Datasets:

kkawamu1

/

fmd_train_val

like 0

FMD_train_319

Comparing the price of oil and gas in June 2008 to March 2022 shows that oil companies are price gouging.

03/17/2022

In early March, the price of oil shot up rapidly in response to Russias invasion of Ukraine and the United States decision to ban imports of Russian energy. Coupled with inflation, increased labor costs and other factors that had already raised the price of gasoline, drivers in the U.S. quickly saw much higher prices at the pump. By March 14, the price of oil started todrop, but gasoline prices have been slow to follow, prompting some social media users to make comparisons to 2008 and accuse oil and gas companies of price gouging. Thetermis generally used when businesses take advantage of rising demand during a crisis and charge exorbitant prices for necessities. One Facebook post claimed that the price of oil was $141.71 per barrel in June 2008 while gas cost $4.10 per gallon on average. In March 2022, the post said oil cost $99.76 per barrel, while the average price of gas was $4.32 per gallon. If youre blaming anyone but greedy oil companies for their price gouging, youve bought into propaganda that hurts you more than anyone else, theMarch 14 postsaid. The post was flagged as part of Facebooks efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more aboutour partnership with Facebook.) Other posts similarly claimed that because oil prices fell and gas prices didnt, companies must be exploiting consumers. Posts with misleading claims about the relationship between the price of oil and the price of gasoline. Experts who study the price of oil and gas told PolitiFact that it takes more time for gas prices to respond to changes in crude oil costs and noted that there are factors in 2022 that werent at play in 2008, which make direct comparisons misleading. The numbers are also cherry-picked, and the difference in pricing between 2008 and 2022 isnt as large as the post suggests. Crude oil prices are set in the global market. And the price of crude oil has the biggest impact on the price of gasoline thats been the case for nearly all changes in retail gasoline prices in the past 35 years, said Mark Finley, afellowin energy and global oil at Rice Universitys Baker Institute for Public Policy. When Russia the worldsthird-largestoil producer attacked Ukraine at the end of February, the uncertainty, fear of further conflict and international efforts to reduce reliance on Russian oil drove upcrude oil prices. High oil prices can quickly drive up prices at gas stations nationwide, experts said. After oil prices fall, it typically takes a while for gas prices to decrease and consumers often assume foul play even when there isnt any, said Nicole Petersen, a GasBuddy spokesperson. Gas stations lose profit when oil prices increase sharply because they cannot drastically lift gas prices due to local competition, Petersen said. Then, when oil prices fall, gas stations try to recoup any losses before lowering their prices, she said. Unique factors in each states gasoline market also affect gas prices, said Devin Gladden, a AAA spokesperson. Locally, gas stations might have contracts with gasoline dealers that lock in prices at a certain rate for set periods of time sometimes weeks or months, he said. The March 14 Facebook postcorrectlycited the average priceof a gallon of gas that day: $4.32. But it cherry-picked its $99.76 figure for the price of crude oil. West Texas Intermediate crude oil is traditionally used as a U.S. benchmark when discussing and comparing oil prices. On March 14, WTI crude oil hit a low of $99.76, but the closing price was$103.01. Gas rose to $4.32 per gallon on March 14 as a result of oil prices being around $130 per barrel at times in the first half of March, Gladden said. The Facebook post was wrong about prices in June 2008. Themonthly averageprice of a gallon of gasoline was $4.05, and the average price ofWTI crude oilwas $133.88 per barrel, less than what the post claimed. The data set in this posting is misleading because it gives people this impression that crude prices are more stationary than they are, Gladden said. In all actuality, they are highly volatile. Posts comparing June 2008 prices to current prices also mislead because they compare a full month of data to half a month in 2022, experts said. Different global conditions are also at play. In 2008, the spike in oil and gas prices was tied to the financial crisis. The recession caused a drop in demand for gasoline, and as the economic recovery began, there was an immediate ramp-up in production to meet growing supply needs. That supply crunch, caused prices to spike, Gladden said. In March, the Russia-Ukraine conflict caused panic and speculation that contributed to the rapid price rises, Gladden said. But its also normal for prices to rise this time of year due to the demand from the spring and summer driving season, he said. In part, that will keep prices elevated even though oil prices have declined, Gladden said. Also, an ongoing truck driver shortage, increased labor costs and high inflation in the U.S. have caused gas prices to rise. On top of that, Gladden said the oil industry is still recovering from the COVID-19 pandemic, which decreased gas prices due to decreased demand. State-level taxes on gasoline are also about 7 centshigherper gallon now than they were in2008, Finley said. A Facebook post claimed that comparing the price of oil and gas in June 2008 to March 2022 shows that oil companies are price gouging. Experts said it takes time for gas prices to respond to drops in crude oil costs, and thats not necessarily indicative of price gouging. The posts numbers are cherry-picked; the difference in prices isnt as great as it suggests. The current situation differs from 2008 because increased labor costs, the pandemic, additional taxes and inflation were all already contributing to rising gasoline prices before Russia invaded Ukraine in February. Direct comparisons lack important context, experts said. We rate these posts False. RELATED:Ask PolitiFact: Why are gas prices going up? RELATED:How much blame does Putin deserve for high gasoline prices?

False

By March 14, the price of oil started todrop, but gasoline prices have been slow to follow, prompting some social media users to make comparisons to 2008 and accuse oil and gas companies of price gouging. Thetermis generally used when businesses take advantage of rising demand during a crisis and charge exorbitant prices for necessities.If youre blaming anyone but greedy oil companies for their price gouging, youve bought into propaganda that hurts you more than anyone else, theMarch 14 postsaid.The post was flagged as part of Facebooks efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more aboutour partnership with Facebook.) Other posts similarly claimed that because oil prices fell and gas prices didnt, companies must be exploiting consumers.Crude oil prices are set in the global market. And the price of crude oil has the biggest impact on the price of gasoline thats been the case for nearly all changes in retail gasoline prices in the past 35 years, said Mark Finley, afellowin energy and global oil at Rice Universitys Baker Institute for Public Policy.When Russia the worldsthird-largestoil producer attacked Ukraine at the end of February, the uncertainty, fear of further conflict and international efforts to reduce reliance on Russian oil drove upcrude oil prices.The March 14 Facebook postcorrectlycited the average priceof a gallon of gas that day: $4.32.But it cherry-picked its $99.76 figure for the price of crude oil. West Texas Intermediate crude oil is traditionally used as a U.S. benchmark when discussing and comparing oil prices. On March 14, WTI crude oil hit a low of $99.76, but the closing price was$103.01.The Facebook post was wrong about prices in June 2008. Themonthly averageprice of a gallon of gasoline was $4.05, and the average price ofWTI crude oilwas $133.88 per barrel, less than what the post claimed.State-level taxes on gasoline are also about 7 centshigherper gallon now than they were in2008, Finley said.RELATED:Ask PolitiFact: Why are gas prices going up?RELATED:How much blame does Putin deserve for high gasoline prices?

FMD_train_243

Is John Dillinger's Penis on Display at the Smithsonian?

05/10/2000

One of the more bizarre celebrity legends is the claim that notorious bank robber John Dillinger was not only the proud possessor of an unusually large penis, but that this portion of his anatomy was removed post-mortem and put on display at one of the Smithsonian museums in Washington, D.C. (Some versions state that the receiving institution was not the Smithsonian but the Armed Forces Medical Museum, which is on the grounds of the Walter Reed Medical Center in Washington.) That the Smithsonian denies having (or ever having had) this piece of classic Americana in their collection is part of the game, of course. (An auxiliary portion of the legend is that Smithsonian docents, upon being asked where Mr. Dillinger's organ can be found, will not deny its presence in the collection but will fabricate an excuse as to why it is not currently on display.) How and when this rumor got started is unknown. No documentary evidence indicates that Dillinger was renowned for either his sexual prowess or his possession of a prodigious member during his lifetime. It is often claimed that the photograph below, taken in the circus-like atmosphere of the Cook County morgue after the elusive bank robber was finally gunned down by FBI agents outside the Biograph theater in Chicago on 22 July 1934, begat the legend of the pickled penis: The bulge in the center of the photo (Dillinger's arm) was supposedly mistaken by contemporary viewers of fuzzy newspaper photos for his penis, thus starting the tale of an incredibly well-endowed John Dillinger. (How he managed to die in a fully erect state was a question the public either didn't ponder or else attributed to some rather strange misunderstandings about the process of rigor mortis.) We doubt this explanation of the rumor's genesis because the legend does not seem to have begun circulating until many years after the photograph was first published in newspapers, and it doesn't account for how the famous phallus supposedly came to be housed in one of America's premier museums (other than that, because it was an extraordinary anatomical specimen, somebody who felt that it belonged in a museum somewhere happily donated it). How the organ was surreptitiously severed also remains unexplained; presumably the undertaker who prepared the body for burial in Indiana would have noticed the mutilation and reported it to one of Dillinger's relatives before the funeral. Our psychological take on the rumor? Consider that Dillinger was the FBI's Public Enemy #1 after committing a string of flamboyant bank robberies, continually eluding capture, and boasting that no jail could hold him (and proving the latter by escaping from the Lake County Jail in Crown Point, Indiana, on 3 March 1934, reportedly bluffing his way out with a wooden replica of a gun). After Dillinger held up a few more banks and raided a Warsaw, Indiana, police station in the following months, the FBI was finally tipped off to his presence at the Little Bohemia Lodge in northern Wisconsin. The raid on the lodge by J. Edgar Hoover's vaunted FBI was an embarrassing disaster: agents opened fired on a carful of innocent lodge visitors (killing one), an agent was shot to death by Baby Face Nelson (who then escaped in an FBI automobile), and Dillinger himself once again eluded capture. Although the FBI finally caught up with and killed the infamous gangster in Chicago a few months later (with the assistance of Anna Sage, the "lady in red" who tipped off local police to Dillinger's presence and agreed to lead him into a trap), he had given Hoover and the FBI a black eye, leading them on a extended merry chase across the Midwest and humiliating them by escaping yet again when they had him cornered. What better revenge for Hoover than a symbolic emasculation, especially considering that it was a woman whom the FBI finally used to lure Dillinger to his death? Spread the word that Public Enemy #1 had been interred sans penis, and that his manhood had been put on display for all to see right across town from FBI headquarters in Washington, D.C. It's an unlikely explanation, but a satisfying one. Sightings: Look for Kevin and his buddies to refer to this legend in an episode of television's The Wonder Years ("Heartbreak", original air date 23 January 1991). Also, in the 2003 film The Recruit, one character offers his romantic interest a day of tourist activities in Washington, suggesting they "Look at John Dillinger's penis; I swear to God it's in the Smithsonian." The Recruit In the 1988 Jay McInerney's novel Story of My Life, we found this: "I remember I read somewhere that outlaw guy John Dillinger had one that was about a foot and a half long and it's preserved in the Smithsonian or someplace. Now that's what I call the Washington Monument." Leccese, Michael. "Looking for Mr. Dillinger." Washington Tribune. April 1980. McInerney, Jay. Story of My Life. Canada: McClelland and Stewart, 1988. ISBN 0-7710-5452-1 (p. 140). Morgan, Hal and Kerry Tucker. Rumor! New York: Penguin Books, 1984. ISBN 0-14-007036-2 (pp. 28-29). Nash, Jay Robert and John Offen. Dillinger: Dead or Alive? Chicago: H. Regnery Co., 1970.

False

Sightings: Look for Kevin and his buddies to refer to this legend in an episode of television's The Wonder Years ("Heartbreak", original air date 23 January 1991). Also, in the 2003 film The Recruit, one character offers his romantic interest a day of tourist activities in Washington, suggesting they "Look at John Dillinger's penis; I swear to God it's in the Smithsonian."

FMD_train_1397

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

05/22/2023

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

False

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

FMD_train_152

Fraudulent Free Dunkin' Donuts Coupon Offer

04/18/2017

Social media users are frequently targeted by anniversary giveaway and survey scams, with one common form of bait being fake coupon offers for free boxes of Dunkin' Donuts: Such scams typically provide links which lead to web pages (not operated or sponsored by Dunkin' Donuts) displaying the Dunkin' logo along with entreaties to spread the scam further by sharing those pages and writing thank you in the comments field. The free Dunkin' Donuts offers are a variation of the company anniversary survey scam, a ploy that depends on the unwary unwittingly promoting the phony offer to their social media friends: anniversary survey scam These web pages (which are not operated or sponsored by the companies they reference) typically ask the unwary to click what appear to be Facebook share buttons and post comments to the scammers site (which is really a ruse to dupe users into spreading the scam by sharing it with all of their Facebook friends). Those who follow such instructions are then led into a set of pages prompting them to input a fair amount of personal information (including name, age, address, and phone numbers), complete a lengthy series of surveys, and finally sign up (and commit to paying) for at least two Reward Offers (e.g., Netflix subscriptions, credit report monitoring services, prepaid credit cards). A representative for Dunkin' Donuts wrote on the company's official Facebook page that the online "free dozen" coupon was not one offered by the chain: The Better Business Bureau issued guidelines warning specifically of identical scams on Facebook that target shoppers: Dont believe what you see. Its 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 theres 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 organizations real website may have further information. Watch out for a reward thats 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. Legitimate Dunkin' Donuts offers are listed in a Promotions page on the company's website. Promotions

False

The free Dunkin' Donuts offers are a variation of the company anniversary survey scam, a ploy that depends on the unwary unwittingly promoting the phony offer to their social media friends:Legitimate Dunkin' Donuts offers are listed in a Promotions page on the company's website.

FMD_train_804

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene Said 'Jewish Space Lasers' Caused California Wildfires?

03/06/2024

In March 2024,Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia was questioned about her support for fringe conspiracy theories by journalist Emily Maitlis, who asked her to talk about her supposed past comments on "Jewish space lasers." Their interaction went viral on social media as Greene used an expletive and walked away. Marjorie Taylor Greene questioned viral media used BREAKING: Marjorie Taylor Green said it was Jewish space lasers that caused the California wild fires. She loses it when asked about it by British Journalist: She responds "why don't you F**ck off"! The BBC is a discredited legacy media based on lies and deception. pic.twitter.com/vWgiW8b77c pic.twitter.com/vWgiW8b77c Khalissee (@Kahlissee) March 6, 2024 March 6, 2024 Greene has courted controversy on various issues by promoting QAnon conspiracy theories, alongside a history of anti-Muslim and antisemitic remarks. Years-old views, including a Facebook interaction in which she agreed with a comment that the Parkland shooting was a "false flag" staged event, and a video in which she pushed 9/11 conspiracy theories, have been unearthed. courted controversy interaction 9/11 conspiracy theories One post from 2018 in particular was reported on by Media Matters for America, a watchdog group, where she speculated about a conspiracy surrounding the November 2018 wildfires in California. In the now-deleted post, Greene theorized that a space-based solar generator, used in a clean-energy experiment with the goal of replacing coal and oil, could have beamed the sun's energy back to Earth and started the fires. We have covered similar claims surrounding the wildfires before. reported now-deleted theorized similar claims She said, "there are too many coincidences to ignore" and "oddly there are all these people who have said they saw what looked like lasers or blue beams of light causing the fires." Greene also speculated that a range of people or groups were involved in this fire, including former California Gov. Jerry Brown, Pacific Gas & Electric and Rothschild Inc., an investment firm. She said that Roger Kimmel, who was on the board of PG&E, was also "Vice Chairman of Rothschild Inc," and "If they are beaming the suns energy back to Earth, I'm sure they wouldn't ever miss a transmitter receiving station right??!! I mean mistakes are never made when anything new is invented. What would that look like anyway? A laser beam or light beam coming down to Earth I guess. Could that cause a fire? Hmmm, I don't know. I hope not! That wouldn't look so good for PG&E, Rothschild Inc, Solaren or Jerry Brown who sure does seem fond of PG&E." The Rothschilds, a Jewish banking family, have long been the targets of antisemitic conspiracy theories claiming that Jewish people are in control of the entire world. While Greene specifically did not use the words "Jewish space laser," she heavily implied that the Rothschilds were involved in the laser conspiracy. targets An investigation showed that the California wildfires of 2018 were ignited by PG&E power lines, and then spread with the help of warm temperatures, dry vegetation and strong winds. showed In late January 2021, CNN reported that dozens of posts from 2018 and 2019 had been removed from Greene's Facebook page. removed Given that Greene did not directly state that "Jewish lasers" caused the fires, but did speculate that laser beams somehow connected to the Rothschild investment firm were a cause, we rate this claim as a "Mixture."

NEI

In March 2024,Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia was questioned about her support for fringe conspiracy theories by journalist Emily Maitlis, who asked her to talk about her supposed past comments on "Jewish space lasers." Their interaction went viral on social media as Greene used an expletive and walked away.The BBC is a discredited legacy media based on lies and deception. pic.twitter.com/vWgiW8b77c Khalissee (@Kahlissee) March 6, 2024Greene has courted controversy on various issues by promoting QAnon conspiracy theories, alongside a history of anti-Muslim and antisemitic remarks. Years-old views, including a Facebook interaction in which she agreed with a comment that the Parkland shooting was a "false flag" staged event, and a video in which she pushed 9/11 conspiracy theories, have been unearthed.One post from 2018 in particular was reported on by Media Matters for America, a watchdog group, where she speculated about a conspiracy surrounding the November 2018 wildfires in California. In the now-deleted post, Greene theorized that a space-based solar generator, used in a clean-energy experiment with the goal of replacing coal and oil, could have beamed the sun's energy back to Earth and started the fires. We have covered similar claims surrounding the wildfires before.The Rothschilds, a Jewish banking family, have long been the targets of antisemitic conspiracy theories claiming that Jewish people are in control of the entire world. While Greene specifically did not use the words "Jewish space laser," she heavily implied that the Rothschilds were involved in the laser conspiracy.An investigation showed that the California wildfires of 2018 were ignited by PG&E power lines, and then spread with the help of warm temperatures, dry vegetation and strong winds.In late January 2021, CNN reported that dozens of posts from 2018 and 2019 had been removed from Greene's Facebook page.

FMD_train_1799

Do Seniors on Social Security Have to Pay for Medicare While 'Illegal Immigrants' Get It Free?

06/19/2019

In May and June 2019, a misleading but widely seen meme about immigrants and Medicare benefits continued to circulate on Facebook. Although the trope that undocumented immigrants are cashing in on U.S. government-funded public benefits for free is common, it is generally misleading. Contrary to what the meme asserts, undocumented persons do not qualify to receive Medicare. Additionally, many undocumented persons acquire fake Social Security numbers to work, allowing them to pay billions of dollars into the system without ever reaping those benefits, said Steven Wallace, professor of public health at the University of California, Los Angeles, and associate director of UCLA's Center for Health Policy Research. "In reality, undocumented immigrants paying into these programs are actually helping to subsidize them," Wallace told us by phone. "So it's the other way around—it's not that they're draining the system. They're actually subsidizing it." The impacts of immigration on the economy and public benefits are political flashpoints in a larger national debate. For example, in September 2017, the Trump administration was criticized for rejecting a study by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services that concluded refugees have an overall positive effect on government revenue. A 2017 study conducted by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine reported that immigration "has an overall positive impact on the long-run economic growth in the U.S." In the short term and at the local and state government levels, new immigrants do have a negative revenue impact largely due to costs associated with educating children, health care, and law enforcement. However, in the long term, they are a net positive on revenue due to the higher incomes of their descendants, who are among the strongest fiscal and economic contributors in the U.S. PBS News Hour reported that "In general, more people working means more taxes," and that's true overall with undocumented immigrants as well. Undocumented immigrants pay an estimated $11.6 billion a year in taxes, according to the Institute on Taxation & Economic Policy. Immigrants are also less likely to take public benefits than the native-born population for two reasons. Those two reasons, according to PBS, are that undocumented persons aren't eligible to receive federal public benefits, and many of those who are authorized to be here aren't eligible because they earn too much money.

False

Although the trope that undocumented immigrants are cashing in on U.S. government-funded public benefits for free is a common one, it's generally misleading.Contrary to what the meme asserts, undocumented persons do not qualify to receive Medicare. Additionally, because many undocumented persons acquire fake Social Security numbers so that they can work, they pay billions of dollars into the system but never reap those benefits, said Steven Wallace, professor of public health at the University of California, Los Angeles, and associate director of UCLA's Center for Health Policy Research."In reality, undocumented immigrants paying into these programs actually are helping to subsidize them," Wallace told us by phone. "So its the other way around -- its not that they're draining the system. They're actually subsidizing it."The impacts of immigration on the economy and public benefits are political flashpoints in a larger national debate. For example, in September 2017 the Trump administration was criticized for rejecting a study by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services that concluded refugees have an overall positive effect on government revenue.A 2017 study conducted by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine reported that immigration "has an overall positive impact on the long-run economic growth in the U.S. In the short term and on the local and state government levels, new immigrants do have a negative revenue impact largely due to costs associated with educating children, health care and law enforcement. But in the long term, they are a net positive on revenue due to higher incomes of their descendants who are among the strongest fiscal and economic contributors in the U.S.PBS News Hour reported that "In general, more people working means more taxes and thats true overall with undocumented immigrants as well. Undocumented immigrants pay an estimated $11.6 billion a year in taxes, according to the Institute on Taxation & Economic Policy. Immigrants are also less likely to take public benefits than the native-born population for two reasons."Those two reasons, according to PBS, are that undocumented persons aren't eligible to receive federal public benefits, and many of the ones who are authorized to be here aren't eligible because they earn too much money.Contrary to what the meme asserts, undocumented persons do not qualify to receive Medicare. Additionally, because many undocumented persons acquire fake Social Security numbers so that they can work, they pay billions of dollars into the system but never reap those benefits, said Steven Wallace, professor of public health at the University of California, Los Angeles, and associate director of UCLA's Center for Health Policy Research.The impacts of immigration on the economy and public benefits are political flashpoints in a larger national debate. For example, in September 2017 the Trump administration was criticized for rejecting a study by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services that concluded refugees have an overall positive effect on government revenue.A 2017 study conducted by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine reported that immigration "has an overall positive impact on the long-run economic growth in the U.S. In the short term and on the local and state government levels, new immigrants do have a negative revenue impact largely due to costs associated with educating children, health care and law enforcement. But in the long term, they are a net positive on revenue due to higher incomes of their descendants who are among the strongest fiscal and economic contributors in the U.S.

FMD_train_1439

Trump Sons Sell Access to Father for Hunting Trip Fundraiser

12/21/2016

In December 2016, several web sites reported that Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump, sons of President-elect Donald Trump, were selling access to their father via a fundraising event called "Opening Day 45" scheduled for the day after his inauguration: several reported BREAKING: Donald Trumps Kids Are Selling Access To Their Father For A $1 Million Donation This Is IMPEACHABLE! [DETAILS] The shamelessness of President-elect Donald Trump and his family is limitless and without boundaries. They do not care about the appearance of impropriety or actual impropriety. That is why Trumps sons, Eric and Donald Jr., founded a non-profit organization to funnel money through when they sell access to Trump once he is inaugurated. Indeed, Fascism has come to America in the form of an orange failed businessman with a penchant for using racial slurs. The non-profit the Trump offspring founded is named the Opening Day Foundation, and they are offering Trumps richest supporters the grand opportunity of private access. However, the access comes with a price tag of a cool one million dollars. Individuals who are rich, but not rich enough to attempt to buy a favor from the president, can also purchase time with either of the Trump boys for as little as $25,000. What does one purchase besides time with Trump? Certain packages include pictures and a private reception with the president. Others include a multi-day hunting trip, or a fishing trip with Eric or Donald Jr. Reports that the Trump sons were selling access to their father began on 16 December 2016 when the gossip web site TMZ published a draft of an invitation for the "Opening Day 45" event. The unofficial invitation featured several packages which donors could buy, such as the $1 million "Bald Eagle" package (which included a photo opportunity with the president-elect) or the $500,000 "Grizzly Bear" package (which included a hunting trip with Donald Jr. and Eric Trump): TMZ published The Washington Post reported that the Trump sons were temporarily listed as "hosts" of the event on the "Opening Day 45" web site. However, Trump spokeswoman Hope Hicks said that the initial invitation was just a draft and had not been approved by Trump's transition team. Furthermore, Hicks added, Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump were not involved with the event: reported Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump are avid outdoorsman and supporters of conservation efforts, which align with the goals of this event, however they are not involved in any capacity, she said in a statement. Additionally, the President-elect is not aware of the event or the details pertaining to. While Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump may not be involved with the planning of this particular event, they were listed as members of the Board of Directors on paperwork filed to register the non-profit "Opening Day" foundation on 14 December 2016. Again, however, Trump's transition team asserted that Eric and Donald Jr. were included on the foundation's paperwork without their permission: paperwork But transition officials said the Trump sons were listed on the document without their permission and have asked the Texas secretary of state to remove their names. [Mark Brinkerhoff, a spokesman for the event] confirmed that they should not have been named as directors of the Opening Day Foundation. He said that the paperwork filed last week was not the official filing and that new documents would be submitted shortly. Still, he said the Trump brothers were supportive of the foundation and its goals. Eric and Donald Trump Jr.'s level of involvement with the organization is still unclear. A new version of the invitation for "Opening Day 45" published on the event web site on 20 December 2016 listed them as "honorary chairmen" but not organizers or hosts. invitation The photo opportunity with President-elect Donald Trump, as well as the hunting trip with his sons, was also absent from the newer invitation. Instead, donors who spent $1 million on the "Bald Eagle" package would get a private reception with unnamed VIPs and celebrities associated with the event: This version of the invitation is no longer available on the web site, however, which now leads to a "Coming Soon" page. We've reached out to event spokesman Mark Brinkerhoff to clarify some information regarding the event. TMZ. "Donald Trump & Family Celebrate Hunters and Fisherman at Inauguration Bash." 20 December 2016. Gold, Matea. "Offer of Access to Trump and Family at Fundraiser Is Pulled Back, But Ties Remain." The Washington Post. 20 December 2016. The Center for Public Integrity. "Donald Trump's Sons Behind Nonprofit Selling Access to President-Elect." 19 December 2016.

NEI

In December 2016, several web sites reported that Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump, sons of President-elect Donald Trump, were selling access to their father via a fundraising event called "Opening Day 45" scheduled for the day after his inauguration:Reports that the Trump sons were selling access to their father began on 16 December 2016 when the gossip web site TMZ published a draft of an invitation for the "Opening Day 45" event. The unofficial invitation featured several packages which donors could buy, such as the $1 million "Bald Eagle" package (which included a photo opportunity with the president-elect) or the $500,000 "Grizzly Bear" package (which included a hunting trip with Donald Jr. and Eric Trump):The Washington Post reported that the Trump sons were temporarily listed as "hosts" of the event on the "Opening Day 45" web site. However, Trump spokeswoman Hope Hicks said that the initial invitation was just a draft and had not been approved by Trump's transition team. Furthermore, Hicks added, Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump were not involved with the event:While Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump may not be involved with the planning of this particular event, they were listed as members of the Board of Directors on paperwork filed to register the non-profit "Opening Day" foundation on 14 December 2016. Again, however, Trump's transition team asserted that Eric and Donald Jr. were included on the foundation's paperwork without their permission:Eric and Donald Trump Jr.'s level of involvement with the organization is still unclear. A new version of the invitation for "Opening Day 45" published on the event web site on 20 December 2016 listed them as "honorary chairmen" but not organizers or hosts.

FMD_train_1352

Was the Mayor of Minneapolis responsible for canceling the 4th of July fireworks while permitting a Muslim animal sacrifice at the Vikings Stadium?

08/23/2018

In August 2018, a bit of Islamophobic copypasta started making its way around social media, asserting that the mayor of Minneapolis, Minnesota had canceled a 4th of July city fireworks display but allowed "Muslim animal sacrifice" to be held in the city's U.S. Bank Stadium (home of the Minnesota Vikings football team) the following month: copypasta This copypasta was based on a bit of fake news, a fear-mongering report about the Muslim holiday Eid al-Adha, and a misreading of two genuine news reports. Fake News On 10 June 2018, the Last Line of Defense web site published an article positing that the Muslim mayor of Minneapolis had "canceled the 4th of July": article Mayor Ahneid al Ahmed of Haskentot, Minnesota has done the unthinkable and canceled the 4th of July. According to his office, the city has no desire to spend money on something so frivolous. Muslim spokesman Art Tubolls said: This city elected our mayor to do what is best. We dont hink buying a bunch of flags and fireworks and spending a day celebrating nationalism like nazis is a good idea. This was not a genuine news story about the mayor of Minneapolis, who is neither named "Ahneid al Ahmed" nor a Muslim. (The city's actual mayor is Jacob Frey.) The Last Line of Defense is part of a network of sites that engages in political trolling under the guise of proffering "satire." Jacob Frey This junk news piece may have prompted some confusion, as it resembled a genuine news story about a nearby Minnesota city. The mayor of St. Paul did cancel the city's Independence Day firework show due to budgetary concerns: cancel St. Paul will go without the rockets red glare on Independence Day this year. Mayor Melvin Carter announced that the city wont hold a Fourth of July fireworks event. The cancellation may foreshadow of what could be a difficult budget season. Carters announcement, posted to Facebook, cited concerns about the citys budget climate. Minneapolis, on the other hand, hosted multiple firework shows on July 4th. multiple firework shows Fear-Mongering Reports About Eid al-Adha The Muslim celebration of Eid al-Adha is also referred to as the "Feast of Sacrifice." The holiday, which honors Ibrahim's (Abraham's) willingness to sacrifice his son at God's command, is celebrated by Muslims around the world. In many places, Muslims observe that holiday by sacrificing an animal and then sharing its meat with the poor: sacrificing To commemorate God's test of Ibrahim, many Muslim families sacrifice an animal and share the meat with the poor. They also are required to donate to charities that benefit the poor. Muslims also routinely exchange presents during the holiday. When it was announced that U.S. Bank Stadium would be hosting a Eid al-Adha festival, the Islamophobic web site "Bare Naked Islam" published an article about the upcoming event imploring readers to "imagine" 50,000 Muslims at the stadium and displaying various photographs and videos of animal sacrifices from around the world. article The following photograph, for instance, was taken in Lahore, Pakistan, in 2008: taken These photographs led many readers to mistakenly believe that the "Super EID" festival at U.S. Bank Stadium would also feature animal sacrifices, but that wasn't the case. Ahmed Anshur, executive director of Masjid Al-Ihsan Islamic Center in St. Paul and one of the organizers of "Super EID," attempted to quell these fears, telling Minnesota Public Radio that no animal sacrifices would take place at the event: Minnesota Public Radio Eid Al-Adha, the second Muslim holiday of the year, comes at the end of the pilgrimage. Its name in Arabic means the "festival of sacrifice." Muslims celebrate by sacrificing animals and donating meat to charity. But Ahmed Anshur, executive director of Masjid Al-Ihsan Islamic Center in St. Paul and one of the organizers, wants to be clear: The actual ritual will not take place at U.S. Bank Stadium. "Nobody is going to sacrifice an animal, or nobody is going to slaughter an animal in that field," he said. "I can assure you that, 100 percent." The Minneapolis Star Tribune filed a report after the 21 August 2018 celebration on which stated that in fact no animal sacrifices had taken place at the stadium during the EID celebration: report The holiday honors the prophet Ibrahim, also known as Abraham in Judaism and Christianity, and his willingness to sacrifice his son for God. It comes at the end of the annual hajj pilgrimage. It is one of the holiest days of the year for Muslims, who celebrate with prayer, shared meals and gifts. In some places, families who can afford it slaughter an animal and share the meat with family and charities. No animals were sacrificed at the stadium Tuesday. Bowling, Chris. "Thousands Join in 'Super Eid' Celebration at U.S. Bank Stadium in Minneapolis." [Minneapolis] Star Tribune. 21 August 2018. Feshir, Riham. "Thousands Expected for 'Super Eid' in Downtown Minneapolis." MPR News. 20 August 2018. CNN. "5 Things to Know About the Muslim Holiday Eid al-Adha." 21 August 2018. The Current. "Fourth of July 2018: Where to See Fireworks in Minneapolis, St. Paul, and Beyond." 26 June 2018. Melo, Frederick. "St. Paul Mayor Cancels July 4 Fireworks, Cites Budget Concerns." TwinCities.com. 27 June 2018.

False

In August 2018, a bit of Islamophobic copypasta started making its way around social media, asserting that the mayor of Minneapolis, Minnesota had canceled a 4th of July city fireworks display but allowed "Muslim animal sacrifice" to be held in the city's U.S. Bank Stadium (home of the Minnesota Vikings football team) the following month:On 10 June 2018, the Last Line of Defense web site published an article positing that the Muslim mayor of Minneapolis had "canceled the 4th of July":This was not a genuine news story about the mayor of Minneapolis, who is neither named "Ahneid al Ahmed" nor a Muslim. (The city's actual mayor is Jacob Frey.) The Last Line of Defense is part of a network of sites that engages in political trolling under the guise of proffering "satire."This junk news piece may have prompted some confusion, as it resembled a genuine news story about a nearby Minnesota city. The mayor of St. Paul did cancel the city's Independence Day firework show due to budgetary concerns:Minneapolis, on the other hand, hosted multiple firework shows on July 4th.The Muslim celebration of Eid al-Adha is also referred to as the "Feast of Sacrifice." The holiday, which honors Ibrahim's (Abraham's) willingness to sacrifice his son at God's command, is celebrated by Muslims around the world. In many places, Muslims observe that holiday by sacrificing an animal and then sharing its meat with the poor:When it was announced that U.S. Bank Stadium would be hosting a Eid al-Adha festival, the Islamophobic web site "Bare Naked Islam" published an article about the upcoming event imploring readers to "imagine" 50,000 Muslims at the stadium and displaying various photographs and videos of animal sacrifices from around the world.The following photograph, for instance, was taken in Lahore, Pakistan, in 2008:Ahmed Anshur, executive director of Masjid Al-Ihsan Islamic Center in St. Paul and one of the organizers of "Super EID," attempted to quell these fears, telling Minnesota Public Radio that no animal sacrifices would take place at the event:The Minneapolis Star Tribune filed a report after the 21 August 2018 celebration on which stated that in fact no animal sacrifices had taken place at the stadium during the EID celebration:

FMD_train_372

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

10/24/2016

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

False

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

FMD_train_1619

A study conducted by Stanford University provides evidence of election fraud based on inconsistencies observed in exit polls.

06/15/2016

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.

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:

FMD_train_1560

Is an Asteroid Expected to Hit Earth Around Christmas?

11/11/2019

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: "No, there is nothing unusual or dangerous about this asteroid. 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 an average of 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."

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:

FMD_train_822

Has a school walkout been scheduled in reaction to the Parkland mass shooting?

02/22/2018

Following the school shooting on February 14, 2018, at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, people began posting information about planned school walkouts and protests, frequently using the hashtags #schoolwalkout or #nationalschoolwalkout. Readers expressed confusion about the various dates promoted by different groups. Below is a breakdown of planned events. On February 20 and 21, 2018, students from at least 50 high schools in South Florida participated in a walkout as part of at least two regional demonstrations staged by students in response to the shooting in Parkland. The Sun Sentinel reported that perhaps the largest crowd gathered on Wednesday, February 21, 2018, when teens from various schools converged on Marjory Stoneman Douglas High, where authorities say Nikolas Cruz shot and killed 17 people. The demonstrators formed long lines that snaked for several city blocks, as seen in aerial images captured by news helicopters. Drivers passing by honked their horns in support. U.S. Senator Bill Nelson, D-Fla., was outside Marjory Stoneman, praising the students. "You all are so strong and so articulate," Nelson told the students as they nodded. "Keep that message going, because if you don't, it will get swallowed up into the same old same old, just like it has been." On March 14, 2018, Women's March Youth EMPOWER, an organization sponsored by the Women's March Network, which planned large-scale protests the day after Donald Trump's inauguration and a year later, is planning a walkout for March 14. It will last for 17 minutes, one minute for each of the people killed in the Parkland shooting. On March 24, 2018, survivors of the February 14 shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School and other students are planning a protest in Washington, D.C., called "March for Our Lives." The event has attracted the interest of celebrities, including Oprah Winfrey and George and Amal Clooney, who have donated large amounts of money to the cause. "Sister marches" will take place in cities around the world. The most highly publicized walkout appears to be planned for April 20, 2018, the 19th anniversary of the massacre at Columbine High School in Colorado. Details about the event vary across social media, ranging from a full-day absence to signing children out (or having students walk out) at the time the Columbine massacre occurred. At least one high school has threatened disciplinary action against any student participating in a school walkout. On Facebook, a "No Kids Left" event was scheduled for April 20, 2018, urging parents to keep their children out of school for the entire day: "Parents and Caregivers, please keep your children out of the classroom on Friday, April 20, 2018, the 19th anniversary of the Columbine High School massacre. This will be a simulation of the extreme outcome if we continue to only offer thoughts and prayers when our children are murdered at school. #nokidsleft Together, let's send a message to our representatives and the current administration in Washington to take action. I'm a mom who doesn't know what else to do, but we must do something. Please share this event and RSVP to show your solidarity. Please help families who cannot afford to stay home from work by offering your service of childcare." NOTE: We are working with www.noshootings.com to make the 19th anniversary of the Columbine shooting a day when no kids get shot because no kids will be at school. The Twitter account @schoolwalkoutUS, created in February 2018, provided a date of April 20 and clarified that the event was separate from the March 24 demonstrations: "On Friday, April 20th, we want students to attend school and then promptly WALK OUT at 10:00 a.m. Sit outside your schools and peacefully protest. Make some noise. Voice your thoughts. 'We are students, we are victims, we are change.'" We contacted event organizers for clarification, and National School Walkout responded: "Hello, The Walkout is real. It will take place at 10:00 a.m. on the anniversary of the Columbine killings, April 20th, and will be an opportunity for young people to send a clear message that we will not tolerate inaction on gun violence. Other organizations are planning similar events and protests. We fully endorse those events as well, and we hope that together we can end the violence that terrorizes our country." Chokey, Aric, Juan Ortega, and Brett Clarkson. "'Enough Is Enough,' Students Chant As Thousands Stage Walkouts Across South Florida." Sun Sentinel. February 21, 2018. Williams, David. "Schools Threaten To Punish Students Who Join Walkouts Over Gun Control." CNN. February 21, 2018. Women's March. "ENOUGH: National School Walkout." Accessed February 22, 2018.

True

On 20 and 21 February 2018, students from at least 50 high schools in South Florida participated in a walkout in one of at least two regional demonstrations staged by students in response to the shooting in Parkland. The Sun Sentinel reported:Women's March Youth EMPOWER, an organization sponsored by the Women's March Network which planned large-scale protests the day after Donald Trump's inauguration and a year afterwards is planning a walkout for 14 March. It would be for 17 minutes, one minute for each of the people killed in the Parkland shooting: Survivors of the 14 February shooting at Margery Stoneman Douglas High School and other students are planning a protest in Washington, D.C., called "March for Our Lives." The event has caught the interest of celebrities, including Oprah Winfrey and George and Amal Clooney, who have donated large amounts of money to the event. "Sister marches" will take place in cities around the world. The most highly publicized walkout appears to be planned for 20 April 2018, the 19th anniversary of the massacre at Columbine High School in Colorado. Details about the event vary across social media from a full-day absence to signing children out (or having students walk out) at the time the Columbine massacre occurred. At least one high school has threatened disciplinary action against any student participating in a school walkout.On Facebook, a "No Kids Left" event was scheduled for 20 April 2018, which urged parents to keep their children out of school for the entire day:The Twitter account @schoolwalkoutUS, created in February 2018 provided a date of 20 April and clarified that the event was separate from the 24 March demonstrations: National School Walkout (@schoolwalkoutUS) February 17, 2018

FMD_train_363

Obama's stance on the Debt Limit

07/28/2011

Claim: In 2006, U.S. Senator Barack Obama spoke out against raising the U.S. government debt limit. Example: [Collected via e-mail, July 2011] 'The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the US Government can not pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government's reckless fiscal policies. Increasing America's debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that "the buck stops here." Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better.' Origins: In 2006, while serving his first term as a freshman U.S. senator from Illinois, Barack Obama made the remarks attributed to him above during discussion in the U.S. Senate prior to the call for votes on raising the debt limit. The full text of his remarks in the Senate on 16 March 2006 are: The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can't pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government's reckless fiscal policies. Over the past 5 years, our federal debt has increased by $3.5 trillion to $8.6 trillion. That is "trillion" with a "T." That is money that we have borrowed from the Social Security trust fund, borrowed from China and Japan, borrowed from American taxpayers. And over the next 5 years, between now and 2011, the President's budget will increase the debt by almost another $3.5 trillion. Numbers that large are sometimes hard to understand. Some people may wonder why they matter. Here is why: This year, the Federal Government will spend $220 billion on interest. That is more money to pay interest on our national debt than we'll spend on Medicaid and the State Children's Health Insurance Program. That is more money to pay interest on our debt this year than we will spend on education, homeland security, transportation, and veterans benefits combined. It is more money in one year than we are likely to spend to rebuild the devastated gulf coast in a way that honors the best of America. And the cost of our debt is one of the fastest growing expenses in the Federal budget. This rising debt is a hidden domestic enemy, robbing our cities and States of critical investments in infrastructure like bridges, ports, and levees; robbing our families and our children of critical investments in education and health care reform; robbing our seniors of the retirement and health security they have counted on. Every dollar we pay in interest is a dollar that is not going to investment in America's priorities. Instead, interest payments are a significant tax on all Americans a debt tax that Washington doesn't want to talk about. If Washington were serious about honest tax relief in this country, we would see an effort to reduce our national debt by returning to responsible fiscal policies. But we are not doing that. Despite repeated efforts by Senators Conrad and Feingold, the Senate continues to reject a return to thecommonsense Pay-go rules that used to apply. Previously, Pay-go rules applied both to increases in mandatory spending and to tax cuts. The Senate had to abide by the commonsense budgeting principle of balancing expenses and revenues. Unfortunately, the principle was abandoned, and now the demands of budget discipline apply only to spending. As a result, tax breaks have not been paid for by reductions in Federal spending, and thus the only way to pay for them has been to increase our deficit to historically high levels and borrow more and more money. Now we have to pay for those tax breaks plus the cost of borrowing for them. Instead of reducing the deficit, as some people claimed, the fiscal policies of this administration and its allies in Congress will add more than $600 million in debt for each of the next 5 years. That is why I will once again cosponsor the Pay-go amendment and continue to hope that my colleagues will return to a smart rule that has worked in the past and can work again. Our debt also matters internationally. My friend, the ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee, likes to remind us that it took 42 Presidents 224 years to run up only $1 trillion of foreign-held debt. This administration did more than that in just 5 years. Now, there is nothing wrong with borrowing from foreign countries. But we must remember that the more we depend on foreign nations to lend us money, the more our economic security is tied to the whims of foreign leaders whose interests might not be aligned with ours. Increasing America's debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that "the buck stops here.'' Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better. I therefore intend to oppose the effort to increase America's debt limit. The shortened quote now attributed to him is a verbatim capture of the opening and closing paragraphs of his remarks of 16 March 2006. (The Senate vote held later that day on a resolution to increase the debt limitpassed by a 52-48 margin, with Senator Obama voting against it.) passed President Obama has undergone a change of position regarding raising the debt limit. In a 15 April 2011 Good Morning America interview, President Obama said this of his reasons for doing so: Last updated: 7 October 2013 Congressional Record. "Remarks by Sen. Barack Obama." 16 March 2006. Farley, Robert. "Obama Says Reagan Raised Debt Ceiling 18 Times; George W. Bush 7 Times." St. Petersburg Times. 26 July 2011. Stephanopoulos, George. "President Obama One-on-One." Good Morning America. 15 April 2011. Werner, Erica. "WH: Obama Regrets Vote Against Raising Debt Limit." Associated Press. 11 April 2011.

NEI

The shortened quote now attributed to him is a verbatim capture of the opening and closing paragraphs of his remarks of 16 March 2006. (The Senate vote held later that day on a resolution to increase the debt limitpassed by a 52-48 margin, with Senator Obama voting against it.)

FMD_train_1324

Do Photos Show Children at Detention Center Under Trump's Watch?

06/25/2019

In June 2019, a variety of news outlets published reports detailing the horrid conditions at immigrant detention centers along the United States' southern border. The Associated Press, for instance, quoted a lawyer named Warren Binford, who visited a facility in Texas and spoke to some of the immigrant children detained there, stating that the kids were living in "inhumane conditions." ABC News obtained a medical declaration that likened these detention centers to torture facilities. As outrage from these reports grew online, actress Nancy Lee Grahn posted a set of photographs that supposedly documented these conditions and accused the Trump administration of forcing children to "sleep on cement floors with an aluminum blanket & lights on all night." While the text of Grahn's tweet accurately reflects recent news reports, the photographs she used to illustrate her point were not taken during U.S. President Donald Trump's administration. These photographs are actually still images from a surveillance camera at a Border Patrol holding facility in Tucson, Ariz., in August 2015. The images were released as part of a lawsuit brought by the American Immigration Council and the American Civil Liberties Union against U.S. Customs and Border Protection concerning the conditions at the agency's temporary holding facilities. Here's an excerpt from an NPR report: The holding cells were designed to be used for temporary holding for a period of hours. The American Immigration Council analyzed Border Patrol data and concluded that from September 2014 to August 2015, two-thirds of immigrants detained in Border Patrol facilities in the Southwest were held for more than 24 hours, and tens of thousands of people were held for more than three days. Photos of the cells show people crowded together in concrete cells. Several images show prisoners sitting or sleeping on bare floors with no mats available to them, even when there are unused mats in empty cells. While these photographs were taken during the Obama administration, the conditions described in Grahn's tweet still apply to the detention facilities operating under Trump. Physician Dolly Lucio Sevier was granted access to a detention center after a flu outbreak sent five infants to the neonatal intensive care unit. In a medical declaration obtained by ABC News, Sevier compared the conditions to a "torture facility" and wrote that minors were dealing with "extreme cold temperatures, lights on 24 hours a day, no adequate access to medical care, basic sanitation, water, or adequate food." Binford, a law professor, told NPR: "They are worse than actual prison conditions. It is inhumane. It's nothing that I ever imagined seeing in the United States of America." The second part of Grahn's tweet mentions "Sarah Fabian" and claims that companies are making $750 a day to detain immigrant children. Fabian is a Department of Justice lawyer who attempted to defend the conditions at detention centers during a June 2019 Court of Appeals hearing. According to the Washington Post, the government went to federal court this week to argue that it shouldn't be required to give detained migrant children toothbrushes, soap, towels, showers, or even half a night's sleep inside Border Patrol detention facilities. The position bewildered a panel of three judges in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit on Tuesday, who questioned whether government lawyers sincerely believed they could describe the temporary detention facilities as safe and sanitary if children weren't provided adequate toiletries and sleeping conditions. One circuit judge said it struck him as inconceivable. The government was in court to appeal a 2017 ruling finding that child migrants and their parents were detained in dirty, crowded, bitingly cold conditions inside U.S. Customs and Border Protection facilities along the southern border. Migrants are first taken to those facilities after they are apprehended at the border. U.S. District Judge Dolly Gee had found that migrants in Rio Grande Valley facilities were hungry, with some eating only sandwiches of two pieces of dry bread and one slice of ham. They were thirsty, with up to 20 migrants sharing the same cup to drink from the water cooler. They were embarrassed to use a toilet in front of 50 other people, and they couldn't take a shower or brush their teeth or even wash their hands with soap and dry them with a towel, the judge found. At night, they couldn't sleep. The lights were left on as they shivered beneath an aluminum blanket on the concrete floor, the judge found. Gee ruled in June 2017 that these Obama-era conditions violated a 1997 settlement agreement requiring that immigrant children in the government's custody be housed in safe and sanitary conditions and that the government maintain concern for the particular vulnerability of minors. But the Trump administration protested. The 1997 consent decree, known as the Flores Settlement Agreement, didn't say anything about providing a toothbrush, towels, dry clothing, soap, or even sleep, the administration has argued. Grahn's claim that companies make $750 "a kid a day to torture them" relates to the fact that some immigration detention centers are owned and operated by private for-profit companies. Reuters reported in February 2019 that while it costs about $250 per day to hold a child at a permanent detention center, the cost can triple at temporary, privately owned, for-profit facilities such as the "Homestead Temporary Shelter for Unaccompanied Children." As the government seeks to rapidly expand the site's capacity, it has waived a federal requirement at Homestead meant to ensure children receive sufficient health care. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, which cares for the children, previously required Homestead to maintain a clinician-to-child ratio of 1 to 12 to provide mental health services, according to a November 2018 report. But that requirement has been relaxed to 1 to 20, a Homestead program director said on Wednesday. The facility sits on federal property, and unlike established children's shelters, such as smaller group or foster homes that hold migrant children across the country, it is not governed by state child welfare regulations designed to protect youngsters from harm. About 35 miles south of Miami, the facility is run by Comprehensive Health Services, Inc., a private, for-profit company with a growing line of business in housing immigrant children. In a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission last year, the firm's parent company, Caliburn International Corp., noted President Donald Trump's immigration policies were driving significant growth. It costs approximately $250 per day to house a migrant child at a standard, permanent shelter, said Mark Weber, an HHS spokesman. But at an influx facility like Homestead, the cost is triple that—around $750 per day. It is covered by American taxpayers. To sum up: Viral photographs supposedly documenting the conditions at immigration detention facilities under the Trump administration were actually taken in 2015 during Obama's tenure. The poor conditions at these Obama-era centers have continued or worsened under Trump.

False

In June 2019, a variety of news outlets published reports detailing the horrid conditions at immigrant detention centers along the United States' southern border. The Associated Press, for instance, quoted a lawyer named Warren Binford, who visited a facility in Texas and spoke to some of the immigrant children detained within, saying that the kids were living in "inhumane conditions." ABC News obtained a medical declaration that likened these detention centers to torture facilities.As outrage from these reports grew online, actress Nancy Lee Grahn posted a set of photographs that supposedly documented these conditions and accused the Trump administration of forcing children to "sleep on cement floor with an aluminum blanket & lights on all night": These photographs are actually still images from a surveillance camera at a Border Patrol holding facility in Tucson, Ariz., in August 2015. The images were released as part of a lawsuit brought by the American Immigration Council and the American Civil Liberties Union against U.S. Customs and Border Protection concerning the conditions at the agency's temporary holding facilities.Here's an excerpt from an NPR report:Physician Dolly Lucio Sevier was granted access to a detention center after a flu outbreak sent five infants to the neonatal intensive care unit. In a medical declaration obtained by ABC News, Sevier compared the conditions to a "torture facility" and wrote that minors were dealing with "extreme cold temperatures, lights on 24 hours a day, no adequate access to medical care, basic sanitation, water, or adequate food."Binford, a law professor, told NPR: "They are worse than actual prison conditions. It is inhumane. It's nothing that I ever imagined seeing in the United States of America."The second part of Grahn's tweet mentions "Sarah Fabian" and claims that companies are making $750 day to detain immigrant children. Fabian is a Department of Justice lawyer who attempted to defend the conditions at detention centers during a June 2019 Court of Appeals hearing. According to the Washington Post: Reuters reported in February 2019 that while it costs about $250 per day to hold a child at a permanent detention center, the cost can triple at temporary, privately owned, for-profit facilities such as the "Homestead Temporary Shelter for Unaccompanied Children":

FMD_train_1266

Has Target discontinued its 'Shop with a Cop' initiative?

07/27/2020

In late July 2020, Snopes readers requested verification of numerous social media posts stating that Target had canceled its annual "Shop with a Cop" program, officially known as "Heroes & Helpers," in an effort to "distance themselves from police officers." Here is an example of one such post circulating on Facebook: Similar posts also circulated on Twitter, and to add to the confusion, a website called The Courier Daily only reported that people were discussing the rumor on Twitter but didn't provide any evidence for the claim. We reached out to the source itself, asking Target Corporate whether it had ended the long-standing program that pairs children from low-income backgrounds with local law enforcement officers for holiday shopping trips funded by charitable donations. A spokesperson for Target informed us that the program will continue, although details about how it will proceed amid the COVID-19 pandemic are still pending. In response to our inquiry about whether the program had been canceled, the company sent the following statement: "We plan to continue to support children with Heroes & Helpers events across the country this holiday season. Like many of our holiday programs, we are carefully considering how to manage these events during the COVID-19 environment in a way that ensures the health and safety of our team and guests. We will have additional details to share as we approach the holiday season." The program was launched in 2009 and takes place in stores nationwide. To date, $5 million in grants has been used to support the shopping trips, and more than 100,000 children and 60,000 police officers have participated, according to Target. The false social media rumors may have been inspired by the fact that since the May 25, 2020, death of George Floyd in Minneapolis police custody, there have been ongoing protests against and discussions about police violence and racism in America, spurring calls to reform policing practices and even some activists calling for police departments to be defunded. However, as of this writing, Target does not plan to cancel the program as a result of the racial justice protests. With the information currently available, we rate this claim as a Bullseye View. "Target Teams Up with Donnie Wahlberg to Celebrate 10 Years of Heroes & Helpers." 4 December 2019. Trujillo, Damian. "Shop With a Cop Foundation Considers Name Change to Reconnect with Community." KNTV. 2 July 2020. Hill, Evan, et al. "How George Floyd Was Killed in Police Custody." The New York Times. 31 May 2020.

False

Similar posts also made the rounds on Twitter, and to add to the confusion, a website called The Courier Daily only reported that people were talking about the rumor on Twitter but didn't offer any evidence for the claim.The program was launched in 2009 and takes place in stores nationwide. To date, $5 million in grants has been used to support the shopping trips, and more than 100,000 children and 60,000 police officers have participated, per Target.The false social media rumors may have been inspired by the fact that since the May 25, 2020, death of George Floyd in Minneapolis police custody, there have been ongoing protests against and conversation about police violence and racism in America, spurring calls to reform policing practices and even some activists calling for police departments to be defunded.

FMD_train_1267

Were These Electric Cars Abandoned Because Their Batteries Failed?

05/16/2021

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].

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:

FMD_train_1852

Is Elon Musk Rebranding Twitter as 'X'?

07/24/2023

In July 2023, we began receiving emails from readers asking if it was true that the social media platform Twitter was rebranding to "X." We also found posts repeating the claim on social media platforms like Facebook, Reddit, and TikTok. Twitter owner Elon Musk did rebrand Twitter to X. At the time of writing, Twitter had already begun replacing its famous bird logo with a stylized X. "And soon we shall bid adieu to the Twitter brand and, gradually, all the birds," Musk tweeted on July 23, 2023. Reputable news organizations like the Associated Press (AP), The Verge, NBC News, and CNN all reported on the rebrand. AP reported that Musk had founded a startup in 1999 called X.com, which later became PayPal, and that he also calls his son with singer Grimes "X" for short. At the time of writing, Twitter's bird logo was still displayed as its logo on the company's web page that discussed branding. "Our logo is our most recognizable asset," the page said. "That's why we're so protective of it." However, Twitter's sign-up page looked different. In an article about the replacement of Twitter's bird logo, The Verge wrote: The bird theming runs deep, and it's not clear that X Corp. (as Twitter has legally been known for months now) will be able to replace it entirely. We've previously written about changes to Twitter's platform, including a false claim that U.S. President Joe Biden's Twitter account had been designated as a business account.

True

We also found posts repeating the claim on social media platforms like Facebook, Reddit, and TikTok.At the time of writing, Twitter had already begun replacing its famous bird logo with a stylized X. "And soon we shall bid adieu to the twitter brand and, gradually, all the birds," Musk tweeted on July 23, 2023. Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 23, 2023Reputable news organizations like the Associated Press (AP), The Verge, NBC News, and CNNall reported on the rebrand. AP reportedthat Musk had founded a startup in 1999 called X.com, which later became PayPal, and that he also calls his son with singer Grimes "X" for short.At the time of writing, Twitter's bird logo was still displayed as its logo on the company's web page that discussed branding. "Our logo is our most recognizable asset," the page said. "That's why we're so protective of it."In an article about the replacement of Twitter's bird logo, The Verge wrote:We've previously written about changes to Twitter's platform, including a false claim that U.S. President Joe Biden's Twitter account had been designated as a business account.

FMD_train_1395

Did Stalin Say 'America Is Like a Healthy Body with Threefold Resistance'?

03/15/2012

One of the forms of political expression that frequently arrives in our inbox for verification is the "evil plan" warning, items which present the notion that some malevolent entity (ranging from Communists to Satan himself) not only expressed an intent to destroy our society from within, but outlined a specific plan for doing so. A quote attributed to Soviet dictator Josef Stalin that a reader emailed us in November 2011 exemplifies the genre: Soviet dictator Josef Stalin "America is like a healthy body and its resistance is threefold: its patriotism, its morality, and its spiritual life. If we can undermine these three areas, America will collapse from within." The specifics of these plans (no matter how long ago they may supposedly have been formulated) generally relate to current events, and the political purpose of circulating them is to make readers aware that trends which threaten the health of our society are currently in place (i.e., "This is EXACTLY what is happening now!"), and to warn them that we must be vigilant about holding our course and stopping or reversing the encroachment of these socially unhealthful trends. This form has been expressed in such widely circulated items as Paul Harvey's "If I Were the Devil" essay, an (apocryphal) quotation by Karl Marx about the perils of consumer debt, and an (also apocryphal) warning from Abraham Lincoln about the accumulation of vast wealth in the hands of a few. If I Were the Devil Karl Marx Abraham Lincoln The putative quotation from Stalin referenced above is another item of this genre, one which presents the concept that Communist enemies of the U.S. viewed patriotism, morality, and spirituality as America's greatest assets and cannily plotted that the U.S. could be made to collapse from within if these values were sufficiently undermined (and which, of course, serves as an admonition to American readers to be attentive in maintaining these values). Whatever level of truth one might find in this sentiment, however, it's highly unlikely that Stalin ever spoke these words. Proving a negative is often an uncertain proposition, but our reasons for believing this quotation to be of dubious origin are: Josef Stalin Internet Archive Stalin documents letter Cummings, Jeanne. "Gingrich Out to Save America."The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. 16 January 1994 (p. G1). "Readers Respond to 'The Day After'."Lawrence Journal-World. 23 November 1983 (p. 9). Stalin Internet Archive. https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/subject/index.htm. Accessed 15 Sept. 2022. Stalin, Joseph, 1879-1953 | The Online Books Page. https://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/webbin/book/lookupname?key=Stalin%2c%20Joseph%2c%201879-1953. Accessed 15 Sept. 2022. Updated [Sept.15, 2022]: Sources and links refreshed.

False

A quote attributed to Soviet dictator Josef Stalin that a reader emailed us in November 2011 exemplifies the genre:The specifics of these plans (no matter how long ago they may supposedly have been formulated) generally relate to current events, and the political purpose of circulating them is to make readers aware that trends which threaten the health of our society are currently in place (i.e., "This is EXACTLY what is happening now!"), and to warn them that we must be vigilant about holding our course and stopping or reversing the encroachment of these socially unhealthful trends. This form has been expressed in such widely circulated items as Paul Harvey's "If I Were the Devil" essay, an (apocryphal) quotation by Karl Marx about the perils of consumer debt, and an (also apocryphal) warning from Abraham Lincoln about the accumulation of vast wealth in the hands of a few.

FMD_train_1313

Enter to win a $100 Chipotle gift card giveaway.

07/31/2018

In July 2018, the Chipotle Mexican Grill chain of fast casual restaurants ran a promotion in conjunction with National Avocado Day, offering free guacamole to customers with their orders on 31 July: free guacamole Unfortunately, scammers took advantage of this promotion to post counterfeit offers for free $100 Chipotle gift cards, touting that users need only share a link with five friends to claim their bounty: counterfeit offers This fake offer was just another variation of a long-running form of scam with a familiar pattern. First, scammers set up look-alike websites and social media pages that mimic those of legitimate companies in order to promote scams advertising free gift cards or coupons. Users who respond to those fake offers are required to share a website link or social media post in order to spread the scam more widely and lure in additional victims. Then those users are presented with a "survey" that extracts personal information such as email addresses, telephone numbers, dates of birth, and even sometimes credit card numbers. Finally, those who wish to claim their "free" gift cards eventually learn they must first sign up to purchase a number of costly goods, services, or subscriptions (negating the free aspect of the gift card). The Better Business Bureau offers three tips to identify similar scams: Dont believe what you see. Its 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 theres a link to their privacy policy. Watch out for a reward thats 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.

False

In July 2018, the Chipotle Mexican Grill chain of fast casual restaurants ran a promotion in conjunction with National Avocado Day, offering free guacamole to customers with their orders on 31 July:Unfortunately, scammers took advantage of this promotion to post counterfeit offers for free $100 Chipotle gift cards, touting that users need only share a link with five friends to claim their bounty:

FMD_train_1404

Was Barack Obama a Foreign College Student?

05/08/2009

One of the avenues of approach taken by "birthers" in their quest to demonstrate that Barack Obama is not eligible to hold the office of President of the United States is to try to demonstrate that, even if he was born in the United States, he gave up his U.S. citizenship somewhere along the way, and, if he's not a U.S. citizen, then he can't legitimately be president. birthers Barack Obama Therefore, many birthers gleefully seized onto a supposed news report from April 2009, which purported that Obama attended Occidental College in Los Angeles under a scholarship granted only to students of "foreign citizenship." They spread the rumor via the below-transcribed text: text April 1, 2009 Final Nail In Obama's Lack Of US Citizenship Coffin? AP WASHINGTON D.C.: In a move certain to fuel the debate over Obama's qualifications for the presidency, the group Americans for Freedom of Information has released copies of President Obama's college transcripts from Occidental College. Released today, the transcript indicates that Obama, under the name Barry Soetoro, received financial aid as a foreign student from Indonesia as an undergraduate at the school. The transcript was released by Occidental College in compliance with a court order in a suit brought by the group in the Superior Court of California. The transcript shows that Obama (Soetoro) applied for financial aid and was awarded a fellowship for foreign students from the Fulbright Foundation Scholarship program. To qualify, for the scholarship, a student must claim foreign citizenship. This document would seem to provide the smoking gun that many of Obama's detractors have been seeking. The news has created a firestorm at the White House as the release casts increasing doubt about Obama's legitimacy and qualification to serve as president. When reached for comment in London, where he has been in meetings with British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, Obama smiled but refused comment on the issue. Meanwhile, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs scoffed at the report stating that this was obviously another attempt by a right-wing conservative group to discredit the president and undermine the administrations efforts to move the country in a new direction. Britain's Daily Mail has also carried the story in a front-page article titled, Obama Eligibility Questioned, leading some to speculate that the story may overshadow economic issues on Obama's first official visit to the U.K. In a related matter, under growing pressure from several groups, Justice Antonin Scalia announced that the Supreme Court agreed on Tuesday to hear arguments concerning Obama's legal eligibility to serve as President in a case brought by Leo Donofrio of New Jersey. This lawsuit claims Obama's dual citizenship disqualified him from serving as president. Donofrios case is just one of 18 suits brought by citizens demanding proof of Obama's citizenship or qualification to serve as president. Gary Kreep of the United States Justice Foundation has released the results of their investigation of Obama's campaign spending. This study estimates that Obama has spent upwards of $950,000 in campaign funds in the past year with eleven law firms in 12 states for legal resources to block disclosure of any of his personal records. Mr. Kreep indicated that the investigation is still ongoing but that the final report will be provided to the U.S. attorney general, Eric Holder. Mr. Holder has refused to comment on the matter. However, this item wasn't a news report at all it was a hoax whose elements were demonstrably false: April Fool's Day Associated Press stylebook registered website Read these tiny words very closely: the group Americans for Freedom of Information does not exist, just like the supposed "AP article" you keep cutting and pasting into e-mails to your irritated family does not exist, just like the "Daily Mail article" referenced in the fake "AP article" does not exist. They're all fabrications. Fakes. Hoaxes. Ask yourself why you're so eager to believe these obvious fakes. No, really. Really, really ask yourself. Occidental College told journalists Occidental has no record of a "Barry Soetoro" ever attending [Occidental], nor was there ever any such court order [requiring the school to turn over his transcripts], said Jim Tranquada, Occidental College's communications director, who personally answers the inquiries, demands and pleas of people looking for proof that the president is not who he claims to be. Tranquada said: "Contemporary public documents, such as the 1979-80 freshman 'Lookbook' [a guide distributed to incoming freshman] published at the beginning of President Obama's first year at Occidental, list him as Barack Obama. All of the Occidental alumni I have spoken to from that era (1979-81) who knew him, knew him as Barry Obama." Fulbright scholarships AMINEF lawsuit Supreme Court United States Justice Foundation Months after the fake news story started circulating, another iteration of the rumor surfaced: This time, the claim focused on photographs of Obama posing with family members (his mother; his step-father, Lolo Soetoro; and his half-sister, Maya) and an Indonesian elementary school registration form. The below-displayed photo is an authentic image of Lolo Soetoro, Stanley Ann Dunham Soetoro, baby Maya Soetoro, and 9-year-old Barry Soetoro (Obama). authentic image Then, there is the below-displayed image depicting a registration document that the Fransiskus Assisi School in Jakarta, Indonesia, released publicly on Jan. 24, 2007. Much as been made of the document, which ostensibly shows Obama's stepfather, Lolo Soetoro, having listed his stepson's nationality as "Indonesian" (thereby supposedly indicating that Obama relinquished his U.S. citizenship at some point). The document also lists Obama's religion as "Islam." Fransiskus Assisi School After her divorce from her first husband, Obama's mother married an Indonesian student, Lolo Soetoro, who was attending college in Hawaii. In 1967, the family moved to Indonesia, where Obama attended elementary school in Jakarta until 1971. After that, he returned to Hawaii to live with his maternal grandparents. However, Lolo Soetoro's putatively listing his stepson's nationality as Indonesian on a school registration form does not in itself demonstrate that Obama was officially regarded as an Indonesian citizen by the government of that country. In any case, it's a moot point, since the same form shows that Obama was born in Honolulu, Hawaii, thereby making him a U.S. citizen from birth. (U.S. law states that a foreign nationality acquired through a parent does not affect one's U.S. citizenship status, nor can a child's U.S. citizenship be renounced solely through the actions of his parents.) states Parents cannot renounce U.S. citizenship on behalf of their minor children. Before an oath of renunciation will be administered under Section 349(a)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), a person under the age of 18 must convince a U.S. diplomatic or consular officer that they fully understand the nature and consequences of the oath of renunciation; are not subject to duress or undue influence, and are voluntarily seeking to renounce their U.S. citizenship. Immigration and Nationality Act The claim that Obama attended college in the United States as a foreign student and/or under the name Barry Soetoro has also spread online via a digitally edited photo of a 1998 Columbia University student ID card. via a digitally edited photo Abcarian, Robin. "'Birthers' Claim Obama Applied to College as a Foreigner." Los Angeles Times. 30 May 2012. Corcoran, Monica. "Barack Obama Went Hawaiian Casual at Occidental College in L.A." Los Angeles Times. 18 January 2009. Gordon, Larry. "Occidental Recalls 'Barry' Obama." Los Angeles Times. 29 January 2007.

False

One of the avenues of approach taken by "birthers" in their quest to demonstrate that Barack Obama is not eligible to hold the office of President of the United States is to try to demonstrate that, even if he was born in the United States, he gave up his U.S. citizenship somewhere along the way, and, if he's not a U.S. citizen, then he can't legitimately be president.Therefore, many birthers gleefully seized onto a supposed news report from April 2009, which purported that Obama attended Occidental College in Los Angeles under a scholarship granted only to students of "foreign citizenship." They spread the rumor via the below-transcribed text:The below-displayed photo is an authentic image of Lolo Soetoro, Stanley Ann Dunham Soetoro, baby Maya Soetoro, and 9-year-old Barry Soetoro (Obama).Then, there is the below-displayed image depicting a registration document that the Fransiskus Assisi School in Jakarta, Indonesia, released publicly on Jan. 24, 2007. Much as been made of the document, which ostensibly shows Obama's stepfather, Lolo Soetoro, having listed his stepson's nationality as "Indonesian" (thereby supposedly indicating that Obama relinquished his U.S. citizenship at some point). The document also lists Obama's religion as "Islam."However, Lolo Soetoro's putatively listing his stepson's nationality as Indonesian on a school registration form does not in itself demonstrate that Obama was officially regarded as an Indonesian citizen by the government of that country. In any case, it's a moot point, since the same form shows that Obama was born in Honolulu, Hawaii, thereby making him a U.S. citizen from birth. (U.S. law states that a foreign nationality acquired through a parent does not affect one's U.S. citizenship status, nor can a child's U.S. citizenship be renounced solely through the actions of his parents.)Parents cannot renounce U.S. citizenship on behalf of their minor children. Before an oath of renunciation will be administered under Section 349(a)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), a person under the age of 18 must convince a U.S. diplomatic or consular officer that they fully understand the nature and consequences of the oath of renunciation; are not subject to duress or undue influence, and are voluntarily seeking to renounce their U.S. citizenship.The claim that Obama attended college in the United States as a foreign student and/or under the name Barry Soetoro has also spread online via a digitally edited photo of a 1998 Columbia University student ID card.

FMD_train_1083

Nordstrom Gift Card Survey Scam

02/03/2016

In early February 2016, social media users began sharing various versions of the above link, claiming that the retailer Nordstrom was offering a $200 gift card to Facebook users who "referred three friends" to the promotion. The embedded links pointed to a URL that was typically some variation of nordstrom.egiftcards.co, which was not hosted on the official Nordstrom website. Users who attempted to complete the steps and claim the Nordstrom gift card were directed to a well-designed (but still illegitimate) page with the following instructions: "To Celebrate Valentine's Day, Get a Nordstrom $200 Gift Card! Simply Invite 3 Friends to Get Your Gift Card After 3 Friends Click Your Link. Get Your Gift Card Instantly!" The landing page in question didn't resemble other popular Facebook coupon scams. However, it did display a rapidly decreasing number of "available gift cards," suggesting users should comply urgently or miss out. Coupon and gift card scams appear frequently on Facebook; Kohl's, Costco, Home Depot, Lowe's, Kroger, Best Buy, Macy's, Olive Garden, Publix, Target, Wegmans, and Walmart were among the popular retailers impersonated by scammers seeking personal information from social media users. On 3 February 2016, a Nordstrom representative responded to our inquiry about the circulating gift card scam: "You're correct, this is a fraudulent promotion as it is not affiliated with Nordstrom, and we are not sponsoring any giveaways of gift cards. We recommend not clicking the link or entering any personal information. Our team is actively working to make customers aware of the situation and apologize for any confusion." A July 2014 Better Business Bureau article advised social media users on how to avoid survey and coupon scams: "Don't believe what you see. It's easy to steal the colors, logos, and header of an established organization. Scammers can also make links look like they lead to legitimate websites and emails appear to come from a different sender. Legitimate businesses do not ask for credit card numbers or banking information on customer surveys. If they do ask for personal information, like an address or email, be sure there's a link to their privacy policy. When in doubt, do a quick web search. If the survey is a scam, you may find alerts or complaints from other consumers. The organization's real website may have further information. Watch out for a reward that's too good to be true. If the survey is real, you may be entered in a drawing to win a gift card or receive a small discount off your next purchase. Few businesses can afford to give away $50 gift cards for completing a few questions."

False

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

FMD_train_361

Islamic Justice — Boy Punished for Stealing Bread

02/28/2006

The photographs displayed above have been circulating on the Internet since at least 2004, usually in email forwards that place them in various Arab/Muslim areas (e.g., Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Palestinian territories) and claim that the boy pictured is being punished under a harsh Sharia law system that imposes a penalty grossly out of proportion to the nature of the crime (i.e., having his arm crushed under a vehicle because he stole a loaf of bread). These pictures originated with the Iranian news site PeykeIran, which, along with individuals who have witnessed similar scenes in other countries, confirmed that what the photographs actually depict is performers hustling money from onlookers by staging a common street act. In this act, a subject seemingly allows himself to be run over by a heavy vehicle and then emerges unscathed. This is a common performance, with variations executed by many magicians and accomplished through a variety of means, resulting in no lasting harm. The fact that the subject is a small boy who grimaces his way through the stunt is all part of the act, intended to elicit sympathy and extra cash from onlookers. (Despite his contorted facial expressions, the boy is not seriously or permanently injured by the process.) It is difficult to make any definitive statement about Sharia/Islamic law since customs and enforcement can vary from region to region. However, although the cutting off of hands may sometimes be the prescribed maximum penalty for cases of theft under the strictest interpretations of Sharia, Islamic law resources consistently note that such punishments shall not be applied to children who have not yet reached puberty (defined as the age of 15 for boys), nor for the theft of small-value items or food by the hungry. The maximum sentence for any violation of law is not applied in every case. In robbery and theft cases, for example, the maximum penalty of hand-cutting applies after considering many factors, such as the offender's track record and whether the theft was made for profit. In some cases, such as stealing food due to severe hunger or to prevent death, there may not be a penalty. A person's hand is not amputated when he steals less than the equivalent of 4.374 grams of gold or something that is deemed useless. The penalty for theft (when the above conditions are met) is that the offender's right arm is amputated. The photographs do not depict any form of amputation, and it is the child's left arm that goes under the wheels. Moreover, there are no police, judges, religious authorities, or other officials evident in any of the pictures, just a huckster with a hand-held microphone who drums up business and describes the action for the onlookers visible in the background of the first photo. (Also note the blanket placed under the boy's arm: something that is useful for a staged stunt but is unlikely to be provided or allowed by those intent on severely punishing a lawbreaker.) The versions of these photographs circulated via email generally leave out the last pictures of the original series, which show the same boy after the conclusion of the stunt.

False

The above-displayed photographs have been circulating on the Internet since at least 2004, usually in e-mail forwards that set them in one of several Arab/Muslim areas (e.g., Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Palestinian territories) and claim that the boy pictured is being punished under a harsh Sharia law system that imposes a penalty grossly out of proportion to the nature of the crime (i.e., having his arm crushed under a vehicle because he stole a loaf of bread).These pictures originated with the Iranian news site PeykeIran, who (along with persons who have witnessed similar scenes in other countries) confirmed that what the photographs actually depict is performers hustling money from onlookers by staging a common street act, one in which a subject seemingly allows himself to be run over by a heavy vehicle and then emerges unscathed. This a common act, variations of which are performed by many magicians and accomplished through a variety of means, with no lasting harm done. That the subject is a small boy who grimaces his way through the stunt is all part of the act, intended to elicit sympathy and extra cash from onlookers. (Despite his contorted facial expressions, the boy is not seriously or permanently injured by the process.)It's difficult to make any definitive statement about Sharia/Islamic law since customs and enforcement can vary from region to region, but although the cutting off hands may sometimes be the prescribed maximum penalty for cases of theft under the strictest interpretations of Sharia, Islamic law resources consistently note that such punishments shall not be applied to children who have not yet reached puberty (which is defined as the age of 15 for boys), nor for the theft of small-value items or food by the hungry:

FMD_train_1831

There is no proof that a decrease in port activity is caused by the lenient laws in California.

11/02/2021

In late October 2021, a misleading copypasta meme spread on Facebook that attributed port bottlenecks and shipping delays to "California's liberal trucking laws." The meme circulated on various platforms including Facebook, LinkedIn, and Twitter. Here is a version of the meme that was posted to Facebook: The meme above reads, in part: So ships are piling up at Long Beach waiting to get unloaded. The port is jammed full of containers with no place to stack more. The liberal media is blaming it on the trucking industry while the nation's store shelves are becoming bare ... Well there's more to the story. Could Gavin Newsom and California's liberal trucking laws be the blame ? ? The NEWS says the California port situation is caused by a driver shortage. Not so fast: It is in part caused by a California Truck Ban which says all trucks must be 2011 or newer and a law called AB 5 which prohibits Owner Operators. The two state laws mentioned are AB5, a 2019 law intended to prevent employers from wrongly classifying workers as contractors, and something called "California Truck Ban." The meme also mentions a September 2020 executive order by California Gov. Gavin Newsom that seeks to phase out fuel-burning vehicle engines by 2035 in an effort to combat global warming. AB5 executive order The meme is referencing congestion at the ports in San Pedro Bay in Southern California and the ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles, which collectively handle an estimated 40 percent of the nation's imports. The back-up is resulting in something of a crisis in shipping delays right before the 2021 winter holidays. congestion 40 percent crisis The meme above attempts to lay the blame for the crisis at the feet of Newsom, along with California labor and environmental laws. But from a broad perspective, the disruption in the supply chain is a global phenomenon sparked by a confluence of major calamities in 2020 and 2021, including labor shortages, facility closures, and an increased e-commerce demand resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic, extreme weather, and a massive container ship that had become lodged in the Suez Canal for nearly a week. global phenomenon Here we will look at whether the two laws and executive order mentioned in the meme are to blame for the slowdown at the Southern California ports. There is no law called the "California Truck Ban." But from the description above that "all trucks must be 2011 or newer" it appears the post is referencing the California Truck and Bus Regulation. That regulation doesn't currently block registration of vehicles from the year 2010 and older, however. Regulation The Truck and Bus Regulation requires trucks serving the ports to have engines from 2010 or newer as of Jan. 1, 2023. If they don't, the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) would deny registrations to non-compliant vehicles. But the rule, which was adopted in 2008, has taken effect gradually over several years. It's not new, whereas the situation at the L.A. and Long Beach ports in the fall of 2021 is acute. requires In an email, Stanley Young, spokesperson for the California Air Resource Board, told Snopes, "As of 2021 only trucks with engines older than 2005 would have their registration denied." Young added that 96 percent of the trucks currently serving the major ports in California are already compliant with the regulation. "Despite what you may have heard or read, there is simply no evidence to support any claims that the current congestion at our ports has any connection to the states efforts to clean up Californias trucks," Young stated. "Since trucks at major California ports have been required to have 2007 or newer engines since 2014, and since these engines are legal until at least 2023, its impossible that any shortage of vehicles at ports is the result of CARB regulations." Assembly Bill 5 (AB 5) is a California law that went into effect in January 2020, although it has faced an onslaught of legal challenges preventing it from being implemented. The law is intended to prevent companies like Uber and Instacart from misclassifying so-called gig workers as independent contractors, rather than employees. Truckers often operate under an "owner-operator" model, in which they own their own vehicles, which they then use to transport goods as contractors for trucking companies. Both the California Trucking Association (CTA) and freight transport company Cal Cartage Express filed legal challenges against AB 5. Cal Cartage lost its case but the U.S. Supreme Court has yet to decide whether to hear a petition by CTA. Until it does, AB 5 remains in limbo for the trucking industry. Matt Schrap, CEO of the the Harbor Trucking Association (which represents drayage truck companies serving the ports of L.A. and Long Beach) said it's not a shortage of truckers that's driving the delays, and pointing the finger at AB 5 doesn't take reality into account. Instead, Schrap said that the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic lockdowns spurred an explosion of online buying that ramped up sharply during the pandemic lockdowns, and the ports of L.A. and Long Beach don't have the infrastructure to handle the sudden influx. explosion "Its like jamming ten lanes of freeway traffic into five lanes," Schrap said in a phone interview with Snopes. Currently, the bte noire for truckers and trucking companies at the ports of L.A. and Long Beach is an excess of empty shipping containers piling up at the ports, which often block truckers from picking up and dropping off cargo. "Were struggling with these empty containers," Schrap said. "That is really whats working us over." Schrap said he expects that the situation will start to improve, because with the sudden attention on the issue, officials are taking steps to help resolve it, like placing fees on cargo ship companies that leave behind empty containers, and potentially allowing empty container stacking on empty parcels of land at the ports. placing fees But these are just Bandaids on a larger problem, which is that the Southern California ports need investment in infrastructure to prevent crises like these, Schrap stressed. "Were in this problem because of the underinvestment in the infrastructure that supports the American consumers buying habits," Schrap said. "It's a temporary solution to a longstanding problem." Newsom issued an executive order in September 2020 seeking to phase out gas-burning vehicles by making all new vehicles sold as of 2035 and beyond zero-emission. But Newsom's order wouldn't make the current fuel-powered trucks illegal as of 2035. The executive order explicitly states that while California will require new vehicles sold as of 2035 and beyond to be zero-emission, older vehicles will not be illegal to own and operate, and can still be purchased and sold. executive order A news release from the governor's office announcing the order states, "The executive order will not prevent Californians from owning gasoline-powered cars or selling them on the used car market." FreightWaves. "CTAs Last Hope To Protect California Trucking From AB5: US Supreme Court," 10 August, 2021, https://www.yahoo.com/now/ctas-last-hope-protect-california-184730483.html. Goodman, Peter S., and Erin Schaff. Its Not Sustainable: What Americas Port Crisis Looks Like Up Close. The New York Times, 10 Oct. 2021. NYTimes.com, https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/11/business/supply-chain-crisis-savannah-port.html. Koetsier, John. COVID-19 Accelerated E-Commerce Growth 4 To 6 Years. Forbes, 12 June 2020, https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnkoetsier/2020/06/12/covid-19-accelerated-e-commerce-growth-4-to-6-years/. No SCOTUS Review of California Laws Impact on Trucking Industry. Reuters, 5 Oct. 2021, https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/no-scotus-review-california-laws-impact-trucking-industry-2021-10-04/. Lynch, David J. Stubborn Supply Chain Woes Are Resisting Bidens Remedies. Washington Post, 26 October 2021, https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2021/10/26/supply-chain-ports-fees-biden/. Swanson, Ana. Angling for a Merry Fishmas Despite Global Shipping Delays. The New York Times, 31 Oct. 2021, https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/31/business/economy/global-shipping-delays-shortages.html. Updated to note AB 5 remains in limbo for the trucking industry pending legal actions.

False

The two state laws mentioned are AB5, a 2019 law intended to prevent employers from wrongly classifying workers as contractors, and something called "California Truck Ban." The meme also mentions a September 2020 executive order by California Gov. Gavin Newsom that seeks to phase out fuel-burning vehicle engines by 2035 in an effort to combat global warming.The meme is referencing congestion at the ports in San Pedro Bay in Southern California and the ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles, which collectively handle an estimated 40 percent of the nation's imports. The back-up is resulting in something of a crisis in shipping delays right before the 2021 winter holidays.The meme above attempts to lay the blame for the crisis at the feet of Newsom, along with California labor and environmental laws. But from a broad perspective, the disruption in the supply chain is a global phenomenon sparked by a confluence of major calamities in 2020 and 2021, including labor shortages, facility closures, and an increased e-commerce demand resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic, extreme weather, and a massive container ship that had become lodged in the Suez Canal for nearly a week.There is no law called the "California Truck Ban." But from the description above that "all trucks must be 2011 or newer" it appears the post is referencing the California Truck and Bus Regulation. That regulation doesn't currently block registration of vehicles from the year 2010 and older, however.The Truck and Bus Regulation requires trucks serving the ports to have engines from 2010 or newer as of Jan. 1, 2023. If they don't, the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) would deny registrations to non-compliant vehicles. But the rule, which was adopted in 2008, has taken effect gradually over several years. It's not new, whereas the situation at the L.A. and Long Beach ports in the fall of 2021 is acute.Instead, Schrap said that the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic lockdowns spurred an explosion of online buying that ramped up sharply during the pandemic lockdowns, and the ports of L.A. and Long Beach don't have the infrastructure to handle the sudden influx.Schrap said he expects that the situation will start to improve, because with the sudden attention on the issue, officials are taking steps to help resolve it, like placing fees on cargo ship companies that leave behind empty containers, and potentially allowing empty container stacking on empty parcels of land at the ports.But Newsom's order wouldn't make the current fuel-powered trucks illegal as of 2035. The executive order explicitly states that while California will require new vehicles sold as of 2035 and beyond to be zero-emission, older vehicles will not be illegal to own and operate, and can still be purchased and sold.

FMD_train_1029

Donald Trump Supporters Seen Wearing Nazi-Style Armbands

03/15/2016

On 14 March 2016, a Fox News producer sent a tweet suggesting that supporters of Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump were spotted at a Florida rally wearing armbands similar to those associated with the Nazis: .@realDonaldTrump supporters sporting armbands in Florida https://t.co/MoJjuXcVOk @realDonaldTrump https://t.co/MoJjuXcVOk Nick Kalman (@NickKalmanFN) March 14, 2016. The armband rumor was one of many that invoked Nazi imagery in connection with Trump's campaign (earlier quips suggested Godwin's Law was suspended for the duration of the 2016 election cycle). Nazi armbands (cataloged extensively by the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum) remain a strong visual reminder of Nazi-era German politics, World War II, and the Holocaust, due in part to their enduring presence in pop culture representations of those events. However, it appeared that the initial tweet was sent without much verification as to whether the Trump armbands were legitimate campaign memorabilia sported unironically by dutiful supporters of the GOP presidential hopeful. Not long after the image hit Twitter, users began pointing out that the "Trump supporters" looked awfully familiar: Trump armband guy looks like the "Rubio stole my girlfriend" guy. Maybe everyone wait a min https://t.co/Hx21ucwKO7 pic.twitter.com/7f84UddJLG Alex Seitz-Wald (@aseitzwald) March 14, 2016. Political pranksters: Guys in Trump armbands appear to be the same guys in "Settle for Hillary" shirts at her rally. pic.twitter.com/8d0TVTWleJ pic.twitter.com/8d0TVTWleJ Matt Viser (@mviser) March 14, 2016. These are the same two guys I saw disrupt a Christie event and a Jeb event on separate days in Iowa https://t.co/F2GthTmuq8 Andrew Johnson (@AndrewE_Johnson) March 14, 2016. Check the tape from Jeb's caucus day event in Des Moines: These two were sitting in the stands behind him and heckled him before security removed them. Andrew Johnson (@AndrewE_Johnson) March 14, 2016. @BecketAdams @aseitzwald They were also present at Iowa events. I saw them at Christie and Jeb causing commotion as well. Andrew Johnson (@AndrewE_Johnson) March 14, 2016. The Washington Post noted that the men pictured were "bipartisan pranksters" who had also "hit" rallies for Democratic candidates: Today the Internet (briefly) went nuts over this photo of two men described as Trump supporters, taken by a Fox News producer at a Trump campaign rally. But those guys looked familiar. And not from Trump rally sightings. Very familiar. Very, very familiar. (They're bipartisan pranksters, who've reportedly also hit Clinton and Sanders rallies.) TL;DR summary: Not everything you see on the Internet is real. So, although this photograph may be real and unaltered, the assumptions commonly made about what it depicts are not. The two men seen here are not Trump partisans genuinely donning armbands as a show of support for the candidate. Rather, the pair are well-known in the media for their ongoing interest in disrupting or otherwise "making it weird" at events for candidates from both parties.

False

.@realDonaldTrump supporters sporting armbands in Florida https://t.co/MoJjuXcVOk Nick Kalman (@NickKalmanFN) March 14, 2016The armband rumor was one of many that invoked Nazi imagery in connection with Trump's campaign (earlier quips suggested Godwin's Law was suspended for the duration of the 2016 election cycle). Nazi armbands(cataloged extensively by the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum) remain a strong visual reminder of Nazi-era German politics, World War II, and the Holocaust, due in part to their enduring presence in pop culture representations of those events: Trump armband guy looks like the "Rubio stole my girlfriend" guy. Maybe everyone wait a min https://t.co/Hx21ucwKO7 pic.twitter.com/7f84UddJLG Alex Seitz-Wald (@aseitzwald) March 14, 2016Political pranksters: Guys in Trump armbands appear to be same guys in Settle for Hillary shirts at her rally. pic.twitter.com/8d0TVTWleJ Matt Viser (@mviser) March 14, 2016These are the same two guys I saw disrupt a Christie event and Jeb event on separate days in Iowa https://t.co/F2GthTmuq8 Andrew Johnson (@AndrewE_Johnson) March 14, 2016Check tape from Jeb's caucus day event in Des Moines: These two were sitting in stands behind him & heckled him before security removed them Andrew Johnson (@AndrewE_Johnson) March 14, 2016@BecketAdams @aseitzwald They were also present at Iowa events. Saw them at Christie and Jeb causing commotion as well Andrew Johnson (@AndrewE_Johnson) March 14, 2016The Washington Post noted that the men pictured were "bipartisan pranksters" who had also "hit" rallies for Democratic candidates:

FMD_train_87

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

11/15/2017

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."

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."

FMD_train_1331

Obama Is Changing the Face of America

07/18/2010

To those who have not witnessed the spectacle themselves (or have merely viewed photographs of it with no explanatory context), the sight of hundreds of Muslims praying in the middle of Manhattan's streets is likely a startling image. Although the pictures are real, they depict a phenomenon that has been taking place regularly for many years and long antedates the presidency of Barack Obama. Example: [Collected via e-mail, July 2010] Not only London, Paris and Barcelona FRIGHTENING SITUATION - OBAMA IS CHANGING THE FACE OF THE USA PLEASE SEND THIS TO EVERYONE YOU KNOW ON EVERY WEB SITE YOU ALSO CHAT IN. THIS IS NOT A JOKE - IT IS HAPPENING!!! This is an accurate picture of every Friday afternoon in several locations throughout NYC where there are mosques with a largenumber of Muslims that cannot fit into the mosque - They fill the surrounding streets, facing east for a couple of hours betweenabout 2 & 4 p.m. - Besides this one at 42nd St & Madison Ave, there is another, even larger group, at 94th St & 3rd Ave, etc., etc. - Also, I presume, you are aware of the dispute over building another "high rise" Mosque a few blocks from "ground zero" - With regard to that one, the "Imam" refuses to disclose where the $110 million dollars to build it is coming from and there is a lawsuit filed to force disclosure of that information - November can't come soon enough This is in New York City on Madison Avenue, not in France or the Middle East or Yemen or Kenya. Is there a message here???? Yes, there is, and they are claiming America for Allah. If we don't wake up soon, we are going to "politically correct" ourselves right out of our own country! A Christian Nation cannot put up a Christmas scene of the baby Jesus in a public place, but the Muslims can stop normal traffic every Friday afternoon by worshiping in the streets.... Something is happening in America that is reminiscent of what is happening in Europe. This is Political Correctness gone crazy... "For evil to flourish, all that is needed is for good people to do nothing." Edmund Burke These photos originated with New York City's annual American Muslim Day Parade, an event first held in 1985 (long before Barack Obama entered the world of politics) and every year since. As the parade's organizers note of its history: Muslim Day Parade New York City is the capital of the world and center of center of economic, business, social and cultural activities. When it comes to social and cultural activities, it houses many ethnic groups from around the world such as Irish, Italian, Latin, Afro-American, Catholic, Jewish and Muslim. Up until 1985, all these groups were celebrating their ethic and cultural heritage in one form or the other, which included street activities, festivals and parades, with the exception of the Muslims.So, in 1984, a few Muslim brothers got together, thought that when there are so many cultural shows and parades are being held in the City then Muslims should also demonstrate their different cultural beauties along with our Islamic values. Muslim representation in the City and State was zero. So they planned about having a United American Muslim Day Parade in New York City which will provide a platform to the Muslim community in this Tri-State area to get together and join the main stream political arena of this country as we have adopted it as our homeland. We are here for good; our children have to carry on our Islamic Values in the future when we will be gone. Late Zakaullah Pirzada, late Imam Qasim Bakiruddin, late Dr. Abdul Quddus, Br. Mohammad A Munim, Dr. Shafi Bezar, Dr. Rashid Jafar and many others were the founding members who organized and incorporated the Muslim Foundation of America, Inc. in 1984, which is a tax-exempt, not-for-profit organization. MFA Inc. organized its first Muslim Day Parade in 1985 and since then we have been dutifully holding this parade every year on the last Sunday of September. Our parade always has an Islamic theme and a Muslim Grand Marshal. It represents many Muslim nationalities and their cultures. At the end of the parade, we have a bazaar where vendors are selling foods, clothing, books and etc. from different countries. Also included are programs for the kids. The photographs displayed above were taken at the 2009 Muslim Day Parade: As noted above, the event depicted in the four photographs is an annual one, not a weekly one, and the participating group obtains the required parade permits from New York City authorities.

NEI

These photos originated with New York City's annual American Muslim Day Parade, an event first held in 1985 (long before Barack Obama entered the world of politics) and every year since. As the parade's organizers note of its history:

FMD_train_969

Alabama Mom's Obamacare Horror Story

01/02/2014

Claim: Alabama mom's Obamacare horror story gives America a glimpse of government run healthcare. CORRECTLY ATTRIBUTED Example: [Collected on the Internet, December 2013] My family's journey with securing our new insurance under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) started on October 1, 2013. I have decided to write this letter to let the American people know what it has been like for us. We are a family of four, with two little boys' ages seven years old and three years old. My husband and I have had full time jobs for 6 years and 13 years respectively. We have been with the same two companies for those years. We are a middle class family; we own our three bedroom two bath house, we own two cars, and previously provided our own insurance for the four of us. We have coverage through Individual Blue from Blue Cross Blue Shield of Alabama until 12/31/13. Our premiums have been $380.00 a month, which also included dental coverage for all four of us. On October, 1, 2013 we received our letters like other Alabamians about our new premiums and plans for 2014 from Blue Cross Blue Shield (BCBS) of Alabama. When I opened our letter to say I had sticker shock was an understatement. Our premiums for the Blue Saver Silver would now be $753.26. This included the ACA tax but did not include the additional $75.00 we would need to pay in order to keep dental for me and my husband. So we would need to pay total $828.26 to keep health and dental insurance for the four of us. This payment is roughly $64.00 less than what we pay for our mortgage each month. I was outraged that anyone thought we could afford this. Sure we have some savings, but with that price tag we would whittle it down to almost nothing very quickly. I consider savings as a rainy day fund, a start to saving for the kids college, our retirement, etc. I never dreamed in a million years we would need to use it to pay our insurance premiums each month how in the world could this help the economy too? [Rest of article here.] here Origins: The item referenced above, an open detailing one Alabama woman's extreme difficulty and frustration in obtaining ACA-compliant health insurance coverage for her family (including her 7-year-old son with ADHD) was posted under the name of Karri Kinder on 23 December 2013 as the sole entry in a blog and was republished (without additional comment) by the Independent Journal Review on 31 December 2013. blog republished Certainly her experience is not unique in kind, as many residents of Alabama covered by Blue Cross and Blue Shield (BCBS) of Alabama (an insurer who has an 88% share of the state's health insurance market) found out at the end of 2013 that they would be paying much higher premiums for ACA-compliant coverage through BCBS: Doug Hoffman, who works statewide to help people sign up for benefits through the Affordable Care Act, just received a Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Alabama notice in the mail to find health insurance rates for his family have doubled. And he's mad at Blue Cross. "I just got my benefits renewal from Blue Cross for next year and they doubled my rate!" he wrote AL.com in an email. "I was paying $675 for a family premium (2 adults, one 22 yo dependent) with a $1,500 deducible. The new rate for a comparable plan is $1,360 with a $3,000 deductible. Basically they have doubled my costs." "It appears as though Blue Cross is taking advantage of the ACA by hiking rates big time," said Hoffman, who is based in Birmingham with Enroll Alabama. Others, who have received the notices from the state's dominant health insurer are mad as well at Obamacare. "Obama thinks that he is making insurance affordable," wrote one reader to the Mobile Press Register Sound Off feature. "I just got a letter from my Blue Cross Blue Shield that if I want to keep their insurance it's going to cost me $300 more a month. I already pay $300 a month now and they're wanting right at $600 a month for this Affordable Care Act." Blue Cross posted an explanation for the rate hikes to its Facebook page, maintaining that several reasons are behind the increased premiums: more taxes and fees, a requirement to rate family members individually, and the elimination of health underwriting and waiting periods for preexisting conditions: explanation The new law requires all health insurance companies in the individual and small group markets to use a consistent rating method called "member level rating." For the individual market, this means each person on an insurance policy will now be rated based on age, whether he or she uses tobacco, and the county in which the policy holder lives. In the past Blue Cross was able to offer one family premium, no matter the size. For family plans, most family members will now be rated individually. Once each person has been rated, the amounts are added together to get a family's premium cost. For children age 20 and younger, the oldest three children will be individually rated and included in the family premium amount. As a result, larger families may experience higher premiums. As Mike Oliver noted in an article for AL.com, the elimination of health underwriting may have a substantial effect on health insurance premiums in that state: article "Alabama has allowed medical underwriting you're going to be quoted a high premium if you have something wrong with you," said Michael Morrisey, director of the University of Alabama at Birmingham Lister Hill Center for Health Policy. "The Affordable Care Act abolishes medical underwriting." This means that those with expensive health problems will likely now jump in and buy coverage because it will be less expensive for them or if they already have coverage their rates will go down. But that also means rates will go up for everyone else as the insurer spreads that new cost around. "The thing that happens when you eliminate underwriting is that you lump dissimilar people together," Morrisey said. "When you combine groups, one group is better off and the other group is worse off" in terms of premium prices. As a policy, the elimination of medical underwriting and preexisting condition clauses helps broaden access to health care coverage and that was the aim of its inclusion in the Affordable Care Act. Reformers say it eliminates insurers from "cherry-picking" and reduces uncompensated care. Karri Kinder subsequently posted followups to her original blog entry about her insurance issue, the update of 4 January 2014 stating that: Karri Kinder blog entry I do have some good news. Because I decided to write my letter and speak out, people stepped up and helped us. We were contacted on January 1, 2014 by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. I was told by the woman I spoke with that she had read my letter and wanted to get her team involved and see what they could do to help us. I recounted to her what was happening and that I had been advised to go ahead and sign me and my husband up for a plan on healthcare.gov. We went with a lower cost plan because it was going to just be the two of us. We had no idea what it was going to cost for the children once we got some answers. So we went with BCBS Blue Value Saver plan. The cost of the plan is $459.19. We qualified for $255.00 in subsidies so the final cost of the plan to us is $204.19 each month. I told the lady that I would cancel that plan if I needed to. What we wanted was to have all of us on one plan like we always have been. She said, "If the kids qualify for All Kids then I am pretty sure they have to go that route or you will have to buy them a plan at the normal rate." So again we were told more than likely we will have to go through All Kids. She took the rest of our information down and said she was getting her team to work on it and would either call us back or All Kids would contact us. Last updated: 4 January 2014 Oliver, Mike. "Blue Cross in Alabama: We Didn't 'Cancel' Health Policies." AL.com. 2 December 2013. Walsh, Alex. "Obamacare, Big Blue, and You." AL.com. 31 December 2013.

True

[Rest of article here.]Origins: The item referenced above, an open detailing one Alabama woman's extreme difficulty and frustration in obtaining ACA-compliant health insurance coverage for her family (including her 7-year-old son with ADHD) was posted under the name of Karri Kinder on 23 December 2013 as the sole entry in a blog and was republished (without additional comment) by the Independent Journal Review on 31 December 2013.Blue Cross posted an explanation for the rate hikes to its Facebook page, maintaining that several reasons are behind the increased premiums: more taxes and fees, a requirement to rate family members individually, and the elimination of health underwriting and waiting periods for preexisting conditions:As Mike Oliver noted in an article for AL.com, the elimination of health underwriting may have a substantial effect on health insurance premiums in that state:Karri Kinder subsequently posted followups to her original blog entry about her insurance issue, the update of 4 January 2014 stating that:

FMD_train_1775

Pink and White M&Ms and Breast Cancer Research

11/16/2003

Claim: Part of the proceeds from bags of pink and white M&Ms goes to fund breast cancer research. . Examples: [Collected on the Internet, 2004] M & M's With A Purpose Send this to everyone you know and get the word out there. There are many women out there who have Breast Cancer. Let's do all we can to support the fight to end this disease. The makers of M&M's candies have teamed up with the Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation to raise funds through the sale of their new pink & white M&M's candies. Special bags of M&M's will be on sale in September, October and November, 2004. (The bags are clearly marked). For each 8-ounce bag of the special candies sold, the makers of M&M's (Masterfoods) will donate 50 cents to the foundation. If you pass this e-mail around you will get no money, just the satisfaction of trying to save a life. Please, pass this to every female (and every male) you know! The next time you want a treat, please pick up a bag now sold in stores nationwide. You will be donating to a great cause and satisfying your sweet tooth. Please pass on to all your family and friends for who knows the life you save one day may be your own, or that of a family member or friend. Check it out: https://www.m-ms.com/us/news/promotions/komen/index.jsp [Collected on the Internet, 2003] The makers of M&M candies has teamed up with the Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation to raise funds through the sale of their new "pink & white" M&M candies. For each 8-ounce bag of the special candies sold, the makers of M&M (Masterfoods) will donate 50 cents to the foundation. The next time you want a treat, please pick up a bag (now sold in stores nationwide) you will be donating to a great cause and satisfying your sweet tooth. Please pass on to all your family and friends. Thank you. Origins: Recent years have brought an awareness of how widespread is breast cancer, a disease which the American Cancer Society estimates will be diagnosed in 211,300 new cases and cause 40,000 deaths in 2003 alone, making this an illness that is everyone's business. We're happy to report this is one of the rare e-mail exhortations that is truthful. Since 2003, Masterfoods (the parent company of Mars, Inc., the producer of M&M's brand candies) has donated 50 cents for every bag of Pink and White M&M's sold to the Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation, a charitable organization that funds cancer research, education, and screening. The foundation is very good at what is does and has raised $450 million in the past 21 years, $139 million in 2002 alone. Susan G. Komen Every year the Masterfoods corporation has promised a minimum donation of $250,000 to the Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation from the Pink and White M&M's promotion no matter how sales turn out. The 2003 and 2004 promotions were each capped at a maximum donation of $650,000, so it wasn't strictly true that every time someone bought a bag of the pink and white confections, 50 cents went to the Foundation those campaigns were effectively over once 1.3 million bags of the pink and white candies were vended, even if some of those bags remained on store shelves afterwards. The 2005 campaign made no mention of a maximum donation cap, and the Foundation has reported that Masterfoods' 2005 donation totaled an impressive $970,895. 2005 The 2006 Pink and White M&Ms campaign is scheduled to run from August 15 through October 31, 2006, with Masterfoods promising to donate 35 cents for each 14-ounce package and 50 cents for each 21.3-ounce package of the candy sold during that period. Again, no mention has been 2006 made of a maximum donation cap for this year. This sort of promotion is known as cause-related marketing: the manufacturer chooses a worthy cause, then ties a particular product to a donation scheme dependent upon sales. Through this promotion, the manufacturer gains far greater publicity for its act of generosity than if it had merely cut a check and handed it over to a charity, the product picks up positive associations in the minds of consumers that last well beyond the campaign, shoppers are moved to select the designated product over that of a competitor's or to purchase more than they otherwise would have, and consumer guilt over "sinful" products (like candy) is counterbalanced by the impression such purchases contribute to the greater good. Cause-related marketing is experiencing a sharp upswing, so expect to see more tie-ins between products and charities on your next few shopping expeditions. Barbara "cause and market effect" Mikkelson Last updated: 21 September 2006 Sources: Coomes, Mark. "Tickled Pink to Help." The [Albany] Times Union. 18 October 2003 (p. D1). Hoffman, Barbara. "M&Ms Sweet Charity." The New York Post. 16 September 2003 (p. 57).

True

We're happy to report this is one of the rare e-mail exhortations that is truthful. Since 2003, Masterfoods (the parent company of Mars, Inc., the producer of M&M's brand candies) has donated 50 cents for every bag of Pink and White M&M's sold to the Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation, a charitable organization that funds cancer research, education, and screening. The foundation is very good at what is does and has raised $450 million in the past 21 years, $139 million in 2002 alone.Every year the Masterfoods corporation has promised a minimum donation of $250,000 to the Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation from the Pink and White M&M's promotion no matter how sales turn out. The 2003 and 2004 promotions were each capped at a maximum donation of $650,000, so it wasn't strictly true that every time someone bought a bag of the pink and white confections, 50 cents went to the Foundation those campaigns were effectively over once 1.3 million bags of the pink and white candies were vended, even if some of those bags remained on store shelves afterwards. The 2005 campaign made no mention of a maximum donation cap, and the Foundation has reported that Masterfoods' 2005 donation totaled an impressive $970,895. The 2006 Pink and White M&Ms campaign is scheduled to run from August 15 through October 31, 2006, with Masterfoods promising to donate 35 cents for each 14-ounce package and 50 cents for each 21.3-ounce package of the candy sold during that period. Again, no mention has been

FMD_train_820

Was a Man Named Carl Twinly Arrested For Pretending to be a Cow?

04/12/2022

In April 2022, an image of a person in a cow costume was circulated on social media along with a decidedly NSFW claim about its origins. The person in the photograph was named Carl Twinly, the meme claimed, and he had been arrested after tricking people into fondling him while he pretended to be a cow in a milking contest: This is not a genuine news story. This image is a screenshot of a fictional story that was published on the satire site Ringsssss.com in December 2021. This satire story started: Ringsssss.com in December 2021 Carl Twinly of Beaumont Texas has been arrested on charges of public indecency and masturbation by deception. Mr. Twinly posed as a dairy cow during the local 4-H milking competition. Carl was milked by a total of 13 contestants before his ruse was uncovered. While Ringsssss states in a disclaimer that it is a "fabricated satirical newspaper and comedy website," many people encountered this story after it was removed from its original context and started spreading online detached from any explicit indication that it was a satire story. Ringsssss states in a disclaimer The story about "Carl Twinly" is a work of fiction. However, the mugshot shown above is real. It was taken in 2008 and shows a woman who was arrested in Middleton, Ohio. According to Fox 19, she had been hired to dress up as a cow to promote a local haunted trail. She was arrested on suspicion of disorderly conduct after she allegedly got drunk, chased some children, and interrupted traffic. Fox 19 reported: "A Middletown woman is behind bars, charged with disorderly conduct after she was arrested while wearing a cow suit ... Police say Michelle Allen was getting in the way of traffic and chasing children while wearing her cow suit. She's also accused of urinating on a neighbor's front porch." Fox 19 reported Man Pretends To Be A Cow In Milking Competition, Gets Jacked-Off For Hours. Ringsssss, 24 Dec. 2021, https://ringsssss.com/human-interest/man-pretends-to-be-a-cow/. Police: Woman in Cow Suit Had Been Arrested Many Times. Https://Www.Fox19.Com, https://www.fox19.com/story/9097572/police-woman-in-cow-suit-had-been-arrested-many-times. Accessed 12 Apr. 2022.

False

This image is a screenshot of a fictional story that was published on the satire site Ringsssss.com in December 2021. This satire story started:While Ringsssss states in a disclaimer that it is a "fabricated satirical newspaper and comedy website," many people encountered this story after it was removed from its original context and started spreading online detached from any explicit indication that it was a satire story. Fox 19 reported: "A Middletown woman is behind bars, charged with disorderly conduct after she was arrested while wearing a cow suit ... Police say Michelle Allen was getting in the way of traffic and chasing children while wearing her cow suit. She's also accused of urinating on a neighbor's front porch."

FMD_train_1847

Alex Singleton on Barack Obama

04/04/2011

Claim: Opinion piece by London Daily Telegraph editor criticizes President Obama's handling of foreign policy. INCORRECTLY ATTRIBUTED Example: [Collected via e-mail, April 2011] THIS FROM THE " LONDON DAILY TELEGRAPH" EDITOR This is a very sobering article. Our handling of relationships with the Britons over the oil spill won't help either. From The London Daily Telegraph Editor On Foreign Relations Quote: "Let me be clear: I'm not normally in favor of boycotts, and I love the American people. I holiday in their country regularly, and hate the tedious snobby sneers against the United States . But the American people chose to elect an idiot who seems hell bent on insulting their allies, and something must be done to stop Obama's reckless foreign policy, before he does the dirty on his allies on every issue." One of the most poorly kept secrets in Washington is President Obama's animosity toward Great Britain, presumably because of what he regards as its sins while ruling Kenya (1895-1963). One of Barack Hussein Obama's first acts as president was to return to Britain a bust of Winston Churchill that had graced the Oval Office since 9/11. He followed this up by denying Prime Minister Gordon Brown, on his first state visit, the usual joint press conference with flags. The president was "too tired" to grant the leader of America's closest ally a proper welcome, his aides told British journalists. Mr. Obama followed this up with cheesy gifts for Mr. Brown and the Queen. Columnist Ian Martin described his behavior as "rudeness personified." There was more rudeness in store for Mr. Brown at the opening session of the United Nations in September. "The prime minister was forced to dash through the kitchens of the UN in New York to secure five minutes of face time with President Obama after five requests for a sit down meeting were rejected by the White House," said London Telegraph columnist David Hughes. Mr. Obama's "churlishness is unforgivable," Mr. Hughes said. The administration went beyond snubs and slights last week when Secretary of State Hillary Clinton endorsed the demand of Argentine President Cristina Kirchner, a Hugo Chavez ally, for mediation of Argentina 's specious claim to the Falkland Islands, a British dependency since 1833. The people who live in the Falklands, who speak English, want nothing to do with Argentina . When, in 1982, an earlier Argentine dictatorship tried to seize the Falklands by force, the British with strong support from President Ronald Reagan expelled them. "It is truly shocking that Barack Obama has decided to disregard our shared history," wrote Telegraph columnist Toby Young. "Does Britain 's friendship really mean so little to him?" One could ask, does the friendship of anyone in the entire world mean anything to him? "I recently asked several senior administration officials, separately, to name a foreign leader with whom Barack Obama has forged a strong personal relationship during his first year in office," wrote Jackson Diehl, deputy editorial page editor of the Washington Post, on Monday. " A lot of hemming and hawing ensued." One official named French President Nicolas Sarkozy, but his contempt for Mr. Obama is an open secret. Another named German Chancellor Angela Merkel. But, said Mr. Diehl, "Merkel too has been conspicuously cool toward Obama." Mr. Obama certainly doesn't care about the Poles and Czechs, whom he has betrayed on missile defense. Honduras and Israel also can attest that he's been an unreliable ally and an unfaithful friend. Ironically, our relations with both Israel and the Palestinian Authority have never been worse. Russia has offered nothing in exchange for Mr. Obama's abandonment of missile defense. Russia and China won't support serious sanctions on Iran. Syria's support for terrorism has not diminished despite efforts to normalize diplomatic relations. The reclusive military dictatorship that runs Burma has responded to our efforts at "engagement" by deepening its ties to North Korea . And the Chinese make little effort to disguise their contempt for him. For the first time in a long time, the President of the United States is actually distrusted by its allies and not in the least feared by itsadversaries. Nor is Mr. Obama now respected by the majority of Americans. Understandably focused on the dismal economy and Mr. Obama's relentless efforts to nationalize and socialize health care, Americans apparentlyhave yet to notice his dismal performance and lack of respect in the world community. They soon will. London Daily Telegraph editor Alex Singleton Origins: This item about Barack Obama is actually a combination of two opinion pieces, neither of them written by the London Daily Telegraph's political editor, Alex Singleton, or published in that newspaper. Both segments were penned by Jack Kelly, a former Marine and Green Beret who was a deputy assistant secretary of the Air Force in the Reagan administration and is now a columnist for the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and the Toledo Blade. The first section (up through the quote "Does Britain'sfriendship really mean so little to him?") comes from Kelly's 15 March 2010 column ("Administration animosity against allies not limited to Israel") and the second portion (from the quote "I recently asked several senior administration officials" onwards) was taken from Kelly's 14 March 2010 column ("Feckless foreign follies"). animosity Feckless Somewhere along the way, in writing about Kelly's columns, someone included an excerpt from an 11 March 2010 opinion piece ("Barack Obama has made me want to boycott America") by London Daily Telegraph contributing editor Alex Singleton. This excerpt (quoted below) was subsequently placed at the head of the piece and resulted in all of Kelly's writing being credited to Alex Singleton rather than just the single opening quotation: included boycott Let me be clear: I'm not normally in favour of boycotts, and I love the American people. I holiday in their country regularly, and hate the tedious snobby sneers against the United States. But the American people chose to elect an idiot who seems bent on insulting their allies, and something must be done to stop Obama's reckless foreign policy, before he does the dirty on his allies on every issue. Last updated: 4 April 2011 Kelly Jack. "Feckless Foreign Follies." Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. 14 March 2010 (p. A21). Singleton, Alex. "Barack Obama Has Made Me Want to Boycott America." London Daily Telegraph. 11 March 2010.

False

Origins: This item about Barack Obama is actually a combination of two opinion pieces, neither of them written by the London Daily Telegraph's political editor, Alex Singleton, or published in that newspaper. Both segments were penned by Jack Kelly, a former Marine and Green Beret who was a deputy assistant secretary of the Air Force in the Reagan administration and is now a columnist for the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and the Toledo Blade. The first section (up through the quote "Does Britain'sfriendship really mean so little to him?") comes from Kelly's 15 March 2010 column ("Administration animosity against allies not limited to Israel") and the second portion (from the quote "I recently asked several senior administration officials" onwards) was taken from Kelly's 14 March 2010 column ("Feckless foreign follies").Somewhere along the way, in writing about Kelly's columns, someone included an excerpt from an 11 March 2010 opinion piece ("Barack Obama has made me want to boycott America") by London Daily Telegraph contributing editor Alex Singleton. This excerpt (quoted below) was subsequently placed at the head of the piece and resulted in all of Kelly's writing being credited to Alex Singleton rather than just the single opening quotation:

FMD_train_1065

New Jersey has the highest property taxes in the nation and not by a little. They are the highest property taxes in the nation, more than double the national average.

05/10/2012

New Jersey often ranks high on lists in categories ranging from beach quality to education.Unfortunately, according to Assembly Majority Leader Lou Greenwald, the state tops another list one with a particularly dubious ranking.New Jersey has the highest property taxes in the nation and not by a little, Greenwald (D-Camden) said in an April 1 interview with Michael Aron on NJTVs On The Record. They are the highest property taxes in the nation, more than double the national average.New Jersey having high property taxes isnt new. But are they more than double the national average? Greenwalds statement is largely on the money, PolitiFact New Jersey found.Lets first explain the source of Greenwalds data and how tax rankings are reviewed.Greenwald got his data from a 2009 list compiled by the business-backed Tax Foundation in Washington, DC. The 2009 data shows that New Jersey ranked number one in three key tax metrics: median property taxes paid on homes; taxes as a percentage of home value; and taxes as a percentage of income.Nick Kasprak, a Tax Foundation analyst and programmer, said taxes as a percentage of home value is the most relevant statistic of the three because it can apply to most people, ranging from those who own condominiums to those in McMansions.Its a good way of comparing apples to apples across the states, Kasprak said of the metric, adding that the Tax Foundations numbers are estimates and come from the U.S. Census Bureaus American Community Survey.So how long has New Jersey worn the highest property taxes banner?That depends on the metric. We found that New Jersey property taxes have topped the rest of the nations at least back to 2004 when looking at median property taxes paid on homes and taxes paid as a percentage of income.When looking at all three Tax Foundation metrics for years 2004 through 2009, New Jerseys median property taxes paid on homes was more than triple the national average; more than double the national average for taxes paid as a percentage of income; and at least one and-a-half times the national average for taxes paid as a percentage of home value.Brigid Callahan Harrison, a professor of political science and law at Montclair State University, said comparing states by property taxes alone is disingenuous because states fund certain needs differently. For example, some states use property taxes to fund education, others do not.In reality, we need to look in total at the entire tax burden, Harrison said. The implication is that New Jerseyans pay the highest taxes in the country, right? Thats what people think. What Im saying is that New Jersey pays a very high tax burden. What we need to do is look at the total tax burden: gas tax, sales tax, security, user fees, certainly property taxes and sales taxes as well.Jon Bramnick, leader of the Assembly Republicans, agreed property taxes are high but credited a slowing of their growth to Gov. Chris Christies implementation of a 2-percent property tax cap, changing arbitration procedures for police and firefighters, and other measures.We obviously have to have mergers, shared services and consolidations across New Jersey, Bramnick said, adding that a bipartisan effort is key. These are the factors that you have to have to continue down that road. If you do, you will see a slowing of property taxes.Our rulingGreenwald said in a TV interview that New Jersey has the highest property taxes in the nation, more than double the national average. He was referring to 2009 statistics from the Tax Foundation. Statistics from 2004 through 2008 show the state leads the nation in two of three key metrics, according to the Tax Foundation. New Jersey led in all three metrics in 2009. Greenwalds overall point is clear: when it comes to property taxes, New Jersey is king. We rate this statement True. To comment on this story, go toNJ.com.

True

To comment on this story, go toNJ.com.

FMD_train_1454

Says Donald Trumps proposed tax treatment of hedge fund managers makes the current loophole even worse.

07/01/2016

Hillary Clinton is attacking DonaldTrumps tax plan, saying it actually benefits the hedge fund managers Trump had promised to cut down to size. Now, before releasing his plan, Trump said, Hedge fund guys are getting away with murder. And he added, Theyll pay more, Clinton said. Then his plan came out. And it actually makes the current loophole even worse. It gives hedge-fund managers a special tax rate thats lower than what many middle-class families pay, Clinton continuedin the June 21, 2016, speech. And I did have to look twice because I didnt believe it. Under Donald Trumps plan, these Wall Street millionaires will pay a lower tax rate than many working people. Trumps plan does roll back one high-profile advantage for hedge fund partners. Is Clinton right to say they still come out ahead? Trump took an aggressive position on tax rates for hedge fund managers during his fight for the Republican nomination. In an interview with CBS in August, Trumpcalledthem paper pushers who did not build this country. In a Republicandebatein September, Trump said his tax plan would make them pay more. The hedge fund guys wont like me as much as they like me right now. I know them all, but theyll pay more, Trump said. After the Republican debate, Trump released the outline of histax plan. Trumps plan eliminates the so-called carried interest tax loophole, which allows general partners in private investment firms (including most hedge fund managers) to treat some of their income as income from investments, or capital gains, subject to a top tax rate of 23.8 percent, instead of the much higher tax rate for ordinary income (43.4 percent). Under Trumps plan, income from carried interest would no longer be treated as capital gains. Tax rates for ordinary income tops out at 25 percent under Trumps plan. This looks like a hike in line with Trumps promises. Except. Along with private equity and venture capital funds, many hedge funds are structured as partnerships. Under Trumps plan, income through a business partnership is taxed at a rate of no more than 15 percent, significantly less than the 23.8 percent they previously paid, according to ananalysisof Trumps tax plan from the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center. Eliminating the carried interest loophole actually helps these hedge fund managers under Trumps plan. If carried interest was still treated as capital gains, it could be taxed at the top rate for capital gains in the plan (20 percent), higher than the fixed 15 percent tax for partnership income. Trumps plan presents the discounted rate for partnership income as a way to help the small businesses that are the true engine of our economy. It also helps large businesses and wealthy financiers who structure their businesses as partnerships, including the hedge funds managers he attacked in his campaign. Clinton also said that rates for hedge fund managers would be lower than for middle-class families under Trumps plan. Defining the middle class can be tricky, but in thePew Research Centers rangeof $42,000 to $125,000 for a household of three in 2014, a substantial number of middle-class households would make enough to qualify for a marginal tax rate of more than 15 percent if Trumps plan were enacted. Not all of these people would pay more than 15 percent overall, according to Bob Williams at the Tax Policy Center, and it would be difficult to say how many middle-income people would pay more than hedge fund managers once the many different variables involved played out. But some would, Williams wrote in an email. In May,Politicoreportedthat the Trump campaign had engaged two economists to craft a new tax plan. The Trump campaign has not confirmed whether they plan to re-write their tax plan, and did not respond toPoliticosrequest for comment. The tax plan announced in September remains on Trump's website, and is the basis of this article. The Trump campaign did not respond to our request for comment on this article. Our ruling Clinton said Trumps proposed tax rate for hedge fund managers makes the current loophole even worse. She has a point. By setting a lower tax rate for income from business partnerships, Trumps tax plan would benefit many hedge fund managers. Though the plan would cut tax rates for middle-class families as well, the cuts that would apply to most hedge fund managers are steeper and their resulting tax rate is lower. Trump promised that his tax plan would roll back advantages for hedge fund managers. Instead, in most cases, it would improve their position. We rate the statement True.

True

Hillary Clinton is attacking DonaldTrumps tax plan, saying it actually benefits the hedge fund managers Trump had promised to cut down to size.It gives hedge-fund managers a special tax rate thats lower than what many middle-class families pay, Clinton continuedin the June 21, 2016, speech. And I did have to look twice because I didnt believe it. Under Donald Trumps plan, these Wall Street millionaires will pay a lower tax rate than many working people.Trump took an aggressive position on tax rates for hedge fund managers during his fight for the Republican nomination. In an interview with CBS in August, Trumpcalledthem paper pushers who did not build this country. In a Republicandebatein September, Trump said his tax plan would make them pay more.After the Republican debate, Trump released the outline of histax plan.Along with private equity and venture capital funds, many hedge funds are structured as partnerships. Under Trumps plan, income through a business partnership is taxed at a rate of no more than 15 percent, significantly less than the 23.8 percent they previously paid, according to ananalysisof Trumps tax plan from the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center.Clinton also said that rates for hedge fund managers would be lower than for middle-class families under Trumps plan. Defining the middle class can be tricky, but in thePew Research Centers rangeof $42,000 to $125,000 for a household of three in 2014, a substantial number of middle-class households would make enough to qualify for a marginal tax rate of more than 15 percent if Trumps plan were enacted.In May,Politicoreportedthat the Trump campaign had engaged two economists to craft a new tax plan. The Trump campaign has not confirmed whether they plan to re-write their tax plan, and did not respond toPoliticosrequest for comment. The tax plan announced in September remains on Trump's website, and is the basis of this article.

FMD_train_1269

Tim Kaine, as governor, proposed tax increases on people earning as little as $17,000.

08/03/2012

Republican Senate candidate George Allen recently accused Democratic opponent Tim Kaine of being a tax hiker, even for people of modest means. During a July 21 debate in Hot Springs, Allen criticized Kaine for proposing tax increases that would affect individuals earning as little as $17,000 a year. We checked to see if Kaine, who served as governor from 2006 to 2010, indeed attempted to raise taxes on people at that income level. The Allen campaign, in a website post, supported Allen's statement by citing news articles about a proposal Kaine unveiled in December 2009 as part of his farewell biennial budget proposal for 2010-2012. Kaine called for adding a 1 percent income tax surcharge and allocating all proceeds to localities in exchange for them eliminating the car tax they impose on personal vehicles. Legislators in 1998 adopted a five-year plan to phase out the personal property tax on most cars and reimburse localities for their lost revenues. However, the program was more expensive than anticipated, and legislators eventually capped the state reimbursement at $950 million a year. The remaining share is paid by vehicle owners. Ending the car tax would mean the state would not have to provide the annual $950 million payment to localities, Kaine said in a speech to the General Assembly's money committees. Kaine wanted to use the savings to help balance the state's recession-wracked budget. News articles from the time indicated that Kaine's policy would raise the maximum state income tax rate from 5.75 percent to 6.75 percent. That maximum rate applies to all taxable income above $17,000 after deductions and exemptions are taken into account. The state charges gradually higher income tax rates up to that level. Virginia imposes a 2 percent levy on the first $3,000 of taxable income, 3 percent on the next $2,000, 5 percent on the next $12,000, and then 5.75 percent on all taxable income above $17,000. The bill advancing Kaine's proposal did not specify that the added tax would only be levied on taxable income of $17,000 or more. The added 1 percent surtax would have applied to all income levels, according to Joel Davison, a spokesman for the Virginia Department of Finance. Virginia does not require individuals with a state adjusted income below $11,950 and married couples with a state adjusted income below $23,900 to pay state income taxes, so they would not have been affected by the tax increase. Kaine's proposal was ultimately rejected by the General Assembly. It should be noted that some individuals earning $17,000 would have benefited from Kaine's plan if their savings from the elimination of the car tax exceeded their increased income tax. There are no estimates of the number of Virginians who would have fallen into this category, but we suspect it would be a small group. Here’s why: For starters, we can eliminate those who did not own cars. Now, let’s consider those who did own vehicles. A single filer with no children earning $17,000 would have a taxable income of $13,070 after taking the standard deduction and exemption. A 1 percent income tax increase for that person would amount to almost $131 a year. The car levy paid by that person would depend on where he or she lived, as each locality sets its own tax rate based on the assessed value of the vehicle. In Richmond, a person would not pay a $131 levy unless they had a car worth about $9,000. In rural Henry County, a vehicle would have to be valued at about $17,500 to incur a $131 tax. Our ruling: Allen stated that Kaine proposed a tax increase that would have affected people earning as little as $17,000 a year. Not everyone at that level would have paid more under Kaine's plan, but it is a safe bet that a large number of them would have seen their overall tax bill rise. We rate Allen's statement True.

True

Republican Senate candidate George Allen recently accused Democratic opponent Tim Kaine of being a tax hiker, even on people of modest means.During a July 21 debate in Hot Springs, Allen criticized Kaine for actually proposing tax increases that would be hitting people earning as little as $17,000 a year.We checked to see if Kaine, who was governor from 2006 to 2010, really did try to raise taxes on people at that income level.The Allen campaign, in awebsite post, backed Allens statement by citing news articles about a proposal Kaine unveiled in December 2009 as part of his farewell biennial budget proposal for 2010-2012. Kaine called for adding a 1 percent income tax surcharge and giving all proceeds to localities in return for them scrapping the car tax they levy on personal vehicles.Legislators in 1998 adopted a five-year plan to phase out the personal property tax on most cars and reimburse localities for their lost revenues. But the program was more expensive than anticipated and legislators eventually capped the state reimbursement at $950 million a year. The remaining share is paid by vehicle owners.Ending the car tax would mean the state wouldnt have to provide the annual $950 million payment to localities, Kaine said in aspeechto the General Assemblys money committees. Kaine wanted to use the savings to help balance the states recession-wracked budget.News articles from the time said Kaines policy would raise the maximum state income tax rate from 5.75 percent to 6.75 percent. That maximum rate applies to all taxable income above $17,000 after deductions and exemptions are taken into account.The state charges gradually higher income tax rates up to that level. Virginia puts a 2 percent levy on the first $3,000 of taxable income, 3 percent of the next $2,000, 5 percent on the next $12,000 and then 5.75 percent on all taxable income above $17,000.Thebilladvancing Kaines proposal did not say the added tax would only be levied on taxable income of $17,000 or more. The added 1 percent surtax would have pertained to all income levels, according to Joel Davison, a spokesman for the Virginia Department of Finance.Virginia does not require individuals with a state adjusted income below $11,950 and married couples with a state adjusted income below $23,900 to pay state income taxes. So they wouldnt have been affected by the tax increase.Kaines proposal was killed by the General Assembly.It should be noted that some people earning $17,000 would have benefitted from Kaines plan if their savings from the elimination of the car tax outstripped their increased income tax. There are no estimates of the number of Virginians who would fallen into this category, but we suspect it would be a small group. Heres why:For starters, we can eliminate those who didnt own cars.Now, lets consider those who did own vehicles. A single filer with no children earning $17,000 would have a taxable income of $13,070 after taking the standard deduction and exemption. A 1 percent income tax increase for that person would come to almost $131 a year.The car levy paid by that person would depend on where he or she lived because each locality sets it own tax rate based on the assessed value of the vehicle. In Richmond, a person wouldnt pay a $131 levy unless they had a car worth about $9,000. In rural Henry County, a vehicle would have to be valued at about $17,500 to merit a $131 tax.Our rulingAllen said that Kaine proposed a tax increase that would have affected people earning as little as $17,000 a year. Not everyone at that level would have paid more under Kaines plan, but its a safe bet that large number of them would have seen their overall tax bill rise.We rate Allens statement True.

FMD_train_528

Turtle Misshapen Due to Being Caught in Rubber Band for 19 Years?

01/03/2017

Since at least 2008, a troubling image of a turtle with a drastically deformed shell has been circulating online, with multiple websites using it to illustrate posts about the dangers of plastic pollution in the oceans. The image shows a brown-colored turtle with a shell constricted in the middle, giving her a figure-eight shape. This image captures a snapping turtle named Mae West, who currently resides at the STAR Eco Station in Los Angeles, California, where she is in good health. A representative from the station, which operates a wildlife rescue and environmental science museum, told us that Mae West was rescued nearly two decades ago after she was discovered with a plastic milk jug ring around her midsection, although it was unclear exactly how long the ring had been in place. In 2000, she was found in Louisiana with a plastic milk jug ring around the width of her shell. In addition to having an extremely narrow midsection, she was also found to be carrying several eggs at the time. The handler in Louisiana decided that she was no longer able to care for her and arranged to have Mae placed at the Eco Station. Some of the blogs posting this image in early 2017 incorrectly claimed the turtle had been caught in a rubber band from an early age, causing her to grow abnormally. Mae West was brought to her current home after being cared for by an anti-pollution non-profit called The 5 Gyres Institute, also based in Los Angeles. The image shown above was used in a 2009 Earth Day report by Oprah Winfrey discussing the effects of plastic pollution on marine life. Sadly, the type of deformity afflicting Mae West isn't unique. Another famous turtle is living with a similar human-caused deformity: Peanut, a red-eared slider turtle who was rescued and nursed to health after being discovered entrapped in a plastic six-pack ring, has often been misidentified as Mae West (and vice-versa) in photographs. Peanut was found in Missouri in 1993 and taken to a zoo, where the plastic ring was removed from his midsection. The turtle, who was for years mistakenly believed to be female, is currently under the care of the Missouri Department of Conservation. Photographs provided by the department show he does indeed resemble a peanut. Despite his deformation, Peanut has also managed to live a long and healthy life and is now believed to be a senior terrapin at 32 or 33 years old, said Dan Zarlenga, spokesman for the Missouri Department of Conservation. Had he not been found and cared for by humans, Peanut probably would not have survived for long in the wild.

True

Since at least 2008, a troubling image of a turtle with a drastically deformed shell has been circulating online, with multiple web sites employing it to illustrate posts about the dangers of plastic pollution in the oceans. The image shows a brown-colored turtle with a shell constricted in the middle, giving her a figure-eight shape:Mae West was brought to her current home after being cared for by an anti-pollution non-profit called The 5 Gyers Institute, also based in Los Angeles. The image shown above was used in a 2009 Earth Day report by Oprah Winfrey discussing the effects of plastic pollution on marine life:Sadly, the type of deformity afflicting Mae West isn't unique. Another famous turtle is living with a similar human-caused deformity: Peanut, a red-eared slider turtle who was rescued and nursed to health after being discovered entrapped in a plastic six-pack ring, has often been misidentified as Mae West (and vice-versa) in photographs.

FMD_train_1446

Mitt Romney Charged with Violating Federal ethics Law

11/05/2012

Claim: Mitt Romney is facing federal ethics charges. : Mitt Romney has been charged with ethics violations by the federal government. The United Auto Workers (UAW) and several other organizations have requested a federal investigation of Mitt Romney's financial disclosures. Example: [Collected via e-mail, November 2012] I saw this on Face Book and I am wondering if this is true? BREAKING: Romney facing federal ethics charges. YES. This is REAL. On Monday, Mitt Romney is expected to face charges for ethics violations and profiteering with regard to his involvement with the 2009 government bailout of the auto industry. Origins: On 1 November 2012, five days before the U.S. presidential election, the United Auto Workers (UAW) and several other organizations sent a letter to Don W. Fox, the General Counsel and Principal Deputy Director of the United States Office of Government Ethics, calling for an investigation of Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney's financial disclosures. The senders maintain that Mitt Romney has "undisclosed stock holdings [that] create very serious conflicts ofinterest" and that he garnered a profit of "at least $15.3 million" from the automobile industry bailout of 2009. letter In a press release about the letter, the UAW stated: press release A coalition of community, labor and good government organizations is calling on the U.S. Office of Government Ethics to investigate presidential candidate Mitt Romney for noncompliance with the Ethics in Government Act and compel him to either disclose his investments or divest them. A letter sent to Don W. Fox, general counsel of the Office of Government Ethics, states that Gov. Romney "has not even attempted to meet the requirements for a federal blind trust with respect to his substantial equity holdings. The only way for this law to be enforced in a meaningful way is for your Office to act promptly to demand that candidate Romney disclose his stock holdings, or divest them if disclosure is not feasible." The letter was sent by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, People for the American Way, Public Campaign, Public Citizen, SEIU, UAW and The Social Equity Group, and it follows up on a previous letter sent to the Office of Government Ethics on Aug. 23, 2012, that urged the office to act. "The American people have a right to know about Governor Romney's potential conflicts of interest, such as the profits his family made from the auto rescue," said UAW President Bob King. "It's time for Governor Romney to disclose or divest." The groups believe that Romneys undisclosed stock holdings create serious conflicts of interest. They point to the auto loans as a key example. The Nation recently reported that the Romney family personally profited by at least $15.3 million from the auto loans of 2009. Yet Romney's June 1, 2012, Public Financial Disclosure Report to the Office of Government Ethics did not reveal this windfall because he did not disclose the underlying holdings of his private equity and limited partnership funds. Romney profited from his family's investment in Delphi Corp. at the expense of the Delphi workers. Other unreported investments that could create conflicts of interest include controversial holdings in Sensata and Global-Tech. The statement that Mitt Romney is "facing federal ethics charges" is at this point an exaggeration, however, as no charges have been issued against him by the federal government for violating ethics laws. All that has happened is that some groups have sent a letter to the Office of Government Ethics requesting an investigation of Romney's financial disclosures, based on information of as-yet undetermined accuracy. Whether sufficient basis will be found to merit an investigation, whether any such investigation will be conducted, what that investigation might find, and whether it would result in any criminal charges being brought against Mitt Romney are all matters of mere speculation. Last updated: 5 November 2012

NEI

Origins: On 1 November 2012, five days before the U.S. presidential election, the United Auto Workers (UAW) and several other organizations sent a letter to Don W. Fox, the General Counsel and Principal Deputy Director of the United States Office of Government Ethics, calling for an investigation of Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney's financial disclosures. The senders maintain that Mitt Romney has "undisclosed stock holdings [that] create very serious conflicts ofinterest" and that he garnered a profit of "at least $15.3 million" from the automobile industry bailout of 2009.In a press release about the letter, the UAW stated:

FMD_train_1701

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

12/07/2015

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

True

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

FMD_train_352

Did a Waitress 'Run to the Manager' After Serving a Cop?

01/23/2021

On Feb. 15, 2019, a pregnant waitress in her third trimester received a generous $100 tip after serving lunch to a cop. It happened at the Lamp Post Diner in Clementon, New Jersey. A Voorhees County police officer had ordered a lunch that cost less than $9. He paid his bill and left the diner before the waitress, Courtney English, was shown the receipt by the hostess. The story ended up being reported by local and national news media. NJ.com reported that the tip "brought her to tears": local national reported As Courtney English worked the lunch crowd Friday at the Lamp Post Diner, she got to chatting with customers about the upcoming birth of her first child. English is nearly eight months pregnant and has been working at the Gloucester Township diner to save as much money as possible before her daughter arrives. What happened next brought her to tears. A police officer dining on a salad at a nearby table must have overheard the conversation, she said. When he left to pay the bill, the anonymous officer included a $100 tip on the $8.75 check, along with a simple note: "Enjoy your first. You will never forget it. This was all true. Then a viral content website seized on the story for profit. The person or people behind the website HouseDiver, which claimed to be managed from Israel, dramatized the tale of kindness into a 71-page slideshow-style article. Most of the pages contained about three sentences each. Since at least January 2021, the HouseDiver article was advertised on the Taboola advertising platform with a misleading headline: "Pregnant Waitress Charges Cop $9 For Lunch, Moments Later She Runs To The Manager." Another ad read: "[Pic] Heavily Pregnant Waitress Runs To Her Boss In Tears After Seeing What Cop Left Next To Bill." The strategy behind HouseDiver's 71-page article was known as advertising "arbitrage." The goal for the website was to make more money on the ads displayed on each of the 71 pages than it cost to run the initial ad that lured readers to the story in the first place. HouseDiver appeared to have located a number of pictures of English and her child, who was born weeks after English received the $100 tip. The viral content website used multiple photographs of her child without her permission. We contacted English, who was eager to set the record straight. We asked her if she had seen the misleading and dramatized version of the story. "I came across all of that too and was very upset," English said. She confirmed to us that she did not "run to the manager." Further, she said that the story's writers "came up with some really outlandish things" and that much of it was "over-exaggerated." We also notified her that it appeared pictures of her and her child had been used without her permission. "Definitely without my permission," she said. Honestly, I just find it inappropriate that pictures I didnt give permission to be used are all over the internet. Pictures of my minor child are being shared with false information and I just feel its an invasion of our privacy, as well as I didnt consent to it. As for the real story of the waitress, the cop, and the $100 tip, Courtney English's father, Brian, shared his thoughts in a Facebook post. It read, in part: waitress Facebook post What a wonderful person to not only leave a VERY generous tip, but a lovely message. I don't know you Mr. Police Officer, but you made my little girl cry, and made her year. Thank you. I always had the utmost respect for officers, but you went above and beyond not just an officer, but a beautiful human being. God Bless. We provided information to English regarding how she can report the advertisement to the Taboola advertising platform. We also directed her to the contact page for housediver.com, the website that hosted her child's pictures without her permission. For further reading, we have previously reported on a similar instance of a viral content website seizing on another true story about something that was hidden in a necklace. previously reported Snopes debunks a wide range of content, and online advertisements are no exception. Misleading ads often lead to obscure websites that host lengthy slideshow articles with lots of pages. It's called advertising "arbitrage." The advertiser's goal is to make more money on ads displayed on the slideshow's pages than it cost to show the initial ad that lured them to it. Feel free to submit ads to us, and be sure to include a screenshot of the ad and the link to where the ad leads. submit ads to us

NEI

The story ended up being reported by local and national news media. NJ.com reported that the tip "brought her to tears":As for the real story of the waitress, the cop, and the $100 tip, Courtney English's father, Brian, shared his thoughts in a Facebook post. It read, in part:For further reading, we have previously reported on a similar instance of a viral content website seizing on another true story about something that was hidden in a necklace.Snopes debunks a wide range of content, and online advertisements are no exception. Misleading ads often lead to obscure websites that host lengthy slideshow articles with lots of pages. It's called advertising "arbitrage." The advertiser's goal is to make more money on ads displayed on the slideshow's pages than it cost to show the initial ad that lured them to it. Feel free to submit ads to us, and be sure to include a screenshot of the ad and the link to where the ad leads.

FMD_train_529

Grand Canyon Skywalk

10/24/2005

Claim: Illustrations show a proposed Grand Canyon skywalk. Example: [Collected via e-mail, 2005] Grand Canyon SkywalkScheduled to open January 1, 2006Hualapai Indian Reservation * Juts out about 70 feet into the canyon, 4000 ft above the Colorado River *Will accommodate 120 people comfortably (How comfortable would YOU be?) * Built with more than a million pounds of steel beams and includes dampeners that minimize the structure's vibration * Designed to hold 72 million pounds, withstand an 8.0 magnitude earthquake 50 miles away, and withstand winds in excess of 100 mph * Has a glass bottom and sides...four inches thick Origins: Strange as it may seem, theabove-displayed illustrations are indeed renderings of a proposed skywalk extending over the south rim of the Grand Canyon, to be built on the Hualapai Indian Reservationadjacent to Arizona's Grand Canyon National Park. Hualapai Indian Reservation The $30 million all-glass Skywalk will hover 3,800 feet above the Colorado River over a rim of the Grand Canyon, allowing tourists to stroll on an 80-yard walk around a semicircular platform jutting beyond the canyon rim, surrounded by Plexiglas that will provide a spectacular view of the canyon floor directly below. (The statement that the structure is designed to hold "72 million pounds" appears to be a copywriter's misparsing of a 72-ton figure.) The Skywalk (initially projected to open in early 2006, before construction delays pushed back the completion date) will be part of a new Grand Canyon West resort on the Hualapai reservation at the western edge of the park, about 120 miles from Las Vegas. As the Arizona Republic noted, the Skywalk is part of an effort by the Hualapai tribe to create a multi-faceted tourist resort and revenue stream not dependent upon casino gaming: Levi Esquerra, program director for Northern Arizona University's Center for American Indian Economic Development, said the Hualapais are one of the few tribes to have a bustling economy without casino gaming as a linchpin. "They've been able to exploit their natural beauty and become a tourist destination," Esquerra said. "What we've normally seen in the past between the tribes and national Park Service is like the Blackfeet in Montana appealing to get free access to Glacier National Park. But the Hualapais have a new and aggressive attitude to develop markets on their own land." The Hualapai's Grand Canyon Resort Corp. already has completed the first phase of an adjoining Indian village, where Navajo, Hopi, Hualapai and Havasupai craftsmen constructed traditional dwellings surrounding an amphitheater that hosts daily Native American dances. The first phase of a nearby Old West village also has been completed, and plans are on the drawing board to construct a tram from the canyon rim to the floor. Ditto for an anticipated high-end resort and a campground, which will house about 50 cabins and be able to accommodate 200 campsites and 200 recreation vehicles. The parts for the Skywalk project were fabricated in other locations and brought to the Grand Canyon site as it was readied for their installation, a process depicted in the photographs shown below: The transparent pathway was installed in place in March 2007, and Apollo 11 astronaut Buzz Aldrin offically inaugurated the Skywalk on 20 March 2007 by taking a stroll on it in front of a crowd of about 1,000 tourists, dignitaries and tribal members: Grand Canyon West has announced 28 March 2007 as the official public opening date: Grand Canyon West, a destination owned and operated by the Hualapai Tribe at the Grand Canyon's western rim, announces March 28, 2007 as the official public opening date of The Skywalk. The Skywalk will be the first-ever cantilever shaped glass walkway to suspend more than 4,000 feet above the canyons floor and extend 70 feet from the canyon's rim. Access to The Skywalk will run from dawn to dusk and will cost $25 per person in addition to the cost of a Grand Canyon West entrance package. One hundred and twenty people will be allowed on the bridge at a time. Admittance is first come, first serve for walk up visitors; however, reservations can be made. Guests will enter and exit the walkway via temporary buildings while the adjacent visitors center is being completed. Grand Canyon West plans to issue numbered shoe covers in in order to avoid scratches and slipping - to each visitor that enters the open-air walkway. Prior to the public opening in March, Grand Canyon West will host a "First Walk" event for media and VIPs. The name of the first public figure to step on The Skywalk will be announced closer to the opening. The historical rollout of The Skywalk structure, with the glass in place, is scheduled for February 27 to March 2. The initial part of the rollout process involves jacking the structure up off of the supports and then subjecting the structure to several days of thorough tests that replicate the conditions of final placement. After the final testing is complete, the multi-million pound steel enforced structure will be rolled out across the canyon's edge, which takes multiple days. Immediately after the structure is in position, it will be seated and attached to the foundation. Details for a media event during the rollout will be revealed closer to the event. Additional information: Destination Grand Canyon West Last updated: 20 March 2007 Sources: Braun, David. "Photo in the News: Grand Canyon to Get Glass Bridge." National Geographic News. 26 August 2005. Clarke, Jay. "Tribe Plans Walkway Over Grand Canyon." The [San Jose] Mercury News. 4 December 2005. Gaynor, Tim. "Astronaut's Small Step Opens Grand Canyon Skywalk." Reuters. 20 March 2007. Mannweiler, David. "Don't Look Down and You'll Be Fine." The Indianapolis Star. 20 November 2005. Shaffer, Mark. "Hualapai Tribe Finds Economy Flows Better with River Plan Than Casino." The Arizona Republic. 13 October 2005.

True

Hualapai Indian Reservationadjacent to Arizona's Grand Canyon National Park. Grand Canyon West has announced 28 March 2007 as the official public opening date: Destination Grand Canyon West

FMD_train_765

Over the last few years, more Virginians are moving away from Virginia than are moving to Virginia from the other 49 states.

06/17/2021

Republican gubernatorial nominee Glenn Youngkin says recent Democratic governors have pushed Virginia into economic decline and people are moving out. Over the last few years, more Virginians are moving away from Virginia than are moving to Virginia from the other 49 states, he said during aMay 21 interviewon WRVA radio in Richmond. Youngkin holds two Democrats responsible: Current Gov. Ralph Northam and former Gov. Terry McAuliffe, who led the state from 2014-2018 and is Youngkins opponent this year. Virginia is the only state that bars governors from serving successive terms. We fact-checked Youngkins talking-point claim that more people are leaving Virginia than coming in and found it to be correct, although the reasons for the outward migration go far beyond any governors control. The numbers The Internal Revenue Service publishes annual statistics on the number of households that moved and filed federal tax returns from a different state than the one in which they lived the previous year. Demographers and economists use these figures to track the net migration of families in the U.S. from year to year. Thedatashow that from 1991 through 2012, Virginia always had more households coming in than going out. That changed in 2013, when there was a net loss of 4,270 households. Virginia had fewer filing households in each of the next five years - an average annual loss of 5,600 families. In 2018, the last year for which figures are available, Virginia lost a net of 4,707 households. This doesnt mean theres been a massive flow out of Virginia. To give some perspective, about4 millionVirginia households annually file federal taxes. The net losses to other states in 2018 came to less than one-eighth of 1% of households. The U.S. Census Bureau also tracks net migration. Itestimatesthat Virginia lost a net 11,994 people through domestic migration during the 12-month period that ended July 1, 2019. The reasons Jobs were the main reason people left Virginia for other states at the start of the last decade. That switched to the rising cost of living at the end of the decade, according to economic and demographic studies. Virginia is home to large military bases, and a fleet of defense and government contractors and federal workers that drive the states economic engine in Northern Virginia. The region was hurt by sequestration programs beginning in 2013 that automatically cut defense and domestic spending when Congress could not agree on a budget. The result was that many Virginians whose paychecks were dependent on federal spending, particularly for defense, left the state to find new jobs, according to a2016 reportby Old Dominion University. More recently, the migration has been mainly triggered by people escaping the high cost of living in Northern Virginia, according to Hamilton Lombard, a demographer at the Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service at the University of Virginia. They are largely young professionals seeking to buy first homes and raise families. Many are heading South to growing regions in North Carolina, Georgia, Florida and Texas. Lombard also said that Virginia is losing retirees, mostly to Southern states. Youngkin blames the migration losses on McAuliffe and Northam.He prefaced his claim by saying he is frustrated with what the Democratic leadership had done to Virginia over eight years. But Lombard said the governors have had little control over the economic trends that have caused losses. Think of the cost of housing; the state has little control of that, he said. If you could point to anything that could have been done on the state level over the years, maybe it could have focused on making more of Virginia (economically) competitive outside Northern Virginia, Lombard said. Our ruling Youngkin said, Over the last few years, more Virginians are moving away from Virginia than are moving to Virginia from the other 49 states. IRS data backs him up. But Youngkin wraps the data in a questionable political context. He blames the last two Democratic governors for the net migration loss when research shows most of the drop has been caused by problems largely beyond any governor's control: federal budget cuts and high prices for buying a home in Northern Virginia. Youngkins statement is accurate but needs clarification. So, we rate it Mostly True.

True

Over the last few years, more Virginians are moving away from Virginia than are moving to Virginia from the other 49 states, he said during aMay 21 interviewon WRVA radio in Richmond.Thedatashow that from 1991 through 2012, Virginia always had more households coming in than going out. That changed in 2013, when there was a net loss of 4,270 households. Virginia had fewer filing households in each of the next five years - an average annual loss of 5,600 families. In 2018, the last year for which figures are available, Virginia lost a net of 4,707 households.This doesnt mean theres been a massive flow out of Virginia. To give some perspective, about4 millionVirginia households annually file federal taxes. The net losses to other states in 2018 came to less than one-eighth of 1% of households.The U.S. Census Bureau also tracks net migration. Itestimatesthat Virginia lost a net 11,994 people through domestic migration during the 12-month period that ended July 1, 2019.The result was that many Virginians whose paychecks were dependent on federal spending, particularly for defense, left the state to find new jobs, according to a2016 reportby Old Dominion University.

FMD_train_1648

What was the reason for the FBI search in Trump's lawyer's office, as opposed to Bill Clinton's office?

03/06/2019

A popular meme in March 2019 questioned why Bill Clinton had "paid Paula Jones $850K to go away" yet the FBI hadn't raided his lawyer's office. The meme was an obvious reference to two completely unrelated issues separated by decades: a 1994 lawsuit involving Clinton and a search warrant executed by the FBI in April 2018 at the office of President Donald Trump's attorney, Michael Cohen. In short, the major differences in the cases referenced by the meme one of which involved an FBI raid on a lawyer's office and the other not were as follows: Clinton openly paid Jones $850,000 to settle a sexual harassment lawsuit well after he became president and well after Jones had had a chance to air her allegations to the public, press, and court system, while Trump secretly used an intermediary to pay hush money to porn actress Stormy Daniels just ahead of a presidential election in order to keep her allegations that she had an affair with him from reaching the public and influencing the election results against him. Nothing Clinton did in settling Jones' civil lawsuit was illegal (or even potentially illegal), but Trump's payment of hush money to Daniels through his lawyer was possibly an illegal act on the part of Trump and/or Cohen, hence the raid on the latter's office but not the office of Clinton's lawyer. On 6 May 1994, Jones, a former Arkansas state employee, filed a sexual harassment lawsuit against Clinton just days before the statute of limitations would have expired. In her lawsuit, she maintained that on 8 May 1991, she was working the registration desk at Excelsior Hotel in Little Rock, Arkansas, where the Third Annual Governor's Quality Management Conference was being held, an event Bill Clinton (then governor of Arkansas) attended to deliver a speech. Jones alleged that an Arkansas state trooper, Danny Ferguson, approached her at the registration desk, told her that Clinton would like to meet with her, and escorted her to a business suite in the hotel where Clinton was staying. lawsuit According to Jones, once she entered Clinton's hotel suite he complimented her on her physical appearance, put his hand on her leg, attempted to kiss her on the neck, asked her if she was married, and finally lowered his trousers to expose his erect penis and asked Jones to "kiss it." When Jones rebuffed Clinton's advances, she said, he told her to "keep this between ourselves" and suggested that, in her words, he "could damage her in her job and even jeopardize her employment." Jones did not publicly discuss the incident until The American Spectator referenced it in a January 1994 article, apparently based on information provided by Trooper Ferguson: The American Spectator account asserts that a woman by the name of "Paula" told an unnamed trooper (obviously Defendant Ferguson), who had escorted "Paula" to Clinton's hotel room, that "she was available to be Clinton's regular girlfriend if he so desired," thus implying a consummated and satisfying sexual encounter with Clinton, as well as a willingness to continue a sexual relationship with him. These assertions are untrue. The American Spectator account also asserted that the troopers' 'official' duties included facilitating Clinton's cheating on his wife ... Since Jones ("Paula") was one of the women preyed upon by Clinton and his troopers, including by Defendant Ferguson, in the manner described above, those who read this magazine account could conclude falsely that Jones ("Paula") had a sexual relationship and affair with Clinton. Jones' reputation within her community was thus seriously damaged. Several months later, Jones filed her lawsuit against Clinton and Ferguson, seeking a total of $750,000 in compensation for damages and attorneys' fees on counts of sexual harassment, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and defamation. The issue of whether Jones could sue a sitting president went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, who upheld an appellate court decision that "the President, like all other government officials, is subject to the same laws that apply to all other members of our society," and allowed Jones' case to proceed. However, Judge Susan Webber Wright of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas dismissed the lawsuit on 1 April 1998, holding that "the governor's alleged conduct does not constitute sexual assault," that "plaintiff's allegations fall far short of the rigorous standards for establishing a claim of outrage under Arkansas law," that "plaintiff has failed to demonstrate that she has a case worthy of submitting to a jury," and that "there are no genuine issues for trial in this case." dismissed When it came to light a few months later that Clinton had lied under oath about his relationship with Monica Lewinsky during proceedings in Jones' lawsuit, Jones filed an appeal to reverse the dismissal and have her claims reinstated. On 13 November 1998, Clinton settled the matter by offering to pay Jones $850,000 in exchange for her agreement to drop her appeal, without admitting to or apologizing for the conduct alleged by Jones. appeal Porn actress Daniels (the stage name of Stephanie Clifford) said she first met Trump at a celebrity golf tournament in Nevada in July 2006. The two engaged in sex in Trump's hotel room, she claimed, and continued an "intimate relationship" into the following year. Daniels discussed her relationship with Trump in a 2011 interview for In Touch magazine, but the interview was not published at that time, reportedly because Trump's personal attorney, Michael Cohen, threatened to sue over it when the magazine reached out to ask for comment. threatened In January 2018, the Wall Street Journal reported that Trump's personal attorney, Cohen, had arranged to pay Daniels $130,000 just weeks before the 2016 U.S. presidential election in exchange for her signing a nondisclosure agreement related to her alleged 2006 affair with Trump. reported The following month, Cohen confirmed that $130,000 had been paid to Daniels, but he maintained that he had used his personal funds for the payment, and that "Neither the Trump Organization nor the Trump campaign was a party to the transaction with Ms. Clifford, and neither reimbursed me for the payment, either directly or indirectly." On 5 April 2018, Trump denied to reporters that he knew about the payment to Daniels. When pressed about why the payment had been made, Trump replied, "You'll have to ask Michael Cohen" and asserted he didn't know where the $130,000 had come from. Four days later, acting on a warrant from federal prosecutors in New York's Southern District obtained in part on a referral from special counsel Robert Mueller's office, FBI agents seized a variety of material from Cohen's New York City office, home, and hotel room, including documents related to Cohen's payment to Daniels and to Karen McDougal, another woman who had alleged an affair with Trump. denied A month later, former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, now a member of Trump's legal team, said that Trump had personally repaid Cohen for the $130,000 payment to Daniels, and that the reimbursement had been "funneled through a law firm." The following day, Trump contradicted his earlier claim that he didn't know about the payment by acknowledging that he had repaid Cohen, but he asserted the money "had nothing to do with the campaign." Rudy Giuliani contradicted In August 2018, Cohen pleaded guilty to eight charges, including five counts of tax evasion, one count of making a false statement to a financial institution, one count of being a "willful cause" of an unlawful corporate contribution, and one count of making an excessive campaign contribution, the latter two stemming from the "hush money" payments made to Daniels and McDougal. Prosecutors held that the payments made by Cohen violated federal campaign finance laws because they were meant to benefit the campaign but did not come from campaign contributions and were not reported to the Federal Election Commission (FEC). The payments therefore constituted illegal in-kind contributions to the Trump campaign that violated laws limiting such donations to $2,700 and requiring their disclosure to the FEC. Whether Trump himself could be charged with engaging in a criminal scheme to violate campaign finance laws for his involvement in the hush money payments is still a matter of legal debate, but the issue took a dramatic turn in February 2019 when Cohen revealed before Congress that he was paid reimbursement for the hush money directly from Trump's personal bank account after Trump became president. legal debate revealed "Cohen's public testimony directly implicates Trump in serious campaign finance violations," former FECGeneral Counsel Lawrence Noble told the Washington Post. "Assuming Cohen is telling the truth about the purpose of the checks, the checks are documentary evidence supporting the allegation that Trump had Cohen pay Daniels $135,000 in hush money and then reimbursed Cohen." Washington Post All in all, events proved the FBI had good reason to raid Cohen's office, as they gathered evidence of multiple federal crimes (beyond just campaign finance violations) to which Cohen pleaded guilty. Bill Clinton's payment to Paula Jones was a settlement of a civil lawsuit that did not involve any criminal matter or criminal wrongdoing, and thus it was of no legitimate interest to law enforcement. The only commonality between the two cases was that they involved payments by politicians to women, but for very different reasons and circumstances. federal crimes Dowd, Katie. "Are These the Checks Donald Trump Gave Michael Cohen for the Stormy Daniels Payment?" San Francisco Chronicle. 27 February 2019. Goodman, Ryan and Andy Wright. "Mueller's Roadmap: Major Takeaways from Cohen and Manafort Filings." Just Security. December 8, 2018 Rupar, Aaron. "What's illegal About Trump's Hush Payments to Women, Briefly Explained." Vox. 12 December 2018. Kelly, Matthew. "In-Kind Contributions Are Boring ... Until Stormy Daniels Gets Involved." OpenSecrets.org. 3 April 2018. Lord, Debbie. "Michael Cohen Plea Deal: How Were Campaign Finance Laws Broken?" The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. 22 August 2018. Associated Press. "A Timeline of Key Moments in Trump-Stormy Daniels Saga." 4 May 2018. Kirby, Jen. "A Timeline of Trumpworld's Changing Story on Stormy Daniels." Vox. 4 May 2018. Samuels, Brett. "Timeline: Trump, Cohen, Stormy Daniels and $130,000." The Hill. 4 May 2018. Theobald, Bill. "Why Hush Money Michael Cohen Paid Stormy Daniels Was an Illegal Campaign Donation." USA Today. 14 December 2018. Kirby, Jen and Andrew Prokop. "Michael Cohen Pleads Guilty to 8 Federal Crimes." Vox. 21 August 2018. Stewart, Emily and Dylan Matthews. "The Michael Cohen-Stormy Daniels Subplot, Explained." Vox. 27 February 2019. Chalfant, Morgan. "Prosecutors Submit Redacted Cohen Raid Documents Under Seal, Teeing Up Public Release." The Hill. 28 February 2019. Reuters. "Trump Says He Did Not Know About $130,000 Payment to Stormy Daniels." 5 April 2018.

False

On 6 May 1994, Jones, a former Arkansas state employee, filed a sexual harassment lawsuit against Clinton just days before the statute of limitations would have expired. In her lawsuit, she maintained that on 8 May 1991, she was working the registration desk at Excelsior Hotel in Little Rock, Arkansas, where the Third Annual Governor's Quality Management Conference was being held, an event Bill Clinton (then governor of Arkansas) attended to deliver a speech. Jones alleged that an Arkansas state trooper, Danny Ferguson, approached her at the registration desk, told her that Clinton would like to meet with her, and escorted her to a business suite in the hotel where Clinton was staying.However, Judge Susan Webber Wright of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas dismissed the lawsuit on 1 April 1998, holding that "the governor's alleged conduct does not constitute sexual assault," that "plaintiff's allegations fall far short of the rigorous standards for establishing a claim of outrage under Arkansas law," that "plaintiff has failed to demonstrate that she has a case worthy of submitting to a jury," and that "there are no genuine issues for trial in this case."When it came to light a few months later that Clinton had lied under oath about his relationship with Monica Lewinsky during proceedings in Jones' lawsuit, Jones filed an appeal to reverse the dismissal and have her claims reinstated. On 13 November 1998, Clinton settled the matter by offering to pay Jones $850,000 in exchange for her agreement to drop her appeal, without admitting to or apologizing for the conduct alleged by Jones.Porn actress Daniels (the stage name of Stephanie Clifford) said she first met Trump at a celebrity golf tournament in Nevada in July 2006. The two engaged in sex in Trump's hotel room, she claimed, and continued an "intimate relationship" into the following year. Daniels discussed her relationship with Trump in a 2011 interview for In Touch magazine, but the interview was not published at that time, reportedly because Trump's personal attorney, Michael Cohen, threatened to sue over it when the magazine reached out to ask for comment.In January 2018, the Wall Street Journal reported that Trump's personal attorney, Cohen, had arranged to pay Daniels $130,000 just weeks before the 2016 U.S. presidential election in exchange for her signing a nondisclosure agreement related to her alleged 2006 affair with Trump.On 5 April 2018, Trump denied to reporters that he knew about the payment to Daniels. When pressed about why the payment had been made, Trump replied, "You'll have to ask Michael Cohen" and asserted he didn't know where the $130,000 had come from. Four days later, acting on a warrant from federal prosecutors in New York's Southern District obtained in part on a referral from special counsel Robert Mueller's office, FBI agents seized a variety of material from Cohen's New York City office, home, and hotel room, including documents related to Cohen's payment to Daniels and to Karen McDougal, another woman who had alleged an affair with Trump.A month later, former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, now a member of Trump's legal team, said that Trump had personally repaid Cohen for the $130,000 payment to Daniels, and that the reimbursement had been "funneled through a law firm." The following day, Trump contradicted his earlier claim that he didn't know about the payment by acknowledging that he had repaid Cohen, but he asserted the money "had nothing to do with the campaign."Whether Trump himself could be charged with engaging in a criminal scheme to violate campaign finance laws for his involvement in the hush money payments is still a matter of legal debate, but the issue took a dramatic turn in February 2019 when Cohen revealed before Congress that he was paid reimbursement for the hush money directly from Trump's personal bank account after Trump became president."Cohen's public testimony directly implicates Trump in serious campaign finance violations," former FECGeneral Counsel Lawrence Noble told the Washington Post. "Assuming Cohen is telling the truth about the purpose of the checks, the checks are documentary evidence supporting the allegation that Trump had Cohen pay Daniels $135,000 in hush money and then reimbursed Cohen."All in all, events proved the FBI had good reason to raid Cohen's office, as they gathered evidence of multiple federal crimes (beyond just campaign finance violations) to which Cohen pleaded guilty. Bill Clinton's payment to Paula Jones was a settlement of a civil lawsuit that did not involve any criminal matter or criminal wrongdoing, and thus it was of no legitimate interest to law enforcement. The only commonality between the two cases was that they involved payments by politicians to women, but for very different reasons and circumstances.

FMD_train_1505

Is 'Public Homosexuality' Banned in Murfreesboro, Tennessee?

11/20/2023

On Nov. 17, 2023, California Gov. Gavin Newsom posted a Nov. 14 article from the New Republic on X (formerly Twitter) with the headline, "A City in Tennessee Banned Public Homosexuality and We All Missed It." This claim that a city ordinance in Murfreesboro, Tennessee, banned public homosexuality was broadly true when an ordinance on "community decency" went into effect in June 2023. However, explicit reference to homosexuality was removed from the code in November 2023. In June 2023, the Murfreesboro City Council passed Ordinance 23-O-22, a law purportedly regarding community decency that The Associated Press described as being "designed to ban drag performances from taking place on public property." As described by its authors, the new law "supplement[ed] existing civil and criminal sanctions for indecent behavior [by] barring persons who engage in prohibited conduct from sponsoring events on public space for two years and increasing to five years where the prohibited conduct occurs in the presence of minors." The bill included "sexual conduct" as one form of indecent behavior covered by the June 2023 enhancements to the code. This "conduct" term, however, was defined by "Section 21-71 of the Murfreesboro City Code," which had been in place since the 1970s and defined terms used in a section of city code detailing criminal offenses related to "exposing minors to harmful materials." That code defined "sexual conduct" in a way that broadly included "acts of [...] homosexuality": Section 21-71 "Sexual conduct" means acts of masturbation, homosexuality, sexual intercourse, or physical contact with a person's clothed or unclothed genitals, pubic area, buttocks or, if such person be a female, breast. A literal reading of the new law, therefore, could have criminalized any sort of public display of homosexuality, even if such a display was not overtly sexual or sexual in nature. Then, in October 2023, the city, citing the new law, denied a permit to the non-profit Tennessee Equality Project (TEP) to hold a Pride rally, which the group had held every year since 2016. That decision was made on the basis of this new city code and the allegedly indecent material present at the 2022 TEP event. As reported by The Associated Press, the ACLU took up the case on behalf of TEP. The legal challenge is the latest development in the ongoing political battle over LGBTQ+ rights in Tennessee, where the state's conservative leaders have sought to limit events where drag performers may appear, restrict classroom conversations about gender and sexuality, and ban gender-affirming care. According to the 67-page complaint, the organization [TEP] has faced recent opposition from Murfreesboro leaders after conservative activists alleged that drag performances during the 2022 Pride event resulted in the illegal sexualization of kids. TEP denied the shows were inappropriate, noting that the performers were fully clothed. However, the city quickly warned the organization it would be denying any future event permits and later approved updating its community decency standards intended to assist in the determination of conduct, materials, and events that may be judged as obscene or harmful to minors. The suit alleges the ordinance violates the First Amendment by chilling free speech rights and argues that it breaks the 14th Amendment by discriminating against the LGBTQ+ community. On Oct. 26, the federal judge assigned to the case issued an order blocking the city from denying TEP's request for a permit to hold the 2023 Pride event. As reported by the Daily News Journal, the ruling tells the local government, Murfreesboro City Manager Craig Tindall, Mayor Shane McFarland, the Murfreesboro Police Department, and other city officials that they "shall not enforce or take any action pursuant to the provision of Murfreesboro City Code 21-71 that includes 'homosexuality' within the definition of 'sexual conduct.'" Against this backdrop, in October 2023, the Murfreesboro council took up the issue of removing homosexuality from the list of "acts" that could constitute sexual conduct. On Nov. 2, a proposal removing the word passed, with the change set to take effect on Nov. 17, the day of Newsom's tweet. As reported by journalist Erin Reed, "Good news. As of tomorrow, Murfreesboro will not have 'homosexuality' in its code banning public homosexuality anymore." That said, the new indecency law that Murfreesboro passed still contains very vague "community standards" provisions used to target Pride and LGBTQ books. Reed argued that while this change made "the targeting of LGBTQ+ people less explicit," the "vague 'community standards' section will still likely be used to target Pride events and books." The ACLU case is ongoing. "The parties agreed, and the judge accepted an agreement temporarily suspending enforcement of an ordinance designed to specify certain civil penalties against indecency in public spaces and to protect children from indecent conduct," Murfreesboro spokesman Mike Browning said in a statement. "However, other existing state statutes and city ordinances and penalties regarding such conduct remain applicable." Because public homosexuality is no longer explicitly prohibited by Murfreesboro city code, the claim made by Newsom and others is out of date. It is still possible, however, based on statements made by the local government and the broad nature of the law, that the portion of the code remaining could be used to prevent future LGBTQ+ events.

NEI

On Nov. 17, 2023, California Gov. Gavin Newsom posted a Nov. 14 article from the New Republic on X (formerly Twitter) with the headline, "A City in Tennessee Banned Public Homosexuality and We All Missed It." This claim that a city ordinance in Murfreesboro, Tennessee, banned public homosexuality was broadly true when an ordinance on "community decency" went into effect in June 2023. But explicit reference to homosexuality was removed from the code in November 2023.In June 2023, the Murfreesboro City Council passed Ordinance 23-O-22, a law purportedly regarding community decency that The Associated Press described as being "designed to ban drag performances from taking place on public property." As described by its authors, the new law "supplement[ed] existing civil and criminal sanctions for indecent behavior [by] barring persons who engage in prohibited conduct from sponsoring events on a public space for two years and increasing to five years where the prohibited conduct occurs in the presence of minors."The bill included "sexual conduct" as one form of indecent behavior covered by the June 2023 enhancements to the code. This "conduct" term, however, was defined by "Section 21-71 of the Murfreesboro City Code," which had been in place since the 1970s and that defined terms used in a section of city code detailing criminal offenses related to "exposing minors to harmful materials." That code defined "sexual conduct" in a way that broadly included "acts of [...] homosexuality": Then in October 2023, the city, citing the new law, denied a permit to the non-profit Tennessee Equality Project (TEP) to hold a Pride rally, which the group had held every year since 2016. That decision was made on the basis of this new city code and the allegedly indecent material present at the 2022 TEP event. As reported by The Associated Press, the ACLU took up the case on behalf of TEP:On Oct. 26, the federal judge assigned to the case issued an order blocking the city from denying TEP's request for a permit to hold the 2023 pride event. As reported by the Daily News Journal:Against this backdrop, in October 2023, the Murfreesboro council took up the issue of removing homosexuality from the list of "acts" that could constitute sexual conduct. On Nov. 2, a proposal removing the word passed, with the change set to take effect on Nov. 17 the day of Newsom's tweet. As reported by journalist Erin Reed:That said, the new indecency law that Murfreesboro passed still contains very vague "community standards" provisions used to target Pride and LGBTQ books. pic.twitter.com/N4rFzqhxFX Erin Reed (@ErinInTheMorn) November 16, 2023Reed argued that while this change made "the targeting of LGBTQ+ people less explicit," the "vague 'community standards' section will still likely be used to target Pride events and books," she said. The ACLU case is ongoing."The parties agreed and the judge accepted an agreement temporarily suspending enforcement of an ordinance designed to specify certain civil penalties against indecency in public spaces and to protect children from indecent conduct," Murfreesboro spokesman Mike Browning said in a statement. "However, other existing state statutes and city ordinances and penalties regarding such conduct remain applicable.

FMD_train_1744

Did Elmo Ask To Use a Slur on 'Sesame Street'?

03/29/2021

In March 2021, the Sesame Workshop, the nonprofit behind the children's TV show "Sesame Street," introduced two new Black characters as part of its "ABCs of Racial Literacy" program. As Elmo and the other the muppets welcomed Wesley and Elijah Walker to the show, a suspicious screenshot started to circulate on social media that supposedly showed Elmo asking if it was OK to use a slur if he was singing it in a song. introduced suspicious screenshot This is not a genuine Elmo quote from "Sesame Street." The above-displayed screenshot shows a message that was originally posted in jest by "Ol QWERTY Bastard" (@TheDillonOne). originally posted in jest While some who encountered the post may have quickly realized that this was a step too far for the children's show, others may have found this quote plausible, as "Sesame Street" truly has tackled some difficult topics, including racism, in its 50-year history. tackled some difficult topics The above-displayed image, in fact, comes from a scene that dealt with race, albeit in a much less controversial fashion. The following clip, entitled "Explaining Race with Elmo & Wes," features Elmo asking some innocent questions about why Elijah and Wesley have brown skin. Wesley tells Elmo that his skin is brown because of melanin. Wes' father Elijah goes on to say: "Melanin is something that we each have inside our bodies that make the outside or our bodies the skin color that it is. It also gives us our eye and our hair color ... The more melanin you have the darker your skin looks. The color of our skin is an important part of who we are. But we should all know that it's ok that we all look different in so many ways." Here's the full clip from the Sesame Street: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dk_HYAiS26I&t=2s When the Sesame Workshop announced its new ABCs of Racial Literacy content, they explained that one of the goals of the program was to use "age-appropriate language and strategies to answer sometimes-tough questions around race and racism." announced Kay Wilson Stallings, executive vice president of creative and production for Sesame Workshop, said: "Sesame Workshop has always stood for diversity, inclusion, equity, and kindness. As a trusted source for families, we have a responsibility to speak out for racial justice and empower families to have conversations about race and identity with their children at a young age ... The work to dismantle racism begins by helping children understand what racism is and how it hurts and impacts people. Sadly, todays announcement comes at a time of racial and social discord when many families are in need of support in talking to their children about racism. Were proud to reaffirm our Coming Together commitment to racial justice, which will be woven into new Sesame Workshop content for years to come.

False

In March 2021, the Sesame Workshop, the nonprofit behind the children's TV show "Sesame Street," introduced two new Black characters as part of its "ABCs of Racial Literacy" program. As Elmo and the other the muppets welcomed Wesley and Elijah Walker to the show, a suspicious screenshot started to circulate on social media that supposedly showed Elmo asking if it was OK to use a slur if he was singing it in a song. This is not a genuine Elmo quote from "Sesame Street." The above-displayed screenshot shows a message that was originally posted in jest by "Ol QWERTY Bastard" (@TheDillonOne).While some who encountered the post may have quickly realized that this was a step too far for the children's show, others may have found this quote plausible, as "Sesame Street" truly has tackled some difficult topics, including racism, in its 50-year history. When the Sesame Workshop announced its new ABCs of Racial Literacy content, they explained that one of the goals of the program was to use "age-appropriate language and strategies to answer sometimes-tough questions around race and racism."

FMD_train_1131

Genpets

06/26/2006

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

False

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

FMD_train_46

Was the Mayor of Minneapolis's decision to cancel the 4th of July fireworks while permitting a Muslim animal sacrifice at Vikings Stadium questioned?

08/23/2018

In August 2018, a bit of Islamophobic copypasta started making its way around social media, asserting that the mayor of Minneapolis, Minnesota had canceled a 4th of July city fireworks display but allowed "Muslim animal sacrifice" to be held in the city's U.S. Bank Stadium (home of the Minnesota Vikings football team) the following month: copypasta This copypasta was based on a bit of fake news, a fear-mongering report about the Muslim holiday Eid al-Adha, and a misreading of two genuine news reports. Fake News On 10 June 2018, the Last Line of Defense web site published an article positing that the Muslim mayor of Minneapolis had "canceled the 4th of July": article Mayor Ahneid al Ahmed of Haskentot, Minnesota has done the unthinkable and canceled the 4th of July. According to his office, the city has no desire to spend money on something so frivolous. Muslim spokesman Art Tubolls said: This city elected our mayor to do what is best. We dont hink buying a bunch of flags and fireworks and spending a day celebrating nationalism like nazis is a good idea. This was not a genuine news story about the mayor of Minneapolis, who is neither named "Ahneid al Ahmed" nor a Muslim. (The city's actual mayor is Jacob Frey.) The Last Line of Defense is part of a network of sites that engages in political trolling under the guise of proffering "satire." Jacob Frey This junk news piece may have prompted some confusion, as it resembled a genuine news story about a nearby Minnesota city. The mayor of St. Paul did cancel the city's Independence Day firework show due to budgetary concerns: cancel St. Paul will go without the rockets red glare on Independence Day this year. Mayor Melvin Carter announced that the city wont hold a Fourth of July fireworks event. The cancellation may foreshadow of what could be a difficult budget season. Carters announcement, posted to Facebook, cited concerns about the citys budget climate. Minneapolis, on the other hand, hosted multiple firework shows on July 4th. multiple firework shows Fear-Mongering Reports About Eid al-Adha The Muslim celebration of Eid al-Adha is also referred to as the "Feast of Sacrifice." The holiday, which honors Ibrahim's (Abraham's) willingness to sacrifice his son at God's command, is celebrated by Muslims around the world. In many places, Muslims observe that holiday by sacrificing an animal and then sharing its meat with the poor: sacrificing To commemorate God's test of Ibrahim, many Muslim families sacrifice an animal and share the meat with the poor. They also are required to donate to charities that benefit the poor. Muslims also routinely exchange presents during the holiday. When it was announced that U.S. Bank Stadium would be hosting a Eid al-Adha festival, the Islamophobic web site "Bare Naked Islam" published an article about the upcoming event imploring readers to "imagine" 50,000 Muslims at the stadium and displaying various photographs and videos of animal sacrifices from around the world. article The following photograph, for instance, was taken in Lahore, Pakistan, in 2008: taken These photographs led many readers to mistakenly believe that the "Super EID" festival at U.S. Bank Stadium would also feature animal sacrifices, but that wasn't the case. Ahmed Anshur, executive director of Masjid Al-Ihsan Islamic Center in St. Paul and one of the organizers of "Super EID," attempted to quell these fears, telling Minnesota Public Radio that no animal sacrifices would take place at the event: Minnesota Public Radio Eid Al-Adha, the second Muslim holiday of the year, comes at the end of the pilgrimage. Its name in Arabic means the "festival of sacrifice." Muslims celebrate by sacrificing animals and donating meat to charity. But Ahmed Anshur, executive director of Masjid Al-Ihsan Islamic Center in St. Paul and one of the organizers, wants to be clear: The actual ritual will not take place at U.S. Bank Stadium. "Nobody is going to sacrifice an animal, or nobody is going to slaughter an animal in that field," he said. "I can assure you that, 100 percent." The Minneapolis Star Tribune filed a report after the 21 August 2018 celebration on which stated that in fact no animal sacrifices had taken place at the stadium during the EID celebration: report The holiday honors the prophet Ibrahim, also known as Abraham in Judaism and Christianity, and his willingness to sacrifice his son for God. It comes at the end of the annual hajj pilgrimage. It is one of the holiest days of the year for Muslims, who celebrate with prayer, shared meals and gifts. In some places, families who can afford it slaughter an animal and share the meat with family and charities. No animals were sacrificed at the stadium Tuesday. Bowling, Chris. "Thousands Join in 'Super Eid' Celebration at U.S. Bank Stadium in Minneapolis." [Minneapolis] Star Tribune. 21 August 2018. Feshir, Riham. "Thousands Expected for 'Super Eid' in Downtown Minneapolis." MPR News. 20 August 2018. CNN. "5 Things to Know About the Muslim Holiday Eid al-Adha." 21 August 2018. The Current. "Fourth of July 2018: Where to See Fireworks in Minneapolis, St. Paul, and Beyond." 26 June 2018. Melo, Frederick. "St. Paul Mayor Cancels July 4 Fireworks, Cites Budget Concerns." TwinCities.com. 27 June 2018.

False

In August 2018, a bit of Islamophobic copypasta started making its way around social media, asserting that the mayor of Minneapolis, Minnesota had canceled a 4th of July city fireworks display but allowed "Muslim animal sacrifice" to be held in the city's U.S. Bank Stadium (home of the Minnesota Vikings football team) the following month:On 10 June 2018, the Last Line of Defense web site published an article positing that the Muslim mayor of Minneapolis had "canceled the 4th of July":This was not a genuine news story about the mayor of Minneapolis, who is neither named "Ahneid al Ahmed" nor a Muslim. (The city's actual mayor is Jacob Frey.) The Last Line of Defense is part of a network of sites that engages in political trolling under the guise of proffering "satire."This junk news piece may have prompted some confusion, as it resembled a genuine news story about a nearby Minnesota city. The mayor of St. Paul did cancel the city's Independence Day firework show due to budgetary concerns:Minneapolis, on the other hand, hosted multiple firework shows on July 4th.The Muslim celebration of Eid al-Adha is also referred to as the "Feast of Sacrifice." The holiday, which honors Ibrahim's (Abraham's) willingness to sacrifice his son at God's command, is celebrated by Muslims around the world. In many places, Muslims observe that holiday by sacrificing an animal and then sharing its meat with the poor:When it was announced that U.S. Bank Stadium would be hosting a Eid al-Adha festival, the Islamophobic web site "Bare Naked Islam" published an article about the upcoming event imploring readers to "imagine" 50,000 Muslims at the stadium and displaying various photographs and videos of animal sacrifices from around the world.The following photograph, for instance, was taken in Lahore, Pakistan, in 2008:Ahmed Anshur, executive director of Masjid Al-Ihsan Islamic Center in St. Paul and one of the organizers of "Super EID," attempted to quell these fears, telling Minnesota Public Radio that no animal sacrifices would take place at the event:The Minneapolis Star Tribune filed a report after the 21 August 2018 celebration on which stated that in fact no animal sacrifices had taken place at the stadium during the EID celebration:

FMD_train_1845

Do Bell Peppers Have Genders?

02/08/2015

Bell peppers come in a variety of sizes and colors, and, according to a popular internet rumor, a variety of genders as well: This old cook's tale about identifying the gender of bell peppers has been around for years, but it has recently seen an uptick in Internet interest on social media sites such as Pinterest. But no matter how many times the above-displayed image is shared, it will not change the fact that a bell pepper's sex cannot be determined by the number of bumps on its outer surface in large part because peppers aren't classifiable as being wholly one sex or the other: Pinterest A section on the reproductive biology of peppers in The Encyclopedia of Fruit and Nuts notes that bell peppers come from flowers possessing both male and female sex organs: "Pepper flowers are complete and perfect, that is they have a calyx, corolla and male and female sex organs. The flowers are protogynous, but readily self-pollinate." notes David Karp, a pomologist at UC Riverside, also addressed the rumor of bell pepper gender in 2013: "The supposition that there are male and female peppers is a common canard, but untrue. Peppers grow from flowers that have both male and female parts. The fruits do not have a gender." addressed While bell peppers are neither male nor female, some food blogs have insisted there is still some usefulness to this widespread rumor. For example, the Garden Frugal writes that while it is not scientifically accurate to label bell peppers male or female, assigning a gender may help cooks remember how to choose the right peppers: writes Describing peppers as a gender is not accurate, because bell peppers are hermaphroditic. The gender reference is used only as a memory aid to help select the best bell pepper for each purpose either eating raw, seed collection, or for cooking. There is a simple method for identifying which bell pepper has the traits you desire. Peppers with four lobes are female and those with three lobes are male. The female peppers with more lobes, contain more seeds are best for seed collecting and growing new plants (hence female). They are also sweeter when eaten raw. The male peppers with three or fewer lobes are better for grilling, cooking. They also contain fewer seeds. But this claim is also unfounded, as the number of lobes on a pepper does not have any bearing on its taste. And while it could be argued a four-lobed pepper has more seeds than a three-lobed pepper, this has more to do with the overall size of the fruit than the number of lobes.

False

This old cook's tale about identifying the gender of bell peppers has been around for years, but it has recently seen an uptick in Internet interest on social media sites such as Pinterest. But no matter how many times the above-displayed image is shared, it will not change the fact that a bell pepper's sex cannot be determined by the number of bumps on its outer surface in large part because peppers aren't classifiable as being wholly one sex or the other:A section on the reproductive biology of peppers in The Encyclopedia of Fruit and Nuts notes that bell peppers come from flowers possessing both male and female sex organs: "Pepper flowers are complete and perfect, that is they have a calyx, corolla and male and female sex organs. The flowers are protogynous, but readily self-pollinate."David Karp, a pomologist at UC Riverside, also addressed the rumor of bell pepper gender in 2013: "The supposition that there are male and female peppers is a common canard, but untrue. Peppers grow from flowers that have both male and female parts. The fruits do not have a gender."While bell peppers are neither male nor female, some food blogs have insisted there is still some usefulness to this widespread rumor. For example, the Garden Frugal writes that while it is not scientifically accurate to label bell peppers male or female, assigning a gender may help cooks remember how to choose the right peppers:

FMD_train_1354

Could Simon Cowell be departing from 'America's Got Talent'?

06/26/2023

In June 2023, paid ads were displayed on Facebook and Instagram, claiming that Simon Cowell would be leaving "America's Got Talent," NBC's performance-competition TV show better known as "AGT." However, this was false, and the purpose of these ads was to lure users into a scam that could cost them thousands of dollars a year. The scam claimed that Cowell had endorsed an "amazing miracle gummy product" for weight loss called G6 Keto ACV Gummies, with "ACV" standing for apple cider vinegar. To be clear, none of this was true. Cowell never endorsed any CBD or keto weight loss gummy products, and his image and likeness were used without permission. Furthermore, we do not recommend placing trust in weight loss promises that feature the words "amazing miracle." In this story, we will walk through how this scam worked, including shedding light on the strange return addresses that appeared on packages received by customers who ordered similar gummies in the past. The Facebook and Instagram ads featuring Cowell displayed before-and-after pictures that seemed to show a weight loss transformation. "Simon Cowell Shares How He Dropped 56 In Just Weeks," the ads read. The link in the ads directed users to a specific page on the website brownnature.art. Before clicking on the link, we decided to check out the homepage for brownnature.art. According to our findings, this website appeared to have been created solely for running scams. How did we know this? A fake bookstore served as the facade for the scam operation on the website. This bookstore did not have any payment options enabled, meaning users could not order any of the books the website claimed to offer. Returning to the ads featuring Cowell, we clicked the link that took us to a specific page on brownnature.art. An article loaded in our browser that featured a People magazine logo. "Simon Cowell Confirms He is 'LEAVING' America's Got Talent After His Accidental 'Live' Confession On-Air," the false headline read. The article also falsely claimed that celebrities Kelly Clarkson and Melissa McCarthy had lost weight with G6 Keto ACV Gummies. Both Clarkson and McCarthy have been featured in these scams for years, despite having no connection to any keto weight loss gummies. This was not a story that People magazine had ever published. Scammers had replicated the design of how articles are displayed on people.com, the official website for the magazine, in an attempt to fool users into believing they were reading an authentic story from the publication. After clicking on one of the many links in the fake People magazine article on brownnature.art, we were led to the G6 Keto ACV Gummies website, secure.get6gproducts.com/v1/. The creator or creators of the product's website published several false statements that extended the scam seen in the social media ads and the fake People magazine article. For example, Dr. Mehmet Oz never called the product the "holy grail" of weight loss, nor did the Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism medical journal publish any pieces about the gummies, as the G6 website claimed. The G6 website also included mentions of CBS News, NBC, CNN, Women's Health, Woman's World, and Honolulu Magazine, even though these publications never featured, mentioned, or endorsed anything about the product. Perhaps worst of all was the fact that no phone number was available on the G6 website, not even in its privacy policy or terms and conditions documentation. In fact, part of the terms and conditions left two spaces after "TOLL FREE" where the phone number belonged: "Please contact Customer service at TOLL FREE between the hours of 9am EST - 9pm EST Mon - Sat with any questions regarding your product, payment or return." We have seen phone numbers omitted like this on CBD and keto weight loss gummies websites for more than a year. This was not a one-time issue. For many months, we have been observing comments from purported customers who complained about being victims of CBD and keto weight loss gummies scams. Many of these comments were posted on YouTube and contained detailed accounts of how they were scammed. These customers often stated in their comments that they were charged around $200 after believing they would only be paying about $40. They also expressed surprise that making a purchase enrolled them in a subscription that would charge their credit card hundreds of dollars per month, resulting in charges totaling thousands of dollars per year. Additionally, customers reported that when the gummy packages arrived at their doorstep, they contained no real identifying information about a parent company or anything about the people behind the products. According to the customers, the packages only included the two words "fulfillment center" along with a P.O. Box physical mailing address for Tampa, Florida, or Las Vegas, Nevada. Customers often reported a return address with the city of Smyrna, Tennessee. If any readers ordered CBD or keto gummies that promised an "amazing miracle" involving weight loss, we recommend they contact their credit card company to inform them of the scam. Again, these scams sign customers up for subscriptions. Unless action is taken, a new charge for hundreds of dollars will be placed on customers' credit cards every month. As for how Cowell truly lost weight, he once credited dropping pounds to his vegan diet. We found no credible reporting that indicated he ever consumed gummies. To be completely clear, we have never found even one real example of a celebrity who endorsed CBD or keto weight loss gummies.

False

After clicking on one of the many links in the fake People magazine article on brownnature.art, we were led to the G6 Keto ACV Gummies website,secure.get6gproducts.com/v1/. The creator or creators of the product's website published several false statements that were an extension of the scam seen in the social media ads and the fake People magazine article.For example, Dr. Mehmet Oz never called the product the "holy grail" of weight loss, nor did the Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism medical journal publish any pieces about the gummies, as the G6 website claimed.As for how Cowell truly lost weight, he once credited dropping pounds to hisvegan diet. We found no credible reporting that said anything about him ever consuming gummies.

FMD_train_827

Did George Carlin Say This About Participation Trophies?

02/18/2022

In February 2022, a meme supposedly featuring a quote from comedian George Carlin about "participation trophies" was recirculated on social media. This is not a genuine quote from Carlin. The meme reads: "Here's an idea for you to ignore. Instead of giving kids participation trophies, teach them activities where the result is the reward. Our society has lost sight of what's truly important, and it's about damned time we found it again." We were unable to find any record of Carlin uttering this phrase. When we looked for the origins of the quote, we did not find an old stand-up routine or a passage from one of Carlin's books. Instead, we traced it back to a 2016 post by Laurie Neverman on the Common Sense Home website. Neverman wrote that she originally posted this message to her personal Facebook page in September 2015 and that since then, a number of Facebook pages have attempted to take credit for it: "I wrote the passage above back in September 2015 and posted it on my personal Facebook wall. Friends gave me so much feedback on it that I shared it on the Common Sense Home Facebook page. Then a couple of huge Facebook pages took it and put their names on it (with no credit to me, naughty folks), and it was wildly popular on their pages, too. Given all the people who seemed to approve of the concept, I decided to write a post on it." This frequently happens with misattributed quotes. A message will get posted by a relatively unknown person, and then, in an attempt to legitimize that opinion and spread that message to a wider audience, the words will be erroneously placed into the mouth of a celebrity. For example, Clint Eastwood did not say, "the problem is not guns," Jim Carrey did not call for the "media to close for 30 days," and Kurt Russell did not write a poem that opposed defunding the police. While Carlin did not say this about "participation trophies," he did express similar sentiments during a stand-up routine about how "every child is special." It's worth noting that while the culture war skirmishes over participation trophies are relatively new, participation trophies themselves are not. They have been given out since at least the 1920s.

False

In February 2022, a meme supposedly featuring a quote from comedian George Carlin about "participation trophies" was recirculated on social media:We weren't able to find any record of Carlin uttering this phrase. When we looked for the origins of the quote, we did not find an old stand-up routine or a passage from one of Carlin's books. Instead, we traced it back to a 2016 post by Laurie Neverman on the Common Sense Home website.This frequently happens with misattributed quotes. A message will get posted by a relatively unknown person and then, in an attempt to legitimize that opinion and spread that message to a wider audience, the words will be erroneously placed into the mouth of a celebrity. For example, Clint Eastwood did not say "the problem is not guns," Jim Carrey did not call for the "media to close for 30 days," and Kurt Russell did not write a poem that opposed defunding the police.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w6Xtk7ALaUIIt's worth noting that while the culture war skirmishes over participation trophies is relatively new, participation trophies themselves are not. Participation trophies have been given out since at least the 1920s.

FMD_train_1139

Was it stated by Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene that California wildfires were caused by 'Jewish Space Lasers'?

02/01/2021

Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene from Georgia has courted controversy on various issues by promoting QAnon conspiracy theories, alongside a history of anti-Muslim and anti-Semitic remarks. Years-old views, including a Facebook interaction in which she agreed with a comment that the Parkland shooting was a "false flag" staged event, and a video in which she pushed 9/11 conspiracy theories, have been unearthed. Marjorie Taylor Greene courted controversy interaction 9/11 conspiracy theories One post from 2018 in particular was reported on by Media Matters for America, a watchdog group, where she speculated about a conspiracy surrounding the November 2018 wildfires in California. In the now-deleted post, Greene theorized that a space-based solar generator, used in a clean-energy experiment with the goal of replacing coal and oil, could have beamed the sun's energy back to Earth and started the fires. We have covered similar claims surrounding the wildfires before. reported now-deleted theorized similar claims She said, "there are too many coincidences to ignore" and "oddly there are all these people who have said they saw what looked like lasers or blue beams of light causing the fires." Greene also speculated that a range of people or groups were involved in this fire, including former California Gov. Jerry Brown, Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E), and Rothschild Inc., an investment firm. She said that Roger Kimmel, who was on the board of PG&E, was also "Vice Chairman of Rothschild Inc," and "If they are beaming the suns energy back to Earth, I'm sure they wouldn't ever miss a transmitter receiving station right??!! I mean mistakes are never made when anything new is invented. What would that look like anyway? A laser beam or light beam coming down to Earth I guess. Could that cause a fire? Hmmm, I don't know. I hope not! That wouldn't look so good for PG&E, Rothschild Inc, Solaren or Jerry Brown who sure does seem fond of PG&E." The Rothschilds, a Jewish banking family, have long been the targets of anti-Semitic conspiracy theories claiming that Jewish people are in control of the entire world. While Greene specifically did not use the words "Jewish space laser," she heavily implied that the Rothschilds were involved in the laser conspiracy. targets An investigation showed that the California wildfires of 2018 were ignited by PG&E power lines, and then spread with the help of warm temperatures, dry vegetation, and strong winds. showed In late January 2021, CNN reported that dozens of posts from 2018 and 2019 had been removed from Greene's Facebook page. removed Given that Greene did not directly state that "Jewish lasers" caused the fires, but did speculate that laser beams somehow connected to the Rothschild investment firm were a cause, we rate this claim as "Mixture."

NEI

Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene from Georgia has courted controversy on various issues by promoting QAnon conspiracy theories, alongside a history of anti-Muslim and anti-Semitic remarks. Years-old views, including a Facebook interaction in which she agreed with a comment that the Parkland shooting was a "false flag" staged event, and a video in which she pushed 9/11 conspiracy theories, have been unearthed.One post from 2018 in particular was reported on by Media Matters for America, a watchdog group, where she speculated about a conspiracy surrounding the November 2018 wildfires in California. In the now-deleted post, Greene theorized that a space-based solar generator, used in a clean-energy experiment with the goal of replacing coal and oil, could have beamed the sun's energy back to Earth and started the fires. We have covered similar claims surrounding the wildfires before.The Rothschilds, a Jewish banking family, have long been the targets of anti-Semitic conspiracy theories claiming that Jewish people are in control of the entire world. While Greene specifically did not use the words "Jewish space laser," she heavily implied that the Rothschilds were involved in the laser conspiracy.An investigation showed that the California wildfires of 2018 were ignited by PG&E power lines, and then spread with the help of warm temperatures, dry vegetation, and strong winds.In late January 2021, CNN reported that dozens of posts from 2018 and 2019 had been removed from Greene's Facebook page.

FMD_train_1497

Was El Paso One of the 'Most Dangerous Cities' in U.S. Before a Border Fence Was Built?

02/06/2019

On 5 February 2019, President Donald Trump delivered the annual State of the Union address and made an appeal in his ongoing effort to deliver on a campaign promise to build a border wall. In his speech, President Trump stated that the city of El Paso, Texas, "used to have extremely high rates of violent crime one of the highest in the country, and [was] considered one of our nations most dangerous cities. Now, with a powerful barrier in place, El Paso is one of our safest cities." stated Following that remark, El Paso Mayor Dee Margo took to Twitter to dispute its accuracy: El Paso was NEVER one of the MOST dangerous cities in the US. Weve had a fence for 10 years and it has impacted illegal immigration and curbed criminal activity. It is NOT the sole deterrent. Law enforcement in our community continues to keep us safe #SOTU #SOTU Mayor Dee Margo (@mayor_margo) February 6, 2019 February 6, 2019 We looked at crime data from the Federal Bureau of Investigation's Uniform Crime Report (UCR) to weigh which public official's statements were accurate. The FBI's UCR project compiles and analyzes data from "more than 18,000 city, university and college, county, state, tribal, and federal law enforcement agencies voluntarily participating in the program." UCR project Crime data do not support the president's claim either that El Paso was one of the country's "most dangerous cities" or that the barrier built between El Paso and Juarez, Mexico, had the effect of dramatically reducing crime on the U.S. side of the border. Instead, UCR data show that violent crime in El Paso generally followed a national trend. It spiked to its highest level in 30 years in the early 1990s and has steadily declined since. The following graph compares crime data from the El Paso Police Department with nationwide figures from 1985 to 2015. Source: Uniform Crime Report. online In 2018, US News & World Report ranked El Paso number 11 in "best places to retire," citing in part the community's relative safety and thriving economy. This ranking was not new, as El Paso had regularly been ranked one of the country's safest cities for its population size going as far back as 2005 -- three years before the border fence there was built. ranked far back Construction on the barrier between El Paso and Juarez began in 2008 under President George W. Bush and was completed in 2009 as part of a larger border security plan known as "Operation Hold the Line" which was launched in 1993. UCR data drawn from the El Paso Police Department shows that violent crime, already trending downward, continued to drop fairly consistently in the five years leading up to fence construction, from a high of 6,109 incidents in 1993 to an all-time low in 2006 of 2,422: Source: Uniform Crime Report. Source: Uniform Crime Report. KDBC El Paso's violent crime was at its peak in 1992. What did make a difference was a flood of Border Patrol agents, who began Operation Hold the Line in 1993. Hundreds of agents were stationed every few feet along the border. Violent crime in El Paso drastically reduced in the years following. We've played a big part of that, said Border Patrol Sector Chief Aaron Hull. We can't determine whether crime in El Paso fell as a result of increased Border Patrol presence, the dynamic that caused crime to drop nationwide, or some combination of both. But what can be determined from crime data is that over the previous three decades, border wall construction hadn't shown a positive impact on reducing violent crime in that community, and El Paso was far and away not one of the most dangerous cities in America. The 2019 State of the Union wasn't the first instance during which the Trump administration made this false claim, and it wasn't the first time that claim had been debunked. In their own fact check, the El Paso Times reported that Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton had also promoted the claim, along with White House press secretary Sarah Sanders: been debunked reported promoted In January 2018, White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders tweeted Ask El Paso, Texas (now one of Americas safest cities) across the border from Juarez, Mexico (one of the worlds most dangerous) if a wall works." She linked to an opinion piece published in the New York Post that was titled This town is proof that Trumps wall can work. The piece, written by a conservative political commentator based in Washington, D.C., argued that El Pasos border fence is the reason for the city's low crime rate and decreased illegal border crossings. At the time, local leaders rejected the article's findings and argued that it did not mention the police-community relations and cooperation between law enforcement agencies that contributed to the city's safety before border fencing was put in place. On the 2016 campaign trail, Donald Trump promised supporters that if elected, he would build a border wall that Mexico would pay for. As time went by and it became clear Mexico would not finance the construction of such a wall, Trump waffled on how it would be funded, resulting in the longest partial shutdown of the federal government in U.S. history when he and Congressional Democrats reached an impasse over the issue. waffled Mekelburg, Madlin. "Fact Check State of the Union: Trump Says El Paso Among Most Dangerous Cities Until Fence." El Paso Times. 5 February 2019. Mekelburg, Madlin. "Did Construction of a Border Fence Cut Down on Crime Rates in El Paso?" El Paso Times. 10 January 2019. Curtis, Genevieve. "Border Fence Didn't Make El Paso Safer From Violent Crimes." KDBC-TV. 6 February 2019. Timmons, Patrick. "Low Crime in El Paso Predates 'Wall'; Smugglers Are U.S. Citizens." UPI. 17 January 2019.

False

In his speech, President Trump stated that the city of El Paso, Texas, "used to have extremely high rates of violent crime one of the highest in the country, and [was] considered one of our nations most dangerous cities. Now, with a powerful barrier in place, El Paso is one of our safest cities."El Paso was NEVER one of the MOST dangerous cities in the US. Weve had a fence for 10 years and it has impacted illegal immigration and curbed criminal activity. It is NOT the sole deterrent. Law enforcement in our community continues to keep us safe #SOTU Mayor Dee Margo (@mayor_margo) February 6, 2019We looked at crime data from the Federal Bureau of Investigation's Uniform Crime Report (UCR) to weigh which public official's statements were accurate. The FBI's UCR project compiles and analyzes data from "more than 18,000 city, university and college, county, state, tribal, and federal law enforcement agencies voluntarily participating in the program." Source: Uniform Crime Report.In 2018, US News & World Report ranked El Paso number 11 in "best places to retire," citing in part the community's relative safety and thriving economy. This ranking was not new, as El Paso had regularly been ranked one of the country's safest cities for its population size going as far back as 2005 -- three years before the border fence there was built. Source: Uniform Crime Report. Source: Uniform Crime Report.The 2019 State of the Union wasn't the first instance during which the Trump administration made this false claim, and it wasn't the first time that claim had been debunked. In their own fact check, the El Paso Times reported that Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton had also promoted the claim, along with White House press secretary Sarah Sanders:On the 2016 campaign trail, Donald Trump promised supporters that if elected, he would build a border wall that Mexico would pay for. As time went by and it became clear Mexico would not finance the construction of such a wall, Trump waffled on how it would be funded, resulting in the longest partial shutdown of the federal government in U.S. history when he and Congressional Democrats reached an impasse over the issue.

FMD_train_1305

Obama mandated that banks provide loans to individuals with low income.

10/03/2008

In 1994, a class-action lawsuit was filed against Citibank, demanding that loans be made to poor people and others who could not show proof that they could pay the money back. The basis of the lawsuit was the 14th Amendment, which requires "fair and equal" treatment for all citizens. The legal theory was that failing to loan money to poor, indigent, or unemployed people was, on its face, a discriminatory act by lending institutions. Thousands of loans were processed, and of course, many went into default, partly explaining why we are in the financial mess we are in. It is easy for some people to point the finger of blame at President George Bush for this crisis because he is sitting in the hot seat. What many people do not know is that the suit was filed during the Clinton Administration. The lawyer who filed the suit was none other than Barack Hussein Obama. This item seeks to place much of the blame for America's current economic woes on Barack Obama by claiming that as a young lawyer, Obama filed a lawsuit requiring financial institutions to lend money to "poor people" and "others who could not show proof that they could pay the money back." Although there is a vague element of fact underlying this politicking, the piece quoted above is woefully incorrect in all its particulars. The 1994 case of Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank had nothing to do with requiring lenders to do business with people "who could not show proof that they could pay the money back." The case was a class-action lawsuit against Citibank Federal Savings initiated by a Black Chicago woman, Selma Buycks-Roberson, who claimed she was unfairly denied a mortgage based on her race. The lawsuit sought to end the practice of redlining, a discriminatory practice by which banks, insurance companies, and other business institutions refuse or limit loans, mortgages, insurance, etc., based solely on the geographic area in which the applicant lives—a practice that commonly excludes minorities in inner-city neighborhoods, regardless of their income or ability to pay. Specifically, the lawsuit charged that Citibank "rejected loan applications of minority applicants while approving loan applications filed by white applicants with similar financial characteristics and credit histories." The case was eventually settled out of court, with some class members receiving cash payments and Citibank agreeing to help ease the way for low- and moderate-income people to apply for mortgages. Although Barack Obama was involved with the Buycks-Roberson case, he did not file the lawsuit, nor was he the lead attorney in the matter. He was a junior member of an eight-lawyer team that worked on the case; Obama admits he played a mostly behind-the-scenes role at his law firm, Miner Barnhill & Galland. He researched the law, drafted motions, prepared for depositions, and did other less glamorous work during his three years full-time and eight years "of counsel" to the firm. "He wrote lots of substantial memos, but he didn't try any cases," said Judson Miner, a partner in the firm who was Obama's boss. Obama represented Calvin Roberson in a 1994 lawsuit against Citibank, charging the bank systematically denied mortgages to African-American applicants and others from minority neighborhoods. "I don't recall him ever standing up and giving an impassioned speech; it was a lot of behind-the-scenes stuff," said Fay Clayton, the lead lawyer on the case. "He was the very junior lawyer in that case," said attorney Robert Kriss. "He had just graduated from law school. I don't recall him being in court at any time I was there. I was the lead lawyer for Citibank, and he was not very visible to me." Kriss, Clayton, and every other co-counsel and opposing counsel interviewed for this story praised Obama's legal ability, temperament, and everything about his courtroom demeanor, even though they agree he did not say much in the courtroom. On February 23, 1995, Obama billed 2 hours and 50 minutes for an appearance before Judge Ruben Castillo on behalf of his client and also for reviewing some documents in advance of a deposition. That cost Citibank—which ultimately had to pay the winning side's fees—$467 at Obama's hourly rate of $165. Miner commanded the higher rate of $285 an hour. During his appearance before the judge, Obama said he would need more time to file a response to a motion, and the judge agreed. That was all Obama said during the half-hour hearing. His final bill on the case was 138 hours, or $23,000. Last updated: September 5, 2012. Associated Press. "Some Cases Obama Worked on in His Career as an Attorney." February 20, 2007.

NEI

The 1994 case of Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank had nothing to do with requiring lenders to do business with people "who could not show proof that they could pay the money back." The case was a class-action lawsuit against Citibank Federal Savings initiated by a black Chicago woman, Selma Buycks-Roberson, who claimed she was unfairly denied a mortgage based on her race. The lawsuit sought to end the practice of redlining, a discriminatory practice by which banks, insurance companies, and other business institutions refuse or limit loans, mortgages, insurance, etc., based solely on the geographic area in which the applicant lives (a practice that commonly excludes minorities in inner-city neighborhoods, regardless of their income or ability to pay). Specifically, the lawsuit charged that Citibank "rejected loan applications of minority applicants while approving loan applications filed by white applicants with similar financial characteristics and credit histories." The case was eventually settled out of court, with some class members receiving cash payments and Citibank agreeing to help ease the way for low- and moderate-income people to apply for mortgages.

FMD_train_694

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

11/14/2019

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.

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:

FMD_train_1820

'Costco' Power Generator Scam Hits Facebook Marketplace

07/11/2022

On July 11, 2022,we received reader mail asking us about sponsored posts on Facebook Marketplace that advertised portable power generators at Costco Wholesale. The sponsored posts led to a page that, to some viewers, may have looked like an official website for Costco. However, that was not really the case. The page was designed by scammers to try to fool users into losing money. One of the sponsored posts on Facebook Marketplace read, "30-day money-back guarantee!" and led to expeditaeos.com. The real website for Costco is costco.com. Facebook Marketplace costco.com That sponsored ad on Facebook looked like this: Once users clicked the sponsored post on Facebook, they were directed to the look-alike website that featured the Costco logo and 22 different products, most of which were portable power generators. The brands for the generators included Honda, Generac, Ryobi, and Toro. Such generators can easily sell for well over $1,000. On the scam page, however, the generators were supposedly available for less than $100. Costco scam While scanning the products, we came across another red flag that this was a scam: The fake page attempted to convince onlookers that they could buy Honda generators from Costco, when, in reality, Honda generators are not sold at Costco stores, nor are they available on the companys website. Honda generators are not sold at Costco stores The scammers appeared to be targeting users Paypal accounts. While checking out, the website asked people for Paypal.com login information even when they wanted to pay with credit or debit cards. We previously reported on a similarly-run scam about a supposed giveaway of pricey items from Traeger Grills. That scam also targeted users' Paypal information. Paypal Paypal.com reported We strongly recommend against ordering any products that claim to be sold by Costco unless the address bar at the top of your web browser specifically says that you are visiting costco.com. The scam involving portable power generators was not the first fraudulent scheme we've seen on Facebook using Costco's name and logo. Less than a month prior, scammers created a Facebook page named "Costco Wholesale Fans" and falsely claimed that the company was giving away TVs for free. (Additionally, we previously reported on a similar scam about Walmart, not Costco, giving away televisions for free.) claimed reported Walmart In sum, no, Costco was not advertising and selling deeply discounted power generators through Facebook Marketplace. We recommend caution when clicking on sponsored posts on Facebook that claim to provide steep price cuts on products that are normally pricey and quite useful. Facebook

False

One of the sponsored posts on Facebook Marketplace read, "30-day money-back guarantee!" and led to expeditaeos.com. The real website for Costco is costco.com. Once users clicked the sponsored post on Facebook, they were directed to the look-alike website that featured the Costco logo and 22 different products, most of which were portable power generators. The brands for the generators included Honda, Generac, Ryobi, and Toro. Such generators can easily sell for well over $1,000. On the scam page, however, the generators were supposedly available for less than $100. While scanning the products, we came across another red flag that this was a scam: The fake page attempted to convince onlookers that they could buy Honda generators from Costco, when, in reality, Honda generators are not sold at Costco stores, nor are they available on the companys website.The scammers appeared to be targeting users Paypal accounts. While checking out, the website asked people for Paypal.com login information even when they wanted to pay with credit or debit cards. We previously reported on a similarly-run scam about a supposed giveaway of pricey items from Traeger Grills. That scam also targeted users' Paypal information.The scam involving portable power generators was not the first fraudulent scheme we've seen on Facebook using Costco's name and logo. Less than a month prior, scammers created a Facebook page named "Costco Wholesale Fans" and falsely claimed that the company was giving away TVs for free. (Additionally, we previously reported on a similar scam about Walmart, not Costco, giving away televisions for free.)In sum, no, Costco was not advertising and selling deeply discounted power generators through Facebook Marketplace. We recommend caution when clicking on sponsored posts on Facebook that claim to provide steep price cuts on products that are normally pricey and quite useful.

FMD_train_1739

Before I was state treasurer, my Rhode Island business helped create over 1,000 jobs.

08/21/2014

In her "Back To Work" campaign ad, General Treasurer Gina Raimondo, one of four Democrats running for governor, stated that her former venture capital firm, Point Judith Capital, helped create more than 1,000 jobs while she was a partner. She made the same claim while campaigning for treasurer in the 2010 election. (Raimondo left the firm the day she took office; her investments there are held in a blind trust. The company has since relocated to Boston.) The ad shows Raimondo at Nabsys, a biomedical company in Providence. "Before I was State Treasurer, my Rhode Island business helped create over 1,000 jobs, including here at Nabsys, a biomedical company," Raimondo said. "As governor, I'll use this as a model for how we create manufacturing jobs. I'll bring colleges and industry together to develop new products in marine science, green technology, and medical devices, and to train our workers to fill those jobs. We need to get Rhode Islanders back to work." This week, Raimondo reiterated that claim in a new TV ad about how she helped bring back Narragansett Beer, originally brewed in Rhode Island until the brewery closed for good in 1983. ("I helped create over a thousand jobs, from high tech to making beer.") Before we get started, let's be clear about one thing: venture capital firms such as Point Judith are not in the business of creating jobs. Their mission is to make money for their investors—and themselves. They do so by raising money from entities such as private investors and public pension funds, and then investing it in startup companies, hoping for a big return if those companies take off. If the companies succeed and grow, they add jobs, but that's not the goal of the venture capitalists. To support her claim, Raimondo sent us a list of 21 companies that Point Judith Capital invested in and how many jobs those investments—and the company's efforts—helped create during the time she was a partner. They add up to 1,063. The list was produced by Point Judith Capital in late 2010, in preparation for her run for treasurer. We also interviewed Raimondo. She described Point Judith Capital's role as an early-stage investor. "Typically, you sit on the board of the company, provide a lot of hand-holding and strategic advice, help recruit people, and get the bank loan. It's hands-on. That's why we say we helped create those jobs. We had to have invested money in the company, which means we had an ownership stake in the company. In every case, we either had a board seat and additionally were just very involved in building the business, writing the business plan, and helping to get customers," Raimondo said. Initially, she stated that the investment was more than two million in each of those companies. On Wednesday, Raimondo's campaign manager Eric Hyers said Raimondo had misspoken. The investments were all at least six figures; they ranged from roughly $400,000 to $2 million or more. Raimondo noted that many of the companies have expanded and added jobs since then. Next, we attempted to call all 21 companies. Many were from out of state. Some had been bought out, and we were unable to reach the principals who worked there when Point Judith Capital was involved. At least one appears to have since closed. Of the representatives of seven companies we reached, all essentially confirmed Raimondo's claims, representing roughly 480 jobs. In one case, the job number appeared to fall slightly short; in another, a CEO gave Raimondo credit for more than the number of jobs she cited. We spoke with Mark Hellendrung, president of Narragansett Brewing Co. The company is based in Providence. Hellendrung said the beer is now brewed in Rochester, N.Y., Pawcatuck, Conn., and Westport, Mass. Test batches have been brewed locally in Rhode Island. Raimondo claimed Point Judith helped create 10 jobs there and invested more than $1 million. Hellendrung confirmed that Point Judith Capital helped launch the company (which put the famous Narragansett lager beer back on the shelves) with slightly less than $2 million in venture capital nine years ago and active involvement. "We've got over 10 full-time people, and routinely we've got over 20 part-time people that work promotions and events. It's been a labor of love and a ton of fun, and Gina was very helpful in that process," Hellendrung said. We spoke with Michael O'Neil Jr., founder and CEO of GetWellNetwork, a health care technology company headquartered in Maryland. Raimondo claimed Point Judith Capital helped create 121 jobs there. "She's totally correct," O'Neil said. "Gina and I met just as the company was getting started. Her leadership helped us get off the ground and helped get hundreds of jobs. Those included software engineers and project managers; others were on the services side," O'Neil said. Donna Dooley, chief financial officer at MedOptions, said that the 185 jobs that Raimondo credits Point Judith Capital with helping to create sounds accurate. Dooley joined MedOptions in 2011, the year after Raimondo left Point Judith Capital, and by then it was about 250 employees, she said. MedOptions provides behavioral health services in southern New England and the Mid-Atlantic. "I know that Point Judith Capital and another investment company put money in. I do think it's fair to say that there was a fair amount of job creation at that time," Dooley said. Steven J. Tallarida, co-founder of the former Spirus Medical, said Raimondo probably sold herself short by listing nine as the number of jobs Point Judith Capital helped create at that medical device company. "It was probably around 20," Tallarida said in a phone interview. "Those included research and development, manufacturing, and sales jobs. Point Judith Capital invested a couple of million. Raimondo sat on the board, and she would give governance on how to do things," Tallarida said. (The Massachusetts-based company was sold in 2011 to the Tokyo-based Olympus Corp.) Genevieve Thiers, who co-founded Sittercity, wrote in an email that Point Judith Capital put in $2.5 million and led their Series A round. "Due to them and the other $2.5 million, we were able to grow from 20 employees to about 80." (Raimondo credited her former company with helping to create 80 jobs at Sittercity, a nationwide babysitter-matching website). Thiers added, "That money did not start the company, but it was needed for a pivotal stage in growth." Thiers has since left the company but remains on the board. Dr. Barrett Bready, Nabsys co-founder and CEO, said in an email that Point Judith Capital was the first venture capital firm to invest in the company, and the firm has continued to invest in subsequent financing rounds. Raimondo formerly held a board seat. Nabsys currently has 40 employees, the number Raimondo credits her former company with helping to create. Bob Lentz, founder of the former PermissionTV in Waltham, Mass., wrote in an email that Point Judith Capital was actively involved. Raimondo said her firm helped create 40 jobs there. Lentz wrote, "It's been a few years, but the numbers sound right." (PermissionTV has been relaunched as VisibleGains). Our ruling: Gina Raimondo said her former firm, Point Judith Capital, helped create more than 1,000 jobs when she was a partner there. She produced a list of 21 companies and a precise number of jobs. We reached representatives of seven companies—most of them co-founders and/or CEOs. They confirmed that Point Judith Capital invested several million dollars—give or take—in each case; held board positions and, as such, helped create jobs. The job numbers added up to roughly 480 at those companies. While we were unable to reach all the companies Raimondo listed, the responses from the companies we did reach supported her qualified claim that Point Judith helped create 1,000 jobs. We rate Raimondo's claim True.

True

In herBack To Workcampaign ad, General Treasurer Gina Raimondo, one of four Democrats running for governor, stated that her former venture capital firm, Point Judith Capital, helped create more than 1,000 jobs when she was partner.The ad shows Raimondo atNabsys, a biomedical company in Providence.This week, Raimondo reiterated that claimin a new TV adabout how she helped bring back Narragansett Beer, originally brewed in Rhode Island until the brewery closed for good in 1983. (I helped create over a thousand jobs, from high tech to making beer )We spoke with Mark Hellendrung, president ofNarragansett Brewing Co. The company is based in Providence. Hellendrung said the beer is now brewed in Rochester, N.Y., Pawcatuck, Conn., Westport, Mass. Test batches have been brewed locally in Rhode Island.We spoke with Michael ONeil Jr., founder and CEO ofGetWellNetwork, a health care technology company headquartered in Maryland. Raimondo claimed Point Judith Capital helped create 121 jobs there.Genevieve Thiers,who cofoundedSittercity, wrote in an email that Point Judith Capital put in $2.5 million and led our Series A round. Due to them and the other $2.5 million we were able to grow from 20 employees to about 80. (Raimondo credited her former company with helping to create 80 jobs at Sittercity, a nationwide babysitter-matching website).Dr. Barrett Bready,Nabsyscofounder and CEO, said in an email that Point Judith Capital was the first venture capital firm to invest in the company, and the firm has continued to invest in subsequent financing rounds. Raimondo formerly held a board seat.(If you have a claim you'd like us to check, email us at[email protected]. And follow us on Twitter: @politifactri.)

FMD_train_1088

Over 80 percent of our trade deficit today is with countries that are not trade agreement partners, that are not level playing fields for the United States.

08/19/2010

U.S. Rep. Kevin Brady, R-The Woodlands, spoke last month in support of creating an Emergency Trade Deficit Commission while expressing his hopes for congressional ratification of trade agreements with South Korea, Panama, and Colombia. "The world has changed," Brady said on the House floor on July 28. "It's not enough to simply buy American; we have to sell American, sell our products, goods, and services throughout this world." In fact, over 80 percent of our trade deficit today is with countries that are not trade agreement partners and do not provide a level playing field for the United States; that's why we push hard for those agreements. The 80 percent figure startled a reader who urged us to review it; we were happy to oblige. Some background: In June, the U.S. trade deficit reached nearly $50 billion, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. Exports in June totaled $150.5 billion, while imports amounted to $200.3 billion. According to the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, the United States has free-trade agreements—meaning neither country imposes trade restrictions such as tariffs—with 17 nations, which together account for 34 percent of U.S. imports and exports. The countries are Israel, Canada, Mexico, Jordan, Chile, Singapore, Australia, Morocco, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Honduras, Guatemala, Bahrain, the Dominican Republic, Costa Rica, Oman, and Peru. Through participation in the World Trade Organization, the United States has agreements permitting some restrictions with many nations. These include export powerhouses such as China, which, from January through June 2010, was the leading exporter to the United States, with $161 billion in exported goods, according to the Census Bureau. China was followed in the exports-to-USA category by Canada, Mexico, and Japan. Regarding Brady's more than 80 percent breakout, Joe Kafchinski, a bureau statistician, stated that from January through June, 13 percent of the nation's trade deficit involved countries that have free-trade agreements with the United States—meaning 87 percent of the deficit was with nations without such agreements. Next, we wondered about Brady's assertion that those agreements serve to level the playing field with other countries, trade-wise, and thus reduce the U.S. trade deficit. The National Association of Manufacturers claims that free-trade agreements ease the export of American goods: "Free trade agreements (FTAs) account for nearly one-half of U.S. manufactured goods exports," the association states on its website. They lower the price of consumer goods in the United States as well as the costs U.S. businesses pay for imported materials. Bilateral deals also open foreign markets to U.S. goods, increasing employment in those export sectors. The manufacturers note that the Census Bureau reports that over the past two years, U.S. manufacturers had a $50 billion surplus with their counterparts in FTA partner countries. Conversely, during the same time period, the U.S. trade deficit in manufactured goods with the rest of the world was an astounding $820 billion. Put another way, the group states that 95 percent of the nation's manufactured-goods deficit is with nations that do not have free-trade agreements with the United States. For labor's perspective, we contacted Jeff Vogt, a global economic policy specialist for the AFL-CIO. Vogt stated that China's 2001 entry into the WTO drove up the U.S. deficit with non-free-trade nations. Regardless of which countries account for the deficit, Vogt said, the imbalance is a problem because the domestic economy benefits more from exports than imports. Vogt shared a March 2010 report by the nonpartisan Economic Policy Institute, which focuses on the economic needs of low- and middle-income Americans. The report states that the U.S. trade deficit with China increased by $186 billion between 2001 and 2008. Rapidly growing imports of computer and electronic parts (including computers, parts, semiconductors, and audio-video equipment) accounted for more than 40 percent of the surge, the report says, with deficits in advanced technology products responsible for 27 percent of the U.S.-China deficit. Additionally, according to the report, the growth of the deficit contributed to the loss of 627,700 U.S. jobs in computer and electronic products, along with other hard-hit industrial sectors, including apparel and accessories (150,200 jobs), miscellaneous manufactured goods (136,900), and fabricated metal products (108,700). However, trade agreements are not the only factors behind the deficit with China. The report identifies a major cause as currency manipulation. Unlike other currencies, the Chinese yuan does not fluctuate freely against the dollar, giving Chinese-made goods an artificial price advantage overseas. In June 2010, China's central bank announced that it would allow the yuan to fluctuate more, but the value of the yuan has since increased by less than 1 percent, according to a news report posted online this week by FinanceAsia. Robert Scott, an economist at the nonpartisan Economic Policy Institute in Washington, cautioned against presuming that free-trade agreements benefit the United States, stating that this depends in part on whether the other nation is as developed as the United States and has open markets. For instance, the U.S. runs a trade deficit with its free-trade neighbor Mexico, he noted, dominated by a flow of manufacturing plants to the less-developed country. Free-trade agreements, Scott argued, are designed to make the world safe for multinationals to outsource production indefinitely. In a July 1 article on the institute's website that criticized the proposed trade agreement with South Korea as foolish, Scott wrote: "History shows that such trade deals lead to rapidly growing trade deficits and job loss in the United States." Clearly, there is a difference of opinion on whether free-trade agreements are beneficial in relation to the growing U.S. trade deficit, as Brady asserts. However, the key statistic in Brady's statement holds true. In fact, he understates the share of our trade deficit with nations that do not have free-trade agreements with the U.S. We rate Brady's statement as Mostly True.

True

Free-trade agreements, Scott said, are designed to make the world safe for multinationals to outsource production forever. And in aJuly 1article on the institute's website that criticized the proposed trade agreement with South Korea as foolish, Scott wrote: History shows that such trade deals lead to rapidly growing trade deficits and job loss in the United States.

FMD_train_271

Rephrase this document: IRS Notification

11/28/2006

Claim: The IRS is sending out unsolicited e-mails providing taxpayers with a web form to use to check on the status of their federal income tax returns and refunds. Examples: [Collected on the Internet, 2005] You filed your tax return and you're expecting a refund. You have just one question and you want the answer now - Where's My Refund? Access this secure website to find out if the IRS received your return and whether your refund was processed and sent to you. New program enhancements allow you to begin a refund trace online if you have not received your check within 28 days from the original IRS mailing date. Some of you will also be able to correct or change your mailing address within this application if your check was returned to us as undelivered by the U.S. Postal Service. "Where's My Refund?" will prompt you when these features are available for your situation. To check your refund status, you'll need to provide the following information as shown on your return: your first and last name, your Social Security Number (or IRS Individual Taxpayer Identification Number), and your credit card information. Okay now, Where's My Refund? Under the Privacy Act of 1974, we must inform you that our legal right to ask for information is based on Internal Revenue Code Sections 6001, 6011, 6012(a), and their regulations. They state that you must furnish us with records or statements for any tax for which you are liable, including the withholding of taxes by your employer. We ask for information to carry out the Internal Revenue laws of the United States, and you are required to provide this information. We may share the information with the Department of Justice for civil and criminal litigation, other federal agencies, states, cities, and the District of Columbia for use in administering their tax laws. If you don't provide this information or provide fraudulent information, the law stipulates that you may be charged penalties, and in certain cases, you may be subject to criminal prosecution. We may also have to disallow the exemptions, exclusions, credits, deductions, or adjustments shown on the tax return. This could increase your tax liability or delay any refund. Interest may also be charged. Origins: In December 2005, we began seeing copies of the above-reproduced phishing scam, an e-mail purporting to come from the Internal Revenue Service (sent with a return address of <[email protected]>) and offering consumers a link to a handy web form they can use to check the status of their federal income tax returns and refunds. Of course, the web form the recipient is directed to after clicking on the provided link is not from the real IRS website, but an imitation hosted on a server in a foreign country (Mexico in the example we received) that harvests information scammers can use for identity and financial theft by prompting the user to input all sorts of personal data (name, Social Security number, address) as well as other financial information (credit card number, ATM PIN). The IRS does not ask for personal identifying or financial information via unsolicited e-mail, and in no case would the IRS need information such as credit card numbers or ATM PINs in order to respond to inquiries about the status of tax returns or refunds. Taxpayers can contact the IRS via telephone at 1-800-829-1040 for questions regarding their taxes, or they can visit the genuine Where's My Refund? page on the IRS website. Where's My Refund? Last updated: 20 December 2005 Sources: Tri-Town News [Howell, NJ]. "IRS Warns of E-Mail Scam." 8 December 2005.

False

Okay now, Where's My Refund?December 2005 we began seeing copies of the above-reproduced phishing scam, an e-mail purporting to come from the Internal Revenue Service (sent with a return address of <[email protected]>) and offering consumers a link to a handy web form they can use to check the status of their federal income tax returns and refunds. Of course, the web form the recipient is directed to after clicking on the provided link is not from the real IRS web site, but an imitation hosted on a server in a foreign country (Mexico in the example we received) that harvests information scammers can use for identity and financial theft by prompting the user to input all sorts of personal data (name, Social Security number, address) as well as other financial information (credit card number, ATM PIN).The IRS does not ask for personal identifying or financial information via unsolicited e-mail, and in no case would the IRS need information such as credit card numbers or ATM PINs in order to respond to inquiries about the status of tax returns or refunds. Taxpayers can contact the IRS via telephone at 1-800-829-1040 for questions regarding their taxes, or they can visit the genuine Where's My Refund? page on the IRS web site.

FMD_train_1120

Why Are Coins Left on Gravestones in Cemeteries?

08/20/2013

Humans have been leaving mementos on and within the final resting places of loved ones almost from the beginning of the species. Excavations of even the earliest graves uncover goods meant to serve the deceased in the next world, such as pottery, weapons, and beads. But what about coins being left on graves? The earliest known coins date to the late seventh century B.C., and as societies began embracing such monetary systems, the practice leaving of coins in the graves of citizens began as yet another way of equipping the dear departed for the afterlife. earliest Mythologies within certain cultures added specific purpose for coins being left with the dead. In Greek mythology, Charon, the ferryman of Hades, required payment for his services. A coin was therefore placed in the mouth of the dear departed to ensure he would ferry the deceased across the rivers Styx and Acheron and into the world of the dead rather than leave him to wander the shore for a hundred years. In England and the U.S., pennies were routinely placed on the closed eyes of the dead, yet the purpose for that practice was not clear some say it was to keep the eyes of the corpse from flying open (even though the eyes, once shut by the person laying out the body, do not reopen). In these more recent days, coins and other small items are sometimes discovered on grave markers, be they plaques resting atop the sod or tombstones erected at the head of the burial plot. These small tokens are left by visitors for no greater purpose than to indicate that someone has visited that particular grave. It has long been a tradition among Jews, for example, to leave a small stone or pebble atop a headstone just to show that someone who cared had stopped by. Coins (especially pennies) are favored by others who wish to demonstrate that the deceased has not been forgotten and that instead his loved ones still visit him. Sometimes these small remembrances convey meaning specific to the person buried in that plot. For more than twenty years, every month someone has been leaving one Campbell's tomato soup can and a pocketful of change on the plain black granite tombstone that marks the grave of Andy Warhol. The soup can is easy to explain, given Warhol's iconic use of that commodity in his art, but the handful of change remains a bit of a mystery. In similar vein, visitors often leave pebbles, coins and maple leaf pins at the grave of Canadian Prime Minister Lester B. Pearson, the man who replaced Canada's Red Ensign with the Maple Leaf flag. soup can Regarding the 'tradition' of soldiers leaving on the headstones of fallen comrades varying denominations of coins to denote their relationship with the deceased, the earliest reference to this practice we've found so far dates only to June 2009, when it appeared as a web site post. A version now commonly circulated in e-mail appears to have been drawn from it, albeit some changes have slipped in, such as "A buddy who served in the same outfit, or was with the deceased when he died, might leave a quarter" becoming "By leaving a quarter at the grave, you are telling the family that you were with the soldier when he was killed": COINS LEFT ON TOMBSTONES While visiting some cemeteries you may notice that headstones marking certain graves have coins on them, left by previous visitors to the grave. These coins have distinct meanings when left on the headstones of those who gave their life while serving in America's military, and these meanings vary depending on the denomination of coin. A coin left on a headstone or at the grave site is meant as a message to the deceased soldier's family that someone else has visited the grave to pay respect. Leaving a penny at the grave means simply that you visited. A nickel indicates that you and the deceased trained at boot camp together, while a dime means you served with him in some capacity. By leaving a quarter at the grave, you are telling the family that you were with the soldier when he was killed. According to tradition, the money left at graves in national cemeteries and state veterans cemeteries is eventually collected, and the funds are put toward maintaining the cemetery or paying burial costs for indigent veterans. In the US, this practice became common during the Vietnam war, due to the political divide in the country over the war; leaving a coin was seen as a more practical way to communicate that you had visited the grave than contacting the soldier's family, which could devolve into an uncomfortable argument over politics relating to the war. Some Vietnam veterans would leave coins as a "down payment" to buy their fallen comrades a beer or play a hand of cards when they would finally be reunited. The tradition of leaving coins on the headstones of military men and women can be traced to as far back as the Roman Empire. [Collected via Facebook, October 2015] While "Cleaning of the Stones" at the National Cemetery in Holly. I noticed a quarter placed on one of the stones. Later I also noticed a nickel placed on another stone. I was so touched with this that I took pictures.I googled about the coins, and found this out. I am very proud to share this. A coin left on a headstone lets the deceased soldiers family know that somebody stopped by to pay their respect. Leaving a penny means you visited. A nickel means that you and the deceased soldier trained at boot camp together. If you served with the soldier, you leave a dime. A quarter is very significant because it means that you were there when that soldier died. Despite the claim of this tradition dating back to the days of the Roman Empire, there's no reason to suppose that it does. A coin might be placed in the mouth of a fallen Roman soldier (to get him across the River Styx), but the deceased's comrades would more likely have been expending any further coinage on a funeral banquet in his honor rather than interring it with his remains. Given the lack of documentation attesting to the origins and consistency of this 'tradition,' it is perhaps best regarded not as an actual common practice but instead as someone's idealized legend of what should be. Roman Empire Yet military folk do sometimes leave very special remembrances at the graves of deceased servicemen: challenge coins. These tokens identify their bearers as members of particular units and are prized and cherished by those to whom they have been given; thus any challenge coins found at gravesites were almost certainly left there by comrades-in-arms of the deceased. challenge coins It needs be mentioned that not only coins, medallions, and stones have been found on military headstones. In July 2013, a wife of a deceased serviceman discovered another woman's name on her husband's marker in place of her own. Edna Fielden, widow of Air Force Master Sergeant Billy Fielden (buried at Fort Logan Cemetery in Denver 25 years earlier) was shocked to discover the headstone bore the inscription "Dolores" over the legend "His Wife" when she brought her grandchildren to visit the grave. Update: In early 2021, coins on graves was the subject of a number of online advertisements. One of the ads read: "[Pics] Here's Why You Should Never, Ever Touch Coins Left On A Gravestone." Another claimed: "[Pics] If You See Coins Placed On A Gravestone, Here's What It Means." Both ads led to lengthy slideshow articles. Buchan, Rebecca. "Toy Cars and Coins Taken from Toddler's Graveside." Aberdeen Press and Journal. 6 October 2011 (p. 3). Caswell, Emily. "Ask Us: Pennies on Gravestones Reflect Greek Mythology." The [Manchester] Union Leader. 13 July 2011 (p. D36). Hamill, Sean. "An Homage in Coins and Soup Cans." The International Herald Tribune. 27 February 2007 (p. 9). Hogan, Jim. "Tokens of Remembrance." Los Angeles Times. 27 May 2013 (p. A15). Lang, Sarah. "Coins Gone from Strong's Grave." The Lebanon Reporter [Indiana]. 11 May 2011. McArthur, Douglas. "A Historical Stroll Through Canada's Prime Ministerial Grave Sites." The Globe and Mail. 7 October 2000 (p. T4). NBC News. "Military Widow Finds Another Woman's Name Engraved on Her Husband's Tombstone." 18 June 2013. San Jose Mercury News. "Fans Still Pay Tribute to Allison." The Globe and Mail. 14 July 1994 (p. F2).

True

The earliest known coins date to the late seventh century B.C., and as societies began embracing such monetary systems, the practice leaving of coins in the graves of citizens began as yet another way of equipping the dear departed for the afterlife.Sometimes these small remembrances convey meaning specific to the person buried in that plot. For more than twenty years, every month someone has been leaving one Campbell's tomato soup can and a pocketful of change on the plain black granite tombstone that marks the grave of Andy Warhol. The soup can is easy to explain, given Warhol's iconic use of that commodity in his art, but the handful of change remains a bit of a mystery. In similar vein, visitors often leave pebbles, coins and maple leaf pins at the grave of Canadian Prime Minister Lester B. Pearson, the man who replaced Canada's Red Ensign with the Maple Leaf flag.Despite the claim of this tradition dating back to the days of the Roman Empire, there's no reason to suppose that it does. A coin might be placed in the mouth of a fallen Roman soldier (to get him across the River Styx), but the deceased's comrades would more likely have been expending any further coinage on a funeral banquet in his honor rather than interring it with his remains. Given the lack of documentation attesting to the origins and consistency of this 'tradition,' it is perhaps best regarded not as an actual common practice but instead as someone's idealized legend of what should be.Yet military folk do sometimes leave very special remembrances at the graves of deceased servicemen: challenge coins. These tokens identify their bearers as members of particular units and are prized and cherished by those to whom they have been given; thus any challenge coins found at gravesites were almost certainly left there by comrades-in-arms of the deceased.

FMD_train_1947

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?

02/26/2019

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.

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.

FMD_train_771

Major petroleum companies

07/14/2008

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

True

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.

FMD_train_1583

Does This Photograph Show ICE Arresting Small Children?

08/10/2018

An image circulated on Facebook shows small children in handcuffs being led into a law enforcement vehicle, along with claims that the pictured children were immigrants who had been taken by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) as part of the Trump administration's controversial "zero tolerance" policy. Under that policy, migrant parents caught crossing the U.S.-Mexico border between ports of entry were criminally charged and their children taken from them: Although hundreds of immigrant children, including some infants, were taken from their parents, the image seen here is unrelated to that activity. The photograph has been online since 2009 and is associated with a Tea Party protest in West Palm Beach, Florida, during which parents brought their kids for a mock arrest to demonstrate how they are being saddled with debt from government spending. taken The alternate weekly newspaper Broward Palm Beach New Times featured the image in a 14 April 2014 story about the demonstration under the caption "Hopefully the cops won't mistake the protesters for real criminals." The New Times reported of the event that: story If you have children, and you'd like to exploit those children for your political gains, and if you have the money to rent those children prison uniforms, you should totally bring them to downtown West Palm Beach on Wednesday. That's when people protesting government spending will bring 20-30 children dressed in prison uniforms and put them in fake debtor jails. It's meant to show how children will have to pay for wasteful government spending of today. And it's also a great way to ensure continued work for psychologists of tomorrow. The event is part of a nationwide Tea Party demonstration put on by Libertarians, Republicans, and others who think economic stimulus bills are a good occasion to put our children into fake debtor jails. Sid Dinerstein, chairman of the Republican Party of Palm Beach County and an organizer of the event, said the fake jails will be two dimensional, meaning the kids won't actually be held captive at any point. Except by the government's excessive debt. This same photograph was similarly used outside its original context as part of a meme in 2012, but that time it was employed to scare parents about the looming "police state" as behavioral issues in school were being treated as crimes: meme Barton, Eric. "Children with No Financial Future to Be Jailed." [Broward Palm Beach] New Times. 14 April 2009. Shapiro, Leslie and Manas Sharma. "How Many Migrant Children Are Still Separated from Their Families?" The Washington Post. 8 August 2018. Ainsley, Julia and Jane C. Timm. "1,995 Children Separated from Families at Border Under 'Zero Tolerance' Policy." NBC News. 15 June 2018.

False

Although hundreds of immigrant children, including some infants, were taken from their parents, the image seen here is unrelated to that activity. The photograph has been online since 2009 and is associated with a Tea Party protest in West Palm Beach, Florida, during which parents brought their kids for a mock arrest to demonstrate how they are being saddled with debt from government spending.The alternate weekly newspaper Broward Palm Beach New Times featured the image in a 14 April 2014 story about the demonstration under the caption "Hopefully the cops won't mistake the protesters for real criminals." The New Times reported of the event that:This same photograph was similarly used outside its original context as part of a meme in 2012, but that time it was employed to scare parents about the looming "police state" as behavioral issues in school were being treated as crimes:

FMD_train_1099

Is this a Photograph of a Large Storm Over Sydney?

04/02/2019

An image supposedly capturing a large storm looming over Sydney, Australia, racked up thousands of views as it was passed around on Facebook in March 2019: Facebook This is not a genuine photograph of a storm over Sydney, but rather a composite of at least two different images. The photograph of the Sydney cityscape was taken by photographer Rudy Blasko and shared to his Instagram page in April 2017. The original image depicted Sydney's Lavender Bay at sunset, not during a major storm: Rudy Blasko Sunset in the city. Sydney Lavender Bay . #sydney #australia #ig_shotz #ig_masterpiece #instagram #neverstopexploring #natgeotravel #natgeotravelpic #agameoftones #sunset #photoprints #main_vision #lavenderbay #canonusa #canon_photos #canonaustralia #worldtravel #worldcaptures #wow_australia #australiagram #australia_oz #moodygrams #earthpix #earth_shotz #earthofficial #longexpoelite #longexposure #longexposure_shots #shoot2kill #harbourbridge Sunset in the city. Sydney Lavender Bay . #sydney #australia #ig_shotz #ig_masterpiece #instagram #neverstopexploring #natgeotravel #natgeotravelpic #agameoftones #sunset #photoprints #main_vision #lavenderbay #canonusa #canon_photos #canonaustralia #worldtravel #worldcaptures #wow_australia #australiagram #australia_oz #moodygrams #earthpix #earth_shotz #earthofficial #longexpoelite #longexposure #longexposure_shots #shoot2kill #harbourbridge A post shared by Rudi Balasko (@rudib1976) on Apr 13, 2017 at 9:46am PDT Rudi Balasko The storm clouds in this viral picture appear to be a distorted version of a photograph available via Adobe Stock, which supposedly shows a supercell that formed in Colorado in 2013. The original cloud photograph was flipped and stretched before it was inserted into the viral image. Adobe Stock Colorado We're not entirely certain that the original photograph captured a genuine storm (the image is available on various stock photo websites with varying information), but supercell clouds are certainly real. Here's how NASA described these alien-looking cloud formations when describing a similar photograph taken in Montana in 2010: stock photo NASA Is that a spaceship or a cloud? Although it may seem like an alien mothership, it's actually a impressive thunderstorm cloud called a supercell. Such colossal storm systems center on mesocyclones -- rotating updrafts that can span several kilometers and deliver torrential rain and high winds including tornadoes. Jagged sculptured clouds adorn the supercell's edge, while wind swept dust and rain dominate the center. The following collage shows the two original images (left) and the doctored photograph (right). We rotated and stretched the cloud image to better match the edited "Stormy Over Sydney" photograph: NASA. "A Supercell Thunderstorm Cloud Over Montana." 26 February 2017.

False

An image supposedly capturing a large storm looming over Sydney, Australia, racked up thousands of views as it was passed around on Facebook in March 2019:The photograph of the Sydney cityscape was taken by photographer Rudy Blasko and shared to his Instagram page in April 2017. The original image depicted Sydney's Lavender Bay at sunset, not during a major storm:Sunset in the city. Sydney Lavender Bay . #sydney #australia #ig_shotz #ig_masterpiece #instagram #neverstopexploring #natgeotravel #natgeotravelpic #agameoftones #sunset #photoprints #main_vision #lavenderbay #canonusa #canon_photos #canonaustralia #worldtravel #worldcaptures #wow_australia #australiagram #australia_oz #moodygrams #earthpix #earth_shotz #earthofficial #longexpoelite #longexposure #longexposure_shots #shoot2kill #harbourbridgeA post shared by Rudi Balasko (@rudib1976) on Apr 13, 2017 at 9:46am PDTThe storm clouds in this viral picture appear to be a distorted version of a photograph available via Adobe Stock, which supposedly shows a supercell that formed in Colorado in 2013. The original cloud photograph was flipped and stretched before it was inserted into the viral image.We're not entirely certain that the original photograph captured a genuine storm (the image is available on various stock photo websites with varying information), but supercell clouds are certainly real. Here's how NASA described these alien-looking cloud formations when describing a similar photograph taken in Montana in 2010:

FMD_train_1515

Fake Pentagon Explosion Pic Goes Viral On Twitter

05/22/2023

A fake photograph of an explosion at the Pentagon in Washington that was virally shared on Twitter may have caused the stock market to briefly take a slight dip. The picture went viral on the social media platform on the morning of May 22, 2023. The photo may have originally been generated by artificial intelligence (AI) technology. It was reshared by a number of prominent accounts. The Arlington County Fire Department in Virginia confirmed on their specially-designated "government or multilateral organization account" that no such explosion had taken place. According to Insider.com, the stock market happened to fall 0.26% four minutes after one prominent user tweeted the fake news. Bear in mind that all of this happened on a Monday morning, the beginning of the week for Wall Street. Still, the market "quickly bounced back," the reporting said. Insider.com tweeted Any rumors that claimed the market took a massive hit because of the photo or the false news were not true. As the news and fake picture went viral, it was shared byRussian state-backed media outlet RT. The tweet was deleted minutes later. The news of the explosion that never happened also appeared on TV on India's Republic Media Network. Additionally, a number of users who paidfor Twitter Blue shared the news. The paid service provides accounts various perks, including a blue checkmark. In one case, an account named @BloombergFeed, whose owner had paid for Twitter Blue, tweeted the news. However, despite its handle, this user had no affiliation with Bloomberg News. The account has since been suspended. In the past, blue checkmarks were not for sale to the general public. They were only handed out to a select number of accounts, many who could have been considered prominent people or authoritative sources. After Elon Musk completed his purchase of Twitter, policies were put into place that made it so anyone could purchase the checkmark symbol to be placed on their account with Twitter Blue. To some users, this perhaps gave a broad and false sense of trust of authority to tweets from "verified" accounts. Twitter Blue @ArlingtonVaFD. "@PFPAOfficial and the ACFD Are Aware of a Social Media Report Circulating Online about an Explosion near the Pentagon. There Is NO Explosion or Incident Taking Place at or near the Pentagon Reservation, and There Is No Immediate Danger or Hazards to the Public." Twitter, 22 May 2023, https://twitter.com/ArlingtonVaFD/status/1660653619954294786. Cohen, Rebecca. "An Apparently AI-Generated Hoax of an Explosion at the Pentagon Went Viral Online and Markets Briefly Dipped." Insider, 22 May 2023, https://www.insider.com/ai-generated-hoax-explosion-pentagon-viral-markets-dipped-2023-5.

False

According to Insider.com, the stock market happened to fall 0.26% four minutes after one prominent user tweeted the fake news. Bear in mind that all of this happened on a Monday morning, the beginning of the week for Wall Street. Still, the market "quickly bounced back," the reporting said.After Elon Musk completed his purchase of Twitter, policies were put into place that made it so anyone could purchase the checkmark symbol to be placed on their account with Twitter Blue. To some users, this perhaps gave a broad and false sense of trust of authority to tweets from "verified" accounts.

FMD_train_916

Pascua-Lama

05/23/2006

Claim: The petition addresses environmental issues associated with the Pascua-Lama mining operation in Chile. Example: [Collected via e-mail, 2006] Dear friends who care about our earth, judge for yourself if you want to take action. In the Valle de San Félix, the purest water in Chile flows from two rivers, fed by two glaciers. Water is a precious resource, and wars will be fought for it. Indigenous farmers use this water; there is no unemployment, and they provide the second largest source of income for the area. Beneath the glaciers, a huge deposit of gold, silver, and other minerals has been found. To access these resources, it would be necessary to break and destroy the glaciers—something never conceived of in the history of the world—and to create two massive holes, each as large as an entire mountain: one for extraction and one for the mine's waste. The project is called Pascua-Lama, and the company behind it is Barrick Gold. This operation is planned by a multinational company, one of whose members is George Bush Senior (what a surprise, eh?). The Chilean government has approved the project to start this year, 2006. The only reason it hasn't begun yet is that the farmers have obtained a temporary stay of execution. If they destroy the glaciers, they will not only eliminate the source of especially pure water but will also permanently contaminate the two rivers, rendering them unfit for human or animal consumption due to the use of cyanide and sulfuric acid in the extraction process. Every last gram of gold will go abroad to the multinational company, leaving the people whose land it is with only poisoned water and resulting illnesses. The farmers have been fighting for their land for a long time but have been forbidden to make a TV appeal due to a ban from the Ministry of the Interior. Their only hope now of putting brakes on this project is to seek help from international justice. The world must know what is happening in Chile. The only place to start changing the world is from here. We ask you to circulate this message among your friends in the following way: please copy this text, paste it into a new email, add your signature, and send it to everyone in your address book. We ask the 100th person to receive and sign the petition to send it to [email protected] to be forwarded to the Chilean government. No to Pascua Lama! Open-cast mine in the Andean Cordillera on the Chilean-Argentine frontier. We ask the Chilean government not to authorize the Pascua Lama project to protect the three glaciers, the purity of the water in the San Félix Valley and El Tránsito, the quality of the agricultural land in the Atacama region, and the quality of life for the Diaguita people and the entire population of the region. Origins: The Pascua-Lama project is an effort undertaken by the Barrick Gold Corporation to mine rich gold and silver fields in the mountainous region along the border between Chile and Argentina. Environmental concerns associated with the project, particularly the potential destruction or relocation of glaciers that sit atop a portion of the gold fields, have led to numerous protests and petitions urging the Chilean government to intervene and stop or modify the Pascua-Lama mining plan. The above-quoted petition is "True" in the broad sense that it addresses a real issue, but, not surprisingly, the two sides (environmentalists and Barrick) make substantially different claims about the environmental and social effects of the Pascua-Lama project. Pascua-Lama Barrick Gold Corporation The controversial plan was described by The Santiago Times in March 2005: Canadian international mining company Barrick Gold has plans to relocate three glaciers in the mountain range between Argentina and Chile to gain access to 17.6 million ounces of rich gold and silver deposits. Chilean farmers and residents of the surrounding Huasco Valley are strongly opposed to the proposal to transfer the ice masses. The glaciers' tributaries are used for irrigation by the farmers, and their removal would threaten the ecological balance and agricultural production of the fertile river valley. Barrick hopes to transfer 300,000 cubic meters of ice with a 20-hectare surface area from the glaciers that surround the deposits. To mitigate ecological impact and prevent ice from melting, Barrick hopes to transfer the three glaciers, Toro I, Toro II, and Esperanza, to an area with similar surface characteristics and elevation by merging the three into a larger glacier, Guanaco, located several kilometers south with a surface area of over 200 hectares. The proposal is part of the "Pascua Lama" mining treaty, signed by Chile and Argentina in August 2004 after four years of discussion. Citizens of the Huasco Valley and Region III are taking a stand against the multibillion-dollar foreign company. Last week, an environmental group, Valley Defense, organized a demonstration against the project, where close to 200 farmers, community leaders, and neighbors marched in protest. "We don't want to live in an area contaminated by the fault of foreign economic interests," they said. Ral Montenegro, an Argentine biologist and Alternative Nobel Prize (formally Right Livelihood Award) winner, agrees with the farmers. "The issue is serious in that the project would put pressure on two important river basins that serve as the principal water supply for communities within a semi-arid environment," Montenegro said. In a letter earlier this year to President Ricardo Lagos, agricultural and community associations of the Huasco Valley voiced their concerns about the mining initiative, insisting that it threatens the ecosystem, agriculture, and water quality of the valley, which not only sacrifices agricultural exports and trade agreements but also human health. "If almost 24 hectares of glacier have been exploited solely for the project's experiments, imagine how much could be destroyed in the end," said Francisco Bou, leader for the Huasco Valley agriculturists. Other environmental concerns involve potential contamination from the chemicals to be used in the mining operation: "Pascua Lama will use sodium cyanide, arsenic, and produce toxic byproducts. The rivers El Estrecho, San Félix, and El Tránsito, together with the Santa Juana dam, are liable to be polluted by Pascua Lama. These dangerous poisons will be handled at the sources of the rivers and could damage water supplies to farms," said César Padilla of the Latin American Observatory for Environmental Conflicts. A December 2005 statement from Barrick downplayed the expressed concerns: Vincent Borg, vice president of corporate communications at Barrick in Canada, said 'glacier experts' had defined the icefields in question as 'ice reservoirs or icefields.' "Regardless of what the experts call them, Barrick is committed to their preservation and conservation. We will move only 5 acres of ice, and it is a straightforward procedure that has been proven in the past to conserve the ice. The ice in question only affects about 3-4% of the ice in the Valley, so it is not an amount that some sensationalists would like to make it appear," he said. On the issue of the use of toxic chemicals such as cyanide, he said, "Cyanide is used worldwide and can be safely used in many industrial applications. Mining comprises only 13% of cyanide use." Opponents contend that Barrick's planned procedures to move ice from the glaciers are not nearly as straightforward and safe as the company asserts: the lack of relevant technical expertise in removing glaciers implies an irreversible environmental impact. What is certain is that the three affected glaciers would suffer an environmental impact. Nevertheless, there is no certainty whatsoever of what the impact would be on glaciers or permafrost (frozen rock or soil) from the road network and the associated stabilization measures that generally involve the use of salts. With respect to the measures and actions that will be implemented for handling glaciers, there are the following concerns: The "clearing" of ice or "pieces of glacier" will be done by bulldozer and front-end loader until the entire rock bed is uncovered. In this case, any mechanical action on the glacier will cause heat transfer, which will raise the temperature of the ice, and this would be exacerbated by the high local insolation. Despite the fact that diurnal temperatures are low, the radiative balance includes more than caloric energy. There are no measurements of radiative energy, but the albedo differences between ice and rock mean that the absorption of energy is greater in rock, which would expose the glacier even more. This is also the case for controlled blasting and pushing the glaciers by the aforementioned means until their final disposition. In the case of blasting, this could elevate the temperature to thresholds of melting and evaporation, which would further encourage the destruction of the glacier. Barrick has published a Pascua-Lama Fact Sheet that counters many of the statements made in the circulated e-mail message: Pascua-Lama Fact Sheet Misleading Assertions and Facts The chain letter makes some very misleading characterizations and inaccurate statements. Here are a few examples: Statement: "Water in Chile runs from two rivers, fed by two glaciers." Fact: The Huasco Valley has more than 50 different glaciers and ice fields. The three smaller glaciers or ice fields that are adjacent to the orebody comprise only 0.3% of the potential water resources in the Valley if they were to be destroyed, which was never to be the case. Statement: "There is no unemployment ..." Fact: Contrary to this statement, unemployment levels in Region III are among the highest in Chile; the most recent statistics according to the Chilean Statistics Agency reveal rates in the valley in question to be approximately 18%. The mayors representing the four municipalities and most of the community leaders in the Huasco Valley have vocally expressed their support for Pascua-Lama, indicating that they believe Barrick will conduct an environmentally responsible project and that the generation of economic benefits is needed for the long-term sustainable development of the region. As an illustration of the lack of employment opportunities, Barrick has received over 50,000 applications for jobs. Chileans in Region III and Argentinians from San Juan are looking for meaningful employment opportunities and the ability to support their families. Human beings deserve the opportunity to make a decent livelihood. Statement: "Under the glaciers has been found a huge deposit of gold ... it would be necessary to break, to destroy the glaciers." Fact: Contrary to the fundamental premise of the email chain letter, the orebody is NOT under glaciers. This is simply not the case: 95% of the orebody is NOT under glaciers or ice fields. Protection of the remaining 5% is a key condition of the Chilean authorities' approval of the project. Statement: "The operation is planned by a multinational company, one of whose members is George Bush, Sr." Fact: Mr. Bush served in an honorary capacity as an advisor to Barrick's International Advisory Board for two years in the mid-1990s. Mr. Bush was neither a director nor an officer of the company. Statement: "If they destroy the glaciers, they will not just destroy the source of especially pure water, but they will permanently contaminate the two rivers." Fact: To underline its confidence in its operations and commitment to responsible mining practices, Barrick has committed that should the water quality change, it would immediately stop the project. In addition to the multiple barriers of protection built into the design, the company has a comprehensive water quality monitoring and management program, which will include 30 automated points from which data will be readily available in real-time for authorities and the public. This program will be subject to regular independent verification. The expanded number of monitoring points is a direct result of community consultation and dialogue with stakeholders. Statement: "Every last gram of gold will go abroad ... and not one will be left with the people." Fact: There will be substantial economic benefits that include 5,500 direct jobs during construction, 1,660 jobs during the two decades of operation, and the indirect job creation and tax revenues generated that will flow back to the communities. In addition, there will be substantial investment in infrastructure, the development of hundreds of local suppliers of goods and services, and the implementation of sustainable development programs. Statement: "The farmers ... have been forbidden to make a TV appeal by a ban from the Ministry of the Interior." Fact: The Water Users Cooperative, representing 2,000 farmers of the Huasco Valley, is fully supportive of the project. Chile is a democratic country, and the media play an important role in the public discussion of community concerns and interests. There has already been an extensive and open discussion of issues, including the participation of farmers. From a practical standpoint, the petition reproduced at the head of this page is not now valid in that the e-mail address supplied is no longer collecting or forwarding copies. The Pascua Lama project remains an issue of ongoing concern, however, and interested parties can find updated information on the subject (and a list of government and business officials to contact) at the Mining Watch Canada website. Mining Watch Canada Additional information: Pascua-Lama Fact Sheet (Barrick Gold Corporation) Campaign Against Barrick Gold's Pascua Lama Project (MiningWatch Canada) Last updated: 3 June 2006 Sources: Frank, Jade. "Farmers Protest Mining Project in Chile's Region III." The Santiago Times. 31 March 2005. Jimena, Jaquelina. "Vast Chilean Gold Mine Meets Opposition." Decanter.com. 2 December 2005.

True

Origins: The Pascua-Lama project is an effort being undertaken by the Barrick Gold Corporation to mine rich gold and silver fields in the mountainous region along the border between Chile and Argentina. Environmental concerns associated with the project, particularly the potential destruction or relocation of glaciers that sit atop a portion of the gold fields, have led to a number of protests and petitions entreating the Chilean government to intervene and stop or modify the Pascua-Lama mining plan. So, the above-quoted petition is "True" in the broad sense that it addresses a real issue, but, not surprisingly, the two sides (environmentalists and Barrick) make substantially different claims about what the environmental and social effects of the Pascua-Lama project will be.A December 2005 statement from Barrick downplayed the expressed concerns:Barrick has published a Pascua-Lama Fact Sheet that counters many of the statements made in the circulated e-mail message:<!--Although the text of the petition states that former U.S. president George Bush is a (board) member of the Barrick Gold Corporation, this does not appear to be the case. George H. W. Bush (who served as President of the United States of America from 1989-1993 and is the father of the current U.S. president, George W. Bush) was Honorary Chairman of Barrick's International Advisory Board from 1995 to 1999. He is not now listed as a member of the corporation's Board of Directors.-->From a practical standpoint, the petition reproduced at the head of this page is not now valid in that the e-mail address supplied is no longer collecting or forwarding copies. The Pascua Lama project remains an issue of ongoing concern, however, and interested parties can find updated information on the subject (and a list of government and business officials to contact) at the Mining Watch Canada web site. Pascua-Lama Fact Sheet (Barrick Gold Corporation) Campaign Against Barrick Gold's Pascua Lama Project (MiningWatch Canada)

FMD_train_634

Does a Picture Show a Divorcing Couple Dividing Up Beanie Babies?

04/20/2022

In April 2022, internet users shared an unusual old photograph with a caption that read, "A divorcing couple divide up their Beanie Baby collection in the courtroom, 1990s" (or words to that effect). The picture was authentic and unedited, and such descriptions were entirely accurate. For example, one April 17 Facebook post included the picture along with the caption, "A divorcing couple dividing Beanie Babies in court, 1999." That is exactly what the strangely moving picture shows. It was captured by Reuters photographer Aaron Mayes on November 5, 1999, at the Clark County Family Court in Las Vegas, Nevada. The original Reuters caption reads as follows: "Attorney Frank Totti looks over papers while his client Frances Mountain sorts out Beanie Babies with her ex-husband Harold Mountain in Judge Gerald Hardcastle's Family Courtroom in Las Vegas, November 5." The couple, who were divorced four months prior, were ordered to divide up the collection valued at $2,500 to $5,000 but were unable to do so by themselves. The collection was spread on the court floor and divided one by one under the supervision of Family Court Judge Hardcastle. According to Clark County court records, the couple jointly filed for divorce in August 1998, which Judge Gerald Hardcastle granted in May 1999. A November 5, 1999, entry on the case docket notes, "Return Hearing (9:00 AM)...DIVISION OF BEANIE BABIES." The Las Vegas Sun reported at the time that Hardcastle was intent on making an example of the couple due to their failure to resolve the distribution of the toys. This morning, a frustrated Clark County Family Court judge ordered the couple to divide up their collection of Beanie Babies one by one under his supervision in the courtroom. Maple the Bear was the first to go. "This isn't about toys. It's about control," Family Court Judge Gerald Hardcastle told the couple. "Because you folks can't solve it, it takes the services of a District Court judge, a bailiff, and a court reporter." Frances and Harold Mountain divorced four months ago. According to the divorce decree, the parties were supposed to divide up their Beanie Baby collection, estimated to be worth between $2,500 and $5,000. However, the man and woman failed to split up their toys by themselves. The collection was still in Frances' possession Thursday when Hardcastle heard Harold's motion to get his share of the toys. "I'd just had enough," said Hardcastle, who has been a Family Court judge for seven years. "We spend a lot of time dealing with some simply unreasonable issues. They are time-consuming, expensive issues. A lot of our calendar is made up of just this kind of nonsense. So I told them to bring the Beanie Babies in, spread them out on the floor, and I'll have them pick one each until they're all gone." Hardcastle also invited reporters.

True

In April 2022, internet users shared an unusual old photograph along with a caption that read "A divorcing couple divide up their Beanie Baby collection in the court room, 1990s" (or words to that effect). The picture was authentic and unedited, and such descriptions were entirely accurate. Our rating is For example, one April 17 Facebook post included the picture, along with the caption "A divorcing couple dividing Beanie Babies in court, 1999":That is exactly what the strangely moving picture shows. It was captured by Reuters photographer Aaron Mayes on Nov. 5, 1999 at the Clark County Family Court in Las Vegas, Nevada. The original Reuters caption reads as follows:According to Clark County court records, the couple jointly filed for divorce in August 1998, one that Judge Gerald Hardcastle granted in May 1999. A Nov. 5, 1999 entry on the case docket notes "Return Hearing (9:00 AM)...DIVISION OF BEANIE BABIES."The Las Vegas Sun reported at the time that Hardcastle was intent on making an example of the erstwhile couple, due to their failure to resolve the distribution of the toys:

FMD_train_158

Did a Chinese Company Buy America's 'Most Famous Burger Brand'?

12/12/2023

In December 2023, multiple display advertisements were shown to online users on YouTube and other websites that claimed, "America's Most Famous Burger Brand Is Now Chinese Owned." In this story, we've detailed how these ads were both false and misleading. We've also provided information about some of the most successful U.S. burger brands. One ad that we reviewed showed a photo of a large cheeseburger in what appeared to be the dining room of a restaurant. We performed a reverse-image search and traced the picture to a page on Pinterest. A link on that Pinterest page led to another page on friesandsalt.tumblr.com, which revealed that the photo was captured in a Five Guys restaurant. Five Guys is headquartered in Virginia and is not owned by a company in China. reverse-image search page friesandsalt.tumblr.com headquartered Additional ads that displayed similar captions showed other pictures of burgers. One of those images may have been a stock photo or was possibly captured in Cyprus, according to a user's post on TripAdvisor.com. TripAdvisor.com All of these ads led to a lengthy article that was hosted on either Investing.com or StreetInsider.com. The story's headline read, "American Companies That Are No Longer American." Investing.com StreetInsider.com The article was massive in its text. It listed nearly 200 businesses and had close to 400 paragraphs. Nowhere in the story did the author mention anything about any American burger brands being bought by a company in China. The ads with the photos of burgers were false and misleading clickbait that may have originally been created to lure readers to click or scroll through nearly 200 slides for nothing. We hope that our brief article saved readers some time. The reason why these kinds of ads and articles exist is usually something called advertising arbitrage. Advertising arbitrage is a strategy in which an advertiser hopes to make more money on ads displayed in a lengthy article than it would cost to display an initial clickbait ad meant to attract users to the article. In other words, instead of the ads being both attractive and potentially helpful to consumers, they instead mislead users from the start. Advertising arbitrage Naming America's "most famous" burger brand might be a subjective choice. However, if sales figures were considered, McDonald's was at the top of the food chain, according to QSR Magazine, Restaurant Business and Yahoo Finance. The company is headquartered in Chicago, Illinois, not China. QSR Magazine Restaurant Business Yahoo Finance headquartered The same three sources that provided sales figures for burger chains also reported that McDonald's was followed by Wendy's and Burger King. Wendy's is headquartered in Dublin, Ohio, while Burger King is owned by the Canadian company Restaurant Brands International. headquartered Restaurant Brands International Note: If readers would like to report any strange or misleading ads on Snopes, we invite you to contact us. Please include the full link of the website where the questionable ad led to so that we can attempt to investigate and potentially block any such ads. contact us Ahmed, Ali. 20 Best Burger Chains in the US. Yahoo Finance, 5 Aug. 2023, https://finance.yahoo.com/news/20-best-burger-chains-us-214700611.html. Campus Gardens at Wendys Headquarters in Dublin, OH. Wendys, https://www.wendys.com/csr-what-we-value/footprint/corporate-office-initiatives/gardens. Careers at the McDonalds Global Headquarters. McDonalds Careers, https://careers.mcdonalds.com/mhq-and-field-offices. El Clasico Sports Pub. TripAdvisor.com, Apr. 2019, https://www.tripadvisor.com/LocationPhotoDirectLink-g190383-d6651868-i275560000-El_Clasico_Sports_Pub-Nicosia_Nicosia_District.html. Evon, Dan. Snopes Tips: A Guide To Performing Reverse Image Searches. Snopes, 22 Mar. 2022, https://www.snopes.com/articles/400681/how-to-perform-reverse-image-searches/. Five Guys Bacon Triple Cheeseburger. Pinterest, www.pinterest.com/pin/513973376204398170/. ---. friesandsalt.tumblr.com, https://friesandsalt.tumblr.com/post/136992557459/photoset_iframe/friesandsalt/tumblr_nragqdSeHE1qhffuc/0/false. Liles, Jordan. Snopes Tips: How To Avoid Ad Arbitrage Clickbait. Snopes, 2 Jan. 2022, https://www.snopes.com/articles/387913/avoid-ad-arbitrage-clickbait/. Our Locations. Restaurant Brands International, https://careers.rbi.com/global/en/locations. Ranked: The Top Fast-Food Burger Chains in America. QSR Magazine, 1 Aug. 2023, https://www.qsrmagazine.com/operations/fast-food/ranked-the-top-fast-food-burger-chains-in-america/. Restaurant Business Staff. The Largest Burger Chains in the U.S. Restaurant Business, 13 May 2020, https://restaurantbusinessonline.com/financing/largest-burger-chains-us.

False

One ad that we reviewed showed a photo of a large cheeseburger in what appeared to be the dining room of a restaurant. We performed a reverse-image search and traced the picture to a page on Pinterest. A link on that Pinterest page led to another page on friesandsalt.tumblr.com, which revealed that the photo was captured in a Five Guys restaurant. Five Guys is headquartered in Virginia and is not owned by a company in China.Additional ads that displayed similar captions showed other pictures of burgers. One of those images may have been a stock photo or was possibly captured in Cyprus, according to a user's post on TripAdvisor.com.All of these ads led to a lengthy article that was hosted on either Investing.com or StreetInsider.com. The story's headline read, "American Companies That Are No Longer American."The reason why these kinds of ads and articles exist is usually something called advertising arbitrage. Advertising arbitrage is a strategy in which an advertiser hopes to make more money on ads displayed in a lengthy article than it would cost to display an initial clickbait ad meant to attract users to the article. In other words, instead of the ads being both attractive and potentially helpful to consumers, they instead mislead users from the start.Naming America's "most famous" burger brand might be a subjective choice. However, if sales figures were considered, McDonald's was at the top of the food chain, according to QSR Magazine, Restaurant Business and Yahoo Finance. The company is headquartered in Chicago, Illinois, not China.The same three sources that provided sales figures for burger chains also reported that McDonald's was followed by Wendy's and Burger King. Wendy's is headquartered in Dublin, Ohio, while Burger King is owned by the Canadian company Restaurant Brands International.Note: If readers would like to report any strange or misleading ads on Snopes, we invite you to contact us. Please include the full link of the website where the questionable ad led to so that we can attempt to investigate and potentially block any such ads.

FMD_train_702

Are Biden and Dems Planning to 'Spy' on Bank and Cash App Accounts?

12/21/2021

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.

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."

FMD_train_1684

Has Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene asserted that California wildfires were triggered by 'Jewish Space Lasers'?

02/01/2021

Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene from Georgia has courted controversy on various issues by promoting QAnon conspiracy theories, alongside a history of anti-Muslim and anti-Semitic remarks. Years-old views, including a Facebook interaction in which she agreed with a comment that the Parkland shooting was a "false flag" staged event, and a video in which she pushed 9/11 conspiracy theories, have been unearthed. Marjorie Taylor Greene courted controversy interaction 9/11 conspiracy theories One post from 2018 in particular was reported on by Media Matters for America, a watchdog group, where she speculated about a conspiracy surrounding the November 2018 wildfires in California. In the now-deleted post, Greene theorized that a space-based solar generator, used in a clean-energy experiment with the goal of replacing coal and oil, could have beamed the sun's energy back to Earth and started the fires. We have covered similar claims surrounding the wildfires before. reported now-deleted theorized similar claims She said, "there are too many coincidences to ignore" and "oddly there are all these people who have said they saw what looked like lasers or blue beams of light causing the fires." Greene also speculated that a range of people or groups were involved in this fire, including former California Gov. Jerry Brown, Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E), and Rothschild Inc., an investment firm. She said that Roger Kimmel, who was on the board of PG&E, was also "Vice Chairman of Rothschild Inc," and "If they are beaming the suns energy back to Earth, I'm sure they wouldn't ever miss a transmitter receiving station right??!! I mean mistakes are never made when anything new is invented. What would that look like anyway? A laser beam or light beam coming down to Earth I guess. Could that cause a fire? Hmmm, I don't know. I hope not! That wouldn't look so good for PG&E, Rothschild Inc, Solaren or Jerry Brown who sure does seem fond of PG&E." The Rothschilds, a Jewish banking family, have long been the targets of anti-Semitic conspiracy theories claiming that Jewish people are in control of the entire world. While Greene specifically did not use the words "Jewish space laser," she heavily implied that the Rothschilds were involved in the laser conspiracy. targets An investigation showed that the California wildfires of 2018 were ignited by PG&E power lines, and then spread with the help of warm temperatures, dry vegetation, and strong winds. showed In late January 2021, CNN reported that dozens of posts from 2018 and 2019 had been removed from Greene's Facebook page. removed Given that Greene did not directly state that "Jewish lasers" caused the fires, but did speculate that laser beams somehow connected to the Rothschild investment firm were a cause, we rate this claim as "Mixture."

NEI

Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene from Georgia has courted controversy on various issues by promoting QAnon conspiracy theories, alongside a history of anti-Muslim and anti-Semitic remarks. Years-old views, including a Facebook interaction in which she agreed with a comment that the Parkland shooting was a "false flag" staged event, and a video in which she pushed 9/11 conspiracy theories, have been unearthed.One post from 2018 in particular was reported on by Media Matters for America, a watchdog group, where she speculated about a conspiracy surrounding the November 2018 wildfires in California. In the now-deleted post, Greene theorized that a space-based solar generator, used in a clean-energy experiment with the goal of replacing coal and oil, could have beamed the sun's energy back to Earth and started the fires. We have covered similar claims surrounding the wildfires before.The Rothschilds, a Jewish banking family, have long been the targets of anti-Semitic conspiracy theories claiming that Jewish people are in control of the entire world. While Greene specifically did not use the words "Jewish space laser," she heavily implied that the Rothschilds were involved in the laser conspiracy.An investigation showed that the California wildfires of 2018 were ignited by PG&E power lines, and then spread with the help of warm temperatures, dry vegetation, and strong winds.In late January 2021, CNN reported that dozens of posts from 2018 and 2019 had been removed from Greene's Facebook page.

FMD_train_463

Who is responsible for the increase in debt?

01/23/2012

Debt is typically a major campaign issue in elections from the municipal level all the way up to the office of the President of the United States. Candidates tout their accomplishments in balancing budgets or reducing government debt as examples of fiscal prudence while pointing to increased debts during their opponents' administrations as indicators of profligate and wasteful spending of taxpayers' money. The chart reproduced above, which was posted to the Flickr account of House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, attempted to reverse conventional political stereotypes by portraying recent Republican presidents as responsible for huge increases in the national debt, while showing recent Democratic presidents as responsible for much lower increases in the level of debt. Flickr account As a first step in evaluating this chart, we have to determine the applicable definition of "debt." In general, the term "public debt" (or "debt held by the public") refers to money borrowed by the government through the issuance and sale of securities, government bonds, and bills. It includes federal debt held by all investors outside of the federal government, including individuals, corporations, state or local governments, the Federal Reserve banking system, and foreign governments. Another form of debt is "intragovernmental debt" (or "debt held by government accounts"), which refers to money that the government has borrowed from itself, such as when the U.S. government invests money from federal savings programs such as Medicare and the Social Security trust fund by buying up its own treasury securities. A variety of names have been applied to the total of these two forms of debt, including "gross federal debt," "total public debt," and "national debt." Although this chart is labeled as presenting a "percent increase in public debt," it actually uses figures corresponding to the total described as "gross federal debt" above (i.e., a combination of debt held by the public and debt held by government accounts, rather than just the former). We checked the numbers in this chart by using (for pre-1993 years) the U.S. Treasury's Monthly Statement of the Public Debt (MSPD), noting the total debt reported as of January 31 of each relevant year, and (for 1993 onwards) the Treasury's The Debt to the Penny and Who Holds It application, noting the total debt reported as of Inauguration Day of each relevant year. Monthly Statement of the Public Debt The Debt to the Penny and Who Holds It From these records, we gleaned the following information: Ronald Reagan:Took office January 1981. Total debt: $848 billionLeft office January 1989. Total debt: $2,698 billionPercent change in total debt: +218% George H.W. Bush:Took office January 1989. Total debt: $2,698 billionLeft office 20 January 1993. Total debt: $4,188 billionPercent change in total debt: +55% Bill Clinton:Took office 20 January 1993. Total debt: $4,188 billionLeft office 20 January 2001. Total debt: $5,728 billionPercent change in total debt: +37% George W. Bush:Took office 20 January 2001. Total debt: $5,728 billionLeft office 20 January 2009. Total debt: $10,627 billionPercent change in total debt: +86% Barack Obama:Took office 20 January 2009. Total debt: $10,627 billionTotal debt (as of the end of April 2011): $14,288 billionPercent change in total debt: +34% So, as far as raw numbers go, the chart is reasonably accurate (although our calculations produced a somewhat higher debt increase for Ronald Reagan than reported). That said, however, we have to consider how valuable these numbers are; whether by themselves they present a reasonable comparative measure of presidential fiscal responsibility. In that regard, one could find a number of aspects to take issue with: The chart isn't a true comparison of equals, as it includes three presidents who served two full terms (Reagan, Clinton, and George W. Bush), a president who served one term (George H.W. Bush), and a president who had served half a term (Obama). Obviously, the longer a president holds office the greater the opportunity for him to influence the debt, and certainly (barring a radical change in current circumstances) the increase reported for Barack Obama would be considerably higher by the time he left office. All presidents come into office with policies and budgets that were put into place by their predecessors in the White House and Congress, and they all pass the same along to their successors when they leave office. Therefore, determining how much of the change in debt that occurs during a given president's administration is actually the result of his actions (rather than the consequence of factors over which he had little or no influence) would require a much more complex analysis than the one presented here. Which is the best measure of debt for this purpose: public debt, intragovernmental debt, or a combination of the two? As noted in the General Accounting Office's FAQ on Federal Debt, they represent rather different concepts: FAQ Debt held by the public approximates current federal demand on credit markets. It represents a burden on today's economy, and the interest paid on this debt represents a burden on current taxpayers. Federal borrowing from the public absorbs resources available for private investment and may put upward pressure on interest rates. Further, debt held by the public is the accumulation of what the federal government borrowed in the past and is reported as a liability on the balance sheet of the government's consolidated financial statements. In contrast, debt held by government accounts (intragovernmental debt) and the interest on it represent a claim on future resources. This debt performs largely an internal accounting function. Special federal securities credited to government accounts (primarily trust funds) represent the cumulative surpluses of these accounts that have been lent to the general fund. These transactions net out on the government's consolidated financial statements. Debt issued to government accounts does not affect today's economy and does not currently compete with the private sector for available funds in the credit market. Are plain percentage changes in the national debt level a useful figure, or do they need to be placed in context to have relevance? Some would argue, for example, that the Debt-to-GDP ratio is a better measure of economic health relative to the national debt than raw debt figures alone, and a chart which tracked the change in that ratio over the last several presidencies would paint a significantly different picture of debt levels than the one displayed above. Debt-to-GDP chart All in all, this is a case of relatively accurate information which is of marginal value due to a lack of proper comparative context.

True

The chart reproduced above, which was posted to the Flickr account of House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, attempted to reverse conventional political stereotypes by portraying recent Republican presidents as responsible for huge increases in the national debt, while showing recent Democratic presidents as responsible for much lower increases in the level of debt. Although this chart is labeled as presenting a "percent increase in public debt," it actually uses figures corresponding to the total described as "gross federal debt" above (i.e., a combination of debt held by the public and debt held by government accounts, rather than just the former). We checked the numbers in this chart by using (for pre-1993 years) the U.S. Treasury's Monthly Statement of the Public Debt (MSPD), noting the total debt reported as of January 31 of each relevant year, and (for 1993 onwards) the Treasury's The Debt to the Penny and Who Holds It application, noting the total debt reported as of Inauguration Day of each relevant year. Which is the best measure of debt for this purpose: public debt, intragovernmental debt, or a combination of the two? As noted in the General Accounting Office's FAQ on Federal Debt, they represent rather different concepts: Are plain percentage changes in the national debt level a useful figure, or do they need to be placed in context to have relevance? Some would argue, for example, that the Debt-to-GDP ratio is a better measure of economic health relative to the national debt than raw debt figures alone, and a chart which tracked the change in that ratio over the last several presidencies would paint a significantly different picture of debt levels than the one displayed above.

FMD_train_301

Benefits given to former presidents after they leave office

08/14/2008

Claim: John McCain would not be eligible to draw a pension after serving two terms as president. Example: [Collected via e-mail, August 2008] Retirement - Mr. President A point to ponder ... A president's pension currently is $191,300 per year until he is 80 years old. Assuming the next president lives to age 80, Sen. McCain would receive ZERO pension as he would reach 80 at the end of two terms as president. Sen. Obama would be retired for 26 years after two terms and would receive $4,973,800 in pension. Therefore, it would certainly make economic sense to elect McCain in November. How's that for non-partisan thinking? Origins: We're not sure whether the above-quoted bit of electioneering about presidential pensions was meant to be taken seriously or whether it was intended to be light-hearted or sardonic, but regardless, its basic premise is incorrect. It is true in broad terms that since John McCain is twenty-five years older than Barack Obama (they'll be 72 and 47 years old, respectively, at the time of the next presidential inauguration), the former would probably draw a smaller aggregate pension as a former president than the latter would. (There are no guarantees, of course, since we never know what Fate might have in store for anyone.) It is not true, however, that if John McCain served two terms as president, he would draw no pension at all due to having reached the maximum age limit (80) by then. The pension payments allocated to former presidents are lifetime benefits and do not end or expire once a recipient reaches a particular age. Under the terms of the Former Presidents Act (FPA), former presidents are entitled to "a taxable pension that is equal to the annual rate of basic pay for the head of an executive department" (currently $191,300). This pension is a lifetime benefit that begins "immediately upon a President's departure from office at noon on Inauguration Day." (Presidential widows receive lifetime pensions of $20,000 per year.) In fact, pensions constitute a relatively small fraction of the federal funds that are provided for the maintenance of former presidents, who also receive Secret Service protection, free mailing privileges, travel funds, and allowances to maintain and staff their offices. (Secret Service protection for presidents who began serving after January 1, 1997, is no longer a lifetime benefit and is now limited to ten years.) As the chart below indicates, these additional benefits typically add up to far more than the base pension amount: All of these expenditures on former presidents are but a drop in the bucket of the overall U.S. federal budget, which currently totals about $3 trillion per year. Since both John McCain and Barack Obama are members of the U.S. Senate, whichever one doesn't win the upcoming presidential election will still have a congressional pension to look forward to. Last updated: August 14, 2008 Sources: Alexander-Bloch, Benjamin. "Former Presidents Cost U.S. Taxpayers Big Bucks." The [Toledo] Blade. January 7, 2007. Smith, Stephanie. "Former Presidents: Federal Pension and Retirement Benefits." Congressional Research Service. March 18, 2008.

False

Under the terms of the Former Presidents Act (FPA), former presidents are entitled to "a taxable pension that is equal to the annual rate of basic pay for the head of an executive department" (currently $191,300). This pension is a lifetime benefit that begins "immediately upon a President's departure from office at noon on Inauguration Day." (Presidential widows receive lifetime pensions of $20,000 per year.)All of these expenditures on former presidents are but a drop in the bucket of the overall U.S. federal budget, which currently totals about $3 trillion per year.

FMD_train_1894

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

07/26/2017

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.

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:

FMD_train_1638

Says the Central Health district's tax rate is the lowest among the largest counties in Texas, and it will continue to be the lowest if voters approve a proposed tax increase.

10/26/2012

Central Health, the government agency entrusted with improving health care access across Travis County, has a low tax rate that will remain low if voters ratify Proposition 1 on the November 2012ballot, a proponent says.Mark Nathan of theKeep Austin HealthyPAC said recently: Our health care districts tax rate is the lowest among the largest counties in Texas, and it will continue to be the lowest if the proposal wins approval. His comment appeared in anAustin American-Statesmannews article posted online the same day, Oct. 18, 2012.Central Health, the county health-care district created in 2004, seeks to increase its tax rate from 7.89 cents per $100 of assessed value to 12.9 cents for the fiscal year beginning Oct. 1, 2013. Resulting revenue would help support health-care initiatives including a new medical school plus a site for a new teaching hospital.We wondered about the districts current and possible future tax rates.In 2005, the first year the district collected property taxes, Central Healths governing board set a tax rate of 7.79 cents per $100 of assessed property value, which cost the average taxpayer $126.84, according to a July 31, 2012,Statesmannews story. Between 2005 and 2011, the average tax bill for Central Health rose $29.77 to the current $156.61 on the average-valued home in Travis County, counting exemptions--an increase of 23.5 percent, the story says.Generally, according to the story, Central Healths finances were helped over the years by unexpected windfalls in federal payments, a robust real estate market that pumped up property tax collections and a deal the City of Austin cut with the Seton Healthcare Family years before voters created the district, allowing the district to steadily expand services while setting relatively modest tax rates.By phone, district spokeswoman Christie Garbe told us the districts low tax rate is an artifact of how the district was born, reflecting the merger of separate rates previously levied for health care by the City of Austin and Travis County. Garbe said by email that after the change, residents outside the city experienced a significant rate increase while city residents saw a slight decrease.Another fiscally relevant distinction: Unlike hospital districts in Harris, Dallas, Bexar, Tarrant and El Paso counties, the JulyStatesmanstory says, Central Health does not run a hospital, so it can function with a lower tax rate. The Seton Healthcare Family operates the safety-net University Medical Center Brackenridge and bears most of the financial responsibility for it, the story says, which has helped Central Health set property tax rates 60 to 74 percent lower than other urban Texas hospital districts.At our inquiry, Nathan emailed us a chart, attributed to Central Health, indicating that its tax rate trails those of hospital districts in the urban counties noted in the JulyStatesmanarticle plus Nueces County. All things staying equal, the other districts rates would also outpace the Central Health rate if Proposition 1 passes, according to the chart. Garbe told us by email that the chart reflects April 2012 research by Central Health.According to the chart, the Nueces County district has the next-lowest rate, 16.24 cents per $100 valuation. That's more than double Central Healths rate.Via telephone interviews and web research, we confirmed the proclaimed rates, but found one rate getting cut. Mike Norby of the Harris County Hospital District, also known as the Harris Health System, said by phone that the countys commissioners court voted to reduce the districts tax rate by a penny to 18.22 cents per $100 valuation, effectively cutting the districts revenue by $10 million once all factors are considered. (He said the vote to do so occurred Oct. 23, 2012, which was after Nathan made his claim. )So, Central Health has the lowest rate among seven urban Texas hospital districts and would still have the lowest rate if the proposition passes, presuming other districts do not slash rates in the meantime.At the recommendation of Jonny Hipp, ceo of the Nueces County district, we queried Austin consultant Shari Holland, who told us she has written reports in the past comparing Texas hospital districts; report purchasers have included Central Health, she said.Holland agreed that Central Health has and will likely have a lower tax rate than the other cited districts, due in part, she said, to the Austin areas high property values. In 2008, she said, Travis County had assessed property values of $97,100 per resident, tops among the 10 most populous counties.Curious about the possible effect of higher property values, we asked Nathan how much tax revenue each of the cited health districts raises per resident.Central Health has ranked last among the seven districts in total tax revenues per resident, at $71, according to another Central Health chart emailed to us by Nathan. However, its per-resident revenue would escalate to $115 if the proposition passes. The district could then be collecting more per resident than the districts in Nueces and El Paso counties, which have per-person tax revenues of $91 and $86, respectively, according to Central Health. The other analyzed health districts still would generate more tax revenue per resident, the districts research suggests.By email, Nathan pointed out he did not say Central Healths per-resident tax collections would stay the lowest.Our rulingNathan, the PAC spokesman, said Central Health has the lowest tax rate among districts in the largest Texas counties and will retain that distinction if the proposition passes. Thats correct, presuming other districts dont slash rates.Still, Central Healths per-person tax levy is projected to outpace those of two other districts should Travis County voters approve the bump. This information was missing from the spokesman's statement. Tax rates alone make the comparison incomplete..We rate the claim as Mostly True.

True

Central Health, the government agency entrusted with improving health care access across Travis County, has a low tax rate that will remain low if voters ratify Proposition 1 on the November 2012ballot, a proponent says.Mark Nathan of theKeep Austin HealthyPAC said recently: Our health care districts tax rate is the lowest among the largest counties in Texas, and it will continue to be the lowest if the proposal wins approval. His comment appeared in anAustin American-Statesmannews article posted online the same day, Oct. 18, 2012.Central Health, the county health-care district created in 2004, seeks to increase its tax rate from 7.89 cents per $100 of assessed value to 12.9 cents for the fiscal year beginning Oct. 1, 2013. Resulting revenue would help support health-care initiatives including a new medical school plus a site for a new teaching hospital.We wondered about the districts current and possible future tax rates.In 2005, the first year the district collected property taxes, Central Healths governing board set a tax rate of 7.79 cents per $100 of assessed property value, which cost the average taxpayer $126.84, according to a July 31, 2012,Statesmannews story. Between 2005 and 2011, the average tax bill for Central Health rose $29.77 to the current $156.61 on the average-valued home in Travis County, counting exemptions--an increase of 23.5 percent, the story says.Generally, according to the story, Central Healths finances were helped over the years by unexpected windfalls in federal payments, a robust real estate market that pumped up property tax collections and a deal the City of Austin cut with the Seton Healthcare Family years before voters created the district, allowing the district to steadily expand services while setting relatively modest tax rates.By phone, district spokeswoman Christie Garbe told us the districts low tax rate is an artifact of how the district was born, reflecting the merger of separate rates previously levied for health care by the City of Austin and Travis County. Garbe said by email that after the change, residents outside the city experienced a significant rate increase while city residents saw a slight decrease.Another fiscally relevant distinction: Unlike hospital districts in Harris, Dallas, Bexar, Tarrant and El Paso counties, the JulyStatesmanstory says, Central Health does not run a hospital, so it can function with a lower tax rate. The Seton Healthcare Family operates the safety-net University Medical Center Brackenridge and bears most of the financial responsibility for it, the story says, which has helped Central Health set property tax rates 60 to 74 percent lower than other urban Texas hospital districts.At our inquiry, Nathan emailed us a chart, attributed to Central Health, indicating that its tax rate trails those of hospital districts in the urban counties noted in the JulyStatesmanarticle plus Nueces County. All things staying equal, the other districts rates would also outpace the Central Health rate if Proposition 1 passes, according to the chart. Garbe told us by email that the chart reflects April 2012 research by Central Health.According to the chart, the Nueces County district has the next-lowest rate, 16.24 cents per $100 valuation. That's more than double Central Healths rate.Via telephone interviews and web research, we confirmed the proclaimed rates, but found one rate getting cut. Mike Norby of the Harris County Hospital District, also known as the Harris Health System, said by phone that the countys commissioners court voted to reduce the districts tax rate by a penny to 18.22 cents per $100 valuation, effectively cutting the districts revenue by $10 million once all factors are considered. (He said the vote to do so occurred Oct. 23, 2012, which was after Nathan made his claim.)So, Central Health has the lowest rate among seven urban Texas hospital districts and would still have the lowest rate if the proposition passes, presuming other districts do not slash rates in the meantime.At the recommendation of Jonny Hipp, ceo of the Nueces County district, we queried Austin consultant Shari Holland, who told us she has written reports in the past comparing Texas hospital districts; report purchasers have included Central Health, she said.Holland agreed that Central Health has and will likely have a lower tax rate than the other cited districts, due in part, she said, to the Austin areas high property values. In 2008, she said, Travis County had assessed property values of $97,100 per resident, tops among the 10 most populous counties.Curious about the possible effect of higher property values, we asked Nathan how much tax revenue each of the cited health districts raises per resident.Central Health has ranked last among the seven districts in total tax revenues per resident, at $71, according to another Central Health chart emailed to us by Nathan. However, its per-resident revenue would escalate to $115 if the proposition passes. The district could then be collecting more per resident than the districts in Nueces and El Paso counties, which have per-person tax revenues of $91 and $86, respectively, according to Central Health. The other analyzed health districts still would generate more tax revenue per resident, the districts research suggests.By email, Nathan pointed out he did not say Central Healths per-resident tax collections would stay the lowest.Our rulingNathan, the PAC spokesman, said Central Health has the lowest tax rate among districts in the largest Texas counties and will retain that distinction if the proposition passes. Thats correct, presuming other districts dont slash rates.Still, Central Healths per-person tax levy is projected to outpace those of two other districts should Travis County voters approve the bump. This information was missing from the spokesman's statement. Tax rates alone make the comparison incomplete..We rate the claim as Mostly True.

FMD_train_1106

California's Central Valley and Inland Empire are undergoing significant growth in employment opportunities.

04/04/2017

Gov. Jerry Brown frequently touts California's overall job growth when telling what he has called the state's comeback story. He claimed recently on NBC's Meet the Press that California has added 2.1 million jobs in the last six or seven years. We checked the numbers and rated that claim True. Later in the same interview, the show's host, Chuck Todd, asked Brown about inland California's struggles, leading to another claim that caught our attention: Chuck Todd: "But there are parts of your state that are struggling. You have rural counties, ones that don't touch the ocean, struggling. Housing prices are up there, while jobs don't go there." Gov. Brown: "The Inland Empire, the Central Valley, they have a harder time. But they, too, are experiencing tremendous job growth." Brown makes his jobs claim at about the 2:05 minute mark in the video above. California's job growth is normally associated with coastal hubs like Silicon Valley and San Francisco. So, we wondered whether Brown had his facts right when he said these inland regions had really experienced tremendous job growth, too. We set out on a fact-check. Inland Empire: Home to about 4.5 million people, Riverside and San Bernardino counties make up what's known as the Inland Empire, a sprawling set of communities east of Los Angeles. The economists we spoke with say Brown's case for tremendous job growth here is a strong one. The region's 3.2 percent job growth rate was the fastest among the state's large metro areas from February 2016 through February 2017, said John Husing, chief economist for the Inland Empire Economic Partnership. During that year, it added 47,500 jobs, which was more than the 35,700 created in the Santa Clara metro area, considered the heart of Silicon Valley, Husing said. "This area is a real growth engine," he added, listing construction, logistics, and transportation among the growing sectors. Over the past five years, as the region has recovered from the Great Recession, it added jobs at a rate of 22.3 percent. That trailed only the San Francisco-Redwood City-South San Francisco metro area's 22.7 percent rate among large metros. A spokesman for the Brown Administration cited the same statistics backing up the governor's claim. Colin Strange of the San Bernardino Area Chamber of Commerce said San Bernardino is seeing job growth, but mainly in blue-collar jobs that pay about $15 per hour, including forklift operators and truck drivers. Husing, who has studied the region's wages, said the Inland Empire has a lower share of high-paying administrative jobs compared with the state as a whole. He said, however, that the region is outperforming the state in its share of middle-class jobs that pay between $45,000 and $60,000. Central Valley: The Central Valley stretches about 450 miles from Bakersfield north to Redding. It includes urban cities like Sacramento, Stockton, Modesto, and Fresno, vast farmland, and a diverse economy, making job growth trends for the overall region more complex. A report by Stanislaus State University in the Central Valley city of Turlock offers some help. That report shows the 8-county San Joaquin Valley, which makes up the central and southern portions of the Central Valley, experienced a 1.56 percent job growth rate in 2016; a 1.86 percent rate in 2015; and 1.80 percent in 2014. Those averages trailed the state's overall job growth average, which measured 3 percent in 2015 and about 2 percent last year. But it beat the 8-county region's 1.23 percent historical average job growth rate. Within its own limits, the Valley has consistently grown. But it hasn't been a home run, Gokce Soydemir, an economics professor at Stanislaus State, said of job growth in that portion of the Central Valley. Jeffrey Michael, director of the University of Pacific's Center for Business and Policy Research in Stockton, added by email: "Central Valley areas have also done very well in recent years with the exception of Bakersfield, where recent economic fluctuations are tightly connected to the oil industry." Bakersfield's job growth rate was flat, at 0.1 percent, over the past year. Meanwhile, Sacramento, the biggest metro area in the northern portion of the Central Valley, saw 1.8 percent growth over the past year, close to the statewide average. Our ruling: Gov. Jerry Brown recently claimed California's Central Valley and Inland Empire are experiencing tremendous job growth. Economists say Brown is right about the Inland Empire. That region experienced the fastest job growth rate among the state's large metro areas over the past year and added more jobs than the Santa Clara metro area, the heart of Silicon Valley, during that period. Job growth in the Central Valley, while it has outperformed its historical benchmark in much of the diverse region, hasn't kept up with the overall state average. The governor's argument here needs this key clarification. In the end, we rate his overall claim Mostly True. MOSTLY TRUE: The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information.

True

He claimed recently on NBCsMeet the Pressthat California has added 2.1 million jobs in the last six or seven years.We checked the numbers and rated that claimTrue.The regions 3.2 percent job growth rate was the fastest among the states large metro areas from February 2016 through February 2017, saidJohnHusing, chief economist for the InlandEmpire EconomicPartnership.Areport by Stanislaus State Universityin the Central Valley city of Turlock offers some help.SOURCE: Stanislaus State University, College of Business Administration,2016 Business Forecast Report,Volume VI, Issue 1Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check.

FMD_train_58

Ive got the spending down, Ive got the debt down a little bit, Ive got the reserves up.

08/28/2013

Winnebago County Executive Mark Harris, a Democratmulling a run for governorin 2014, contends that his private-sector experience would put the state on a better course. Making the media rounds thissummer, the former bank trust officer has gently criticized Gov. Scott Walker and other Republicans for what he views as overly exuberant tax cuts and borrowing. Harris, as you might expect, thinks his own record on fiscal issues is more responsible. Ive got the spending down, Ive got the debt down a little bit, Ive got the reserves up, Harristold journalist Mike Goushaon WISN-TVs Upfront show July 21, 2013. Harris was first elected county executive in 2005 and previously served as mayor of Oshkosh and on the Oshkosh City Council and Winnebago County Board. He has worked as a certified public accountant in Michigan and Indiana, was a lawyer in Indiana, and worked as a trust officer and vice president at Associated Trust Company in Oshkosh from 1995 until 2005. With Harris pledging to decide on running by Labor Day, we thought it was the right time to check the books on his claims. Heres what we found: Reserves Average year-end reserves are up considerably in the Harris era, compared with the final four budget years of his predecessor, county financial records show. Under Harris, the county often has kept reserves in excess of its goal of having a cushion totalling one month of the countys annual spending. The average annual reserve is up more than 50% on average, and in 2012 reserves swelled to nearly two months of spending, prompting the county to suspend new borrowing in 2013. The increase in unrestricted reserves has not been a steady march, but the trend is clear. Spending Harris pointed us to numbers showing that the 2013 adopted county budget set operating spending at 1 percent less than the 2005 budget -- the last one adopted before his election. We confirmed those figures, and found a four-year trend of declining or flat expenditures from 2010-13, so Harris has some backup. The countys finance director, Charles Orenstein, told us savings came in part from reining in fringe benefit costs, consolidation and efficiency moves in county facilities, and savings on court and jail costs through technology. But, looking more broadly, the spending trend lines look like a roller-coaster ride. Spending went up in Harris first four years. In fact, only in 2013 could Harris make the claim that spending is lower compared with when he came in. In every other year but this one under Harris, the countys annual spending total was higher than in the last pre-Harris budget. Harris acknowledges that Walkers curbs on collective bargaining saved the county money, but he contends that state aid cuts offset most if not all of the savings, at least in 2012. The countys property tax levy has increased 24 percent in eight years under Harris as aid from other levels of government -- a category including the state -- fell off markedly, county budget records show. The property tax levy has fallen the last two years amid tight property tax caps imposed by Walker. Debt Harris said he got the countys debt down a little. Yes and no. Harris notes that Winnebago Countys outstanding general-obligation debt totalled $59.6 million at year-end 2012, down from $63 million in December 2004, months before he took office in April 2005. In noting that, he uses 2005 as his first year and 2004 as the baseline year. His numbers are correct, and defensible to a point. But, under the countys capital improvement process, many debt-funded capital projects would have received approval before Harris took office. So both the previous county executive and Harris can claim an influence on the outstanding debt level in 2005. Keeping that in mind, if you instead use 2005 as the baseline year, Harris debt claim fails. Debt added up to $57 million in 2005, slightly lower than the mark under Harris in 2012. Harris claim, though, is on target by two other measures, average annual debt per capita, and average annual debt in raw dollars. In general, this is a difficult area to judge because huge projects -- a new nursing home built on Harris watch, for instance -- spike borrowing in certain years. The Credit Game One final issue. Harris credited himself for driving the fiscal trends. But he acknowledged that the County Board deserves some credit as well. And two veteran Winnebago County Board leaders, David Albrecht and Patrick Brennand, told us that former County Executive Jane Van De Hey and others also helped instill a cautious approach to spending. Theres also the effect of the state budget, which helped the county drive down costs while also cutting aid to the county. Our rating Harris said, Ive got the spending down, Ive got the debt down a little bit, Ive got the reserves up. He was referring to his tenure as Winnebago County executive from April 2005 to the present. He makes the best case on reserves, which clearly have risen. Spending is down when viewed narrowly. The debt burden has dropped by some measures but not by all. Harris deserves some credit for the trends, but not all. We rate his claim Mostly True.

True

Winnebago County Executive Mark Harris, a Democratmulling a run for governorin 2014, contends that his private-sector experience would put the state on a better course.Making the media rounds thissummer, the former bank trust officer has gently criticized Gov. Scott Walker and other Republicans for what he views as overly exuberant tax cuts and borrowing.Ive got the spending down, Ive got the debt down a little bit, Ive got the reserves up, Harristold journalist Mike Goushaon WISN-TVs Upfront show July 21, 2013.

FMD_train_1445

Was there a federal study that was prohibited indicating that refugees generate more government revenues than they consume?

12/12/2018

One of the arguments made by the Trump administration for lowering the cap on the number of refugees allowed into the United States is that the costs of refugee resettlement outweigh its benefits. lowering Estimates vary on the total annual cost of processing and resettling refugees in the U.S., but a rough breakdown by the National Conference of State Legislatures put the total expenditures for accepting approximately 70,000 refugees in 2014 at $582 million.These cost estimates rarely attempt to take into account any economic benefits refugees might provide to the countries that take them in. According to a Facebook meme making the rounds since mid-2018, just such an analysis was undertaken by the Trump administration, but the results were suppressed because they undercut the official position:A recently leaked federal study found that refugees to America brought in $63 billion in government revenues than they cost in the last 10 years. Trump chief policy adviser Stephen Miller banned the release of the study, because it contradicts his claim that refugees are too costly. Pass it on!A leaked document fitting that description was indeed published by the New York Times in September 2017. It was an early draft of a report by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) detailing, at the president's request, the estimated long-term costs of the United States Refugee Admissions Program. The Times noted that:The internal study, which was completed in late July but never publicly released, found that refugees contributed an estimated $269.1 billion in revenues to all levels of government between 2005 and 2014 through the payment of federal, state and local taxes. Overall, this report estimated that the net fiscal impact of refugees was positive over the 10-year period, at $63 billion.All in all, the report said, the net fiscal impact of refugees over the 10-year period was positive, not negative, to the tune of $63 billion at all levels of government:The study concluded that refugees on average had a net fiscal impact "comparable" to that of the general population:The per capita annual net fiscal benefit was $2,205 for refugees and $1,848 for the general U.S. population, a difference not likely to be significant given margins of error and other limitations of this study. Expenditures for the general U.S. population were on average higher than expenditures for refugees, while revenues were more comparable.However, none of this information was contained in the final report delivered to the President, the Times reported, noting that some of the refugee program's proponents believed the results of the study were "suppressed" internally. Administration officials characterized those results as illegitimate:This leak was delivered by someone with an ideological agenda, not someone looking at hard data, said Raj Shah, a White House spokesman. The actual report pursuant to the presidential memorandum shows that refugees with few skills coming from war-torn countries take more government benefits from the Department of Health and Human Services than the average population, and are not a net benefit to the U.S. economy.John Graham, the acting assistant secretary for planning and evaluation at the health department, said: We do not comment on allegedly leaked documents and that no report had been finalized. He noted that Mr. Trumps memorandum seeks an analysis related to the cost of refugee programs. Therefore, the only analysis in the scope of H.H.S.s response to the memo would be on refugee-related expenditures from data within H.H.S. programs.The three-page report the agency ultimately submitted, dated Sept. 5, does just that, using government data to compare the costs of refugees to Americans and making no mention of revenues contributed by refugees.The Times also said that according to White House sources, Trump adviser Stephen Miller, who is reputed to be the chief architect of the administration's immigration policies, "personally intervened" to ensure that only the costs of admitting refugees, and not the fiscal benefits thereof, were enumerated in the final report. (According to the New Yorker, the White House denied that Miller was involved in producing the report.)The Facebook meme is largely accurate, then, although it somewhat mischaracterizes what became of the original draft report. It wasn't "banned" from release, in that it doesn't appear the report was ever intended to be made public. It was allegedly suppressed, however, in that it never reached President Trump's desk, and all discussion of the fiscal benefits of admitting refugees into the United States was excised from the final document. Estimates vary on the total annual cost of processing and resettling refugees in the U.S., but a rough breakdown by the National Conference of State Legislatures put the total expenditures for accepting approximately 70,000 refugees in 2014 at $582 million. breakdown These cost estimates rarely attempt to take into account any economic benefits refugees might provide to the countries that take them in. According to a Facebook meme making the rounds since mid-2018, just such an analysis was undertaken by the Trump administration, but the results were suppressed because they undercut the official position: A recently leaked federal study found that refugees to America brought in $63 billion in government revenues than they cost in the last 10 years. Trump chief policy adviser Stephen Miller banned the release of the study, because it contradicts his claim that refugees are too costly. Pass it on! A leaked document fitting that description was indeed published by the New York Times in September 2017. It was an early draft of a report by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) detailing, at the president's request, the estimated long-term costs of the United States Refugee Admissions Program. The Times noted that: document The internal study, which was completed in late July but never publicly released, found that refugees contributed an estimated $269.1 billion in revenues to all levels of government between 2005 and 2014 through the payment of federal, state and local taxes. Overall, this report estimated that the net fiscal impact of refugees was positive over the 10-year period, at $63 billion. All in all, the report said, the net fiscal impact of refugees over the 10-year period was positive, not negative, to the tune of $63 billion at all levels of government: The study concluded that refugees on average had a net fiscal impact "comparable" to that of the general population: The per capita annual net fiscal benefit was $2,205 for refugees and $1,848 for the general U.S. population, a difference not likely to be significant given margins of error and other limitations of this study. Expenditures for the general U.S. population were on average higher than expenditures for refugees, while revenues were more comparable. However, none of this information was contained in the final report delivered to the President, the Times reported, noting that some of the refugee program's proponents believed the results of the study were "suppressed" internally. Administration officials characterized those results as illegitimate: This leak was delivered by someone with an ideological agenda, not someone looking at hard data, said Raj Shah, a White House spokesman. The actual report pursuant to the presidential memorandum shows that refugees with few skills coming from war-torn countries take more government benefits from the Department of Health and Human Services than the average population, and are not a net benefit to the U.S. economy. John Graham, the acting assistant secretary for planning and evaluation at the health department, said: We do not comment on allegedly leaked documents and that no report had been finalized. He noted that Mr. Trumps memorandum seeks an analysis related to the cost of refugee programs. Therefore, the only analysis in the scope of H.H.S.s response to the memo would be on refugee-related expenditures from data within H.H.S. programs. The three-page report the agency ultimately submitted, dated Sept. 5, does just that, using government data to compare the costs of refugees to Americans and making no mention of revenues contributed by refugees. The Times also said that according to White House sources, Trump adviser Stephen Miller, who is reputed to be the chief architect of the administration's immigration policies, "personally intervened" to ensure that only the costs of admitting refugees, and not the fiscal benefits thereof, were enumerated in the final report. (According to the New Yorker, the White House denied that Miller was involved in producing the report.) denied The Facebook meme is largely accurate, then, although it somewhat mischaracterizes what became of the original draft report. It wasn't "banned" from release, in that it doesn't appear the report was ever intended to be made public. It was allegedly suppressed, however, in that it never reached President Trump's desk, and all discussion of the fiscal benefits of admitting refugees into the United States was excised from the final document. Blitzer, Jonathan. "How Stephen Miller Single-Handedly Got the U.S. to Accept Fewer Refugees." The New Yorker. 13 October 2017. Davis, Julie Hirschfeld. "Trump to Cap Refugees Allowed into U.S. at 30,000, a Record Low." The New York Times. 17 September 2018. Davis, Julie Hirschfeld and Somini Sengupta. "Trump Administration Rejects Study Showing Positive Impact of Refugees." The New York Times. 18 September 2017. Phillips, Amber. "Here's How Much the United States Spends on Refugees." The Washington Post. 20 November 2015. The New York Times. "Rejected Report Shows Revenue Brought in by Refugees." 19 September 2017.

True

One of the arguments made by the Trump administration for lowering the cap on the number of refugees allowed into the United States is that the costs of refugee resettlement outweigh its benefits.Estimates vary on the total annual cost of processing and resettling refugees in the U.S., but a rough breakdown by the National Conference of State Legislatures put the total expenditures for accepting approximately 70,000 refugees in 2014 at $582 million.These cost estimates rarely attempt to take into account any economic benefits refugees might provide to the countries that take them in. According to a Facebook meme making the rounds since mid-2018, just such an analysis was undertaken by the Trump administration, but the results were suppressed because they undercut the official position:A recently leaked federal study found that refugees to America brought in $63 billion in government revenues than they cost in the last 10 years. Trump chief policy adviser Stephen Miller banned the release of the study, because it contradicts his claim that refugees are too costly. Pass it on!A leaked document fitting that description was indeed published by the New York Times in September 2017. It was an early draft of a report by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) detailing, at the president's request, the estimated long-term costs of the United States Refugee Admissions Program. The Times noted that:The internal study, which was completed in late July but never publicly released, found that refugees contributed an estimated $269.1 billion in revenues to all levels of government between 2005 and 2014 through the payment of federal, state and local taxes. Overall, this report estimated that the net fiscal impact of refugees was positive over the 10-year period, at $63 billion.All in all, the report said, the net fiscal impact of refugees over the 10-year period was positive, not negative, to the tune of $63 billion at all levels of government:The study concluded that refugees on average had a net fiscal impact "comparable" to that of the general population:The per capita annual net fiscal benefit was $2,205 for refugees and $1,848 for the general U.S. population, a difference not likely to be significant given margins of error and other limitations of this study. Expenditures for the general U.S. population were on average higher than expenditures for refugees, while revenues were more comparable.However, none of this information was contained in the final report delivered to the President, the Times reported, noting that some of the refugee program's proponents believed the results of the study were "suppressed" internally. Administration officials characterized those results as illegitimate:This leak was delivered by someone with an ideological agenda, not someone looking at hard data, said Raj Shah, a White House spokesman. The actual report pursuant to the presidential memorandum shows that refugees with few skills coming from war-torn countries take more government benefits from the Department of Health and Human Services than the average population, and are not a net benefit to the U.S. economy.John Graham, the acting assistant secretary for planning and evaluation at the health department, said: We do not comment on allegedly leaked documents and that no report had been finalized. He noted that Mr. Trumps memorandum seeks an analysis related to the cost of refugee programs. Therefore, the only analysis in the scope of H.H.S.s response to the memo would be on refugee-related expenditures from data within H.H.S. programs.The three-page report the agency ultimately submitted, dated Sept. 5, does just that, using government data to compare the costs of refugees to Americans and making no mention of revenues contributed by refugees.The Times also said that according to White House sources, Trump adviser Stephen Miller, who is reputed to be the chief architect of the administration's immigration policies, "personally intervened" to ensure that only the costs of admitting refugees, and not the fiscal benefits thereof, were enumerated in the final report. (According to the New Yorker, the White House denied that Miller was involved in producing the report.)The Facebook meme is largely accurate, then, although it somewhat mischaracterizes what became of the original draft report. It wasn't "banned" from release, in that it doesn't appear the report was ever intended to be made public. It was allegedly suppressed, however, in that it never reached President Trump's desk, and all discussion of the fiscal benefits of admitting refugees into the United States was excised from the final document.Estimates vary on the total annual cost of processing and resettling refugees in the U.S., but a rough breakdown by the National Conference of State Legislatures put the total expenditures for accepting approximately 70,000 refugees in 2014 at $582 million.A leaked document fitting that description was indeed published by the New York Times in September 2017. It was an early draft of a report by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) detailing, at the president's request, the estimated long-term costs of the United States Refugee Admissions Program. The Times noted that:The Times also said that according to White House sources, Trump adviser Stephen Miller, who is reputed to be the chief architect of the administration's immigration policies, "personally intervened" to ensure that only the costs of admitting refugees, and not the fiscal benefits thereof, were enumerated in the final report. (According to the New Yorker, the White House denied that Miller was involved in producing the report.)

FMD_train_1091

War Between the States

01/12/2010

Claim: Maps show similarity between 2004 U.S. presidential election results and pattern of free vs. slave states in pre-Civil War America. Multiple see below. Example: [Collected on the Internet, 2004] 2004 U.S. Presidential Election Results Pre-Civil War Free vs. Slave States Origins: This is another example for which it is difficult to assign a value of "" or "" there is a basic (and somewhat superficial) underlying fact which is true, but interpretations of that fact's significance are subjective and can be widely varied. It is true that a map showing the locations of free and slave states (and territories) in the pre-Civil War U.S. bears a rough resemblance to a map showing the electoral vote results for the 2004 U.S. presidential election. Senator John Kerry won most of the states in the northeast, the Great Lakes, and the Pacific coast regions, while President George W. Bush captured all of the south plus most of the midwestern, western, and plains states. However, the similarities between these maps mask some very significant differences. On the eve of the Civil War (which began in April 1861), the United States was very sharply divided along regional lines. Going into the 1860 campaign, the two major parties both essentially split in two, each creating a northern and a southern wing. In the subsequent presidential election the northern Whig/Republican party (represented by Abraham Lincoln of Illinois) didn't even appear on the ballot in most southern states, and while the Southern Democratic party (represented by John C. Breckinridge of Kentucky) did make the ballot throughout most of the north, they rarely drew more than a relative handful of votes in those states. All four candidates captured at least one state's electoral votes, a rarity in U.S. election history. election captured The electorate in 2004 was not nearly so sharply divided along regional lines, however an electoral map just makes it appear that way because of the "winner take all" nature of the U.S. electoral system. Both the popular and electoral vote totals in 2004 were quite close (President Bush won the popular vote by a 51%-48% margin, and a single strongly-contested state such as Ohio could have tipped the electoral vote balance in the other direction), and although the states won by each candidate were largely clumped into regional clusters, both candidates generally ran very strongly even in the states they did not win. An election map with finer gradation (i.e., displaying results on a county-by-county basis rather than a state-by-state one, and providing color shading to reflect the closeness of the vote in each area) produces a better picture of how strongly both candidates in the 2004 election ran even in states which they lost: 2004 (Click here for a larger version of this map.) here According to exit polls and analysis of county-by-county election returns, the sharpest geographic distinction between the two candidates did not primarily correspond to region but to size of community: Senator John Kerry had a substantial 60%-39% edge in large cities (representing roughly 13% of the total U.S. population), while the reverse was true in rural areas (representing roughly 16% of the total U.S. population), where President Bush garnered a 59%-40% majority. What we saw in the 2004 election was more of an urban vs. rural division, regardless of state. exit polls Last updated: 11 November 2004 Sources: Alexander, Kate. "Election Officials Urge Voters to Check Ballots for Errors." Austin American-Statesman. 23 October 2004 (p. B1).

NEI

split in two, each creating a northern and a southern wing. In the subsequent presidential election the northern Whig/Republican party (represented by Abraham Lincoln of Illinois) didn't even appear on the ballot in most southern states, and while the Southern Democratic party (represented by John C. Breckinridge of Kentucky) did make the ballot throughout most of the north, they rarely drew more than a relative handful of votes in those states. All four candidates captured at least one state's electoral votes, a rarity in U.S. election history.The electorate in 2004 was not nearly so sharply divided along regional lines, however an electoral map just makes it appear that way because of the "winner take all" nature of the U.S. electoral system. Both the popular and electoral vote totals in 2004 were quite close (President Bush won the popular vote by a 51%-48% margin, and a single strongly-contested state such as Ohio could have tipped the electoral vote balance in the other direction), and although the states won by each candidate were largely clumped into regional clusters, both candidates generally ran very strongly even in the states they did not win. An election map with finer gradation (i.e., displaying results on a county-by-county basis rather than a state-by-state one, and providing color shading to reflect the closeness of the vote in each area) produces a better picture of how strongly both candidates in the 2004 election ran even in states which they lost:(Click here for a larger version of this map.)According to exit polls and analysis of county-by-county election returns, the sharpest geographic distinction between the two candidates did not primarily correspond to region but to size of community: Senator John Kerry had a substantial 60%-39% edge in large cities (representing roughly 13% of the total U.S. population), while the reverse was true in rural areas (representing roughly 16% of the total U.S. population), where President Bush garnered a 59%-40% majority. What we saw in the 2004 election was more of an urban vs. rural division, regardless of state.

FMD_train_1202

No state gets back less from Washington than New York state.

02/11/2021

Does New York get the short end of the stick when it comes to federal funding? Governor Andrew Cuomo said so in a tweet on January 14. New Yorkers are tired of subsidizing other states with our tax dollars. New York subsidizes 42 other states. No state receives less back from Washington than New York. The federal government must stop shortchanging New York, Cuomo tweeted. Is Cuomo correct that no state gets back less from Washington than New York? We looked at a comprehensive independent analysis and found that Cuomo's assertion was close to accurate. Freeman Klopott, a spokesman for the New York State Division of Budget, told PolitiFact that Cuomo was referencing a widely cited analysis from the Rockefeller Institute of Government, a public policy arm of the State University of New York. The report, published in January 2020, shows four-year totals of funding flows from fiscal year 2015 to fiscal year 2018. The report found that New Yorkers cumulatively sent $116 billion more to the federal government during that period than New York received from the federal government. The four major categories of federal spending analyzed by the report are direct payments for individuals under programs such as Social Security and Medicare, federal grants to state and local governments, federal contracts and procurement, and wages paid to federal workers. The institute found that during that period, only 11 states received fewer dollars in funding than they sent to the federal government in tax payments, and of these, New York's cumulative shortfall was easily the largest. The other 10 states with negative balances with the federal government during that four-year period were, in descending order, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Connecticut, California, Illinois, Colorado, Nebraska, Washington, Utah, and New Hampshire. In the most recent year studied in the report, 2018, New York sent almost $22 billion more to the federal government than it received. That's a larger sum than the combined shortfalls of the next two states, New Jersey and Massachusetts. However, when adjusted for population, New York isn't the biggest loser; it ranks fourth, after three of its smaller neighbors: Connecticut, New Jersey, and Massachusetts. Cuomo's mention of 42 states stems from the 2018 figures in the report, which states, "Forty-two states had a positive balance of payments with the federal government in 2018." Broadly speaking, federal money flows from high-income states to low-income states through spending by programs such as Medicaid. The system isn't designed to return each state the equivalent of what its residents and businesses paid. Because New York is home to a large critical mass of very high-income households, as well as a considerable number of merely affluent (mid-six-figure) residents, the Empire State's residents generate a disproportionately large share of federal revenues through a tax system that is, after all, based on a progressive income tax, said E.J. McMahon, founder and research director of the Empire Center for Public Policy, a free-market think tank. New York's balance of payments with the federal government could worsen in the coming years unless a change made to the tax code in 2017 is reversed. In the Republican-backed tax bill signed that year by President Donald Trump, lawmakers limited the size of the federal deduction for state and local taxes paid. This change to the state and local tax deduction meant that some taxpayers in high-tax states like New York would pay more in federal taxes. Cuomo stated that no state gets back less from Washington than New York. This aligns with a widely cited study by the Rockefeller Institute of Government that looked at every state's balance of payments with the federal government from 2015 to 2018. However, that same study notes a slightly different result when population is taken into account. On a per-capita basis, New York ranked fourth, after Connecticut, New Jersey, and Massachusetts. We rate the statement Mostly True.

True

Does New York get the short end of the stick when it comes to federal funding? Gov. Andrew Cuomo said so in atweeton Jan. 14.New Yorkers are just tired of subsidizing other states with our tax dollars.New York subsidizes 42 other states.No state gets back less from Washington than New York State.The federal government must stop shortchanging NY.#SOTS2021Freeman Klopott, a spokesman for the New York State Division of Budget, told PolitiFact that Cuomo was referencing a widely citedanalysisfrom the Rockefeller Institute of Government, a public policy arm of the State University of New York.New Yorks balance of payments with the federal government could worsen in the coming years unless a change made to the tax code in 2017 is reversed. In the Republican-backed tax bill signed that year by President Donald Trump, lawmakers limited the size of the federal deduction for state and local taxes paid. This change to thestate and local tax deductionmeant that some taxpayers in high-tax states like New York would pay more in federal taxes.

FMD_train_1493

SCAM ALERT: Walmart Is Not Giving Away Vouchers To Celebrate Going Plastic Bag-Free

03/24/2021

A scam that circulated on Facebook in late March 2021 claimed that anyone who shared and commented on a post would receive a bag full of goodies and a $75 Walmart voucher after validating their entry at a link included in the post (archived here). The text in the post read: "To celebrate the great news of Walmart becoming plastic bag-free by the end of 2021, we are giving one of these Walmart gift bags to everyone who has shared and commented by 7 PM on March 24. Each person who does this will receive one of these gift bags full of goodies and a $75 Walmart voucher. After that, validate your entry at https://bit.ly/2Qq4gwy." Snopes spoke with a representative from the chain supermarket, who confirmed that the post was fake. This page is not affiliated with or endorsed by Walmart. "We take any fraud impacting our customers seriously and continue to implement and improve upon measures designed to help guard against various consumer scams," Walmart spokesperson Casey Staheli told Snopes. The scam may have been inspired by an announcement made by Walmart on February 21, declaring it was reducing its use of plastic bags. As part of the Beyond the Bag Challenge, an international consortium of large-scale vendors, Walmart announced that stores in Mexico and Central America would go fully bagless, and nearly three-quarters of stores in Mexico had stopped providing plastic bags by December 2020. Walmart stores also launched a pilot program in Vermont by implementing a reusable bags-only requirement after it banned the use of plastic shopping bags in all stores effective July 2020, reported Vermont Biz. However, the retailer did not make a promise to ban plastic bags from all its stores, nor did it offer any sort of gift bag or store credit for those who shared and commented on a Facebook post. For help identifying other potential scams, Walmart encourages consumers to visit the Fraud Alerts section on its website. Correction [March 25, 2021]: Vermont's "paper bag only" requirement was updated to reflect its newly imposed reusable bag-only policy.

False

A scam that circulated on Facebook in late March 2021 claimed that anyone who shared and commented on a post would receive a bag full of goodies and a $75 Walmart voucher after validating their entry at a link included in the post (archived here).The scam may have been inspired by an announcement made by Walmart on Feb. 21 declaring it was reducing its use of plastic bags. As part of the Beyond the Bag Challenge, an international consortium of large-scale vendors, Walmart announced that stores in Mexico and Central America would go fully bagless and nearly three-quarters of stores in Mexico had stopped providing plastic bags by December 2020.Walmart stores also launched a pilot program in Vermont by implementing a reusable bags only requirement after it banned the use of plastic shopping bags in all stores effective July 2020, reported Vermont Biz.However, the retailer did not make a promise to ban plastic bags from all its stores, nor did it offer any sort of gift bag or store credit for those that shared and commented on a Facebook post. For help identifying other potential scams, Walmart encourages consumers to visit the Fraud Alerts section on its website.

FMD_train_1546

Eric Trump Tweets (Illegal) Ballot Selfie

11/08/2016

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.

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:

FMD_train_129

The $12,000 Armani jacket owned by Hillary Clinton

06/08/2016

In early June 2016, Facebook users widely shared articles reporting that Hillary Clinton wore a $12,495 Giorgio Armani jacket to deliver a speech on income inequality. The underlying implication was that Clinton's interest in the plight of middle-class Americans was visibly superficial. Interest in the claim began with a New York Post article that focused not on the jacket, but on Clinton's general wardrobe choices on the campaign trail. Its title referenced the "surprising strategy behind Hillary Clinton's designer wardrobe," and the piece began by noting that Clinton's appearance and style have been publicly scrutinized and mocked for decades. Clinton's New York primary victory speech in April focused on topics including income inequality, job creation, and helping people secure their retirement. It was a clear attempt to position herself as an everywoman. But an everywoman she is not; she gave the speech in a $12,495 Giorgio Armani tweed jacket. The polished outfit was a stark contrast to the fashion choices Clinton had made in the past. As First Lady, Clinton wore frumpy pastel skirtsuits. As a New York senator and secretary of state, she attempted a more serious look, wearing pantsuits in a rainbow of colors—so mocked that they sparked memes. In comparison to Michelle Obama, who has become known as a style icon during her time in the White House and appeared on the cover of Vogue twice, Clinton has never been able to nail down a personal aesthetic that works for her. The article speculated (but didn't confirm) that Clinton paid full price for the clothing and did not wear it on loan from its designers. The paper also suggested that Clinton's fashion choices negatively affected her public perception in the past. The cost of men's suits worn by fellow politicians didn't appear in the article for contrast: It's a marked shift from Clinton's 2008 run, when she regularly recycled outfits such as blue-and-tangerine pantsuits from DC-based designer Nina McLemore. But just like Clinton's fashion choices of the past, the makeover could turn out to be divisive. On one side will be those who say it's an appropriate expense for Clinton, given that she's in the unprecedented position of running for president as a woman—and looking the part is crucial to her success. On the other side are those who will see her spending as being out of touch with her message. Not long after Clinton's 2016 campaign looks were dissected by the Post, a litany of items condensed the article to a single headline: It's true that the jacket was from Giorgio Armani's collection and bore a list price of $12,495. But on June 8, 2016, the jacket's actual retail price was $7,497, and the jacket can now be had for about one-third of that list price. The Post speculated that Clinton paid for the clothing out of pocket, but the website Fashionista, in turn, said that might not necessarily be the case: The Post also posits that Clinton must be spending her own money on all these clothes, as no designer is taking credit for dressing her as they do with First Lady Obama; with Anna Wintour backing her campaign, it would not be outrageous to think that designers might also be quietly gifting clothing to Clinton. (The Post also attacks Clinton's style by mentioning that Michelle Obama has nabbed the cover of Vogue twice; it would be worth noting that Clinton has her own cover of Vogue, for which she wore Oscar de la Renta.) It's unclear whether Clinton purchased expensive clothing for such major appearances (such as her New York speech in April 2016), and it's possible she was loaned articles of clothing to wear by major designers. Stylists Jennifer Rade and Rebecca Klein of Media Style told CNBC that no matter what Clinton did, she would be criticized for her sartorial choices: CNBC But Clinton is "damned if she does, damned if she doesn't," said Rade. If Clinton were to wear a lower-priced wardrobe, she would be criticized for not wearing the same caliber of clothing as her competitors. "It's not appropriate for the forum," Klein said. "She is a presidential candidate. That would be disrespectful... She is dressing for the occasion." A June 2014 Associated Press article examined the matter of the contents of White House closets, noting that as an issue, the debate went back at least as far as Mary Todd Lincoln. The outlet noted that some clothing was gifted to Michelle Obama under specific circumstances: In recent weeks, Mrs. Obama has turned heads with a forest-green Naeem Khan dress and shimmered in a silver Marchesa gown ... her flowered shirtdress for a Mother's Day tea at the White House (recycled from an earlier event) hit just the right note for an audience of military moms. It takes money to pull that off, month after month. Those three dresses by themselves could add up to more than $15,000 retail, not to mention accessories such as shoes and jewelry. Is it the taxpayers who foot the bill? No. (Despite what critics say.) Is it Mrs. Obama? Usually, but not always. Does she pay full price? Not likely. Does she ever borrow gowns from designers? No. The financing of the first lady's wardrobe is something that the Obama White House is loath to discuss. It's a subject that has bedeviled presidents and their wives for centuries. First ladies are expected to dress well, but the job doesn't come with a clothing allowance or a salary. Here's how Joanna Rosholm, press secretary to the first lady, explains it: "Mrs. Obama pays for her clothing. For official events of public or historic significance, such as a state visit, the first lady's clothes may be given as a gift by a designer and accepted on behalf of the U.S. government. They are then stored by the National Archives." The claim also included that Ms. Clinton wore the designer piece to "deliver a speech about income inequality." The Post originally reported that "Clinton's New York primary victory speech in April focused on topics including income inequality, job creation, and helping people secure their retirement," an opener widely condensed to "a speech about income inequality." But in fact, neither claim was accurate; the full text of Clinton's April 2016 New York speech was available online, and the words "income inequality" didn't appear a single time. The wide-ranging speech only briefly touched on a theme of "income inequality," in a much broader sense than the rumor suggested: Now, we all know many people who are still hurting. I see it everywhere I go. The Great Recession wiped out jobs, homes, and savings, and a lot of Americans haven't yet recovered. But I still believe with all my heart that as another greater Democratic President once said, there's nothing wrong with America that can't be cured by what's right with America. That is, after all, what we've always done. It's who we are. America is a problem-solving nation. And in this campaign, we are setting bold progressive goals backed up by real plans that will improve lives, creating more good jobs that provide dignity and pride in a middle-class life, raising wages and reducing inequality, making sure all our kids get a good education no matter what zip code they live in, building ladders of opportunity and empowerment so all of our people can go as far as their hard work and talent will take them. Let's revitalize places that have been left out and left behind, from inner cities to coal country to Indian country. And let's put Americans to work rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure, including our failing water systems like the one in Flint, Michigan. There are many places across our country where children and families are at risk from the water they drink and the air they breathe. Let's combat climate change and make America the clean energy superpower of the 21st century. Let's take on the challenge of systemic racism, invest in communities of color, and finally pass comprehensive immigration reform. And once and for all, let's guarantee equal pay for women. After the Republican National Convention (RNC) in July 2016, Hillary Clinton's infamous Armani jacket was again negatively compared to the dress worn at the convention by GOP nominee Donald Trump's daughter Ivanka, an item of clothing (from Ivanka's own label) that retails for $158. Trump's wife Melania, however, opted for a pricier Margot dress by Roksanda, which retails for $2,190.

NEI

It's true that the jacket was from Giorgio Armani's collection and bore a list price of $12,495. But on 8 June 2016 the jacket's actual retail price was $7,497, and the jacket can now be had for about one-third of that list price.It's unclear whether Clinton purchased expensive clothing for such major appearances (such as her New York speech in April 2016), and it's possible she was loaned articles of clothing to wear by major designers. Stylists Jennifer Rade and Rebecca Klein of Media Style told CNBC that no matter what Clinton did, she would be criticized for her sartorial choices:A June 2014 Associated Press article examined the matter of the contents of White House closets, noting that as an issue, the debate went back at least as far as Mary Todd Lincoln. The outlet noted that some clothing was gifted to Michelle Obama under specific circumstances:The claim also included that Ms. Clinton wore the designer piece to "deliver a speech about income inequality." The Post originally reported that "Clintons New York primary victory speech in April focused on topics including income inequality, job creation and helping people secure their retirement," an opener widely condensed to "a speech about income inequality." But in fact neither claim was accurate; the full text of Clinton's April 2016 New York speech was available online, and the words "income inequality" didn't appear a single time. The wide-ranging speech only briefly touched on a theme of "income inequality," an in a much broader sense than the rumor suggested:After the Republican National Convention (RNC) in July 2016, Hillary Clinton's infamous Armani jacket was again negatively compared to the dress worn at the convention by GOP nominee Donald Trump's daughter Ivanka, an item of clothing (from Ivanka's own label) that retails for $158. Trump's wife Melania, however, opted for a pricier Margot dress by Roksanda, which retails for $2,190

FMD_train_92

Is This a Doctor Mourning a Woman Who Died During Childbirth?

09/06/2017

On 5 September 2017, the Facebook page "Babies Are Beautiful" (@babofficial) posted a story accompanied by a photograph of a crying doctor. The narrative, purportedly penned by the unnamed doctor, told of a woman who gave birth under highly implausible medical circumstances, only to die after her child was delivered: @babofficial posted Today is the saddest day of my life. As a Doctor, I have handled so many pregnant women in Labour and every time am in the delivery room I always pray to God to bless all mothers. The pain women go through in the delivery room is undescribable and this does not include the 9 months they spent carrying the baby. They go through a lot just to bring forth new life. Today I cried bitterly because I lost a woman, we don't pray for things like this to happen but sometimes God may have other plans. Why is this woman's case so painful? She has been barren for 14 years! We have tried IVF & so many method known to man, the woman went through a lot. Finally God blessed her, it was way beyond science and human knowledge. She just got pregnant despite the fact she has ovarian cyst and huge load of fibroids, brethren she got pregnant. Her fibroid started melting and everything was OK, I know that's God, he will do things just to show off his glory and awesomeness. After 9 months, it was time, her husband rushed her to the hospital and quickly I left everything that I was doing and attended to her. She laboured for hours, after 7 hours, it was so painful so we decided to open her up. We lost her but the baby was alive,. Before her death, she held the baby in her arms and smiled "God is great" and then she gave up the ghost. I was devastated and sad, I went to broke the news to her husband myself, upon hearing the news, her husband fainted, their happy day just turned sour. We lost a live just to deliver a new life today. Please respect women because they pass through the valley of death to bring life. Respect your wife! Carrying your baby for 9 months is no jokes and labouring for hours to give birth to your children is a huge sacrifice. I pray to God to please protect everyone reading this, especially pregnant women, please put them in your prayers. Dear husband, I repeat respect your wife because she is truly the giver of life. May God strengthen all pregnant women, you will all deliver your babies like the women of Hebrew. Don't ignore this post, share to others it is very important because the women in our lives should be worshipped. Please if you are having problems with your mother and you refused to call her, I beg you to CALL HER NOW! she went through hell to give birth to you. Show some love to women, they are super. Please share. GOD BLESS WOMEN ? In just over 24 hours, the post was shared more than half a million times. The Facebook page that posted the tale, "Babies Are Beautiful," appeared to be affiliated with an online baby supply shop (babbyy.com) which listed a California phone number and Delaware address as its contact information. However, the babbyy.com domain was registered by an owner in Nigeria. address registered The nature of the story suggested that the tale was fabricated to rack up Facebook likes and shares. (The majority of recent posts on the page were similar "likebait" photographs, sometimes directing users to "type amen.") No details were provided about the name of the doctor or location of the hospital, and commenters who identified themselves as medical professionals were quick to point out weak spots in the story: likes type amen Those commenters noted that, among other things, the purported patient would have been treated as high-risk and obtained a C-section, that uterine fibroids are not typically fatal, and that details of the account did not align with the actual origins of the photograph. zge Metin Photography was credited for the photograph of the crying doctor (which bears a watermark in Turkish) and posted it to Instagram on 6 September 2017. In the post's comment thread, photographer zge Metin confirmed the "Babies Are Beautiful" post was a hoax, as the father captured in the image was crying tears of joy after the birth of his healthy baby: Instagram confirmed kole.photography [link] Another stolen post. What a beautiful photo! You should get credit. elia_79 Hi is this a sad story or it is just a hoax on internet ozgemetinphotography @elia_79 This Crying Father is photo of mine, i took it. The Father was crying because his baby was born as a healthy baby. Not because his wife died, his wife did not die. This story is not true. elia_79 @ozgemetinphotography ughh thank you so much. Yes I saw that it had your picture on it that's why I looked you up in Instagram thank you so much. Great pictureozgemetinphotography@elia_79 We contacted babbyy.com and reached the owner, Alex Onyia, who told us that the photograph was not meant to depict the events in the story, which he said had been sent in by a fan of the Facebook page. He claimed that the company had reached out to photographer zge Metin on Instagram and had secured permission to use her photographs, but given the Metin's comments on Instagram, we doubt that this is the case. Onyia also maintained that the story was genuine, although he had not verified that the person who wrote it was an actual doctor: "We have featured so many similar stories over the years and all are genuine." Although sharing the false story and misused photograph posed little danger to Facebook users, it did bolster the reach of a dubious Facebook page attached to a retail outlet of unknown reliability.

False

On 5 September 2017, the Facebook page "Babies Are Beautiful" (@babofficial) posted a story accompanied by a photograph of a crying doctor. The narrative, purportedly penned by the unnamed doctor, told of a woman who gave birth under highly implausible medical circumstances, only to die after her child was delivered:The Facebook page that posted the tale, "Babies Are Beautiful," appeared to be affiliated with an online baby supply shop (babbyy.com) which listed a California phone number and Delaware address as its contact information. However, the babbyy.com domain was registered by an owner in Nigeria.The nature of the story suggested that the tale was fabricated to rack up Facebook likes and shares. (The majority of recent posts on the page were similar "likebait" photographs, sometimes directing users to "type amen.") No details were provided about the name of the doctor or location of the hospital, and commenters who identified themselves as medical professionals were quick to point out weak spots in the story:zge Metin Photography was credited for the photograph of the crying doctor (which bears a watermark in Turkish) and posted it to Instagram on 6 September 2017. In the post's comment thread, photographer zge Metin confirmed the "Babies Are Beautiful" post was a hoax, as the father captured in the image was crying tears of joy after the birth of his healthy baby:

FMD_train_1286

Is This 'Chemistree' Picture Real?

12/12/2020

In December 2020, a picture of a seemingly oddly shaped branch was widely circulated on social media along with the punny title "chemistree." Many viewers appeared skeptical that this was a genuine photograph. For starters, one of the earliest and most popular postings of this image was shared to r/LSD, a section of Reddit dedicated to the hallucinogenic drug Lysergic Acid Diethylamide, along with comments about how the branch resembled the chemical structure of the drug. This, in turn, led some to believe that the picture of the branch had been edited to better resemble the chemical structure of LSD. Other social media users seemed to think that the hexagonal shapes of this branch were too unnatural to be real. As the image started circulating under the punny "chemistree" title, it appeared once again that this picture was digitally edited with the intent of scoring internet points. We have not been able to source this particular image, but we don't see any reason to believe that this "chemistree" was photoshopped. In fact, this branch doesn't seem all that unusual. Hexagons may have the appearance of being humanmade, but these six-sided shapes are widely found throughout nature, such as in the honeycomb of a beehive or the symmetrical shape of a snowflake. Several plants can also grow in seemingly oddly shaped formations. We reached out to the U.S. National Arboretum for help identifying this branch. While we haven't been able to identify this tree species with absolute certainty yet, we have come across a few likely contenders. The Sophora prostrata, or dwarf kowhai, for instance, has angular branches similar to the ones in the above-displayed picture. Before we show you an image of the dwarf kowhai, it should also be noted that the lighting in the viral picture makes it difficult to discern any depth. This branch appears, more or less, to be two-dimensional, with all of the branches moving at angles equidistant to the camera. In reality, however, it's likely that the branches' offshoots are moving slightly toward and away from the camera. In July 2020, the non-profit organization Trees For Canterbury shared an image showing a branch of this "little twister." Here's another picture of the dwarf kowhai. While the branch in the viral "chemistree" picture may belong to a dwarf kowhai, this tree is native to New Zealand. If this picture was snapped in the United States, it's possible that it shows a spiny black olive (Bucida spinosa), a tree that grows in warmer climates, like the Caribbean, Hawaii, or Florida. Here's an eerily similar photograph of a spiny black olive tree branch that was posted to Flickr by Jenny Evans in 2008. While we have not been able to positively identify the "chemistree" branch, it isn't out of the ordinary for trees and plants to have angular branches. The viral picture most likely shows a poorly lit photo of a spiny black olive (Bucida spinosa) tree.

NEI

Many viewers appeared skeptical that this was a genuine photograph. For starters, one of the earliest and most popular postings of this image was shared to r/LSD, a section of Reddit dedicated to the hallucinogenic drug Lysergic Acid Diethylamide, along with comments about how the branch resembled the chemical structure of the drug. This, in turn, led some to believe that the picture of the branch had been edited to better resemble the chemical structure of LSD:We have not been able to source this particular image, but we don't see any reason to believe that this "chemistree" was photoshopped. In fact, this branch doesn't seem all that unusual. Hexagons may have the appearance of being humanmade, but these six-sided shapes are widely found throughout nature, such as in the honeycomb of a beehive or the symmetrical shape of a snowflake. Several plants can also grow in seemingly oddly shaped formations. Before we show you an image of the dwarf kowhai, it should also be noted that the lighting in the viral picture makes it difficult to discern any depth. This branch appears, more or less, to be two-dimensional, with all of the branches moving at angles equidistant to the camera. In reality, however, it's likely that the branches' offshoots are moving slightly toward and away from the camera. In July 2020, the non-profit organization Trees For Canterbury, shared an image showing a branch of this "little twister" :While the branch in the viral "chemistree" picture may belong to a dwarf kowhai, this tree is native to New Zealand. If this picture was snapped in the United States, it's possible that it shows a spiny black olive (Bucida spinosa), a tree that grows in warmer climates, like the Caribbean, Hawaii, or Florida. Here's an eerily similar photograph of a spiny black olive tree branch that was posted to Flickr by Jenny Evans in 2008:

FMD_train_941

Did Astronaut Chris Hadfield Test the Effects of Marijuana in Space?

11/26/2018

An image purportedly showing NASA astronaut Chris Hadfield holding a bag of marijuana aboard the International Space Station (ISS) was posted by the "Pictures in History" Facebook page in November 2018, along with a caption stating that the astronaut was testing the effects of the drug in space: Facebook Although followers might expect to see genuine historical images being posted by a social media page named "Pictures in History," that account frequently shares manipulated or miscaptioned images. In this case, an image of Hadfield holding a bag of Easter Eggs was doctored in order to make it appear as if the astronaut were showing off a pouch of marijuana frequently shares manipulated miscaptioned The genuine image was originally posted to Hadfield's Twitter account on Easter in 2013: posted Not only is the image of Chris Hadfield holding a bag of marijuana fake, but it's unlikely that any similar (but genuine) photographs of astronauts with drug paraphernalia exist, as NASA has been a drug-free workplace since at least the mid-1980s. drug-free workplace Astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson has also warned against drug use aboard the International Space Station, arguing that it could be deadly for astronauts to get stoned in space: warned "The problem is, in space now, many things will kill you. So, if you do anything to alter your understanding of what is reality, that's not in the interest of your health. If you want to get high in space, lock yourself in your cabin, and don't come out. 'Cause you could break stuff inadvertently." Koren, Marina. "Reefer Madness at NASA." The Atlantic. 21 November 2018. Specktor, Brandon. "Neil deGrasse Tyson Reminds Us Why Smoking Weed in Space Is a Bad Idea." Live Science. 17 September 2018.

False

An image purportedly showing NASA astronaut Chris Hadfield holding a bag of marijuana aboard the International Space Station (ISS) was posted by the "Pictures in History" Facebook page in November 2018, along with a caption stating that the astronaut was testing the effects of the drug in space:Although followers might expect to see genuine historical images being posted by a social media page named "Pictures in History," that account frequently shares manipulated or miscaptioned images. In this case, an image of Hadfield holding a bag of Easter Eggs was doctored in order to make it appear as if the astronaut were showing off a pouch of marijuanaThe genuine image was originally posted to Hadfield's Twitter account on Easter in 2013:Not only is the image of Chris Hadfield holding a bag of marijuana fake, but it's unlikely that any similar (but genuine) photographs of astronauts with drug paraphernalia exist, as NASA has been a drug-free workplace since at least the mid-1980s. Astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson has also warned against drug use aboard the International Space Station, arguing that it could be deadly for astronauts to get stoned in space:

FMD_train_1281

Did Biden affirm that individuals earning less than $400,000 would not have to pay any taxes?

05/04/2021

In May 2021, a video started to circulate that supposedly showed U.S. President Joe Biden saying that people making less than $400,000 won't have to pay a single penny in taxes. Joe Biden This is a genuine clip showing a portion of the remarks Biden delivered during a visit to Tidewater Community College in Portsmouth, Virginia, on May 3, 2021. While the president said that people making under $400,000 would not pay a single penny in taxes during these remarks, that is not what is outlined in the Biden administration's tax plan. Biden misspoke here. A more accurate way of representing his tax plan would have been to say that people making under $400,000 would not see their taxes "raised" by a single penny. remarks Biden delivered Here's how Fox News reported on this gaffe: Fox News reported President Biden reiterated his pledge that no American earning less than $400,000 would not pay "a single penny" in additional taxes with a slight twist on Monday, after he proposed several tax increases to fund two sweeping spending plans. Biden appeared to mistakenly leave out a key word during his speech at Tidewater Community College instead saying that no one earning under his specified threshold would pay any taxes. Biden repeatedly promised during his 2020 presidential campaign that people making less than $400,000 "wont pay a penny more in taxes." repeatedly promised 2020 presidential campaign This campaign promise was included in Biden's proposal for the American Families Plan that was released in April 2021: released in April 2021 In all, the American Families Plan includes $1.8 trillion in investments and tax credits for American families and children over ten years. It consists of about $1 trillion in investments and $800 billion in tax cuts for American families and workers. Alongside the American Families Plan, the President will be proposing a set of measures to make sure that the wealthiest Americans pay their share in taxes, while ensuring that no one making $400,000 per year or less will see their taxes go up. When combined with President Bidens American Jobs Plan, this legislation will be fully paid for over 15 years, and will reduce deficits over the long term. Biden has repeatedly promised that people making less than $400,000 would not see their taxes raised under his plan. Although a video that showed him saying that people making less than a $400,000 won't "pay a single penny in taxes" is real, the president clearly misspoke during this portion of his speech.

True

In May 2021, a video started to circulate that supposedly showed U.S. President Joe Biden saying that people making less than $400,000 won't have to pay a single penny in taxes. This is a genuine clip showing a portion of the remarks Biden delivered during a visit to Tidewater Community College in Portsmouth, Virginia, on May 3, 2021. While the president said that people making under $400,000 would not pay a single penny in taxes during these remarks, that is not what is outlined in the Biden administration's tax plan. Biden misspoke here. A more accurate way of representing his tax plan would have been to say that people making under $400,000 would not see their taxes "raised" by a single penny. Here's how Fox News reported on this gaffe:Biden repeatedly promised during his 2020 presidential campaign that people making less than $400,000 "wont pay a penny more in taxes." This campaign promise was included in Biden's proposal for the American Families Plan that was released in April 2021:

FMD_train_960

Was the Oval Office Trashed During the Capitol Riot?

01/08/2021

On Jan. 7, 2021, a day after a pro-Trump mob stormed the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., a picture began circulating on social media that supposedly showed damage done to the Oval Office. This is not a genuine photograph of a desecrated Oval Office, and the picture predates the riot. It should also be noted that the Oval Office is located in the White House, not the Capitol. While the Capitol was vandalized during the riot, no damage was done to the White House. The image in question has been circulating online since at least November 2020, when it was shared on social media along with messages mocking U.S. President Donald Trump in the wake of his election loss to President-elect Joe Biden. This image was created by Nick den Boer, an animator, director, and digital artist who posts on social media under the handle @smearballz. This image, along with three others depicting a tarnished Oval Office, was originally posted on Twitter on Nov. 8, 2020, the day after Biden was declared the winner of the presidential election, along with the caption: "Aftermath." Another set of similar images depicting a trashed Oval Office was posted to @Smearballs' Instagram page in November 2019. Den Boer explained that the images are all 3D models of the Oval Office. While this is a digital creation that does not depict any actual damage done to the Oval Office, the Capitol was truly vandalized during a mob riot that resulted in the deaths of five people. NBC News reported that hundreds of President Donald Trump's supporters swarmed the U.S. Capitol on Wednesday, leaving the halls of Congress with broken windows, vandalized walls, and ransacked offices. Among the wreckage were pieces of broken furniture, battered doors, and heaps of trash littering the hallway floors. A thick film of dust and tear gas residue remained throughout the building that contains the Senate and the House of Representatives. Stolen and damaged items were reported in elected officials' offices, including the wood and gold placard above House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's office. Updated [8 January 2021]: Article updated to credit the original artist.

False

This image was created by Nick den Boer, an animator, director, and digital artist who posts on social media under the handle @smearballz. This image, along with three others depicting a tarnished Oval Office, was originally posted on Twitter on Nov. 8, 2020, (the day after Biden was declared the winner of the presidential election) along with the caption: "Aftermath."Another set of similar images depicting a trashed Oval Office was posted to @Smearballs Instagram page in November 2019. Den Boer explained to us that the above-displayed images are all 3D models of the Oval Office. While this is a digital creation that does not depict any actual damage done to the Oval Office, the Capitol was truly vandalized during a mob riot that included the deaths of five people.NBC News reported:

FMD_train_355

Is Pelosi advocating for ensuring a minimum income for undocumented immigrants in the upcoming COVID-19 stimulus package?

05/11/2020

Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And, please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease. fighting Find out Read Submit Become a Founding Member CDC WHO On May 4, 2020 as federal leaders debated how to respond to an unprecedented interruption to the U.S. economy due to the COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic a conservative provocateur tweeted that U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said she wanted the country's next economic relief package to establish "guaranteed minimum incomes" for "illegal aliens." COVID-19 Suggesting that only legal U.S. residents should benefit from federal stimulus packages, Charlie Kirk who's the founder of the conservative political group Turning Point USA and social media ally of U.S. President Donald Trump said in the tweet to his roughly 1.7 million followers: To investigate the validity of his claim, we examined Pelosi's public statements and media appearances to determine if, or when, she used the phrased "guaranteed income" and under what circumstances. While Kirk provides no explanation for where or when or to whom Pelosi made the remarks in the above-displayed tweet aside from the tweet's indication with the word "BREAKING" that the House Speaker had made the comments shortly before he composed the post we considered statements by Pelosi since the beginning of the COVID-19 U.S. outbreak in early 2020 for our investigation. Within that timeframe, she used or referenced the phrase "guaranteed income" in three public statements, two of which were televised interviews. First, the House Speaker spoke the words on HBO's "Real Time with Bill Maher" on April 24. In light of the federal government's approval of the $2.2 trillion Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act in March 2020 (and stimulus bills totaling about $500 billion since then), Maher asked Pelosi if the federal government could afford similar economic relief packages for Americans should the pandemic keep businesses closed and systems locked down in the coming months. She responded: April 24 CARES I think that it should be clear that this (COVID-19 stimulus spending so far) is not doing the job that it is set out to do completely, that we may have to consider some other options. Others have proposed a sovereign fund profits of which go to these unemployed people or guaranteed income, other things that may not even be as costly as continuing down this path. She provided no further details on the so-called proposals for "guaranteed income," which generally refers to a government-imposed system so that every citizen receives a minimum income a central idea of the 2020 presidential campaign by former Democratic candidate Andrew Yang. Also in the conversation with Maher, Pelosi did not explicitly state that she wanted the system implemented via Congressional legislation. Andrew Yang Three days later, however, the House Speaker again said the words "guaranteed income" in a televised interview, this time with more specificity on her openness to the social welfare system. In the April 27 segment of MSNBC's "Live with Stephanie Ruhle," while explaining federal leaders' next steps to help small businesses survive the financial crisis, Pelosi said: MSNBC As we go forward, let's see what works: what is operational and what needs other attention. Others have suggested a minimum income for a guaranteed income for people. Is that worthy of attention now? Perhaps so, because there are many more people than just in small business and hired by small business, as important as that is to the vitality of our economy. And other people who are not in the public sector, you know, meeting our needs in so many ways, that may need some assistance as well. Soon after she made the statement on live TV, news outlets including CBS News and CNBC published stories with headlines such as, "Pelosi says 'guaranteed income' for Americans is worth considering for coronavirus recovery." In a story by Business Insider about the televised comments, an aid to Pelosi said the House Speaker was referring to proposals that would guarantee worker paychecks not a sweeping system for universal basic income. CBS News CNBC Business Insider guarantee worker paychecks Then, on May 1, the House Speaker and the Congressional Hispanic Caucus made themselves available to journalists via a conference call to discuss provisions within the CARES Act that exclude immigrants without Social Security numbers from receiving one-time stimulus checks. May 1 receiving one-time stimulus checks. In the call, Pelosi expressed support for legislation that would guarantee COVID-19 economic relief to not only people with Social Security numbers but also immigrants and their families who use Individual Taxpayer Identification Numbers (ITINs), which the IRS assigns to workers without Social Security numbers, to pay annual taxes. According to the IRS, the federal agency issues the numbers "regardless of immigration status, because both resident and nonresident aliens may have a U.S. filing or reporting requirement under the Internal Revenue Code." In other words, some immigrants who use the identification numbers (ITINs) not social security numbers to pay taxes may be "undocumented." According to a transcript of the May 1 call, at one point a reporter asked Pelosi: transcript Pretty recently you said that Congress should consider adding some form of guaranteed monthly income into the next coronavirus relief package. So I was wondering if you would extend that form of guaranteed income to undocumented immigrants and non-citizens who file taxes with tax ID numbers, ITINs, instead of Social Security numbers? In her response, Pelosi reiterated that she thinks federal leaders should consider guaranteed income and that she would talk to chairs of House committees about exploring the idea further. Additionally, as they consider future economic benefits for Americans during the pandemic, she said: Any way we go down the path that [ITINs] should apply, whether its direct payments, whether its participation in PPP (the federal Paycheck Protection Plan loan program)... I said it [guaranteed income] should be considered. And, why it should be considered, in my view, is because there is a lot of money, federal taxpayer dollars, going out the door. Whether its PPP, whether its Unemployment Insurance, whether its direct payments ... But, whatever we do, I think the tax number is an easy entre to many more people who deserve it, who should get this, but are being cut out now, in whatever it is that we are putting out there. Given the nature of and circumstances surrounding the May 1 call, and considering the fact that Pelosi did not mention "guaranteed income" in any other public statements after the U.S. COVID-19 outbreak and before Kirk's viral posting, we determined it to be the most likely source of inspiration for his May 4 tweet. However, though Pelosi said she wants people who use ITINs to receive economic relief from the federal government during the pandemic a group that would include "undocumented" immigrants she did not say she wants the government to provide stimulus payments to all "undocumented" immigrants. Additionally, the House Speaker said she wanted federal leaders to consider, not implement, "guaranteed income" for Americans, unlike what Kirk's tweet implies. In sum, given those reasons as well as the lack of clarity for what Pelosi means by the phrase "guaranteed income," the context in which she made the comments analyzed above, and the fact that she did say she wanted future stimulus money to help foreign people without Social Security numbers we rate this claim as "false." Rosenberg, Mattew and Rogers, Katie. "For Charlie Kirk, Conservative Activist, the Virus Is a Cudgel." The New York Times. 19 April 2020. Ruhle, Stephanie. "Pelosi says guaranteed income may be worth considering amid coronavirus hardships." MSNBC. 27 April 2020. Real Time with Bill Maher. "Speaker Nancy Pelosi | Real Time with Bill Maher (HBO)." YouTube. 24 April 2020. Silverstein, Jason. "Pelosi says 'guaranteed income' for Americans worth considering for coronavirus recovery." CBSNews. 28 April 2020. Zeballos-Roig, Joseph. "House Speaker Nancy Pelosi opens the door to guaranteed income for Americans, saying it's 'worthy of attention.'" Business Insider. 27 April 2020. Pelosi, Nancy. "Pelosi Remarks on Press Call with Congressional Hispanic Caucus and Mixed-Status Families on Denial of COVID-19 Stimulus Checks." Newsroom. 1 May 2020. Pelosi, Nancy. "Transcript of Pelosi Interview on MSNBC's Live with Stephanie Ruhle." Newsroom. 27 April 2020. Pelosi, Nancy. "Transcript of Pelosi Interview on HBO's Real Time with Bill Maher." Newsroom. 24 April 2020. Internal Revenue Service. "Individual Taxpayer Identification Number." Accessed 11 May 2020.

False

Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And, please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease. On May 4, 2020 as federal leaders debated how to respond to an unprecedented interruption to the U.S. economy due to the COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic a conservative provocateur tweeted that U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said she wanted the country's next economic relief package to establish "guaranteed minimum incomes" for "illegal aliens."Suggesting that only legal U.S. residents should benefit from federal stimulus packages, Charlie Kirk who's the founder of the conservative political group Turning Point USA and social media ally of U.S. President Donald Trump said in the tweet to his roughly 1.7 million followers: First, the House Speaker spoke the words on HBO's "Real Time with Bill Maher" on April 24. In light of the federal government's approval of the $2.2 trillion Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act in March 2020 (and stimulus bills totaling about $500 billion since then), Maher asked Pelosi if the federal government could afford similar economic relief packages for Americans should the pandemic keep businesses closed and systems locked down in the coming months. She responded:She provided no further details on the so-called proposals for "guaranteed income," which generally refers to a government-imposed system so that every citizen receives a minimum income a central idea of the 2020 presidential campaign by former Democratic candidate Andrew Yang. Also in the conversation with Maher, Pelosi did not explicitly state that she wanted the system implemented via Congressional legislation.Three days later, however, the House Speaker again said the words "guaranteed income" in a televised interview, this time with more specificity on her openness to the social welfare system. In the April 27 segment of MSNBC's "Live with Stephanie Ruhle," while explaining federal leaders' next steps to help small businesses survive the financial crisis, Pelosi said:Soon after she made the statement on live TV, news outlets including CBS News and CNBC published stories with headlines such as, "Pelosi says 'guaranteed income' for Americans is worth considering for coronavirus recovery." In a story by Business Insider about the televised comments, an aid to Pelosi said the House Speaker was referring to proposals that would guarantee worker paychecks not a sweeping system for universal basic income.Then, on May 1, the House Speaker and the Congressional Hispanic Caucus made themselves available to journalists via a conference call to discuss provisions within the CARES Act that exclude immigrants without Social Security numbers from receiving one-time stimulus checks. According to a transcript of the May 1 call, at one point a reporter asked Pelosi:

FMD_train_1430

Was a study able to determine if a vegan diet might offer greater health benefits for dogs compared to meat-based diets?

04/13/2022

Well-rounded vegan diets may be less hazardous and better for the health of dogs compared to conventional meat or raw meat diets, according to research published in April 2022. Pets are a multibillion-dollar industry. According to estimates published in 2018, there are 471 million pet dogs and 373 million pet cats worldwide, which sets the international worth of pet food sales at nearly 132 billion euros. Such high demand has a significant impact on the environment, particularly in the sourcing of the animal and agricultural products that make up pet food. Feeding pets is also a lucrative market. In 2020, the vegan pet food market alone was worth $8.7 billion in the U.S. and was expected to grow to over $15 billion in the next six years. Because pets and their nutrition represent large shares of both the economy and its production line, researchers at the University of Winchester in the U.K. set out to determine which diets are best for the health of pets. To explore the links between diet and health, the team advertised an online survey through social media between May and December 2020 and analyzed the data of more than 2,500 dogs included in the survey responses from the pets' guardians. Each dog had been living with its guardian for at least one year. About half were fed conventional meat-based diets, around one-third raw meat, and 13% were fed a vegan diet. The survey included questions about the dogs' health, such as veterinary visits, medications, and overall health disorders, and consulted both the guardian and a veterinarian on the dog's health status. "We believe our study of 2,536 dogs is by far the largest study published to date exploring health outcomes of dogs fed vegan and meat-based diets," wrote the researchers in a news release. It analyzed a range of objective data, as well as owner opinions and reported veterinary assessments of health. It revealed that the healthiest and least hazardous dietary choices for dogs are nutritionally sound vegan diets. Figures show the three main diets fed to the 2,536 dogs included in the survey. Publishing their work in the peer-reviewed journal PLOS One, the team found that overall, dogs on conventional meat diets were less healthy than those on raw meat or vegan diets. Previously, it was thought that raw meat diets were linked to an increased risk of pathogen exposure, while vegan diets might result in nutritional deficiencies. However, when necessary hygienic and nutritional supplements were taken into consideration, both diets were, by and large, shown to be healthier and less hazardous to the canine consumer. In summary, when jointly considering health outcomes and dietary hazards, our results and those of other studies indicate that the healthiest and least hazardous dietary choices for dogs are nutritionally sound vegan diets, concluded the researchers. However, there are several limitations to the study that should be taken into consideration. For one, it could be the case that dogs given a raw meat diet were not necessarily healthier than those given a conventional diet, but rather that their guardians might have been less likely to take their pets to a veterinarian. Because the frequency of veterinarian visits was considered a health indication, this internal bias may have skewed the results. Furthermore, dogs given a raw meat diet tended to be younger in age than those eating other diets, which could further explain why they were deemed healthier. The study authors also didn't factor in the sex or breed of each dog, a limitation that may have influenced the results given that certain breeds are more prone to illness than others. Let's also look at the structure of the study itself. Participating guardians were asked to consider the main ingredients within their pets' normal diet, which means that a pet may not have been fed the identified diet exclusively, nor were treats or other dietary supplements excluded. It was also an opinion-based study in which respondents gave their thoughts on a dog's health in a non-standardized way. Additionally, because the survey was conducted online, this required that respondents have internet access and the time necessary to complete the survey, which may have excluded pet guardians of lower income statuses. Lastly, there is an inherent unconscious bias within the study structure, which means that a given guardian might have been expecting a better health outcome based on the preferred diet, and this expectation could have influenced how they responded to the survey question. While there is now scientific evidence to suggest that both raw meat and vegan diets are better than conventional diets alone, the study authors said more research is needed to determine which of the two is associated with better dog health outcomes. Dog guardians should ensure that all aspects of their dogs' nutrition are being met, regardless of primary diet preference. They should check pet food labels and consult with manufacturers to ensure that healthy practices are in place to provide nutritional soundness.

True

Pets are multibillion-dollar industries. According to estimates published in 2018, there are 471 million pet dogs and 373 million pet cats worldwide, which sets the international worth of pet food sales at nearly 132 billion euros. Such high demand has a large impact on the environment, particularly in the sourcing of the animal and agricultural products that make up pet food. Feeding pets is also a lucrative market. In 2020, the vegan pet food market alone was worth $8.7 billion in the U.S., and was expected to grow to over $15 billion in the next six yearsWe believe our study of 2,536 dogs is by far the largest study published to date, exploring health outcomes of dogs fed vegan and meat-based diets, wrote the researchers in a news release. Figures show the three main diets fed to the 2,536 dogs included in the survey. PLOS OnePublishing their work in the peer-reviewed journal PLOS One, the team found that overall, dogs on conventional meat diets were less healthy than those on raw meat or vegan diets. Previously it was thought that raw meat diets were linked to an increased risk of pathogen exposure, while vegan diets may result in nutritional deficiencies. But when necessary hygienic and nutritional supplements were taken into consideration, both diets were, by and large, shown to be healthier and less hazardous to the canine consumer.

FMD_train_447

Inheritance of a Family Name

02/09/2004

We all dream of rich relatives kicking the bucket and leaving us their fortunes, which is why this "unexpected inheritance" scam works as well as it does. My name is Becky J. Harding, I am a senior partner in the firm of Midland Consulting Limited: Private Investigators and Security Consultants. We are conducting a standard process investigation on behalf of HSBC, the International Banking Conglomerate. This investigation involves a client who shares the same surname with you and also the circumstances surrounding investments made by this client at HSBC Republic, the Private Banking arm of HSBC. The HSBC Private Banking client died in testate and nominated no successor in title over the investments made with the bank. The essence of this communication with you is to request you provide us information/comments on any or all of the four issues: 1-Are you aware of any relative/relation who shares your same name whose last known contact address was Brussels Belgium?2-Are you aware of any investment of considerable value made by such a person at the Private Banking Division of HSBC Bank PLC?3-Born on the 1st of october 19414-Can you establish beyond reasonable doubt your eligibility to assume status of successor in title to the deceased? It is pertinent that you inform us ASAP whether or not you are familiar with this personality that we may put an end to this communication with you and our inquiries surrounding this personality. You must appreciate that we are constrained from providing you with more detailed information at this point. Please respond to this mail as soon as possible to afford us the opportunity to close this investigation. Thank you for accommodating our enquiry. Becky J. Harding.For: Midland Consulting Limited.09/02/2004 Imagine being transformed overnight from office drudge to a member of the jet set it's the stuff of daydreams! (or at least the impetus to buy lottery tickets). Because this urge for the big "something for nothing" runs so deep in us, it makes us vulnerable to the machinations of con men, which is what these e-mailed come-ons areabout.This scam has been part of the grifters' bag of tricks for many a year. It was only a matter of time before it began showing up on the Internet, where those who make their livings by defrauding others have an even easier time vending their cons to the unwary. Though the text quoted above as our example is one of the more common forms this sort of come-on takes in the wilds of cyberspace, the scam can be dressed out any number of ways. How it is worded is far less important than its thrust its "hook" that you might be entitled to an inheritance you had no reason to expect was coming your way. Although the names change from e-mail to e-mail, the scam itself is immutable: potential victims receive notification they share the surname of a recently deceased person who failed to leave a will. This notification purportedly comes from a representative of a firm of "Private Investigators and Security Consultants," with said representative stating he or she is "conducting a standard process investigation on behalf of[name of large financial entity, such as Barclays or HSBC]." Recipients of those e-mails are then asked three or four questions along the lines of the following: How the about-to-be-scammed answer the questions is unimportant the queries are there merely to lend a patina of legitimacy to the inquiry. Regardless of whether potential victims respond with the news that none of their relatives have been to Brussels or whether they claim great-uncles whom the family subsequently lost track of after they settled there, the game is now afoot. In either case, they will be assured there is a very real chance significant inheritances are about to come their way, provided one small insignificant detail is first taken care of: payment of a fee to advance the matter. Similar to the Nigerian Scam and the foreign lottery fraud, the promise of untold wealth is used to distract the overly trusting away from the sorry fact that they are being asked to send money. In all three cases, the con works the same way: after being mesmerized by the vision of riches to come, those being taken advantage of are required to open their wallets and whip out their checkbooks to bring about the happy event. Nigerian Scam lottery There is no dead Uncle Fred, no rich deceased Reese. It's all a lie told to part you from your cash. So far we've seen versions of this scam emanating from supposed private investigating firms named Cappa Consultants, Midland Consulting Limited, and De Rosenberg Consulting, but the names the fraud artists choose to adopt for the purpose of parting the unwary from their money are unimportant; it's all a con. The names of genuine banking concerns (such as HSBC and Barclays) are dragged into the fray willy-nilly by the ill-intentioned to make the matter look more credible, but these real entities have nothing to do with the con. Indeed, as one official at HSBC responded to a query about these supposed windfall inheritances: It has come to our attention that a variation on an email is being circulated that has no connection to HSBC Republic. The email claims that HSBC Republic has employed investigators to contact the family of a deceased client who died intestate. To our knowledge such claims have no validity and we strongly recommend that recipients of such emails do not respond to the sender. Regards Web AdministrationHSBC Republic In another form of the scam, folks are contacted through regular mail by "estate locators" who say those receiving their notices are named beneficiaries of unclaimed family inheritances. Recipients are lured into mailing fees for estate reports, which will supposedly explain where their inheritances are located and how they can be claimed. These "estate locators" may also offer to process claims against these estates for a fee. It does occasionally happen someone so contacted does eventually find he or she has a right to claim against the estate of a distant relative who died without leaving a will. But in those cases, the amount garnered generally proves not to have been worth going after (indeed, often less than what was paid to the "locator" for the information). Estates do hire actual "heir locators" to find missing beneficiaries, but those so engaged are paid by the estate, not by the folks they find. There are also heir locators who freelance on a contingency basis, entering into agreements with those they connect with their rightful inheritances for percentages of sums so recovered. While this might sound like the scam being described above it's not these legitimate heir locators receive payment only after estates are settled and heirs so found have received their bequests. Ergo, if a "locator" is asking you to pay up front, it's a scam. Those still clinging to the hope that there might still be something to their pie-in-the-sky e-mail, that hints at a life of luxury are just in the offing, should pause to consider that professionals in the process of contacting legitimate heirs do so through recognizable law firms, with the contact coming in the form of an actual letter (as opposed to an e-mail) on that firm's letterhead. We find it somewhat amusing that "intestate" (meaning to die without leaving a will) is so often mis-rendered in the e-mails distributed by the defrauders: it either comes out as "in testate" or as "interstate" (which we presume means to die between two highways). What You Can Do: Additional information: Phony Inheritance Scam (United States Postal Service) Phony Inheritance Scam (United States Postal Service) Last updated: 27 November 2011 Choney, Suzanne. "Key Flaws Reveal Truth Behind New E-Mail Hoax."Copley News Service. 7 July 2003. Bangor Daily News. "Be Wary of Inheritance Notifications."2 February 2004 (p. A5).

False

Similar to the Nigerian Scam and the foreign lottery fraud, the promise of untold wealth is used to distract the overly trusting away from the sorry fact that they are being asked to send money. In all three cases, the con works the same way: after being mesmerized by the vision of riches to come, those being taken advantage of are required to open their wallets and whip out their checkbooks to bring about the happy event. Phony Inheritance Scam (United States Postal Service)

FMD_train_1233

Did Alex Trebek's wealth bring his family to tears?

11/18/2020

Alex Trebek's net worth became the subject of strange online advertisements in the weeks following his death. The husband, father, and "Jeopardy" game show host died on Nov. 8, 2020, after a battle with advanced pancreatic cancer. The ad in question read: "Alex Trebek's Net Worth Left His Family In Tears." This was false—misleading, baseless, and untrue. The ads were sponsored by LifeExact, The Financial Mag, Travel Patriot, and perhaps others, and were routed through Zemanta, which is owned by Outbrain. Crunchbase defines Outbrain as "a content discovery platform providing publishers a service for recommended links to increase traffic and generate revenue." Outbrain (via Zemanta) provided the technology that allowed the Trebek ads to appear, while LifeExact, The Financial Mag, and Travel Patriot hosted the landing pages. The landing pages featured an image slideshow, with one celebrity name and net worth figure per page. The slideshow story was headlined: "52 Celebrities & Their Huge Net Worth: Chadwick Boseman's Net Worth Left Us in Disbelief." The "net worth left family in tears" advertising lure has also been used by advertising networks exploiting the names of Kenny Rogers, Sean Connery, and Pat Sajak. However, Sajak is still alive and, as of this writing, is on the first page of the "52 Celebrities" slideshow. While the headline claimed the story was about 52 celebrities, including Chadwick Boseman, who died on Aug. 28, 2020, Boseman did not appear until after 140 clicks, on slide 140. Trebek appeared after 141 clicks, on slide 141. His page was the end of the slideshow. Trebek's page did not acknowledge his cancer or passing. The page, which claimed his net worth was $50 million, was likely created in the past and may have been moved along with Boseman's page to the end of the 141-page slideshow after their deaths. The one-item-per-click slideshow model is known in the online advertising world as "arbitrage." On the business and technology blog Margins, run by Ranjan Roy and Can Duruk, Roy defines arbitrage as "leveraging an inefficient set of systems to make a riskless profit, usually by buying and selling the same asset." He also called it "the mythical free lunch that economics tells us does not exist." In arbitrage, the advertising network's goal is to make more money on the ads displayed to readers who click through the slideshow than it costs to advertise the false "net worth left his family in tears" claim that lured them to it. As the family grieved Trebek's passing, on Nov. 11, his wife, Jean, shared a heartfelt message with a photograph from their wedding day. She posted to Instagram: "My family and I sincerely thank you all for your compassionate messages and generosity. Your expressions have truly touched our hearts. Thank you so very, very much. Many blessings to all, Jean Trebek." In sum, the ads claiming that Alex Trebek's net worth "left his family in tears" were misleading and false. 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.

False

Alex Trebek's net worth became the subject of strange online advertisements in the weeks following his death. The husband, father, and "Jeopardy" game show host died on Nov. 8, 2020, following a battle with advanced pancreatic cancer. Misleading, baseless, and false.The ads were sponsored by LifeExact, The Financial Mag, Travel Patriot, and perhaps others, and were routed through Zemanta, which is owned by Outbrain. Crunchbase defined Outbrain as "a content discovery platform providing publishers a service for recommended links to increase traffic and generate revenue." Outbrain (via Zemanta) provided the technology that allowed the Trebek ads to appear, while LifeExact, The Financial Mag, and Travel Patriot hosted the landing pages. The landing pages featured an image slideshow, with one celebrity name and net worth figure per page. The slideshow story was headlined as: "52 Celebrities & Their Huge Net Worth Chadwick Boseman's Net Worth Left Us in Disbelief."The "net worth left family in tears" advertising lure has also been used by advertising networks exploiting the names of Kenny Rogers, Sean Connery, and Pat Sajak. However, Sajak is still alive, and as of this writing is on the first page of the "52 Celebrities" slideshow.While the headline claimed the story was about 52 celebrities, including Chadwick Boseman, who died on Aug. 28, 2020, Boseman did not show up until after 140 clicks, on slide 140. Trebek appeared after 141 clicks, on slide 141. His page was the end of the slideshow. Trebek's page did not appear to acknowledge his cancer or passing. The page, which claimed his net worth was $50 million, was likely created in the past, and may have been moved along with Boseman's page to the end of the 141-page slideshow after their deaths.The one-item-per-click slideshow model is known in the online advertising world as "arbitrage." On the business and technology blog Margins, run by Ranjan Roy and Can Duruk, Roy defined arbitrage as "leveraging an inefficient set of systems to make a riskless profit, usually by buying and selling the same asset." He also called it "the mythical free lunch that economics tells us does not exist."As the family grieved Trebek's passing, on Nov. 11, his wife, Jean, shared a heartfelt message with a photograph from their wedding day. She posted to Instagram: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.

FMD_train_999

Says Texas charter schools get 100% state $/pupil funding while district schools (95% students) get about 1/3 funding from state w/ rest coming from local prop taxes (which is why those taxes are so high). Districts getting less b/c scarce $ going to charters.

08/15/2018

A Democratic legislator declared that state aid fully fuels Texas charter schools while schools serving the vast bulk of students field less money. State Rep.Donna Howardof Austin said in her July 18, 2018tweet: Here's the thing. In Tx, charters get 100% state $/pupil funding while district schools (95% students) get about 1/3 funding from state w/ rest coming from local prop taxes (which is why those taxes are so high). Districts getting less b/c scarce $ going to charters. Howard was reacting to a national Associated Pressnews storyon billionaires championing charter schools. Since 2006, the story says, philanthropists and their private foundations and charities--topped by the Walton Family Foundation, run by heirs to the Walmart fortune--gave almost half a billion dollars to 52 state-level charter support organizations to sustain, defend and expand the charter schools movement. Texas charter schools--public schools with charters run most often by private nonprofit entities--have boomed since the 1995 Legislature authorized them by law. Such schools must meet state-set academic accountability standards, but theyre exempted from other laws affecting districts such as teacher certification and elementary school class-size limits. To our inquiry, Bruce Marchand of theTexas Charter Schools Associationcalled Howards jam-packed claim factually squishy solid. The squishy part, Marchand said by email, is the implication that 100% funded charters have something to do with high property taxes and that districts get less money because that money is going to charters. Districts get less, Marchand said, because state dollars follow students based on where theyre enrolled. Lets break down Howards tweet by its factual elements. Howard said charter schools get all their funding from the state: Charter schools get nearly all their funding from state aid, Marchand agreed by phone, drawing 3 percent from grants and federal sources. That heavy state reliance is logical, Marchand and others said, because unlike districts, charter schools lack the authority to levy property taxes. According to a December 2017 Texas Education Agencydocument summarizing charter school funding, state aid to charter schools escalated from nearly $417 million for 2005-06 to about $2 billion in 2015-16. Howard said school districts serve 95 percent of students: Charter schools serve a growing handful of pupils--5.5 percent of Texas public school students in 2017, according to figures we fielded by email from the TEAs DeEtta Culbertson. That year, she said, 705 charter campuses enrolled 296,323 students--a doubling since 2011, according to an August 2018agency presentationnoted by Marchand. (The state caps the number of state-issued charters, but a charter-holder may open more than one school.) An implication: Districts in 2017 served 94.5 percent of public school students. Howard said districts get one-third of their aid from the state:Earlier this year, we reviewed Legislative Budget Board figures to conclude that in the 1980s, lawmakers voted for the state to cover 70 percent of theFoundation School Program, which is the states primary way of funding schools. State aid, we found, ended up covering a little more than half of related state-local costs. State aid covered 44 percent of such costs in 2016; its expected to cover 38 percent of such costs in 2019. Thats more than a third. When we sought Howards factual backup, Jacob Cottingham in her office responded with materials including aJanuary 2018 LBB chartdelivering percentages like what we previously reported. Cottingham also emailed us a spreadsheet isolating state aid going to districts alone.According to the sheet, which Cottingham said he built based on LBB data, in 2016, more than $17.8 billion in state aid sent to districts accounted for 39 percent of state spending on public education. The sheet says that in 2019, more than $15.7 billion in state funds projected to go to districts will account for 32 percent of state school aid. Howard said the states one-third share of what schools spend is why school property taxes are so high: To the contrary, we asked Howard, isnt it changes in the value of local property tax bases that drive how much state aid a district is entitled to receive? Howard replied with a statement noting that a districts per-pupil tax wealth is key to how much state aid flows. When students leave a district for a charter (or private school or drop out), the (districts) property wealth per student increases as there are fewer students, and the state's required minimum share to the district is decreased, Howard said. The TEAs Culbertson separately responded by email: One of the primary drivers of the Texas school finance system is student attendance. If a student leaves a school district for any reason, including moving out of state, enrolling in another school district, public charter school, or private school (including home school), the original school district would no longer incur the costs of educating that student, and the original school districts total funding entitlement would be reduced. Howard said districts get less money because dollars go to charter schools: Cottingham told us Howard reached that conclusion by reviewing changes in per-student state spending on charter schools and districts. Cottingham emailed us anLBB chartshowing Foundation School Program state aid per student enrolled in districts compared with charter schools from fiscal 2010 through fiscal 2016 plus estimated and projected aid for fiscal 2017 through fiscal 2019. The chart shows charter schools consistently getting thousands of dollars more per student in average daily attendance: SOURCE: Chart,Foundation School Program State Aid and Average Daily Attendance for School Districts and Charter Schools, Fiscal Years 2010-19,Legislative Budget Board, 2018 (confirmed by email, R.J. DeSilva, communications officer, Legislative Budget Board, July 31, 2018) According to the chart, charter schools in 2016 fielded $8,956 in state aid per ADA and school districts on average drew $3,800--meaning charter schools got 136 percent of what districts drew.By our calculations, the chart shows charter schools getting 149 percent of what districts would have gotten in 2017 and 167 percent of what districts would get in 2018 and 190 percent of what districts would get in 2019. Cottingham told us the fact that state aid to districts goes up or down based on the value of local tax bases helps explain why districts are projected to get increasingly less in state aid than charter schools. Charter schools, he said, can count by law on getting each years full average adjusted state-aid allotment in contrast to districts whose allocations are affected by how much theyre expected to reap in property taxes. By phone, Amanda Brownson of the Texas Association of School Business Officials offered a similar analysis. Another facet noted by Cottingham: The state ponies up the full per-student entitlement cost of each student--costing the state more than each per-student payment sent to districts. Of late, the August 2018 TEA presentation says, charter schools draw an adjusted state allotment of $6,540--equivalent, the agency says, to what a small district receives. Meantime, the presentation says, more than 95 percent of students enrolled in districts are in districts getting less than $6,540 in state allotments. We also heard back from Greg Worthington, a University of Texas doctoral student. By email, Worthington saidlegislation revising the school finance system that passed into law in a summer 2017 special sessionwould result in numerous districts losing chunks of per-student aid as charter schools draw more. Asked how funding of charter schools results in less money for districts, Worthington offered adetailed replycentered on reductions in aid to districts caused by students transferring to charter schools. This shouldnt surprise, Worthington indicated, in that the concept of school choicepromulgatedby the late economist Milton Friedman relies on schools competing for funding tied to enrollment. Friedman said government might be responsible for funding schools, Worthington wrote, but he maintained it isnt supposed to administer education. School choice policies embraced by many ruling Republicans ultimately work to replace the public school system with a market-based education system, Worthington said. Our ruling Howard said Texas charter schools get all their per-student aid from the state while school districts, which serve 95 percent of students, get a third of their funding that way with the rest drawn from property taxes. Also, Howard said, districts get less because scarce dollars go to charter schools. Howards points about student enrollment and state funding going to charter schools and school districts hold up. Its also true that a student who leaves a district school to attend a charter school costs the district state aid while that student brings the charter school thousands of dollars more in per-pupil state aid than what the district would get. This dense tweet lacks the clarification that upticks or slides in local property values greatly affect whether a district faces ups or downs in state aid. We rate this claim Mostly True. MOSTLY TRUE The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information. Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check.

True

State Rep.Donna Howardof Austin said in her July 18, 2018tweet: Here's the thing. In Tx, charters get 100% state $/pupil funding while district schools (95% students) get about 1/3 funding from state w/ rest coming from local prop taxes (which is why those taxes are so high). Districts getting less b/c scarce $ going to charters.Howard was reacting to a national Associated Pressnews storyon billionaires championing charter schools. Since 2006, the story says, philanthropists and their private foundations and charities--topped by the Walton Family Foundation, run by heirs to the Walmart fortune--gave almost half a billion dollars to 52 state-level charter support organizations to sustain, defend and expand the charter schools movement.To our inquiry, Bruce Marchand of theTexas Charter Schools Associationcalled Howards jam-packed claim factually squishy solid. The squishy part, Marchand said by email, is the implication that 100% funded charters have something to do with high property taxes and that districts get less money because that money is going to charters. Districts get less, Marchand said, because state dollars follow students based on where theyre enrolled.Howard said charter schools get all their funding from the state: Charter schools get nearly all their funding from state aid, Marchand agreed by phone, drawing 3 percent from grants and federal sources. That heavy state reliance is logical, Marchand and others said, because unlike districts, charter schools lack the authority to levy property taxes. According to a December 2017 Texas Education Agencydocument summarizing charter school funding, state aid to charter schools escalated from nearly $417 million for 2005-06 to about $2 billion in 2015-16.Howard said school districts serve 95 percent of students: Charter schools serve a growing handful of pupils--5.5 percent of Texas public school students in 2017, according to figures we fielded by email from the TEAs DeEtta Culbertson. That year, she said, 705 charter campuses enrolled 296,323 students--a doubling since 2011, according to an August 2018agency presentationnoted by Marchand. (The state caps the number of state-issued charters, but a charter-holder may open more than one school.) An implication: Districts in 2017 served 94.5 percent of public school students.Howard said districts get one-third of their aid from the state:Earlier this year, we reviewed Legislative Budget Board figures to conclude that in the 1980s, lawmakers voted for the state to cover 70 percent of theFoundation School Program, which is the states primary way of funding schools. State aid, we found, ended up covering a little more than half of related state-local costs. State aid covered 44 percent of such costs in 2016; its expected to cover 38 percent of such costs in 2019.Thats more than a third. When we sought Howards factual backup, Jacob Cottingham in her office responded with materials including aJanuary 2018 LBB chartdelivering percentages like what we previously reported. Cottingham also emailed us a spreadsheet isolating state aid going to districts alone.According to the sheet, which Cottingham said he built based on LBB data, in 2016, more than $17.8 billion in state aid sent to districts accounted for 39 percent of state spending on public education. The sheet says that in 2019, more than $15.7 billion in state funds projected to go to districts will account for 32 percent of state school aid.Cottingham emailed us anLBB chartshowing Foundation School Program state aid per student enrolled in districts compared with charter schools from fiscal 2010 through fiscal 2016 plus estimated and projected aid for fiscal 2017 through fiscal 2019. The chart shows charter schools consistently getting thousands of dollars more per student in average daily attendance:SOURCE: Chart,Foundation School Program State Aid and Average Daily Attendance for School Districts and Charter Schools, Fiscal Years 2010-19,Legislative Budget Board, 2018 (confirmed by email, R.J. DeSilva, communications officer, Legislative Budget Board, July 31, 2018)According to the chart, charter schools in 2016 fielded $8,956 in state aid per ADA and school districts on average drew $3,800--meaning charter schools got 136 percent of what districts drew.By our calculations, the chart shows charter schools getting 149 percent of what districts would have gotten in 2017 and 167 percent of what districts would get in 2018 and 190 percent of what districts would get in 2019.We also heard back from Greg Worthington, a University of Texas doctoral student. By email, Worthington saidlegislation revising the school finance system that passed into law in a summer 2017 special sessionwould result in numerous districts losing chunks of per-student aid as charter schools draw more.Asked how funding of charter schools results in less money for districts, Worthington offered adetailed replycentered on reductions in aid to districts caused by students transferring to charter schools.This shouldnt surprise, Worthington indicated, in that the concept of school choicepromulgatedby the late economist Milton Friedman relies on schools competing for funding tied to enrollment. Friedman said government might be responsible for funding schools, Worthington wrote, but he maintained it isnt supposed to administer education. School choice policies embraced by many ruling Republicans ultimately work to replace the public school system with a market-based education system, Worthington said.MOSTLY TRUE The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information. Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check.

FMD_train_356

Today, you can't rely on (the retirement fund for public employees), it's not funded.

03/07/2012

Gov. Rick Scott made no secret of his distaste fora judges decision to overturna 3 percent cut in state workers salaries on March 6, 2012.Lawmakers in 2011 touted the cut as necessary; they said they were diverting the money to shore up the $124 billion pension fund for state and local employees. The change saved the state $1 billion and local governments $600 million, reported theTampa Bay Timesand theMiami Herald.Circuit Judge Jackie Fulfords decision throws that plan into chaos. She ruled the pay cut an unconstitutional breach of the state's contract with employees and ordered the money returned with interest. Fulford noted in her order that the 3-percent salary reduction did not actually go toward the retirement fund; legislators used it to balance the budget and left $1.2 billion unspent. Her decision didn't sit well with Scott. This is an example of a judge wanting to write the law. We all know that this is constitutional, there's no question about it, Scotttold reporters. I want to make sure we fix the plan so individuals can actually rely on it. Because today, you can't rely on that plan, it's not funded, he said. So it's going to have a big impact on our counties, it has a big impact on our state budget. But it's clearly constitutional.Weve heard alarming things about Floridas pension fund over the years, but never that it is flatly not funded. PolitiFact Florida wanted to set the record straight on how the Florida Retirement System works.The truth is that Floridas pension fund is funded. Is it fully funded? No, but thats not typical for most state pension funds.The most recent data shows the pensions worth versus what it owes in benefits is 87.5 percent, as of June 30, 2011. So if everyone in the pension system retired at once, there would not be enough money in the retirement system to pay their full benefits.Still, 87 percent isnt bad compared to most states. The average level is 77 percent.87 (percent) is a strong funding level, particularly given the difficult financial market over recent years, said Keith Brainard, research director of the National Association of State Retirement Administrators.Scott spokesman Lane Wright said we were nit-picking the governors statement and that he obviously just misspoke. Wright pointed us to past stories on the pension fromour siteand theTampa Bay Times, where Scott correctly asserts the retirement system is underfunded.Whats more, Wright said, is that Scotts office for a few months has been occupied by a big chart comparing the pension funds liabilities, assets and payments. His graphic correctly shows the plan as funded at 87.5 percent for fiscal year 2010-11. It also shows how that liability has grown since 2007-08.Hes had that chart there since at least the beginning of January, Wright said.Not long before storing a daily reminder of the liability gap in his office, Scott attempted to address it in his 2011-12 budget proposal. He called for $300 million to go into the retirement system, including an additional $120 million to address the liability on top of fully funding the normal annual contribution.In his response to the judges ruling, though, Scotts warning was stark, saying I want to make sure we fix the plan so individuals can actually rely on it. Because today, you can't rely on that plan, it's not funded. That sounds really bad to people who are relying on state benefits. The truth is, it's one of the better funded pension plans in the country. If all public employees retired tomorrow, they still get 87.5 percent of what they were owed. We rate his statement False. PolitiFact Florida is partnering with 10 News for the 2012 election season. See the video version of this fact-checkhere.

False

Gov. Rick Scott made no secret of his distaste fora judges decision to overturna 3 percent cut in state workers salaries on March 6, 2012.Lawmakers in 2011 touted the cut as necessary; they said they were diverting the money to shore up the $124 billion pension fund for state and local employees. The change saved the state $1 billion and local governments $600 million, reported theTampa Bay Timesand theMiami Herald.Circuit Judge Jackie Fulfords decision throws that plan into chaos. She ruled the pay cut an unconstitutional breach of the state's contract with employees and ordered the money returned with interest.This is an example of a judge wanting to write the law. We all know that this is constitutional, there's no question about it, Scotttold reporters.I want to make sure we fix the plan so individuals can actually rely on it. Because today, you can't rely on that plan, it's not funded, he said. So it's going to have a big impact on our counties, it has a big impact on our state budget. But it's clearly constitutional.Weve heard alarming things about Floridas pension fund over the years, but never that it is flatly not funded. PolitiFact Florida wanted to set the record straight on how the Florida Retirement System works.The truth is that Floridas pension fund is funded. Is it fully funded? No, but thats not typical for most state pension funds.The most recent data shows the pensions worth versus what it owes in benefits is 87.5 percent, as of June 30, 2011. So if everyone in the pension system retired at once, there would not be enough money in the retirement system to pay their full benefits.Still, 87 percent isnt bad compared to most states. The average level is 77 percent.87 (percent) is a strong funding level, particularly given the difficult financial market over recent years, said Keith Brainard, research director of the National Association of State Retirement Administrators.Scott spokesman Lane Wright said we were nit-picking the governors statement and that he obviously just misspoke. Wright pointed us to past stories on the pension fromour siteand theTampa Bay Times, where Scott correctly asserts the retirement system is underfunded.Whats more, Wright said, is that Scotts office for a few months has been occupied by a big chart comparing the pension funds liabilities, assets and payments. His graphic correctly shows the plan as funded at 87.5 percent for fiscal year 2010-11. It also shows how that liability has grown since 2007-08.Hes had that chart there since at least the beginning of January, Wright said.Not long before storing a daily reminder of the liability gap in his office, Scott attempted to address it in his 2011-12 budget proposal. He called for $300 million to go into the retirement system, including an additional $120 million to address the liability on top of fully funding the normal annual contribution.In his response to the judges ruling, though, Scotts warning was stark, saying I want to make sure we fix the plan so individuals can actually rely on it. Because today, you can't rely on that plan, it's not funded. That sounds really bad to people who are relying on state benefits. The truth is, it's one of the better funded pension plans in the country. If all public employees retired tomorrow, they still get 87.5 percent of what they were owed. We rate his statement False.PolitiFact Florida is partnering with 10 News for the 2012 election season. See the video version of this fact-checkhere.

FMD_train_391

Cecilia Zhang

11/10/2003

Claim: Nine-year-old Cecilia Zhang is missing from her Toronto home. Outdated. Example: [Collected on the Internet, 2003] TORONTO POLICE ISSUE AMBER ALERT FOR MISSING 9-YEAR OLD GIRL DONG-YUE (CECILIA) ZHANG The Toronto Police Service is requesting the assistance of the public and media in regards to locating a missing 9-year old girl from the area of Don Mills Road and Finch Avenue East. An amber alert has been issued in regards to the young girl's disappearance from her residence. The missing girl has been identified as Dong-Yue (Cecilia) ZHANG a 9-year old grade 4 student at Seneca Hill Public School. Her parents last saw the child when she went to bed on Sunday night (October 19th, 2003). Her disappearance was not noticed until Monday morning shortly before 8:30 A.M. She is described as; female, Asian, 9 years of age, 4'11", 70lbs, thin build, shoulder length black hair with blond highlights, brown eyes, wearing unknown clothing. Anyone with Information is asked to contact 33 Division at (416) 808-3300 or Crime Stoppers at 1-800-222-TIPS (8477) On a more personal note: ATTENTION: Please everyone, this only takes a few minutes to forward to everyone you can think of who can also send this on. The more people who can hear her name and see her picture, the more likely that is it for this girl to be found safely. How would we feel if this was our child? I can't even imagine what her parents are going through right now. Thanks for taking the time to care... Origins: Sadly, this was no hoax the child described in the e-mail quoted above and in a number of similar alerts was all too real, as were the circumstances of her disappearance. On the morning of 20 October 2003, nine-year-old Cecilia Zhang was discovered missing from her family home in North York, a satellite of Toronto. She had been last seen at 10 p.m. the previous evening. Police believed she had been abducted during the night, and the theory of the crime had the kidnappers entering the house through the window of her second floor bedroom. (Its screen was broken.) Two phone calls were made from different pay phones in Brampton (a nearby town) to the Zhang home just before Cecilia's parents realized their daughter was gone. In each instance, the caller said nothing when the phone was answered. No ransom demand was received, and no contact was made by the abductors either with the family or the police. A province-wide Amber Alert was issued on the day Cecilia was taken. It sent a description of the girl across Ontario and activated highway signs alerting motorists about the abduction. The alert was canceled a day later. As part of its 1 November 2003 episode, America's Most Wanted ran a segment on the kidnapping of Cecilia Zhang. Thanks to the show, one day later thirteen fresh tips were turned over to the Toronto police working the segment case. Two rewards totaling $85,000 were being offered. Numerous hotlines had been set up in English and in Chinese dialects. More than 1700 posters and flyers bearing photos of the missing girl were posted in bus and subway stations. Yet little new information came in as time went by, and the older leads were exhausted. As of 13 November 2003, police confirmed that they still had no suspects in the case. There was hope the child was taken by those looking to strike it rich. Kidnapping for profit is not unheard of within the Chinese community though not common by any means, such abductions occur more often than they do within the general population. Had she been such a hostage, there would have been greater reason to hope she would eventually be returned unharmed. But that was not to be. Two days before what would have been Cecilia Zhang's tenth birthday, police in Toronto reported that she had been found. On 28 March 2004, authorities confirmed as hers the remains discovered in a Mississauga park by the Credit River the previous day. On 21 July 2004, Min Chen, a 21-year-old Chinese national in Canada on a student visa, was arrested in connection with the case and the next day charged with first-degree murder for the death of the fourth-grader. It appears he knew the child, having been introduced to her during visits to a classmate who at one time rented a room from the Zhangs. Chen pled guilty to second-degree murder in May 2006 and was sentenced to life in prison. Last updated: 2 December 2010 Sources: Campbell, Colin. "Canada: No Suspects in Girl's Disappearance." The New York Times. 13 November 2003 (p. A9). Robertson, Lloyd. "Toronto Girl Abducted From Her Home in the Middle of the Night." CTV News. 20 October 2003. Robertson, Lloyd. "'America's Most Wanted' Airs the Cecilia Zhang Story." CTV News. 30 October 2003. Woods, Allan. "Crime Show Adds Tips in Search for Cecilia." National Post. 3 November 2003 (p. A12). Woods, Allan. "Phone Sites Suggest Lead in Cecilia Case." National Post. 29 October 2003 (p. A15). Canadian Press. "Police Find Remains of Cecilia Zhang." 28 March 2004. United Press International. "Reward Jumps for Missing Girl's Return." 31 October 2003.

True

As part of its 1 November 2003 episode, America's Most Wanted ran a segment on the kidnapping of Cecilia Zhang. Thanks to the show, one day later thirteen fresh tips were turned over to the Toronto police working the

FMD_train_1696

Is COVID-19 Stimulus Legislation Delayed Because of Pelosi?

10/20/2020

Voting in the 2020 U.S. Election may be over, but the misinformation keeps on ticking. Never stop fact-checking. Follow our post-election coverage here. here After a months-long political debate over how to address America's pandemic-stricken economy and just 13 days before the 2020 presidential election, U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's office announced she and U.S. President Donald Trump's top emissary, Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, were inching toward an agreement on a new economic stimulus package. "Both sides are serious about finding a compromise," tweeted Drew Hammill, a spokesperson for Pelosi, on Oct. 20. The announcement came after repeated claims by Trump that Pelosi was the sole roadblock in his administration's plans to spend about $1.8 trillion on unemployment benefits, schools, and other initiatives adding to $3 trillion in emergency relief that the federal government approved in spring 2020. In a nationally televised town hall on Oct. 15, for instance, Trump said of Pelosi: "We are ready to sign and pass stimulus, but shes got to approve it," he said. "Shes penalizing our people. Im ready to sign a big, beautiful stimulus." Days later, while speaking to a Milwaukee news reporter, Trump suggested that Pelosi, who was running a reelection campaign to represent California's 12th Congressional District, was not negotiating in good faith and purposefully delaying a consensus until after the Nov. 3 election. That way, in theory, she and Democrats could restart stimulus talks with Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden in the White House. "She thinks it's good politically for her not to approve it," Trump said. In an interview with Bloomberg, Pelosi denied that accusation by the president and his supporters and said she would not be negotiating with the White House if she did not want an agreement. Nonetheless, a closer look at the stimulus negotiations showed a more complex debate. It was not just Pelosi with whom the White House needed reconciliation to pass COVID-19 economic relief in fall 2020 as the president alleged. Here's what was true: Members of Congress and the White House reached an impasse over COVID-19 emergency spending in fall 2020. Mnuchin and Pelosi had intermittently negotiated terms of a comprehensive relief package since August, and the Democrat-led House approved a package totaling about $2.2 trillion concurrently. Weeks later, as the election crept closer, Trump said in media interviews that he would sign a package that was greater than House Democrats' proposal, even though key Republicans wanted him to go the opposite direction in negotiating. "I would rather go bigger than that [$2.2 trillion] number, but we'll see," he said on Fox & Friends. "[Pelosi] doesn't want to do anything until after the election, because she thinks it helps her. I actually think it helps us because everyone knows she's the one who's breaking up the deal." Fox & Friends All of that said, the Democrat-approved plan overlapped in some areas with the White House's proposal to help small businesses and pay each eligible U.S. citizen a one-time $1,200 check. But this was key: Trump's GOP allies in the Senate were skeptical of any proposal greater than $1 trillion. For months, they had debated economic stimulus measures smaller than the White House's initial proposal of about $1.6 trillion, which later grew to $1.8 trillion before Trump said he wanted to spend more than Democrats. Reuters reported: "Senate Republicans have repeatedly stated their opposition to additional COVID-19 relief spending near the $2 trillion mark and have focused instead on smaller initiatives." Reuters reported The Republicans were focusing on one-off initiatives to help businesses and families instead of a comprehensive spending bill. They supported one measure in particular that totaled about $650 billion in emergency economic relief, or about one-third the amount of Trump's proposal. In other words, the disagreement over funding was not along party lines, with Senate Republicans taking Trump's side and Pelosi leading an oppositional force, like most political battles over Trump's first term. Rather, key Republicans were skeptical of a relief package greater than $1 trillion and had not expressed support for the White House's proposal. As proof of that lack of enthusiasm for Trump's COVID-19 spending plan, the leading GOP vote-counter, Sen. John Thune, told reporters on Oct. 19 that "itd be hard" to find the necessary Republican support to pass the $1.8 trillion package. Additionally, multiple news reports said McConnell told Senate Republicans the following day that he had advised the White House against making any deal with Pelosi before the election significant evidence that the House Speaker was not the only barrier to a compromise. The New York Times reported: multiple The New York Times Mr. McConnells counsel, confirmed by three Republicans familiar with his remarks, threw cold water on Mr. Trumps increasingly urgent push to enact a fresh round of pandemic aid before he faces voters on Nov. 3. It underscored the divisions within the party that have long hampered a compromise. Republicans are growing increasingly anxious that Mr. Trump and his team are too eager to reach a multitrillion-dollar agreement and are conceding far too much to the Democrats. Republicans fear that scenario would force their colleagues up for re-election into a difficult choice of defying the president or alienating their fiscally conservative base by embracing the big-spending bill he has demanded. The Washington Post added: added Many Senate Republicans oppose a massive new spending bill and McConnell is not eager to hold a vote that would divide his conference just before the election, when most Senate Republicans want attention focused on the Barrett nomination. [...] McConnells remarks Tuesday indicate that even if Pelosi and Mnuchin do manage to reach a deal, any vote in the Senate would wait until after the election. If Democrats win a number of seats in the November elections, they could seize control of the Senate beginning in January. Nonetheless, if or when Pelosi and Mnuchin reached an agreement, Trump suggested on multiple occasions without evidence that he could convince naysayers to agree to whatever he wanted. "He'll be on board if something comes," Trump said of McConnell's reluctance in the Fox News interview. "Not every Republican agrees with me, but they will." Fox News interview The time window for an agreement before the Nov. 3 election was narrowing as of this report. Hammill, the spokesman for Pelosi, on Oct. 20 tweeted that Mnuchin and Pelosi had a 45-minute conversation earlier in the day that showed they were "serious about finding a compromise" and moving closer to an agreement in the coming days or weeks with the help of congressional committee chairs. In sum, considering McConnell, the Senate Majority leader, had reportedly told the White House to not make a deal with Pelosi proof that the House Speaker was not the only barrier to an agreement as well as a comment by another Senate Republican that "it'd be hard" to rally his colleagues around Trump's plan for emergency economic spending, we rate this claim a "Mixture" of truth and falsehoods. Factba.se. "Interview: Charles Benson of WTMJ4 Milwaukee Interviews Donald Trump - October 17, 2020." Accessed 20 October 2020. Rev. "Donald Trump NBC Town Hall Transcript October 15." Accessed 20 October 2020. Nancy Pelosi Newsroom. "Dear Colleague: Update on Effort to Reach Coronavirus Relief Agreement Before Election." 18 October 2020. Nancy Pelosi Newsroom. "Transcript of Pelosi Interview on ABC's This Week With George Stephanopoulos." 18 October 2020. Nancy Pelosi Newsroom. "Dear Colleague on Urgency to Pass Relief Bill with Values and Common Sense." 15 October 2020. Nancy Pelosi Newsroom. "Transcript of Pelosi Interview on MSNBC's The ReidOut with Joy Reid." 19 October 2020. Taylor, Andrew. "Deadline Looms, But COVID Relief Deal May Be Far Off." The Associated Press. 20 October 2020. Zeballos-Roig, Joseph. "Senate Republicans Are Pouring Cold Water on Approving A Multi-Trillion Dollar Stimulus Deal As Trump Pushes For A Larger Relief Package Than Democrats." Business Insider. 20 October 2020. Henney, Megan. "Trump Says He Want A Bigger Coronavirus Relief Package Than Pelosi's $2.2T Proposal." FOXBusiness. 20 October 2020. Stein, Jeff, et. al. "Trump Makes $1.8 Trillion Economic Relief Offer, But Deal With Pelosi Remains Elusive." The Washington Post. 9 October 2020. Cornwell, Susan. "Trump Pushes For Major COVID-19 Deal Over Senate Republican Objections." Reuters. 20 October 2020. House, Billy, et. al. "Pelosi Mnuchin Narrowing Gap on Stimulus, to Talk Again Tuesday." Bloomberg. 19 October 2020. Fandos, Nicholas. "McConnell Advises White house Not to Strike Pre-Electino Stimulus Deal With Pelosi." The New York Times. 20 October 2020. Stein, Jeff, and Werner, Erica. "McConnell Warns White House Against Making Stimulus Deal Before Election, Sources Say." The Washington Post. 20 October 2020.

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."I would rather go bigger than that [$2.2 trillion] number, but we'll see," he said on Fox & Friends. "[Pelosi] doesn't want to do anything until after the election, because she thinks it helps her. I actually think it helps us because everyone knows she's the one who's breaking up the deal."But this was key: Trump's GOP allies in the Senate were skeptical of any proposal greater than $1 trillion. For months, they had debated economic stimulus measures smaller than the White House's initial proposal of about $1.6 trillion, which later grew to $1.8 trillion before Trump said he wanted to spend more than Democrats. Reuters reported: "Senate Republicans have repeatedly stated their opposition to additional COVID-19 relief spending near the $2 trillion mark and have focused instead on smaller initiatives."As proof of that lack of enthusiasm for Trump's COVID-19 spending plan, the leading GOP vote-counter, Sen. John Thune, told reporters on Oct. 19 that "itd be hard" to find the necessary Republican support to pass the $1.8 trillion package.Additionally, multiple news reports said McConnell told Senate Republicans the following day that he had advised the White House against making any deal with Pelosi before the election significant evidence that the House Speaker was not the only barrier to a compromise. The New York Times reported:The Washington Post added:Nonetheless, if or when Pelosi and Mnuchin reached an agreement, Trump suggested on multiple occasions without evidence that he could convince naysayers to agree to whatever he wanted. "He'll be on board if something comes," Trump said of McConnell's reluctance in the Fox News interview. "Not every Republican agrees with me, but they will."

FMD_train_1204

Kohl's Thanksgiving Coupon Scam

11/18/2015

Claim: Kohl's is giving Facebook users a coupon for 50 percent off any purchase for liking and sharing a status. Example: [Collected via e-mail, October 2015] There is a Yes pass from Kohl's, saying that everything is 50% off. You need to share and comment Thanks Kohl's. Is this true?? _______________________________________________________________________ Happy Thanksgiving from Kohl's. 50 % OFF of everything. Origins: In mid-November 2015, links began circulating on Facebook promising users a Thanksgiving coupon for 50 percent off all Kohl's purchases: The appended links involved a variety of URLs (above, "couponbits.com"), and users who clicked through to claim their coupon landed on a page titled "Complete these steps below to get KOHL'S Reward!" While the page mimicked the style of Facebook-based content, it was hosted on a non-Facebook URL: As with many similar coupon lures on Facebook, the dangled bait was based upon an actual Kohl's coupon (albeit one whose savings were far more modest): In response to an avalanche of Facebook complaints from frustrated users who hadn't received coupons after completing the steps, Kohl's verified account replied: Please know this is not a valid Kohl's offer. Social media users are largely acquainted with survey scams of this type; Kohl's (previously), Costco, Home Depot, Lowe's, Kroger, Best Buy, Macy's, Olive Garden, Publix, Target, and Walmart are among retailers used as scam bait (by folks mining personal 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 bait 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: 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. It's likely Kohl's planned to release Black Friday coupons on or around Thanksgiving, but the retailer was unlikely to do so by forcing its customers to like and share a Facebook status update. Last updated: 19 November 2015 Originally published: 19 November 2015

False

Social media users are largely acquainted with survey scams of this type; Kohl's (previously), Costco, Home Depot, Lowe's, Kroger, Best Buy, Macy's, Olive Garden, Publix, Target, and Walmart are among retailers used as scam bait (by folks mining 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:

FMD_train_515

Every American now is $51,000 in debt. Thats money I owe, thats money my children owe before they even go to kindergarten, thats their check to the federal government right now.

11/15/2012

Pity the poor children of the United States they, along with their parents, are already in hock to the federal government for thousands of dollars.Assemblywoman Caroline Casagrande (R-Monmouth) made that claim Oct. 26 during an interview with Michael Aron on NJTVs On The Record.Every American now is $51,000 in debt, Casagrande told Aron. Thats money I owe, thats money my children owe before they even go to kindergarten, thats their check to the federal government right now.Casagrandes number is solid, but she doesnt have to worry about whipping out her checkbook or debit card any time soon, some federal budget experts say.Lets start by reviewing the two commonly cited forms of national debt -- debt held by the public and total debt.Debt held by the public is money borrowed from investors outside of the federal government. The total debt represents debt held by the public as well as money the federal government owes itself, including for programs such as Social Security and Medicare.Now lets look at the numbers in Casagrandes claim.The U.S. Government Debt website on Nov. 6 the date we started looking into Casagrandes clam -- listed the national debt at $16,295,297,196,000. If thats divided by 314,719,484 -- the total U.S. population, according to the Census Bureau, each American owes the federal government $51,777.21.So, Casagrandes number is accurate. But should Americans actually expect to pay that bill? Not necessarily.Gary Burtless, a senior fellow of economic studies at the Brookings Institution who has worked as a government economist and served on federal advisory panels under presidents of both parties, explained that what the nation owes each year on the national debt is annual interest and principal payments.Do grandma and the grandkids have to pay off the national debt, as Assemblywoman Caroline Casagrande seems to suggest? No, they do not, Burtless wrote. Our grandkids great grandparents did not pay off the federal debt; neither did their parents or grandparents. There is no rule that the national debt has to be paid off in one generation, three generations, or even ten generations. Taxpayers do not face the possibility that they will receive a $51,000 bill in the mail anytime soon.An invoice might not be in the mail but Casagrandes statement is fair, according to spokespeople for the conservative Heritage Foundation and American Enterprise Institute.Were not even going to pay off the debt, were going to pay down the interest, said Matt Jensen, a research associate in Economic Policy Studies at the AEI. Under no proposal that Ive seen is someone paying down the debt in real dollars. What were really talking about is paying the interest on the debt, forever. Youll pay the interest, your children will pay the interest.Our PolitiFact colleagues in Virginia and New Hampshire also looked into similar claims in their states and found that the amount of debt cited by their lawmakers was largely accurate.Virginia Rep. Randy Forbes in January said the national debt amounted to $48,700 for every American or $128,300 for every U.S. Household. Our colleagues rated the claim True.In August, PolitiFact New Hampshire rated Mostly True a claim by Rep. Frank Guinta that every child in the United States has a $50,000 share in the national debt. Guinta received a Mostly True because that would mean each of the nations nearly 74 million children would owe $216,102. Guintas figure was accurate, however, when the debt was spread across the entire population.Our rulingCasagrande said in a television interview, Every American now is $51,000 in debt. Thats money I owe, thats money my children owe before they even go to kindergarten, thats their check to the federal government right now.A simple mathematical calculation confirms that every American technically owes the government $51,777.21 toward the national debt. But will youngsters have to suddenly start handing over their allowances to pay down the federal deficit? Not likely. We rate the statement Mostly True. To comment on this story, go toNJ.com.

True

To comment on this story, go toNJ.com.

FMD_train_816

Spokeo

03/25/2010

Claim: Your personal information may be viewable through the Spokeo web site. Example: [Collected via e-mail, March 2010] This is so scary to me. My address along with a picture of my home is showing on this site.. GO to this website: https://www.spokeo.com/ and type in your name. If you find ANYTHING with your info on it, go to "Privacy" at the bottom of the page and follow the instructions to remove your information. Some of the information they have listed may not be correct, but if your address, phone number and a picture of your home comes up, that's cause for concern! Holy Cow Family and Friends! I just received a link for a crazy website. A friend emailed it to me saying that the website has all the personal info on her family and that maybe I should check it out to make sure I am not on the site. Well, I checked it out and although it didn't show mine, it listed many names addresses, birthdays, even showing a picture of the houses my friends lived in. It also mentions if you were married, with kids and much more. Then they have a service were people can sign up and pay 3.00 and have access to even more of my info like credit score, income, etc. I have typed in several other of my family members names and ALL were in the database. Who wants all this personal info out there on the web??????? you can scroll down to the bottom and find the privacy link and remove yourself from the website! good luck! and pass this email along to help your family and friends will possible identity theft. here is the website..... www.spokeo.com Origins: Spokeo is one of many sites now operating on the Internet that aggregate and display personal information collected from a variety of public sources (such as social networking accounts, blog posts, phone book listings, customer-submitted reviews, real estate listings, etc., as well as from the databases of other information aggregators) and sell detailed reports on individuals to anyone who pays for them. Spokeo advertises itself as a "search engine specialized in organizing people-related information": advertises Spokeo is a search engine specialized in organizing people-related information from phone books, social networks, marketing lists, business sites, and other public sources. Most of this data is publicly available on the Web. For example, you can find peoples name, phone, and address on Whitepages.com, and you can get home values from Zillow.com. That said, only Spokeo's algorithm can piece together the scattered data into coherent people profiles, giving you the most comprehensive intelligence about anyone you want to find. Spokeo displays listings that sometimes contain more personal information than many people are comfortable having made publicly accessible through a single, easy-to-use search site, and in March 2010 warning messages alerting recipients that their personal information was viewable through Spokeo began circulating, just as warnings about a similar (pay-for-use) site, ZabaSearch, had been circulated several years earlier. ZabaSearch Our advice here is similar to what we wrote in response to concerns about ZabaSearch several years ago: Spokeo does have a privacy policy that allows you to request that Spokeo remove your listing from public searches, but it's important to understand that even if you block your Spokeo listing, your personal information will still be available through the underlying sources used by Spokeo. Those third-party records will still exist and will still be publicly accessible, so the same information provided by Spokeo will still be available to others, either working on their own or using information aggregators similar to Spokeo: privacy You can remove your Spokeo listing from public searches for free. Please note that removing your Spokeo listing from public searches does not remove your information from the third-party data sources. Your information will still be shown on other people search sites, and you will need to contact those third-party sites one-by-one, In short, removing your personal information from display by Internet aggregators isn't a one-time deal, but rather more like a never-ending game of Whack-a-Mole: You might swat down an aggregator site or two, but more of them will inevitably pop up. Last updated: 12 January 2011 Smith, Alicia. "Search Site Raises Privacy Concerns." WXYZ-TV [Detroit]. 8 April 2010.

True

Origins: Spokeo is one of many sites now operating on the Internet that aggregate and display personal information collected from a variety of public sources (such as social networking accounts, blog posts, phone book listings, customer-submitted reviews, real estate listings, etc., as well as from the databases of other information aggregators) and sell detailed reports on individuals to anyone who pays for them. Spokeo advertises itself as a "search engine specialized in organizing people-related information":Spokeo displays listings that sometimes contain more personal information than many people are comfortable having made publicly accessible through a single, easy-to-use search site, and in March 2010 warning messages alerting recipients that their personal information was viewable through Spokeo began circulating, just as warnings about a similar (pay-for-use) site, ZabaSearch, had been circulated several years earlier. Our advice here is similar to what we wrote in response to concerns about ZabaSearch several years ago: Spokeo does have a privacy policy that allows you to request that Spokeo remove your listing from public searches, but it's important to understand that even if you block your Spokeo listing, your personal information will still be available through the underlying sources used by Spokeo. Those third-party records will still exist and will still be publicly accessible, so the same information provided by Spokeo will still be available to others, either working on their own or using information aggregators similar to Spokeo:

FMD_train_1741

Did Nancy Pelosi Invest Up to $1M in Tesla?

02/01/2021

In January and February 2021, Snopes readers asked us to examine reports that U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi had invested as much as $1 million in the electric vehicle company Tesla, prompting concerns over a potential conflict of interest on her part. On Jan. 25, Business Insider published an article with the headline "Nancy Pelosi Has Plowed Up to $1 Million Into Bullish Bets on Tesla Stock." The article reported that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi had placed up to $1 million worth of bullish bets on Tesla stock, as revealed in a financial disclosure form the previous week. Pelosi bought 25 call options on Tesla stock with a strike price of $500 and an expiration date of March 18, 2022. Similar articles were published by the San Francisco Chronicle, Jalopnik, Benzinga, and Refinery29. On Facebook, users promoted a meme that claimed Pelosi had invested in Tesla on Jan. 24, 2021, just one day before President Joe Biden announced his intention to replace the federal government's fleet with electric vehicles, suggesting she had advance knowledge of Biden's plan and acted with that in mind. However, Pelosi did not personally invest in Tesla, so reports and social media posts to that effect were inaccurate in that respect. Her husband, Paul, did invest, leaving open ethical considerations similar to those that would have arisen if the stock options had been purchased in her name. As a result, we are issuing a rating of "Mixture" regarding the claim that the House Speaker invested up to $1 million in Tesla. The Facebook meme highlighted above was doubly inaccurate, as it falsely stated not only that Pelosi herself had conducted the Tesla transaction, but also that it took place just one day before Biden made his electric vehicle announcement, and that the amount in question was $1.25 million. In fact, Paul Pelosi bought the Tesla options on Dec. 22, 2020, more than a month before Biden's announcement, and the amount in question was between $500,000 and $1 million. The details of Paul Pelosi's investments were contained in Speaker Pelosi's periodic transaction report, filed on Jan. 21, 2021. Under federal law and the Code of Federal Regulations, public officials (including members of Congress) are required to submit a report every time they, their spouse, or their dependent children conduct any "purchase, sale, or exchange of stocks, bonds, commodity futures, and other forms of securities," where the amount of the transaction is greater than $1,000. The official is required to file the report within 30 days of becoming aware of it. Officials are not required to report the exact amount of the investment or purchase, but rather they must specify a "valuation category," divided into various bands including $15,000 to $50,000; $250,000 to $500,000; $500,000 to $1 million; and $5 million to $25 million, among others. Paul Pelosi's investment in Tesla amounted to somewhere between $500,000 and $1 million and was described as "25 call options with a strike price of $500 and an expiration date of 3/18/22." The "SP" under the "Owner" column makes it clear that the transaction was conducted not by the congresswoman herself, but by her spouse. The federal Office of Government Ethics describes a "call option" as a contract that provides the buyer the right to purchase a security. The buyer has the right, but not the obligation, to exercise the option at a specified price (i.e., the strike price) until the contract's expiration date. Some put and call options may be purchased on the open market. As an alternative to exercising put and call options, investors can resell these options on the open market before their expiration. The Jan. 21 transaction report states that Paul Pelosi also bought call options in Disney and Apple and purchased shares in AllianceBernstein, an investment management firm. Concerns around Paul Pelosi's investment in Tesla are based on the fact that Speaker Pelosi is likely to play a prominent role in congressional negotiations over clean energy policy during the Biden administration, and that her family could stand to gain financially if Biden's plan to move the entire federal fleet to electric vehicles leads to a significant appreciation in the value of Tesla stock. Snopes asked a spokesperson for Speaker Pelosi for her response to such concerns over the potential appearance of a conflict of interest on her part. We also asked whether she or her husband were aware of Biden's intention to transition the federal fleet to electric vehicles at the time the investment was made, and whether Paul Pelosi now intended to sell his Tesla options in light of the president's electric vehicle announcement, in order to minimize any appearance of a conflict of interest. We did not receive a response to those questions in time for publication, but we will update this story if we hear back.

NEI

On Jan. 25, Business Insider published an article with the headline "Nancy Pelosi Has Plowed Up to $1 Million Into Bullish Bets on Tesla Stock." The article reported that:Similar articles were published by the San Francisco Chronicle, Jalopnik, Benzinga, and Refinery29.On Facebook, users promoted a meme that claimed Pelosi had invested in Tesla on Jan. 24, 2021, just one day before President Joe Biden announced his intention to replace the federal government's fleet with electric vehicles suggesting she had advance knowledge of Biden's plan and acted with that in mind.The details of Paul Pelosi's investments were contained in Speaker Pelosi's periodic transaction report, filed on Jan. 21, 2021. Under federal law and the Code of Federal Regulations, public officials (including members of Congress) are required to submit a report every time they, their spouse, or their dependent children conduct any "purchase, sale, or exchange of stocks, bonds, commodity futures, and other forms of securities," where the amount of the transaction is greater than $1,000. The official is required to file the report within 30 days of becoming aware of it.Paul Pelosi's investment in Tesla amounted to somewhere between $500,000 and $1 million, and was described as "25 call options with a strike price of $500 and an expiration date of 3/18/22." The "SP" under the "Owner" column makes it clear that the transaction was conducted not by the congresswoman herself, but by her spouse:The federal Office of Government Ethics describes a "call option" as follows:A call option is a contract that provides the buyer the right to purchase a security... The buyer has the right, but not the obligation, to exercise the option at a specified price (i.e., the strike price) until the contracts expiration date. Some put and call options may be purchased on the open market. As an alternative to exercising put and call options, investors can resell these options on the open market before their expiration.

FMD_train_481

Did the greatest number of jobs in February 2021 come from the 'Waiters and Bartenders' sector?

03/05/2021

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.

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":

FMD_train_710

Did 'Total Collapse' in Wind and Solar Energy Leave Germans in Need of Coal-Fired Power?

02/19/2021

As Texas struggled with statewide rolling blackouts and much of the United States experienced a potent arctic storm with frigid temperatures and unprecedented ice and snow in February 2021, social media users speculated that frozen wind turbines in Texas played a major role in the power outages there. Across the world, others argued that Germany's renewable energy sources, wind and solar, failed that country, requiring greater output from nuclear and coal production to make up the difference. The allegation stemmed from an article published by Stop These Things (STT), an anti-wind website that the Center for Media and Democracy's SourceWatch said promotes anecdotes and pseudoscience intended to cast doubt on the effectiveness of wind energy. The STT report cited a pseudoscientific blog post published by NoTricksZone on Jan. 28, 2021, by Pierre Goselin titled, "Berlin on the Brink! Winter Blackouts Loom As Coal Plants Run At 100% Capacity, Struggle to Keep Lights On." Similar claims were shared on Reddit and other publications, including World News Era. While it is true that solar panels and wind turbines can suffer during periods of extreme cold and high snow accumulation, it is not accurate to say that Germany experienced a total collapse of power. It is also inaccurate to say that coal and nuclear power were required to step up to make up the difference. In particular, NoTricksZone cited a video produced by German national broadcaster Rundfunk Berlin-Brandenburg (RBB) that had reportedly been taken down by the channel but was reuploaded to YouTube by the wind energy protest group Vernunftkraft. NoTricksZone claimed that in the video, Daniel Bartig, a mechanic at the LEAG Lausitz power plant, expressed skepticism about whether green energy could meet demand and stated that the greatest share of power was currently coming from coal. Harald Schwarz, a professor of power distribution at the University of Cottbus, also expressed skepticism about wind and solar energy, stating, "With this supply of wind and photovoltaic energy, it's between 0 and 2 or 3 percent—that is de facto zero. You can see it in many diagrams that we have days, weeks, in the year where we have neither wind nor PV. Especially this time, for example, there is no wind and PV, and there are often times when the wind is very minuscule. These are things, I must say, that have been physically established and known for centuries, and we've simply totally neglected this during the green energies discussion." While our emails to RBB, Schwarz, and the Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy went unanswered, an investigation into Germany's power grid in early 2021 revealed that such claims were largely unfounded. Germany is heralded as a leader in wind and solar power. In 2013, leaders launched Energiewende, a movement to shift the power grid to a more efficient and carbon-neutral system, eliminate electricity generated from nuclear by 2022, and fully phase out coal by 2038. Movements in early 2021 continued the shift from nuclear, as well as coal and oil, to a more diversified system. As of December 2019, about 12% of Germany's electricity came from nuclear energy produced at seven reactors, while over 40% of electricity came from coal, according to the World Nuclear Association, an international organization that promotes nuclear power. By and large, coal was the largest source of power generation in 2019, according to a 2020 report published by the International Energy Agency. Those numbers shifted slightly in 2020, according to preliminary data published by the German Association of Energy and Water Industries (BDEW), which found that 44.6% of energy sourced in Germany in 2020 was from renewables—nearly a quarter of which was produced by onshore and offshore wind, and 8.9% of which was solar, reported Clean Energy Wire. However, other energy sources still held a share in that total. Natural gas made up 16.2%, while nuclear accounted for around 11.4%, and hard coal 7.5%, so it is not out of the ordinary for Germany to be getting its energy from coal and nuclear sources, particularly in the winter. The largest issue with Germany's power grid, according to the IEA, is that most of the wind capacity is located in the northern region, whereas most of the demand is in urban regions to the south, and transporting wind power can be a difficult and arduous task. According to the STT report, Germany's millions of solar panels are blanketed in snow and ice and were thus rendered useless: "So much for the transition to an all wind and sun powered future—aka the Energiewende." Despite being the object of consternation and much vilification over the last 20 years, Germany's coal-fired plants are now being appreciated for what they are: truly meaningful power generation sources, available on demand, whatever the weather. With a nationwide blackout a heartbeat away, the German obsession with unreliable wind and solar is like a time bomb set to explode. It is true that solar panels require sunlight to produce energy and that being covered in snow can hamper their efficiency, but that doesn't mean that they are rendered useless. Most solar panels are tilted at an angle, so snow will slide off on its own. And if it doesn't, caretakers will simply remove the snow without damaging the panels, according to the solar industry company Energy Sage. Cold, sunny weather is actually good for panels. Winter months are beneficial for solar energy production, as long as your panels aren't covered by snow. Like most electronics, solar panels function more efficiently in cold conditions than in hot. According to the U.S. Department of Energy, a little snow has little impact on solar panels. While heavy snow can limit the amount of energy produced, light is still able to move through the snow; even when panels are completely covered by snow, they can still generate energy. The biggest threat to solar panels from heavy snowfall is weight, which can put stress on the delicate system and photovoltaic panels, which are responsible for generating electricity via sunlight. The STT report also claimed that freezing weather has halted 30,000 wind turbines, which could, in part, be true. Turbines use wind to make electricity when it rotates the blades around a rotor, which spins a generator to create electricity. However, when there is an accumulation of ice on these blades, an increased load can reduce power and damage the blades. Cold weather can also shut down equipment, and in places that are ill-equipped for chilly temperatures, this can slow down energy production. But NoTricksZone reported that 30,000 wind turbines in Germany were largely out of operation, and in a world 100% reliant on green energies, this would mean near 100% darkness at home. Snopes did not find evidence to confirm that tens of thousands of turbines were out of operation; neither is it true that Germany is fully dependent on green energies yet.

False

As Texas struggled with statewide rolling blackouts and much of the United States experienced a potent arctic storm with frigid temperatures and unprecedented ice and snow in February 2021, social media users speculated that frozen wind turbines in Texas played a major role in power outages there (false). And across the world, others argued that Germany's renewable energy sources, wind and solar, failed that country, requiring greater output from nuclear and coal production to make up the difference.The allegation stemmed from an article published by Stop These Things (STT), an anti-wind website that the Center for Media and Democracy's SourceWatch said promotes anecdotes and pseudoscience intended to cast doubt on the effectiveness of wind energy. The STT report cited a pseudoscientific blog post published by NoTricksZone on Jan. 28, 2021, by Pierre Goselin titled, Berlin on the Brink! Winter Blackouts Loom As Coal Plants Run At 100% Capacity, Struggle to Keep Lights On. Similar claims were shared on Reddit and other publications, including World News Era.In particular, NoTricksZone cited a video produced by German national broadcaster Rundfunk Berlin-Brandenburg (RBB) that had reportedly been taken down by the channel but was reuploaded to YouTube by wind energy protest group Vernunftkraft.du. NoTricksZone said that in the video, Daniel Bartig, a mechanic at the LEAG Lausitz power plant, said that he was skeptical that green energy can do the job and that the greatest share of power is currently coming from coal. Harald Schwarz, professor of power distribution at the University of Cottbus, said that he is very skeptical of wind and solar energy doing the job:As of December 2019, about 12% of Germanys electricity came from nuclear energy produced at seven reactors, while over 40% of electricity came from coal, according to the World Nuclear Association, an international organization that promotes nuclear power. By and large, coal was the largest source of power generation in 2019, according to a 2020 report published by the International Energy Agency.Those numbers shifted slightly in 2020, according to preliminary data published by the German Association of Energy and Water Industries (BDEW), which found that 44.6% of energy sourced in Germany in 2020 was from renewables nearly a quarter of which was produced by onshore and offshore wind, and 8.9% of which was solar, reported Clean Energy Wire.Cold, sunny weather is actually good for panels. Winter months are actually good for solar energy production, as long as your panels arent covered by snow. Like most electronics, solar panels function more efficiently in cold conditions than in hot, wrote the solar industry experts. This means that your panels will produce more power for each precious hour of sunshine during the short days of winter.And according to the U.S. Department of Energy, a little snow has little impact on solar panels. While heavy snow can limit the amount of energy produced, light is still able to move through the snow even when panels are completely covered by snow, they can still generate energy.The TSS report also claimed that freezing weather has halted 30,000 wind turbines, which could in part be true. Turbines use wind to make electricity when it rotates the blades around a rotor, which spins a generator to create electricity. But when there is an accumulation of ice on these blades, an increased load can reduce power and damage the blades.

FMD_train_1022

Has the Government Banned School Students Bringing Sack Lunches from Home?

09/16/2014

Claim: The federal government has banned public school students from bringing sack lunches to school. Examples: [Collected via e-mail, October 2013] Naturalcuresnotmedicine.com posted an article indicating that the "Feds" are prohibiting school lunches from home without doctor's orders. Is this true or false? When and where? Is it true that the federal government won't allow parents to pack lunches for preschool kids without a doctor's note? It doesn't even sound slightly true to me, but it's being tossed around the internet. Origins: Intermittent rumors about imminent government control of school lunches (and specifically, a ban on lunches brought in from home) have popped up across the internet since 2011, and claims about the imposition of a government ban on brown bag lunches have continued to circulate since. Mentions of home lunch bans began cropping up on the Internet as early as 2011, with the pattern of this cyclical rumor appearing to be consistent: A parent packs a lunch, receives a note from a teacher or school official informing them of a district or program policy regarding lunches from home, and the note circulates as proof that the "feds" are sweeping in to seize control of the cafeteria. Back in 2001, one Chicago-area school called Little Village Academy banned home lunches. The Chicago Tribune covered the minor controversy, explaining that the school's principal (not the federal government) had instituted the rule at his school only after watching students bring lunches consisting of "bottles of soda and flaming hot chips" on field trips. The rumor about federal lunch bans died down a bit after 2011 but picked up again in 2013 when a mom blog relayed the story of a friend in Virginia who had received a note from her child's school about packed lunches. The note, which was quickly reproduced on a number of prominent natural news and conspiracy sites, read: "I have received word from Federal Programs Preschool pertaining to lunches from home. Parents are to be informed that students can only bring lunches from home if there is a medical condition requiring a specific diet, along with a physician's note to that regard. I am sorry for any inconvenience. If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact Stephanie [redacted], the Health Coordinator for Federal Programs Preschool at [redacted]." Perhaps due to the start of the school year, the same story began to circulate in September 2014, with the same image and text attached. Given the timing and the return to classrooms for the majority of America's kids, it's no surprise the tale has once more gained traction and begun to spread virally on social media sites. When the story first began to travel across the social web, the Director of Communications and Public Relations for Henrico County Public Schools responded to an inquiry on this particular incident with a statement noting that schools receiving funds to participate in the federal Head Start Nutrition Assistance Programs must provide meals to schoolchildren at no cost to their parents, and allowing schoolkids to bring their own lunches from home would (barring special medical requirements) violate that requirement: "It is Head Start policy, not Henrico County Public Schools policy, that there cannot be any costs to parents associated with the program, meals or otherwise. Parents packing a lunch is considered a 'cost' by Head Start. As a result, every year parents are informed that students can only bring lunches from home if there is a medical condition that merits a specific diet, along with a physician's note to that regard. Meals served by the school conform to USDA nutritional requirements along with cultural, religious, and personal preferences on a case-by-case basis. Parents are always welcome to discuss their children's dietary needs with our health coordinator. While many disagree with this particular Head Start (HS) performance standard by which we are regulated and funded, as good stewards of federal dollars, it is protecting one of our most at-risk populations and operating at the highest level of expectation with all of the funding strands we utilize for Pre-K. Additionally, parents are made aware of the policy as stated in the preschool parent handbook upon entrance to the program and are required to sign that they have received and read it. The family advocates go over it with them in some of their initial meetings with parents. As indicated in this response, the issue was not one of the federal government's trying to control exactly what schoolkids may eat for lunch, but rather one of ensuring that all children covered under the Head Start program were provided with their allotted lunches at no cost to their parents. Last updated: 16 September 2014.

False

The rumor about federal lunch bans died down a bit after 2011 but picked up again in 2013 when a mom blog relayed the story of a friend in Virginia who had received a note from her child's school about packed lunches. The note, which was quickly reproduced on a number of prominent natural news and conspiracy sites, read:Perhaps due to the start of the school year, the same story began to circulate in September 2014, with the same image and text attached. Given the timing and the return to classrooms for the majority of America's kids, it's no surprise the tale has once more gained traction and begun to spread virally on social media sites. When the story first began to travel across the social web, the Director of Communications and Public Relations for Henrico County Public Schools responded to an inquiry on this particular incident with a statement noting that schools receiving funds to participate in the federal Head Start Nutrition Assistance Programs must provide meals to schoolchildren at no cost to their parents, and allowing schoolkids to bring their own lunches from home would (barring special medical requirements) violate that requirement:

FMD_train_550

Three Former Presidents Mocked Trump on Twitter?

01/09/2018

In January 2018, shortly after the publication of the book *Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House*, which suggested that President Trump was unfit for office, the President took to Twitter to defend his mental stability: "Actually, throughout my life, my two greatest assets have been mental stability and being, like, really smart. Crooked Hillary Clinton also played these cards very hard and, as everyone knows, went down in flames. I went from VERY successful businessman to top T.V. star... to President of the United States (on my first try). I think that would qualify as not smart, but genius... and a very stable genius at that!" Trump's tweets sparked a flurry of political punditry and provided fodder for comedians. On January 8, 2018, the Facebook page "Politicked" published an image purportedly showing former presidents Obama, Bush, and Clinton mocking Trump's claim that he became President of the United States on his first try. Politicked describes itself as a "left-wing political satire" group that creates its own "original and biting memes." The images of these purported tweets are fake. We searched the Twitter timelines for Obama, Bush, and Clinton and did not find any of these messages. It is also unlikely that the three former presidents posted and subsequently deleted the tweets. Messages sent from President Obama and Clinton are routinely retweeted thousands of times (Bush hasn't used the service since 2010), yet we found no retweets linking back to the original messages. Furthermore, it would be highly unlikely for these three former presidents to coordinate a social media joke simply to mock President Trump, only to get cold feet and delete their posts without being detected by a mainstream media source. It is true that Obama, Clinton, and Bush all won presidential elections on their first attempts. Trump's claim that he won the presidency on his first try, however, is a matter of debate regarding how serious one considers his first attempt. He ran for the nomination of the Reform Party in 2000 and appeared on the primary ballot in two states, but Trump withdrew from the race before the election. Although the 2000 campaign was the only time Trump actually entered any primary races prior to 2016, the real estate mogul toyed with the idea so often that his political aspirations found their way onto the popular cartoon show *The Simpsons*.

False

Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 6, 2018 Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 6, 2018Trump's tweets sparked a flurry of political punditry (and fodder for comedians). On 8 January 2018, the Facebook page "Politicked" published an image purportedly showing former presidents Obama, Bush, and Clinton mocking Trump's claim that he became President of the United States on his first try:We searched the Twitter timelines for Obama, Bush, and Clinton and didn't find any of these messages. It's also unlikely that the three former presidents posted and subsequently deleted the tweets. Messages sent from President Obama and Clinton are routinely retweeted thousands of times (Bush hasn't used the service since 2010) yet we found no retweets linking back to the original messages. It is true that Obama, Clinton, and Bush all won presidential elections on their first attempts. Trump's claim that he won the presidency on his first try, however, is a matter of debate (and of how serious one considers his first attempt). He ran for the nomination of the Reform Party in 2000 and appeared on the primary ballot in two states. Trump withdrew from the race before the election.Although the 2000 campaign was the only time Trump actually entered any primary races prior to 2016, the real estate mogul toyed with the idea so often that his political aspirations found their way onto the popular cartoon show The Simpsons.

FMD_train_786

Rabbi Steven Pruzansky -- The Decline and Fall of the American Empire

03/15/2013

Claim: Rabbi Steven Pruzansky penned an opinion piece about the 2012 U.S. presidential elections entitled "The Decline and Fall of the American Empire." CORRECTLY ATTRIBUTED Example: [Collected via e-mail, March 2013] Just wondering if you can verify whether the following waswritten by Rabbi Steven Pruzansky of Teaneck, NJ: Please take a moment to digest this provocative article by a Rabbi fromTeaneck, N.J. It is far and away the most succinct and thoughtfulexplanation of how our nation is changing. The article appeared in TheIsrael National News, and is directed to Jewish readership. 70% of AmericanJews vote as Democrats. The Rabbi has some interesting comments in thatregard. The most charitable way of explaining the election results of 2012 isthat Americans voted for the status quo for the incumbent Presidentand for a divided Congress. They must enjoy gridlock, partisanship,incompetence, economic stagnation and avoidance of responsibility.And fewer people voted.2008 total. But as we awake from the nightmare, it is important to eschew the facile explanations for the Romney defeat that will prevail among the chattering classes. Romney did not lose because of the effects of Hurricane Sandy that devastated this area, nor did he lose because he ran a poor campaign, nor did he lose because the Republicans could have chosen better candidates, nor did he lose because Obama benefited from a slight uptick in the economy due to the business cycle. Romney lost because he didnt get enough votes to win. That might seem obvious, but not for the obvious reasons. Romney lost because the conservative virtues the traditional American virtues of liberty, hard work, free enterprise, private initiative and aspirations to moral greatness no longer inspire or animate a majority of the electorate. The notion of the Reagan Democrat is one clich that should be permanently retired. [Rest of article here.] here Origins: Rabbi Steven Pruzansky describes himself on his web site biography as: biography [T]he spiritual leader of Congregation Bnai Yeshurun, a synagogue consisting of nearly 600 families located in Teaneck, New Jersey, and one of the most vibrant centers of Orthodox Jewish life today. He has served since August 1994. Previously, Rabbi Pruzansky was for nine years the spiritual leader of Congregation Etz Chaim in Kew Gardens Hills, New York. While in New York, he served a two-year term as President of the Vaad Harabonim (Rabbinical Board) of Queens. On 7 November 2012, the day after the 2012 U.S. presidential election, Rabbi Pruzansky (a Romney supporter) published the opinion piece referenced above on his blog under the title "The Decline and Fall of the American Empire," offering his viewpoint on why the election turned out the way it did and what the results augur for the future. published Last updated: 15 March 2013

True

[Rest of article here.]Origins: Rabbi Steven Pruzansky describes himself on his web site biography as:On 7 November 2012, the day after the 2012 U.S. presidential election, Rabbi Pruzansky (a Romney supporter) published the opinion piece referenced above on his blog under the title "The Decline and Fall of the American Empire," offering his viewpoint on why the election turned out the way it did and what the results augur for the future.