the libertarian economics blog Zerohedge wrote: wrote Of the 379K jobs added, 286K were waiters and bartenders. The stockbroker and financial commentator Peter Schiff tweeted: tweeted 75% of the 379k jobs "created" in Feb. were waiters and bartenders returning to work. Since many restaurants and bars that closed will never reopen there's a limit to how long this can last... The right-wing British blog Guido Fawkes tweeted: tweeted "US economic recovery sees 379,000 jobs added this week, 286,000 were waiters and bartenders. God bless America and cheers!" Those figures were accurately stated, although "waiters and bartenders" was a reductive description of the occupations in question. As a result, we're issuing a rating of "true." The standard measure of job growth is "total nonfarm payroll employment, seasonally adjusted," a metric that is collated and published by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), each month. On March 5, the BLS published figures for the preceding month, February 2021, writing that: "Total nonfarm payroll employment rose by 379,000 in February..." In effect, this means that there were 379,000 more jobs in the United States in February than there were in January. published The BLS provides in-depth breakdowns of job gains or losses, and unemployment, including details on the demographic and sectoral contours of each month's data. According to the same set of figures, the "leisure and hospitality" sector gained 355,000 of the 379,000 total new jobs in February (Summary Table B). Summary Table B Of those, 285,900 jobs were specifically in "food services and drinking places" (Table B-1). That's the source of the "286K" figure presented by Zerohedge. Those 285,900 jobs made up 75.4% of the total number of new jobs added in February, the percentage figure provided by Schiff in his tweet. Table B-1 However, the "food services and drinking places" subsector is made up of more than just "waiters and bartenders." The following is how that subsector is defined in the official North American Industry Classification System: defined Industries in the Food Services and Drinking Places subsector prepare meals, snacks, and beverages to customer order for immediate on-premises and off-premises consumption. There is a wide range of establishments in these industries. Some provide food and drink only; while others provide various combinations of seating space, waiter/waitress services and incidental amenities, such as limited entertainment. The industries in the subsector are grouped based on the type and level of services provided. The industry groups are full-service restaurants; limited-service eating places; special food services, such as food service contractors, caterers, and mobile food services; and drinking places. The BLS figures for February 2021 don't specify the proportion of those 285,900 jobs composed of specific occupations, but it's highly unlikely they were all "waiters and bartenders." In 2019, the most recent year for which figures are available, the following was the breakdown of occupations within the "food services and drinking places subsector": breakdown As can be seen from those figures, "waiters and waitresses" made up less than one-third of workers within that subsector. If the distribution of occupations was even broadly similar among the 285,900 new "food services and drinking places" jobs added in February, then it would appear highly unlikely that even a majority of those 285,900 new jobs were made up of "waiters and bartenders" alone.

['economy']

True

In March 2021, new employment figures showed that the U.S. economy added 379,000 jobs in February, the first full month of Joe Biden's presidency. The news was greeted with cautious optimism, with the Wall Street Journal reporting that the gains had "set up a stronger recovery" for the spring of 2021, and The Washington Post reporting that the figures had "surpassed analysts' estimates." Politico wrote that:On Twitter, the libertarian economics blog Zerohedge wrote:The stockbroker and financial commentator Peter Schiff tweeted:The right-wing British blog Guido Fawkes tweeted:The standard measure of job growth is "total nonfarm payroll employment, seasonally adjusted," a metric that is collated and published by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), each month. On March 5, the BLS published figures for the preceding month, February 2021, writing that: "Total nonfarm payroll employment rose by 379,000 in February..." In effect, this means that there were 379,000 more jobs in the United States in February than there were in January.The BLS provides in-depth breakdowns of job gains or losses, and unemployment, including details on the demographic and sectoral contours of each month's data. According to the same set of figures, the "leisure and hospitality" sector gained 355,000 of the 379,000 total new jobs in February (Summary Table B). Of those, 285,900 jobs were specifically in "food services and drinking places" (Table B-1). That's the source of the "286K" figure presented by Zerohedge. Those 285,900 jobs made up 75.4% of the total number of new jobs added in February, the percentage figure provided by Schiff in his tweet.However, the "food services and drinking places" subsector is made up of more than just "waiters and bartenders." The following is how that subsector is defined in the official North American Industry Classification System:The BLS figures for February 2021 don't specify the proportion of those 285,900 jobs composed of specific occupations, but it's highly unlikely they were all "waiters and bartenders." In 2019, the most recent year for which figures are available, the following was the breakdown of occupations within the "food services and drinking places subsector":

Do Lukoil Gas Stations belong to a Russian owner?

["Americans outraged by Russia's invasion of Ukraine called for a boycott of Lukoil gas stations in the U.S. "]

During Russia's invasion of Ukraine in early 2022, American social media users enthusiastically shared posts that called for a boycott of Lukoil gas stations on the East Coast, on the basis that they were Russian owned. As one very widely shared tweet summarized: social media users enthusiastically shared posts called boycott Russian summarized "#BoycottRussia. Lukoil gas is Russian owned." wrote "Fill your tank elsewhere. Lukoil is a Russian multinational corporation headquartered in Moscow. Their CEO, Vagit Alekperov, is a Russian oligarch worth an estimated $19.6 billion. Lukoil gas stations are all over PA, NJ and NY." These posts undoubtedly contained a significant element of truth. Lukoil is indeed a large Russian-headquartered multinational petroleum and natural gas producer, with a U.S. subsidiary that oversees a network of gas stations, primarily in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and New York. Moreover, the company's billionaire president, Vagit Alekperov, has ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin. has ties However, Lukoil typically does not operate those U.S. gas stations itself. Rather, it operates on a franchise basis, meaning any successful boycott of Lukoil-branded gas stations would likely have a negligible effect on the parent company or its billionaire president, but could prove financially devastating for dozens of U.S. franchise owners and their hundreds of local employees. In brief, Lukoil itself might be "Russian owned," but its U.S. gas stations are U.S.-operated and locally staffed. As such, we're issuing a rating of "Mixture." Lukoil emerged from the dissolving Soviet Union in the early 1990s, and entered the American market a decade later. According to the company's website, Lukoil acquired the American company Getty Oil in 2000, taking over and rebranding its existing network of gas stations. the company's website The first Lukoil-branded gas station was opened in the Chelsea neighborhood of Manhattan in September, 2003. Notably, the grand opening was attended by Putin himself who was in the U.S. at that time for talks with then-President George W. Bush. In the photograph below, Putin can be seen outside the Manhattan Lukoil, with Alekperov to his right, and U.S. Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., to his left: attended by Putin himself Russian President Vladimir Putin (C) and Lukoil President Vagit Alekperov (L) listen as U.S. Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY) (R) gestures as he speaks about U.S.-Russian relations during the opening of Lukoil's gasoline station September 26, 2003 in the Chelsea neighborhood of New York City. Lukoil, a Russian oil company, acquired Getty Petroleum Marketing Inc. and its 1,300 stations in November 2000. (Photo by Stephen Chernin/Getty Images) At the time, Lukoil was reported to have taken over Getty's existing network of 1,300 gas stations, but by 2022, the number of Lukoil-branded gas stations in the United States had declined to around 230 most, if not all, located in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and New York. Importantly, most if not all of those gas stations are operated as franchises. Franchising is a popular business model in the United States, with the best-known examples being fast food restaurants such as McDonald's and convenience stores like 7-Eleven. popular business model in the United States Roughly speaking, the franchisee (local entrepreneur) pays the franchisor (main company) some fees: typically an up-front franchise fee, and regular royalties usually a percentage cut of their income from sales. In return, the franchisor gives the franchisee the right to operate a business using their well-known brand, for a defined period of time, usually several years. The company might also provide advice or assistance with logistics, advertising, marketing, and so on. The local entrepreneur is also contractually obliged to operate the business in accordance with certain prescribed methods, customer service models, and so on. Lukoil or more specifically, Lukoil North America, a Delaware-registered LLC with an address in Moorestown, New Jersey offers three-year leases to franchisees in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and New York. In fact, as of March 2, the company's website listed for lease 13 different gas station sites in those states: Lukoil North America, a Delaware-registered LLC 13 different gas station sites offer to lease" document The aforementioned Bidder is submitting the below rental offer to lease the LUKOIL branded service station listed above, and is prepared to enter into an Agreement with LNA for the lease of the same, subject to the conditions specified below. The lease term is generally three (3) years, however a longer term can be approved, at LNA's discretion, provided a sufficient site improvement or supply commitment is made to justify a longer term. Google post "LUKOIL gas stations in the United States are independently owned and operated by local business owners who are members of the communities they serve, and 100% of the gasoline and diesel fuel sold is sourced from American oil refiners." Snopes asked Lukoil for details on the exact number of Lukoil-branded gas stations in the United States, and the number of those operated on a franchise basis, if not all. We also asked for precise details about the company's revenue from franchise fees, royalties and/or rent paid by U.S. franchisees, but we did not receive a response in time for publication. However, Lukoil's 2021 financial results, which were published on March 2, gave an indication of the relatively small role of U.S. gas station revenue in the company's overall income, most of which stems from oil and gas exploration and production inside Russia. Lukoil's 2021 financial results In 2021, according to Lukoil, the company had total sales of 9.4 trillion rubles ($88 billion), and its earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA) were 1.4 trillion rubles ($13 billion). Of that $13 billion, just 8.3% ($1 billion) was made up of "refining, marketing and distribution" outside Russia. Although a more detailed breakdown is not available, it is reasonable to suppose that income related specifically to U.S. gas stations made up an even smaller fraction of that $1 billion, given that Lukoil refines, markets, and distributes petroleum in several other countries throughout the world. It's also not clear whether, in the event of an effective widespread boycott of U.S. Lukoil-branded gas stations, franchisees would still be obliged to continue paying fees and rent to Lukoil North America even if they had no income from gas or convenience store sales. Therefore, a successful boycott could require financial devastation if not ruination among many dozens of local entrepreneurs in the United States, as well as sudden unemployment for their hundreds of workers, in order to achieve what would be only a very small financial impact on the Russian parent company, or its bosses in Moscow. On March 3, Lukoil's board of directors issued a statement in which they expressed their "deepest concerns about the tragic events in Ukraine," and called for an immediate end to the conflict and a "lasting ceasefire." issued a statement Maass, Peter. The Triumph of the Quiet Tycoon. The New York Times, 1 Aug. 2004. NYTimes.com, https://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/01/magazine/the-triumph-of-the-quiet-tycoon.html. PRESS RELEASE MARCH 02, 2022 LUKOIL RELEASES FINANCIAL RESULTS UNDER IFRS FOR 2021 PJSC LUKOIL Today Released Its Audited Consol. https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache%3AnFU75r0Wkh4J%3Ahttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.lukoil.com%2Fapi%2Fpresscenter%2Fexportpressrelease%3Fid%3D577486+&cd=7&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us. Accessed 3 Mar. 2022. Updated [March 4, 2022]: Added reference to the Lukoil board of directors March 3 statement about the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

['income']

NEI

During Russia's invasion of Ukraine in early 2022, American social media users enthusiastically shared posts that called for a boycott of Lukoil gas stations on the East Coast, on the basis that they were Russian owned. As one very widely shared tweet summarized:These posts undoubtedly contained a significant element of truth. Lukoil is indeed a large Russian-headquartered multinational petroleum and natural gas producer, with a U.S. subsidiary that oversees a network of gas stations, primarily in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and New York. Moreover, the company's billionaire president, Vagit Alekperov, has ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin.Lukoil emerged from the dissolving Soviet Union in the early 1990s, and entered the American market a decade later. According to the company's website, Lukoil acquired the American company Getty Oil in 2000, taking over and rebranding its existing network of gas stations.The first Lukoil-branded gas station was opened in the Chelsea neighborhood of Manhattan in September, 2003. Notably, the grand opening was attended by Putin himself who was in the U.S. at that time for talks with then-President George W. Bush. In the photograph below, Putin can be seen outside the Manhattan Lukoil, with Alekperov to his right, and U.S. Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., to his left: Russian President Vladimir Putin (C) and Lukoil President Vagit Alekperov (L) listen as U.S. Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY) (R) gestures as he speaks about U.S.-Russian relations during the opening of Lukoil's gasoline station September 26, 2003 in the Chelsea neighborhood of New York City. Lukoil, a Russian oil company, acquired Getty Petroleum Marketing Inc. and its 1,300 stations in November 2000. (Photo by Stephen Chernin/Getty Images)Importantly, most if not all of those gas stations are operated as franchises. Franchising is a popular business model in the United States, with the best-known examples being fast food restaurants such as McDonald's and convenience stores like 7-Eleven. Lukoil or more specifically, Lukoil North America, a Delaware-registered LLC with an address in Moorestown, New Jersey offers three-year leases to franchisees in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and New York. In fact, as of March 2, the company's website listed for lease 13 different gas station sites in those states:However, Lukoil's 2021 financial results, which were published on March 2, gave an indication of the relatively small role of U.S. gas station revenue in the company's overall income, most of which stems from oil and gas exploration and production inside Russia.On March 3, Lukoil's board of directors issued a statement in which they expressed their "deepest concerns about the tragic events in Ukraine," and called for an immediate end to the conflict and a "lasting ceasefire."

Are the Trumps Looting the White House?

['A photograph of someone carrying a bust of Abraham Lincoln out of the White House raised questions (and unfounded accusations) for some viewers. ']

On Jan. 14, 2021, the day after U.S. President Donald Trump was impeached for the second time and a few days before his scheduled departure from the White House, a photograph started circulating online that supposedly showed members of the Trump administration carrying a bust of Abraham Lincoln out of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. On social media, some people speculated that this item, and other White House artifacts, were being "looted" by the Trump family. This is a genuine photograph of a statue being carried out of the White House, but it doesn't appear to document any "looting." At the start of every president's term, the incoming president has the opportunity to work with the White House curator to populate 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue with various paintings, sculptures, and other artifacts. These items are often loaned to the White House from various museums and galleries. At the end of the president's term, these items are then returned. White House curator Art.net writes: writes A 1961 act of Congress formalized the White Houses art collection, which now contains about 65,000 objects, if one counts things like utensils and glasses individually. The collection also includes around 500 paintings. When a new president arrives, the White House curators office selects new works for display in public spaces and the West Wing. The works can subtly communicate political priorities as well as personal tastes. President Ronald Reagan reportedly installed a portrait of Calvin Coolidge in the cabinet room as a nod to the importance of fiscal conservatism. When she was first lady, Hillary Clinton installed a painting by Georgia OKeeffe in the Green Room. Michelle Obama acquired a bright abstract painting by Alma Thomas, which became the first work by a female African-American artist to enter the White House collection. A new first family can also request art to decorate private spaces. Two paintings by Edward Hopper, for example, hung in the Oval Office during Obamas final term, on loan from the Whitney Museum of American Art in New York. The Independent reported that the bust of Lincoln seen in the viral photo was indeed being removed from the White House, but would be returned to a museum: reported A bust of Abraham Lincoln was also ushered out of the West Wing by the staffers though not because it is a personal item. The statue will be returned to a museum, as incoming officials generally choose their own items from among national artefacts to decorate the White House during their term. We have not been able to independently verify this. However, Stewart McLaurin, the president of the White House Historical Association, said that there was no reason to be concerned about these viral pics. McLaurin said that all of the items on loan to the White House are carefully cataloged by the curator. McLaurin added that members of the Trump administration may have also brought personal items to the White House, which they are allowed to take with them when they leave: Stewart McLaurin

['loan']

False

This is a genuine photograph of a statue being carried out of the White House, but it doesn't appear to document any "looting." At the start of every president's term, the incoming president has the opportunity to work with the White House curator to populate 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue with various paintings, sculptures, and other artifacts. These items are often loaned to the White House from various museums and galleries. At the end of the president's term, these items are then returned. Art.net writes:The Independent reported that the bust of Lincoln seen in the viral photo was indeed being removed from the White House, but would be returned to a museum:We have not been able to independently verify this. However, Stewart McLaurin, the president of the White House Historical Association, said that there was no reason to be concerned about these viral pics. McLaurin said that all of the items on loan to the White House are carefully cataloged by the curator. McLaurin added that members of the Trump administration may have also brought personal items to the White House, which they are allowed to take with them when they leave:

Did Obama Award Presidential Medal of Freedom to Weinstein, Weiner, Clinton, and Cosby?

['So many awards, so few genuine recipients.']

After numerous women came forward to accuse powerful Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein of sexual harassment, assault, and rape in October 2017, social media users circulated photographs of Weinstein with various politicians in an apparent attempt to smear their characters. One meme went even further, purportedly showing President Obama bestowing the Presidential Medal of Freedom on Weinstein, President Bill Clinton, Anthony Weiner, and Bill Cosby, joking that it should be renamed the "sexual predator award." Three women have accused Bill Clinton of sexual harassment, rape, or sexual assault—charges that he denies. Anthony Weiner was sentenced to 21 months in prison for exchanging sexual messages with a 15-year-old girl. Dozens of women accused Bill Cosby of drugging, raping, and assaulting them. The only genuine image included in this meme is that of President Obama awarding the Presidential Medal of Freedom to President Bill Clinton during a ceremony in November 2013. The Washington Post reported at the time that it was a ceremony rich in pageantry and politics: President Obama, at the nadir of his presidency, bestowed the Presidential Medal of Freedom on a Democratic predecessor, Bill Clinton. Obama uttered fewer than 300 words about Clinton, but his remarks paid tribute to the sweep of his public life—from transforming education as governor of Arkansas to growing the economy as the 42nd president to leading relief efforts in the wake of global natural disasters. Obama said Clinton's charitable foundation has saved literally hundreds of millions of people. He still remembers as a child waving goodbye to his mom, tears in her eyes, as she went off to nursing school so she could provide for her family, Obama said of Clinton. And I think lifting up families like his own became the story of Bill Clinton's life. All three of the other images were created by taking a genuine photograph of a different recipient and then using digital manipulation to add the heads of Weinstein, Weiner, and Cosby. The photograph purportedly showing Obama with Weinstein, for instance, originally featured an image of Vice President Joe Biden: Obama surprised Biden with the Presidential Medal of Freedom during a ceremony in January 2017. The image purportedly showing Obama with Anthony Weiner was created using an image that originally featured actor Tom Hanks: Hanks received his award in November 2016. The image of Bill Cosby was also fake. The original image featured President Obama bestowing the Medal of Freedom on musician Bruce Springsteen: although the image of Bill Cosby with President Obama is fake, the comedian truly did receive the award in 2002—from President George W. Bush. Neither Weinstein nor Weiner has received a Presidential Medal of Freedom.

['economy']

False

After numerous women came forward to accuse powerful Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein of sexual harassment, assault, and rape in October 2017, social media users circulated photographs of Weinstein with various politicians in an apparent attempt to smear their characters. One meme went even further, purportedly showing President Obama bestowing the Presidential Medal of Freedom on Weinstein, President Bill Clinton, Anthony Weiner, and Bill Cosby and joking that it should be renamed the "sexual predator award":Three women have accused Bill Clinton sexual harassment, rape, or sexual assault -- charges that he denies. Anthony Weiner was sentenced to 21 months prison for exchanging sexual messages with a 15-year-old girl. Dozens of women accused Bill Cosby of drugging, raping and assaulting them.The only genuine image included in this meme is that of President Obama awarding the Presidential Medal of Freedom to President Bill Clinton during a ceremony in November 2013. The Washington Post reported at the time that:Obama surprised Biden with the Presidential Medal of Freedom during a ceremony in January 2017.Hanks received his award in November 2016.Although the image of Bill Cosby with President Obama is fake, the comedian truly did receive the award in 2002 -- from President George W. Bush:

Warning about pedophiles on Facebook

['Are child predators using Facebook to source victims by adding unsuspecting parents as friends?']

Claim: Predators, pedophiles, and child trafficking rings are using Facebook to source new victims by friending trusting parents and mining images posted of their children. Example: [Collected on Facebook, September 2014] A guy sends you a friend request. You don't know him, but he's got a cute profile pic, so you accept. It's baby girl's first day of school! She looks SO cute in her new outfit you just have to take a picture and put it on Facebook so all your friends and family can see. You're so excited dropping her off that you "check in" to her school on Fb saying "I can't believe how big she's gotten. Time sure flies. One proud momma/daddy right here!"... Meanwhile, the mystery guy whose friend request you hurriedly accepted earlier this morning is saving that picture you posted of your daughter in her cute new outfit to his phone and texting it to 60 other grown men across the world with the caption "Caucasian female. Age 5. Brown hair, green eyes. $2,500." Not only did you provide a picture of your little girl to a child trafficker, you've handed him the name and exact location of her school on a silver cyber platter. You go to pick her up at 3:00 this afternoon, but she's nowhere to be found. Little do you know, your precious baby girl was sold to a 43-year-old pedophile before you even stepped foot off campus this morning, and now she's on her way to South Africa with a bag over her head, confused, terrified and crying because a man she's never seen before picked her up from school, and now she doesn't know where her parents are, where she's going, or what's gonna happen to her. STOP ADDING STRANGERS ON FACEBOOK. Origins: In September 2014, the post above (without original attribution) went viral on Facebook. While this iteration is a new one, panic over internet strangers is as old as the internet itself, and warnings such as this have largely morphed from email forwards to Facebook shares. panic over internet strangers In May and June of 2015, the story received a second wave of interest after it was published to the website StylishLisa on 27 May 2015. On 30 May 2015 the message appeared on the Facebook page Lil' Red Warriors, but was later deleted after Facebook commenters correctly identified the photograph's origin on a page about children's hairstyles. The photo and its claim were later published verbatim to the Facebook page of Cyn Malvita, from where it was shared hundreds of thousands of times. A cached version of the iteration involving the hairstyling picture is embedded below: published Lil' Red Warriors deleted children's hairstyles Cyn Malvita The Facebook post currently in circulation bears some resemblance to a well-traveled warning from years back describing a similar danger. While the premise is similar, the stated risk has evolved, incorporating Facebook's open and share-friendly nature as the door through which rampant child predators will enter your life and summarily terrorize you. well-traveled warning This particular warning has some unpleasant undertones in its telling, suggesting that female users are too readily tempted by a "cute" potential predator to consider the safety of their children. It also tacitly condemns parents (mothers, presumably in particular) for even mentioning their children in hawking its highly improbable, sanctimonious premise. Facebook and similar social media sites have ushered in a new level of panic when it comes to internet safety, given that the social network requires users to supply accurate information about their true identities and real names to use the service. While many users flout this aspect of the site's terms and services, many others have been banned temporarily or permanently for using aliases in place of real names. Reading the circulating post above might lead one to believe that the danger is very real and omnipresent, but the scenario presented is one that is exceedingly unlikely. Among other implausibilities, this warning makes it sound as though the bad guys are stymied in their search for victims and don't know where to look for kids to abduct until they see pictures of them on Facebook. But potential abductors' seeing a Facebook photo of a particular child who attends a given school does nothing to facilitate the snatching of random children for sale to pedophiles would-be kidnappers don't need Facebook photos, as they could simply lie in wait outside just about any school and try to grab children as such opportunities presented themselves. Aside from that, first and foremost, most schools nowadays do not release children to parties who have not been explicitly granted permission and had their names recorded on an authorized list, a fact to which any parent who has ever needed a friend to make a last-minute school pickup can attest. Secondly, while the risk of child abduction and trafficking may exist, children are far, far more likely to be endangered by a relative or other "trusted" adult than a random Facebook contact. According to the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children, the most recent statistics reflect a far different danger than the one described above. Of 800,000 children reported missing, 200,000 were abducted by relatives, 58,000 were kids taken by nonfamily members, and only 115 missing child reports were considered "stereotypical" abductions involving a complete stranger with intent to harm or keep the child. National Center for Missing & Exploited Children A lengthy report on Child Exploitation Prevention presented to Congress by the Justice Department in 2010 [PDF] further delves into the profiles of predators involved in child abuse and trafficking. According to the data presented, the vast majority of children harmed in this manner are either introduced or otherwise victimized by family members or other trusted adults such as babysitters, coaches, or family friends. Only four percent of victims identified were exploited or abused by an adult not previously known to the child or their family. PDF In the cases examined, abuse typically occurred over the course of years and involved "grooming" and other behaviors designed to created compliance. Child victims were not at risk of being immediately whisked to Africa by a strange Facebook user, but rather more likely placed in harm's way by the people meant to ensure their safety and care. On rare occasions child predators may mine publicly posted photos of children for personal use or trade, and posted Facebook pictures and locations might facilitate a kidnapping if the abductors were seeking to grab a specific child (rather than trolling for random victims), but no evidence suggests the posting of kids' photos on Facebook has resulted in a general increase of kidnapping or abuse of children. Last updated: 4 June 2015

['interest']

NEI

Origins: In September 2014, the post above (without original attribution) went viral on Facebook. While this iteration is a new one, panic over internet strangers is as old as the internet itself, and warnings such as this have largely morphed from email forwards to Facebook shares.In May and June of 2015, the story received a second wave of interest after it was published to the website StylishLisa on 27 May 2015. On 30 May 2015 the message appeared on the Facebook page Lil' Red Warriors, but was later deleted after Facebook commenters correctly identified the photograph's origin on a page about children's hairstyles. The photo and its claim were later published verbatim to the Facebook page of Cyn Malvita, from where it was shared hundreds of thousands of times. A cached version of the iteration involving the hairstyling picture is embedded below:The Facebook post currently in circulation bears some resemblance to a well-traveled warning from years back describing a similar danger. While the premise is similar, the stated risk has evolved, incorporating Facebook's open and share-friendly nature as the door through which rampant child predators will enter your life and summarily terrorize you.to be endangered by a relative or other "trusted" adult than a random Facebook contact. According to the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children, the most recent statistics reflect a far different danger than the one described above. Of 800,000 children reported missing, 200,000 were abducted by relatives, 58,000 were kids taken by nonfamily members, and only 115 missing child reports were considered "stereotypical" abductions involving a complete stranger with intent to harm or keep the child.A lengthy report on Child Exploitation Prevention presented to Congress by the Justice Department in 2010 [PDF] further delves into the profiles of predators involved in child abuse and trafficking. According to the data presented, the vast majority of children harmed in this manner are either introduced or otherwise victimized by family members or other trusted adults such as babysitters, coaches, or family friends. Only four percent of victims identified were exploited or abused by an adult not previously known to the child or their family.

Is Marlboro Giving Away Cartons of Cigarettes on Facebook?

['The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act of 2009 prohibits tobacco companies from giving away free samples of cigarettes.']

In October 2015, links began circulating on Facebook promising users a free carton of Marlboro cigarettes to celebrate the brand's 100th anniversary. The embedded links involved a variety of URLs, some of which included entirely unrelated scam-bait terms like "iTunes" and "Apple." Users who clicked through to claim their purported free carton of Marlboros were routed to a page reading, "Marlboro is Giving FREE Carton of Cigarettes to Celebrate 100th Anniversary (150 Cartons Remaining)," which cloned the style of Facebook-based content but was hosted on a non-Facebook URL. As noted, the URLs visible in the posts didn't point to any credible domains or any sites linked to Altria, the brand's parent company. Marlboro didn't appear to maintain any social media accounts, and the brand's official website was locked to registered users only. While no official refutations were issued, it seemed safe to assume that cigarette brands largely refrained from participating on Facebook or creating promotions that could land them afoul of strict tobacco advertising laws. By now, most social media users are familiar with survey scams; Kohl's, Costco, Home Depot, Lowe's, Kroger, Best Buy, Macy's, Olive Garden, Publix, Target, and Walmart are among the retailers used as bait by scammers seeking personal information and valuable page likes from Facebook users. A July 2014 article from the Better Business Bureau illustrated how individuals might spot and avoid bad actors utilizing the reputations of brands on social media: Don't believe what you see. It's easy to steal the colors, logos, and headers of an established organization. Scammers can also make links look like they lead to legitimate websites and emails appear to come from a different sender. Legitimate businesses do not ask for credit card numbers or banking information on customer surveys. If they do ask for personal information, like an address or email, be sure there's a link to their privacy policy. When in doubt, do a quick web search. If the survey is a scam, you may find alerts or complaints from other consumers. The organization's real website may have further information. Watch out for rewards that are 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. While Marlboro occasionally sends coupons to registered customers, tobacco advertising and promotion are heavily restricted, including a prohibition on free samples, and are highly unlikely to ever occur on social media in the manner posited above.

['credit']

False

By now, most social media users are familiar with survey scams; Kohl's, Costco, Home Depot, Lowe's, Kroger, Best Buy, Macy's, Olive Garden, Publix, Target, and Walmart are among retailers used as bait by scammers (seeking personal information and valuable page likes from Facebook users). A July 2014 article from the Better Business Bureau illustrated how folks might spot and avoid bad actors utilizing the reputations of brands on social media:While Marlboro occasionally sends coupons to registered customers, tobacco advertising and promotion is heavily restricted (including a prohibition on free samples) and is highly unlikely to ever occur on social media in the manner posited above.

Stella Awards

['A bouquet of outrageous lawsuits demonstrates the need for tort reform?']

Claim: Six outrageous-but-real lawsuits showcase the need for tort reform. Example: [Collected on the Internet, 2001] This is what's wrong with the world: 1. January 2000: Kathleen Robertson of Austin Texas was awarded $780,000.00 by a jury of her peers after breaking her ankle tripping over a toddler who was running amuck inside a furniture store. The owners of the store were understandably surprised at the verdict, considering the misbehaving tyke was Ms. Robertson's son. 2. June 1998: A 19 year old Carl Truman of Los Angeles won $74,000.00 and medical expenses when his neighbor ran his hand over with a Honda Accord. Mr. Truman apparently didn't notice someone was at the wheel of the car whose hubcap he was trying to steal. 3. October 1998: A Terrence Dickson of Bristol Pennsylvania was exiting a house he finished robbing by way of the garage. He was not able to get the garage door to go up, because the automatic door opener was malfunctioning. He couldn't re-enter the house because the door connecting the house and garage locked when he pulled it shut. The family was on vacation, so Mr. Dickson found himself locked in the garage for eight days. He subsisted on a case of Pepsi he found, and a large bag of dry dog food. This upset Mr. Dickson, so he sued the homeowner's insurance claiming the situation caused him undue mental anguish. The jury agreed to the tune of half a million dollars and change. 4. October 1999: Jerry Williams of Little Rock Arkansas was awarded $14,500.00 and medical expenses after being bitten on the buttocks by his next door neighbor's beagle. The beagle was on a chain in its owner's fenced-in yard, as was Mr. Williams. The award was less than sought after because the jury felt the dog may have been provoked by Mr. Williams who, at the time, was shooting it repeatedly with a pellet gun. 5. May 2000: A Philadelphia restaurant was ordered to pay Amber Carson of Lancaster, Pennsylvania $113,500.00 after she slipped on a spilled soft drink and broke her coccyx. The beverage was on the floor because Ms. Carson threw it at her boyfriend 30 seconds earlier during an argument. 6. December 1997: Kara Walton of Claymont, Delaware successfully sued the owner of a night club in a neighboring city when she fell from the bathroom window to the floor and knocked out her two front teeth. This occurred while Ms. Walton was trying to sneak through the window in the ladies room to avoid paying the $3.50 cover charge. She was awarded $12,000.00 and dental expenses. Origins: This "and you wonder what's wrong with the world today?" whinge appeared on the Internet in May 2001. All of the entries in the list are fabrications: a search for news stories about each of these cases failed to turn up anything, as did a search for each law case. The earliest version concluded with a seventh item that has since been snipped away, likely after someone noticed it was the venerable microwaved poodle legend. Its inclusion would have immediately called into question the truthfulness of the other six cases for any number of folks familiar with urban legends. The remaining six were still false, but they weren't as obviously false as the following poodle tale and thus wouldn't have set the alarm bells ringing: microwaved 7. And just so you know that cooler heads do occasionally prevail: Kenmore Inc., the makers of Dorothy Johnson's microwave, were found not liable for the death of Mrs. Johnson's poodle after she gave it a bath and attempted to dry it by putting the poor creature in her microwave for, "just a few minutes, on low," The case was quickly dismissed. A version of the list that began circulating in the spring of 2002 has yet another urban legend included as its final item, the venerable cruise control legend: cruise control In November 2000, Mr. Grazinski purchased a brand new 32 foot Winnebago motor home. On his first trip home, having joined the freeway, he set the cruise control at 70 mph and calmly left the drivers seat to go into the back and make himself a cup of coffee. Not surprisingly, the Winnie left the freeway, crashed and overturned. Mr. Grazinski sued Winnebago for not advising him in the handbook that he could not actually do this. He was awarded $1,750,000 plus a new Winnebago. Some versions bear the following footer, although many omit it: PLEASE ASSIST OUR LAW OFFICES IN A TORT REFORM PROGRAM. WE ARE ATTEMPTING TO PUT A STOP TO THESE INSANE JURY AWARDS BY SENDING THIS E-MAIL OUT TO THE PUBLIC IN THE HOPES OF SWAYING PUBLIC OPINION. PLEASE FORWARD IT TO EVERY EMAIL ADDRESS YOU KNOW.Mary R. Hogelmen, Esq.Law Offices of Hogelmen, Hogelmen, and ThomasDayton Ohio Mary R. Hogelmen, Esq.Law Offices of Hogelmen, Hogelmen, and ThomasDayton Ohio There is no law firm of Hogelmen, Hogelmen, and Thomas in Dayton, Ohio, as a call to directory assistance quickly confirmed. This detail was included to give the mailing credibility in the eyes of those who received it: if a law firm had pulled this list together to build grassroots support for its tort reform program, then it went without saying a pack of lawyers had properly researched each item and were guaranteeing the information provided. But of course this detail was as false as everything else in the e-mail. Speaking about implied credibility, we note that the "outrageous lawsuits" list has made it into the newspapers at times, which only works to add to the perception that the information given in it is reliable. In June 2002, the New York Daily News presented it solely as an e-mail it had received, making no statements as to its likeliness to be real or detailing any attempts that publication might have made to verify any of the entries. (Had such attempts been made, the Daily News would have quickly found the article you're now reading, which originally appeared on this site a full ten months prior to the Daily News piece.) Fake or not, a list of outrageous awards bestowed upon those whose actions nay, misbehaviors had brought them to grief would fall upon very receptive ears because current feeling is very much against large jury awards for frivolous claims. This e-mail preaches to the choir in that it "confirms" what is already deeply believed. Numerous states have enacted measures to reform their civil law systems in response to the problem of frivolous lawsuits and runaway jury awards. Tort reform usually amounts to placing a cap on punitive damage awards, making the state's joint-and-several liability law more equitable, and limiting judge and court shopping (which means cases are tried in front of whomever they've been assigned to rather than the judge the plaintiff figures will be most sympathetic). Though the cases described in the e-mail are fake, real lawsuits of equal silliness can be found in abundance. An equally impressive list could easily have been compiled by anyone with access to a news database and a few moments to spare. For instance: In March 1995, a San Diego man unsuccessfully attempted to sue the city and Jack Murphy Stadium for $5.4 million over something that can only be described as a wee problem: Robert Glaser claimed the stadium's unisex bathroom policy at a Billy Joel and Elton John concert caused him embarrassment and emotional distress thanks to the sight of a woman using a urinal in front of him. He subsequently tried "six or seven" other bathrooms in the stadium only to find women in all of them. He asserted he "had to hold it in for four hours" because he was too embarrassed to share the public bathrooms with women. A San Carlos, California, man sued the Escondido Public Library for $1.5 million. His dog, a 50-pound Labrador mix, was attacked November 2000 by the library's 12-pound feline mascot, L.C., (also known as Library Cat). The case was heard in January 2004, with the jury finding for the defendant. In a further case which was resolved in July 2004, the plaintiff in the previous suit was ordered to pay the city $29,362.50, which amounted to 75% of its legal fees associated with that case. In 1994, a student at the University of Idaho unsuccessfully sued that institution over his fall from a third-floor dorm window. He'd been mooning other students when the window gave way. It was contended the University failed to provide a safe environment for students or to properly warn them of the dangers inherent to upper-story windows. In 1993, McDonald's was unsuccessfully sued over a car accident in New Jersey. While driving, a man who had placed a milkshake between his legs, leaned over to reach into his bag of food and squeezed the milkshake container in the process. When the lid popped off and spilled half the drink in his lap, this driver became distracted and ran into another man's car. That man in turn tried to sue McDonald's for causing the accident, saying the restaurant should have cautioned the man who had hit him against eating while driving. Although the cases cited above were all eventually dismissed, they still managed to work their way at least partway through our court system. When we hear such stories, it's hard not to be rabidly in favor of tort reform these kinds of cases make it appear that the idiots have taken over the asylum and only the rapid institution of some rules is going to bring things back into a semblance of sanity. Yet this solution is not all skittles and beer; many see such changes as potentially denying those in need of legal remedy their day in court and refusing them their right to be heard. The cap on jury awards is also viewed by some as unfair to the seriously injured, who may well require a large sum to afford the cost of living with whatever disability someone else's negligence or recklessness left them with. Capped awards are also scant deterrent to large corporations who could easily afford the judgments against them and therefore have little reason to mend their ways. Big Business is poised to benefit under tort reform in that it will no longer need to fear the courts. It can also be argued that the need for tort reform is overblown. Only rarely do ridiculous lawsuits result in windfalls for the plaintiff; these cases are almost always either thrown out or the judgment goes for the defendant. Some celebrated "outrageous" suits wherein judgment went for the plaintiff prove upon closer examination to be far less "outrageous" than originally presented in the media. (For example, the "woman scalded by hot coffee" suit, which at first blush looked like the height of frivolity proved to be a perfectly legitimate action taken against a corporation that knew, thanks to a string of similar scaldings it had quietly been paying off, that its coffee was not just hot, but dangerously hot. The Consumer Attorneys of California provides a good description of this case). this case Tort reform thus has both its advocates and its adversaries. On the one hand, we bridle at the thought of the terminally clueless being rewarded for their folly that strikes us as just plain wrong. We also fear for the continued wellbeing of the small- to mid-sized business which can ill afford to fend off one frivolous lawsuit after another and thus stands in danger of being litigated to death. Also, even when litigants do not prevail, costs associated with their suits rain down onto the average citizen through his taxes (some of which underwrite the judicial system) and through increased prices for goods produced by firms who had to mount legal defenses. Yet on the other hand, we don't want to see those who have legitimate cause denied their right to sue (or in the case of the seriously injured, their right to sue for an appropriate amount). We also don't want to see corporations run unchecked, free to turn out whatever dangerous product they like because the combination of capped awards and their deep pockets render them bulletproof. It's a complicated issue, one not made any easier to make sense of by lists of fake cases of horrendous miscarriages of justice. One has to wonder why someone is so busy trying to stir up outrage and who or what that outrage would ultimately benefit. Additional information: George W. Bush's first act upon becoming the Governor of Texas was to reform that state's civil justice system. In January 1995, just after being sworn in, he convened a session of the Legislature to tackle tort reform. Within weeks he signed bills to limit punitive damages to $750,000, cut down on "venue shopping" for favorable judges and juries, and made it easier for judges to impose sanctions on plaintiffs who file frivolous suits. Sightings: The "woman in a store trips over a toddler, then sues the store" fiction was incorporated into an episode of the television drama Boston Legal ("Tabloid Nation," original air date 8 April 2008). Last updated: 11 April 2008 Sources: Associated Press. "Men's Room Invasion Prompts Suit." The Fresno Bee. 1 April 1995 (p. F8). Coile, Zachary. "Bush's Formula to Win Over Business." The San Francisco Examiner. 2 October 2000 (p. A1). Elias, Paul. "So What's a Little Litigation Between Friends?" The Recorder. 14 December 1999 (Court Watch; p. 4). Heller, Jonathan. "Man Seeks $1.5 Million from City; Says Library Cat Attacked His Dog." The San Diego Union-Tribune. 5 May 2001 (p. B2). Littlefield, Dana. "Suit Over Library Cat's Attack Bites Back at disabled Dog Owner." The San Diego Union-Tribune. 31 July 2004 (p. NC3). Perkins, Joseph. "We All Pay When Others File Frivolous Lawsuits." The San Diego Union-Tribune. 18 May 2001 (p. B7). Perry, Tony. "A One-Man Campaign for More Women's Restrooms." Los Angeles Times. 18 August 1995 (p. A3). Riffel, James. "Jury Rejects Claims of Disabled Man Against City for Cat Attack." City News Service. 30 January 2004. Vogt, Andrea. "Ludicrous Lawsuit Against University of Idaho Rears Its Ugly Head." Lewiston Morning Tribune. 2 August 1994 (p. A1). New Jersey Lawyer. "Moral of a Burger Suit: Don't Eat and Drive." 15 November 1993 (p. 3). [New York] Daily News. "Mighty Quinn." 25 June 2002 (Sports, p. 63).

['taxes']

False

The earliest version concluded with a seventh item that has since been snipped away, likely after someone noticed it was the venerable microwaved poodle legend. Its inclusion would have immediately called into question the truthfulness of the other six cases for any number of folks familiar with urban legends. The remaining six were still false, but they weren't as obviously false as the following poodle tale and thus wouldn't have set the alarm bells ringing:A version of the list that began circulating in the spring of 2002 has yet another urban legend included as its final item, the venerable cruise control legend:It can also be argued that the need for tort reform is overblown. Only rarely do ridiculous lawsuits result in windfalls for the plaintiff; these cases are almost always either thrown out or the judgment goes for the defendant. Some celebrated "outrageous" suits wherein judgment went for the plaintiff prove upon closer examination to be far less "outrageous" than originally presented in the media. (For example, the "woman scalded by hot coffee" suit, which at first blush looked like the height of frivolity proved to be a perfectly legitimate action taken against a corporation that knew, thanks to a string of similar scaldings it had quietly been paying off, that its coffee was not just hot, but dangerously hot. The Consumer Attorneys of California provides a good description of this case).

Was a penalty imposed on Donald Trump for misappropriating funds that were meant for veterans?

['Social media posts and memes badly misrepresented the facts surrounding the November 2019 resolution of a high-profile lawsuit against the president.']

In November 2019, we received multiple inquiries about the accuracy of claims that U.S. President Donald Trump had been fined $2 million by a New York court because he was found to have "stolen" charitable donations intended for military veterans. For example, former Democratic Virginia State Senate candidate Qasim Rashid tweeted on several occasions in November 2019 that Trump had "stolen" $2.8 million in charitable donations from veterans and that he had admitted as much in court: "The President stole $2.8M in charity from Veterans & spent it on himself & admits to his crime in court documents. As you speak of honor & service, where is your accountability of a President who trampled on both? Why are you silent, Rep @RobWittman? #VeteransDay" One of Rashid's tweets was later reposted in the form of a meme by the Facebook page Act.tv. Another widely shared meme claimed, "It is a fact that draft dodger Trump stole charitable cash donations that were meant for our veterans." These social media posts and memes grossly misrepresented the facts surrounding a November 2019 settlement agreement between the New York Attorney General and the Donald J. Trump Foundation, Trump himself, and his children Ivanka and Eric. Trump did not "steal" charitable donations intended for veterans, nor did he admit as much in court. All the donations intended for veterans' charities ended up going to those charities. However, Trump's 2016 presidential campaign did direct and benefit from the manner in which many of those donations were distributed to the charities. The claims were related to a lawsuit brought by the New York Attorney General's office in June 2018 against the Trump Foundation, the president, and Ivanka and Eric Trump, in their capacity as board directors of the charity. In her June 2018 petition to the state's Supreme Court, then-New York Attorney General Barbara Underwood wrote: "For more than a decade, the Donald J. Trump Foundation has operated in persistent violation of state and federal law governing New York State charities. This pattern of illegal conduct by the Foundation and its board members includes improper and extensive political activity, repeated and willful self-dealing transactions, and failure to follow basic fiduciary obligations or to implement even elementary corporate formalities required by law." One of the examples of "improper political activity" cited in the lawsuit related to a January 2016 fundraiser that the Trump Foundation and Trump's presidential election campaign jointly operated. In January 2016, days before the Iowa caucuses, Trump complained of unfair treatment by Fox News anchor Megyn Kelly and announced he would be boycotting the next Republican primary debate and instead host a fundraiser for veterans' charities in Iowa. The event raised around $5.6 million, with roughly half going to the Trump Foundation and half going directly to specific veterans' charities. The Trump campaign directed the distribution of funds to recipient charities, and Trump himself repeatedly presented checks at campaign rallies and more broadly used the distribution of funds to boost his presidential campaign. On the basis of those allegations, Underwood requested several outcomes, including asking the court to "dissolve the Foundation for its persistently illegal conduct, enjoin its board members from future service as a director of any not-for-profit authorized by New York law, to obtain restitution and penalties, and to direct the Foundation to cooperate with the Attorney General in the lawful distribution of its remaining assets to qualified charitable entities." The parties to the lawsuit spent around a year negotiating a settlement. In December 2018, for example, all sides agreed that the Foundation would be dissolved and its assets distributed to a list of mutually agreed charities. In November 2019, the New York Supreme Court published the final settlement. As part of that settlement, Trump, his children, and the Foundation stipulated to a set of facts, among them the following section related to the Iowa veterans fundraiser: The website for the Iowa Fundraiser, DonaldTrumpForVets.com, was developed by campaign personnel and, with the agreement of the Foundation, featured the name of the Foundation at the top of the home page and informed visitors that "the Donald J. Trump Foundation is a 501 (c)(3) nonprofit organization"; The campaign planned, organized, and paid for the Iowa Fundraiser, with administrative assistance from the Foundation; and the campaign directed the timing, amounts, and recipients of the Foundation's grants to charitable organizations supporting military veterans. The Iowa Fundraiser raised approximately $5.6 million in donations for veterans' groups, of which $2.823 million was contributed to the Foundation; the balance was contributed by donors directly to various veterans' groups. At campaign events in Iowa on January 30, January 31, and February 1, 2016, Mr. Trump personally displayed presentation copies of Foundation checks to Iowa veterans' groups. On May 31, 2016, at a campaign press conference, Mr. Trump announced the grants the Foundation made to veterans' groups with the proceeds of the Iowa Fundraiser and, on or about the same day, the campaign posted on its website a chart identifying the grant recipients. The New York Attorney General's office objected to the way in which the Trump Foundation had been used to advance the interests of the Trump campaign, and especially the way in which the campaign dictated how more than half of the funds were to be distributed, with Trump at times personally handing out checks at campaign rallies. The Attorney General's Office did not object on the grounds that Trump, his children, or his foundation had stolen or kept the money. Indeed, in an order accompanying the November 2019 settlement, New York Supreme Court Justice Saliann Scarpulla wrote that: "The Attorney General has argued that I should award damages for waste of the entire $2,823,000 that was donated directly to the Foundation at the Fundraiser. In opposition, Mr. Trump notes that the Foundation ultimately disbursed all of the funds to charitable organizations and that he has sought to resolve consensually this proceeding. As stated above, I find that the $2,823,000 raised at the Fundraiser was used for Mr. Trump's political campaign and disbursed by Mr. Trump's campaign staff, rather than by the Foundation, in violation of [New York law]. However, taking into consideration that the funds did ultimately reach their intended destinations, i.e., charitable organizations supporting veterans, I award damages on the breach of fiduciary duty/waste claim against Mr. Trump in the amount of $2,000,000, without interest, rather than the entire $2,823,000 sought by the Attorney General." Trump was ordered to pay $2 million to a list of agreed-upon charities as damages for the waste incurred by the fact that his political campaign orchestrated and benefited from distributing around $2.8 million in donations to veterans' groups. (That $2 million in damages was separate from the roughly $1.7 million the Trump Foundation had already agreed to distribute to various charities as part of the resolution dissolving the Foundation.) Neither Trump, nor his children, nor his charity were found to have "stolen" or kept the funds, and so none "admitted" to such actions. The New York Supreme Court explicitly acknowledged that all the funds raised from the January 2016 Iowa event did ultimately end up with veterans' groups. The irony in those claims was that it was, in fact, the manner in which the Trump Foundation and Trump campaign colluded in distributing the donations to veterans' charities that landed the president in hot water, not his having "stolen" the donations.

['accountability']

NEI

For example, former Democratic Virginia State Senate candidate Qasim Rashid tweeted on several occasions in November 2019 that Trump had "stolen" $2.8 million in charitable donations from veterans, and that he had admitted as much in court:Why are you silent Rep @RobWittman?#VeteransDay https://t.co/rGi9fT0AsP Qasim Rashid, Esq. (@QasimRashid) November 11, 2019One of Rashid's tweets was later reposted in the form of a meme by the Facebook page Act.tv. (The meme was later deleted):The claims were related to a lawsuit brought by the New York Attorney General's office in June 2018 against the Trump Foundation, the president, and Ivanka and Eric Trump, in their capacity as board directors of the charity. We've written about the case in detail in a previous fact check.In her June 2018 petition to the state's Supreme Court, then-New York Attorney General Barbara Underwood wrote:In January 2016, days before the Iowa caucuses, Trump complained of unfair treatment by Fox News anchor Megyn Kelly and announced he would be boycotting the next Republican primary debate and instead host a fundraiser for veterans' charities in Iowa. The parties to the lawsuit spent around a year negotiating a settlement. In December 2018, for example, all sides agreed that the Foundation would be dissolved and its assets distributed to a list of mutually agreed charities. In November 2019, the New York Supreme Court published the final settlement. As part of that settlement between the parties, Trump, his children and the Foundation stipulated to (agreed upon) a set of facts, among them the following section related to the Iowa veterans fundraiser:Indeed, in an order accompanying the November 2019 settlement, New York Supreme Court Justice Saliann Scarpulla wrote that:

The email claiming to be a secret shopper opportunity for Whole Foods Market Research is a fraudulent hoax.

['The U.S. Federal Trade Commission first warned about this scam in 2020.']

In October 2022, we received reader mail about a "Whole Foods Market Research" scam. The scam arrives in the form of an email, text, or mailed letter, claiming that the recipient has been chosen to be a secret shopper for Whole Foods Market. The goal of the scammer is to get the recipient to deposit a check into their bank account. However, unbeknownst to the recipient, the check is fake. The scammer quickly tasks the recipient with buying gift cards and then providing the identifying details on the front and back. Alternatively, the scammer might ask the recipient to initiate a wire transfer or money order to send back a partial amount of the funds from the check. The scammer claims that the recipient can keep a portion of the funds for their work. However, again, the check is fake, so recipients are spending their own money to buy gift cards for the scammers. We reviewed one example of this scam that arrived as an email. It came from [email protected], which was not an official Whole Foods email address. It claimed to come from a person named Jerry A. Wallace, a purported human resources (HR) representative. A previous version of this scam named Wallace as a "project manager," according to scampulse.com. We found no evidence of a person with this name being a real employee of Whole Foods. The original email, which contained several misspellings of store names, read as follows: [email protected] wrote: Attn: (name removed) You submitted your information to one of our recruitment agencies to work as a Whole Foods Market Research representative. Your details have been verified, and you have been shortlisted as one of our representatives. Here is your unique I.D. number MS6953; your details have been stored in our database. Our company has recently been contracted to conduct a quality survey on Target, King Soopers, Walmart Stores, Best Buy, Post Office, CVS, Rite Aid, eBay, Kmart, Pizza Hut, Kroger, Walgreen, Dillons, or 7-Eleven, etc. We have shortlisted a few representatives from various states and cities to visit any of the stores listed above randomly, to buy merchandise and share their experience via our feedback Checklist/Assessment form. You will receive an envelope containing a Cashier's Check and the Instructions Letter. The Checklist/Assessment Form will be sent/attached to your mail. Please signify your interest with a Yes, I'm Ready. Thank you. Best Regards, Whole Foods Market Research HR Personnel: Jerry A. Wallace Cell: (216) 239-2582 We called the phone number listed in the email. After several rings, a voice message was played that said, "The TextNow subscriber you are trying to reach is not available. Please leave your message after the tone." The U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) previously published a full report on this scam back in 2020. People spotted signs of a fake check scam in the bogus Whole Foods secret shopper offer (which was from a scammer, not really Whole Foods). That's when someone sends you a check and convinces you to deposit it and quickly send them money. In this scam, the recruiter would send shoppers a check for more than $2,000, and they would: 1. Cash or deposit the check immediately. 2. Buy gift cards with most of the money. 3. Keep about $450 as their pay. 4. Scratch the coating off the gift cards to show the PIN codes. 5. Send pictures of the cards' front and back (with the codes) to the recruiter. If anyone ever tells you to deposit a check, withdraw money, and send it to someone, that's a scam. When the check later turns out to be fake, the bank will want the money back. And if anyone tells you to go buy gift cards and share the PIN numbers, that's a scam, too. Once the scammer has the PIN, they also have all the money from the cards. The FTC said this scam can be reported at ReportFraud.ftc.gov. They also added, "If you already cashed a fake check and sent money to a scammer, find out how to report to gift card, wire transfer, and money order businesses." In sum, both we and the FTC advise consumers not to respond to any emails, texts, or mailed letters that invite recipients to work as a secret shopper for "Whole Foods Market Research."

['share']

False

We reviewed one example of this scam that arrived as an email. It came from [email protected], which was not an official Whole Foods email address. It claimed to come from a person named Jerry A. Wallace, a purported human resources (HR) representative. A previous version of this scam named Wallace as a "project manager," according to scampulse.com. We found no evidence of a person with this name being a real employee for Whole Foods.The U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) previously published a full report on this scam back in 2020:People spotted signs of a fake check scam in the bogus Whole Foods secret shopper offer (which was from a scammer, not really Whole Foods). Thats when someone sends you a check and convinces you to deposit it and quickly send them money. In this scam, the recruiter would send shoppers a check for more than $2,000 and they would:The FTC said this scam can be reported at ReportFraud.ftc.gov. They also added, "If you already cashed a fake check and sent money to a scammer, find out how to report to gift card, wire transfer, and money order businesses."

Was there a statement made by a BLM organizer indicating indifference towards individuals choosing to loot?

['Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot said of the looting, This is not legitimate First Amendment-protected speech ... This was straight-up felony, criminal conduct.']

After the police shooting of 20-year-old Latrell Allen in Chicago's Englewood community on the afternoon of Aug. 9, 2020, unrest in that city extended through that night and into the early morning hours of the following day, with looters hitting some stores in Chicagos wealthiest shopping district on North Michigan Avenue. Latrell Allen extended The following evening, members of the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement held a solidarity rally in that city with some of the people who had been arrested for looting the night before. Shortly after those events, social media users began circulating a meme stemming from that event, quoting a "BLM leader & organizer" named Ariel Atkins as saying, "I don't care if someone decides to loot, because that makes sure that person eats or has clothes. Anything they want to take, they can, because these businesses have insurance": That was an accurate quote, according to Chicago NBC affiliate WMAQ-TV, who reported on the Aug. 10 event: reported Members of Black Lives Matter held a solidarity rally on Monday night [August 10] with the more than 100 individuals who were arrested after a night of looting and unrest in Chicago. The rally was held at the South Loop police station where organizers say those individuals are currently being held in custody. I dont care if someone decides to loot a Gucci or a Macys or a Nike store, because that makes sure that person eats, Ariel Atkins, a BLM organizer, said. That makes sure that person has clothes. Black Lives Matter Chicago organized the rally after overnight unrest throughout the city, with police saying that more than 100 individuals were taken into custody for a variety of offenses, including looting. That is reparations, Atkins said. Anything they wanted to take, they can take it because these businesses have insurance. Atkins said essentially the same thing a few days later, when she was interviewed by Chicago NPR station WBEZ on the subject of "why she supports looting": interviewed A lot of people are really attacking our pages. Theyre like, Oh, you support the looters. And yeah, we do, 100%. Thats reparations. And like however people choose to protest, especially if it was definitely in line with what happened with the shooting, which would be powerful to see people reacting ... without organizers just being like, Were angry and this is what were gonna do. Were gonna take the power back. I feel like these stores, these Macys, these Guccis, the PNC Banks, theyre not here for us. The city puts way more money and investment into spending time and protecting their spaces and making sure that they exist. And yet our people are constantly being pushed out of the city ... Unemployment is incredibly high, like we are in an incredible situation, and the fact that anybody gives a s*** about these businesses over what is happening in this city right now and the pain that people are in and the suffering that is taking place, I dont care. I will support the looters till the end of the day. If thats what they need to do in order to eat, then thats what youve got to do to eat .... The whole idea of criminality is based on racism anyway, because criminality is punishing people for things that they have needed to do to survive or just the way that society has affected them with white supremacist B.S. So its like her deciding what is criminal and what isnt. WMAQ-TV [Chicago]. "Black Lives Matter Holds Rally Supporting Individuals Arrested in Chicago Looting Monday." 10 August 2020. Black, Curtis. &nbps; "Latrell Allen Police Shooting Exposes Gaps in Body Camera and Foot Pursuit Policies." The Chicago Reporter. 14 August 2020. Yoon-Ji Kang, Esther. "Officers Disrespected Englewood Residents Following Police Shooting, Activists Say." WBEZ [Chicago]. 10 August 2020. Wildeboer, Rob and Chip Mitchell. "Officers Disrespected Englewood Residents Following Police Shooting, Activists Say." WBEZ [Chicago]. 12 August 2020.

['investment']

True

After the police shooting of 20-year-old Latrell Allen in Chicago's Englewood community on the afternoon of Aug. 9, 2020, unrest in that city extended through that night and into the early morning hours of the following day, with looters hitting some stores in Chicagos wealthiest shopping district on North Michigan Avenue.That was an accurate quote, according to Chicago NBC affiliate WMAQ-TV, who reported on the Aug. 10 event:Atkins said essentially the same thing a few days later, when she was interviewed by Chicago NPR station WBEZ on the subject of "why she supports looting":

Did the FBI Once Deem 'It's a Wonderful Life' Communist Propaganda?

['Another fascinating chapter in the history of an American holiday classic. ']

During the 2021 holiday season, internet users enthusiastically shared articles and posts that described a fascinating episode from the history of a classic American Christmas movie, "It's a Wonderful Life." On Dec. 21, for example, the London Independent reported that: "'It's a Wonderful Life' was once considered communist propaganda by the FBI," while various outlets shared their own accounts of the story. Independent reported that shared own accounts Those accounts were broadly accurate, and based on high-quality primary documentary evidence. Although the FBI did not ever formally, as an institution, declare "It's a Wonderful Life" to be communist propaganda, FBI agents and informants investigated the movie, and the people behind it, as such. As part of a sweeping investigation ordered by bureau director J. Edgar Hoover, a special agent in 1949 included the film in a list of "motion pictures disclosing communist propaganda therein." We are issuing a rating of "true." That description of the movie, which was released in December 1946, can be found in an archived and redacted copy of the FBI report on "Communist infiltration into the motion picture industry, available here. Specifically, it can be found on Page 12 in the ninth of 15 dossiers released under the Freedom of Information Act at some point in the ensuing decades. available here The sender of this 1949 update to the report is listed as one "H.B. Fletcher," but it's not clear who specifically wrote the "It's a Wonderful Life" entry: listed Although the FBI does not appear to have ever "officially" declared or designated the film as communist propaganda, it's quite clear those agents involved in the investigation of Hollywood (codenamed "COMPIC") were far from agnostic on the socialist, even Soviet inspiration behind the Christmas classic. Indeed, Hoover instructed Richard Hood, special agent in charge at the Los Angeles field office, to limit his team's criticism and reviews to films "which are obviously communist propaganda in nature." instructed The entry on "It's a Wonderful Life" appears in the fourth section of the report ("Communist Influence in Motion Pictures"), under a sub-section entitled "Analysis of Motion Pictures Disclosing Communist Propaganda Therein." entitled According to the author(s) of the briefing, Frank Capra's movie is noteworthy because: the two credited screenwriters, husband-and-wife team Frances Goodrich and Albert Hackett, were supposedly close associates of known communists; the film negatively portrays the villainous local businessman Mr. Potter, which is "a common trick used by communists"; and the storyline appears to have been borrowed from a putative earlier Russian film entitled "The Letter." The first two sections of the briefing can be read in full below: According to the Informants [redacted] and [redacted] in this picture the screen credits again fail to reflect the Communist support given to the screen writers. According to [redacted] the writers Frances Goodrick and Albert Hackett were very close to known Communists and on one occasion in the recent past while these two writers were doing a picture for Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Goodrick and Hackett practically lived with known Communists and were observed eating luncheon daily with such Communists as Lester Cole, screen writer, and Earl Robinson, screen writer. Both of these individuals are identified in Section I of this memorandum as Communists. With regard to the picture Its A Wonderful Life, [redacted] stated in substance that the film represented a rather obvious attempt to discredit bankers by casting Lionel Barrymore as a scrooge-type so that he would be the most hated man in the picture. This, according to these sources, is a common trick used by Communists. In addition, [redacted] stated that, in his opinion, this picture deliberately maligned the upper class, attempting to show the people who had money were mean and despicable characters. [Redacted] related that if he had made this picture portraying the banker, he would have shown this individual to have been following the rules as laid down by the State Bank Examiners in connection with making loans. Further, [redacted] stated that the scene wouldn't have suffered at all in portraying the banker as a man who was protecting funds put in his care by private individuals and adhering to the rules governing the loan of that money rather than portraying the part as it was shown. In summary, [redacted] stated that it was not necessary to make the banker such a mean character and I would never have done it that way. Magazine, Smithsonian, and Kat Eschner. The Weird Story of the FBI and Its a Wonderful Life. Smithsonian Magazine, https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/weird-story-fbi-and-its-wonderful-life-180967587/. Accessed 22 Dec. 2021.

['loan']

True

On Dec. 21, for example, the London Independent reported that: "'It's a Wonderful Life' was once considered communist propaganda by the FBI," while various outlets shared their own accounts of the story.That description of the movie, which was released in December 1946, can be found in an archived and redacted copy of the FBI report on "Communist infiltration into the motion picture industry, available here. Specifically, it can be found on Page 12 in the ninth of 15 dossiers released under the Freedom of Information Act at some point in the ensuing decades.The sender of this 1949 update to the report is listed as one "H.B. Fletcher," but it's not clear who specifically wrote the "It's a Wonderful Life" entry:Although the FBI does not appear to have ever "officially" declared or designated the film as communist propaganda, it's quite clear those agents involved in the investigation of Hollywood (codenamed "COMPIC") were far from agnostic on the socialist, even Soviet inspiration behind the Christmas classic. Indeed, Hoover instructed Richard Hood, special agent in charge at the Los Angeles field office, to limit his team's criticism and reviews to films "which are obviously communist propaganda in nature."The entry on "It's a Wonderful Life" appears in the fourth section of the report ("Communist Influence in Motion Pictures"), under a sub-section entitled "Analysis of Motion Pictures Disclosing Communist Propaganda Therein."

'Jeepers Creepers 3' Director Victor Salva Was Convicted of Child Molestation?

['"Jeepers Creepers 3" director Victor Salva was convicted in 1988 of molesting a 12-year-old.']

As the premiere of the horror flick Jeepers Creepers 3 approached in September 2017, many posted messages on social media to remind potential moviegoers about director Victor Salva's criminal history. Salva was convicted in 1988 on charges related to the sexual molestation of 12-year-old actor Nathan Forrest Winters during the filming of his movie Clownhouse. Salva served 15 months in prison and completed his parole in 1992. The Associated Press reported at the time that Salva confessed to having oral sex with Winters in 1987 while directing him in "Clownhouse," a low-budget horror film about three boys terrorized by circus clowns. Salva, sentenced to three years in state prison, served 15 months and completed parole in 1992. Salva is a registered sex offender. Victor Salva, a former child-care worker who impressed Hollywood filmmakers with his early cinematic work, was sentenced to three years in state prison in 1988 for molesting a 12-year-old boy who had acted in two of his films. Salva videotaped one of the encounters. The revelations came as the now 20-year-old victim, Nathan Winters of Concord, Calif., picketed a screening of "Powder" on Monday night in Westwood. Winters passed out leaflets urging the public to boycott the movie and said his family and friends would continue protesting after the film debuted Friday on more than 1,500 screens nationwide. Winters said he was "in awe" that Disney would even make a movie with Salva. "I can't believe [Salva] is allowed to work with children again," Winters said. "He should not be allowed around children ever again." At the time, Salva released a statement saying, "How deeply I regret my actions." It continued, "I paid for my mistakes dearly. Now, nearly 10 years later, I am excited about my work as a filmmaker and look forward to continuing to make a positive contribution to our society." Caravan Pictures, the company that made Powder for Disney, also released a statement: "He paid for his crime; he paid his debt to society," said Roger Birnbaum, whose Caravan Pictures made "Powder" for Disney and reportedly didn't know of Salva's record until the film was midway through production. "What happened eight years ago has nothing to do with this movie." More recently, Salva's past hindered the casting of Jeepers Creepers 3 when the website Breakdown Services removed the casting call for a 13-year-old character (to be played by an 18-year-old) upon learning of Salva's crime. Winters never starred in another movie.

['debt']

True

As the premiere of the horror flick Jeepers Creepers 3 approached in September 2017, many posted messages on social media to remind potential moviegoers about director Victor Salva's criminal history:Salva was convicted in 1988 on charges related to the sexual molestation of 12-year-old actor Nathan Forrest Winters during the filming of his movie Clownhouse. Salva served 15 months in prison and finished his parole in 1992. The Associated Press reported at the time:Salva is a registered sex offender:At the time, Salva released a statement saying "How deeply I regret my actions." It continued: More recently, Salva's past hindered the casting of Jeepers Creepers 3 when the web site Breakdown Services removed the casting call for a 13-year-old character (to be played by an 18-year-old) upon learning of Salva's crime. Winters never starred in another movie.

Congressional Budget Office says 8 (percent) unemployment till 2014!

[]

In an Aug. 24, 2011,Twitter post, U.S. Sen. John Cornyn said of the Congressional Budget Office: CBO says 8 (percent) unemployment till 2014!Well assume the Texas Republican doesnt consider this fabulous news, though the predicted rate would be about a percentage point lower than the July 2011 national jobless rate of 9.1 percent,as reported bythe U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.A reminder: The unemployment rate is a measure of the number of jobless people who are available for work and are actively seeking jobs, expressed as a percentage of the labor force.Did Cornyn recap accurately?The nonpartisan CBOssummaryof its latest economic projections says that with modest economic growth expected for the next few years, the office expects the jobless rate to fall to 8.9 percent the fourth quarter of this year and to 8.5 percent the fourth quarter of 2012. And indeed, the report says, the rate will remain above 8 percent until 2014.The nations gross domestic product grew 1 percent the second quarter of this year after growing .4 percent in the years first three months, the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysisreported in August. According to the CBO forecast, the economy will grow slowly in coming years as the federal deficit shrinks, though the prediction about the deficit assumes, among other things, that Congress will not extend all the tax cuts launched under President George W. Bush and temporarily extended under President Barack Obama.In its full report, the CBO projects the annual unemployment rate to average 8.7 percent in 2012 and 2013, which would be an improvement on the 2010 and 2009 averages of 9.6 percent and 9.3 percent, respectively, but would be worse than the 2008 average of 5.8 percent,according tothe Bureau of Labor Statistics.CBO forecasts the unemployment rate falling to an average of 5.4 percent in 2016 and 5.2 percent in 2017 through 2021, which would be the lowest rate since 2007, when the average was 4.6 percent. The report says the projected 5.2 percent rate in those years would match its expected natural unemployment rate for the period.Economists talk about a natural unemployment rate because even in a strong, healthy economy there is always some degree of employee turnover as businesses adopt new technologies and make other staff changes, and as a certain percentage of workers, for various professional and personal reasons, look for new jobs.Things are unsettled now, the CBO report says, with weakness in the demand for goods and services being the principal restraint on hiring, but structural impediments in the labor market such as a mismatch between the requirements of existing job openings and the characteristics of job seekers (including their skills and geographic location) appear to be hindering hiring as well.Other measures also show a great deal of weakness in the labor market, the report says. The number of unemployed workers per job opening averaged about 4 throughout the first half of 2011, down from an average of slightly over 6 in 2009 but still much higher than it was before the recession. In addition, the number of people who are employed part time but want full-time work averaged about 8.5 million in the first half of 2011, slightly below the number in the previous two years but still nearly double the pre-recession figure.The report continues: Likewise, the share of unemployed people who have been out of work for a long time is unusually high. On average, 44 percent of workers who were unemployed in the first half of 2011 had been jobless for more than six months. Moreover, in mid-2011, 31 percent of unemployed workers had been jobless for at least a year. Those rates of long-term unemployment are unprecedented in the post-World War II era.Were not judging here whos responsible for the nations unemployment troubles, but how accurately Cornyn echoed the CBOs projection. His statement rates True.

['Economy', 'Jobs', 'Texas']

True

In an Aug. 24, 2011,Twitter post, U.S. Sen. John Cornyn said of the Congressional Budget Office: CBO says 8 (percent) unemployment till 2014!Well assume the Texas Republican doesnt consider this fabulous news, though the predicted rate would be about a percentage point lower than the July 2011 national jobless rate of 9.1 percent,as reported bythe U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.A reminder: The unemployment rate is a measure of the number of jobless people who are available for work and are actively seeking jobs, expressed as a percentage of the labor force.Did Cornyn recap accurately?The nonpartisan CBOssummaryof its latest economic projections says that with modest economic growth expected for the next few years, the office expects the jobless rate to fall to 8.9 percent the fourth quarter of this year and to 8.5 percent the fourth quarter of 2012. And indeed, the report says, the rate will remain above 8 percent until 2014.The nations gross domestic product grew 1 percent the second quarter of this year after growing .4 percent in the years first three months, the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysisreported in August. According to the CBO forecast, the economy will grow slowly in coming years as the federal deficit shrinks, though the prediction about the deficit assumes, among other things, that Congress will not extend all the tax cuts launched under President George W. Bush and temporarily extended under President Barack Obama.In its full report, the CBO projects the annual unemployment rate to average 8.7 percent in 2012 and 2013, which would be an improvement on the 2010 and 2009 averages of 9.6 percent and 9.3 percent, respectively, but would be worse than the 2008 average of 5.8 percent,according tothe Bureau of Labor Statistics.CBO forecasts the unemployment rate falling to an average of 5.4 percent in 2016 and 5.2 percent in 2017 through 2021, which would be the lowest rate since 2007, when the average was 4.6 percent. The report says the projected 5.2 percent rate in those years would match its expected natural unemployment rate for the period.Economists talk about a natural unemployment rate because even in a strong, healthy economy there is always some degree of employee turnover as businesses adopt new technologies and make other staff changes, and as a certain percentage of workers, for various professional and personal reasons, look for new jobs.Things are unsettled now, the CBO report says, with weakness in the demand for goods and services being the principal restraint on hiring, but structural impediments in the labor market such as a mismatch between the requirements of existing job openings and the characteristics of job seekers (including their skills and geographic location) appear to be hindering hiring as well.Other measures also show a great deal of weakness in the labor market, the report says. The number of unemployed workers per job opening averaged about 4 throughout the first half of 2011, down from an average of slightly over 6 in 2009 but still much higher than it was before the recession. In addition, the number of people who are employed part time but want full-time work averaged about 8.5 million in the first half of 2011, slightly below the number in the previous two years but still nearly double the pre-recession figure.The report continues: Likewise, the share of unemployed people who have been out of work for a long time is unusually high. On average, 44 percent of workers who were unemployed in the first half of 2011 had been jobless for more than six months. Moreover, in mid-2011, 31 percent of unemployed workers had been jobless for at least a year. Those rates of long-term unemployment are unprecedented in the post-World War II era.Were not judging here whos responsible for the nations unemployment troubles, but how accurately Cornyn echoed the CBOs projection. His statement rates True.

Immigration Bill Free Cars

['A 2013 immigration bill provides young people with free cars to transport them to their jobs?']

Claim: A 2013 immigration reform bill provides young people with free cars to transport them to their jobs. Example: [Collected via e-mail, June 2013] BREAKING: Immigration bill now includes free cars (at tax payer expense) for young people to help them get to work! LIKE if you agree: The Senate should vote no on this Gang of 8 immigration bill! Call and let them know what you think! (888) 978-3134 Fox News reported that the riders made to the 2013 Immigration bill now in the Senate that Bernie Sanders has added a provision for free cars, motorcycles or scooters for "young people to use as transportation" to jobs. This was reported by Laura Ingraham on Fox and Friends on June 25, 2013. Is there any truth to this report. I can not find a copy of the 1,190 page 2013 immigration bill to read it my self S.744 Hoeven-Corker Amendment "The Hoeven-Corker amendment takes big and important steps on the immigration issue that matters most: border security," Senator Lamar Alexander said. "It would double the number of agents on the southwest border, construct 700 miles of new or upgraded fencing and spend $3.2 billion on new security technology that was perfected in Iraq and Afghanistan." The Hoeven-Corker amendment would add 20,000 border patrol agents, enough to allow putting one agent every 1,000 feet along the U.S. southwest border. The border patrol agents, fencing and security technology plan would have to be in place before anyone under the immigration legislation's "Registered Provisional Immigrant" program would be allowed to apply for legal permanent residency, otherwise known as a green card. Democratic-affiliated Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont has been outspokenly critical of the potential economic effects of S.744, arguing that the bill would "allow college students from around the world to take jobs that young Americans would otherwise perform." In response, he drafted a Youth Jobs Plan that would "provide $1.5 billion over two years for states and local communities to help find jobs for more than 400,000 16- to 24-year-olds who were hard hit by the Wall Street-caused recession." That job plan was incorporated into the Hoeven-Corker Amendment under a heading of "TITLE V JOBS FOR YOUTH." Youth Jobs Plan TITLE V The claim that the immigration bill includes a provision granting "free cars, motorcycles or scooters for young people" stems from a very broad, speculative interpretation of one sentence in the jobs plan portion of the Hoeven-Corker Amendment which generally directs how the job plan funds should be used: IN GENERAL. The funds made available under this section shall be used (A) to provide summer employment opportunities for low-income youth, with direct linkages to academic and occupational learning, and may be used to provide supportive services, such as transportation or child care, that is necessary to enable the participation of such youth in the opportunities; and (B) to provide year-round employment opportunities, which may be combined with other activities authorized under section 129 of the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (29 U.S.C. 17 2854), to low-income youth. As stated, the bill does not contain a specific provision to provide "free cars for young people to help them get to work." It includes a clause allowing that youth job program funds may be used to "provide supportive services, such as transportation" to low-income youth taking part in summer employment opportunities. Whether and how that provision would be applied in practice is purely speculative at this point and could vary widely from place to place, potentially ranging anywhere from arranging carpools and subsidizing bus fare to buying, leasing, or renting motor vehicles to be temporarily utilized in ferrying job program participants to work. But the government isn't going to be buying up cars and turning ownership of them over to young people engaged in summer job programs. Last updated: 26 June 2013

['income']

False

Youth Jobs Plan that would "provide $1.5 billion over two years for states and local communities to help find jobs for more than 400,000 16- to 24-year-olds who were hard hit by the Wall Street-caused recession." That job plan was incorporated into the Hoeven-Corker Amendment under a heading of "TITLE V JOBS FOR YOUTH."