Datasets:

kkawamu1

/

fmd_train_val

like 0

FMD_train_132

Is a 'Beware of Artists' Poster from the McCarthy Era?

05/29/2019

An image supposedly showing a "Beware of Artists" poster issued during the 1950s by Joseph McCarthy, a U.S. senator known for making accusations of treason and spreading fears of communism, is frequently shared on social media. The poster reads, "Beware of artists. They mix with all classes of society and are therefore the most dangerous." The McCarthy era certainly saw its fair share of propaganda posters, and artists, particularly filmmakers, were often the targets of Congressional investigations into "un-American activities." Although the poster displayed above may express the sentiments of that time, its phrasing did not originate in the 1950s. This warning about "dangerous" artists can actually be traced back to the 19th century. In 1845, Leopold I, King of the Belgians, wrote a letter to Queen Victoria in which he expressed a similar warning against artists: "My Dearest Victoria - All you say about our dear Albert, whom I love like my own child, is perfectly true. The attacks, however unjust, have but one advantage, that of showing the points the enemy thinks weakest and best calculated to hurt. This, being the case, Anson, without boring A. with daily accounts which in the end become very irksome, should pay attention to these very points and contribute to avoid what may be turned to account by the enemy. To hope to escape censure and calumny is next to impossible, but whatever is considered by the enemy as a fit subject for attack is better modified or avoided. The dealings with artists, for instance, require great prudence; they are acquainted with all classes of society, and for that very reason dangerous; they are hardly ever satisfied, and when you have too much to do with them, you are sure to have des ennuis... Your devoted Uncle, Leopold R." We have not been able to determine who revised King Leopold's words into a more modern phrasing or exactly when posters bearing those words may have been created, but we found no record of such a poster circulating during the 1950s. The earliest iteration of this image we've found (multiple online versions of this version employ different fonts, colors, and composition) only dates back to 2012. This "Beware of Artists" poster is a modern expression of a political opinion that has been extant since at least the mid-1800s.

False

An image supposedly showing a "Beware of Artists" poster issued during the 1950s by Joseph McCarthy, a U.S. senator known for making accusations of treason and spreading fears of communism, is frequently shared on social media:The McCarthy era certainly saw its fair share of propaganda posters, and artists particularly filmmakers were often the targets of Congressional investigations into "un-American activities." Although the poster displayed above may express the sentiments of that time, its phrasing did not originate in the 1950s.This warning about "dangerous" artists can actually be traced back to the 19th century. In 1845, Leopold I, King of the Belgians, wrote a letter to Queen Victoria in which he expressed a similar warning against artists (emphasis ours):We have not been able to determine who revised King Leopold's words into a more modern phrasing or exactly when posters bearing those words may have been created, but we found no record of such a poster's circulating during the 1950s. The earliest iteration of this image we've found (multiple online versions of this version employ different fonts, colors, and composition) only dates as far back as 2012.

FMD_train_179

Did Monica Lewinsky 'Leave Behind' an 'Impressive' Net Worth?

12/29/2020

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

False

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

FMD_train_560

L UTA Flight 772 Memorial

11/04/2013

Claim: Photographs show a desert memorial constructed to honor the victims of UTA Flight 772. Example: [Collected via e-mail, November 2013] A friend told me to go to a certain latitude and longitude on Google Maps. When I noticed it seemed to be in the middle of an African desert, I thought he was just sending nonsense. But when I zoomed in, my mind was blown. I noticed a tiny icon that looked like an airplane. So I did some more research and discovered theres an incredibly tragic and beautiful story behind it. Here it is, from start to finish. UTA Flight 772 was a scheduled flight operating from Brazzaville in the Republic of Congo to Paris CDG airport in France. On Tuesday, September 19th, 1989 the aircraft exploded over Niger in the Tenere region of the Sahara Desert. French investigators determined a suitcase bomb planted by Libyan terrorists to be the cause. All 170 people on board died. Eighteen years later, families of the victims gathered at the crash site to build a memorial. Due to the remoteness of the location, pieces of the wreckage could still be found at the site. The memorial was created by Les Familles de lAttentat du DC-10 dUTA, an association of the victims families along with the help of local inhabitants. The memorial was built mostly by hand and uses dark stones to create a 200-foot diameter circle. The Tenere region is one of the most inaccessible places on the planet. The stones were trucked to the site from over 70 kilometers away. The memorial was built over the course of two months in May and June of 2007. 170 broken mirrors, representing each victim, were placed around the circumference of the memorial. The memorial is anchored by the starboard wing of the aircraft which was trucked to the site from 10 miles away. Workers had to dig up the wing and empty it of sand. A plaque commemorating each victim is affixed to the wing. The memorial was partly funded by the $170 million compensation package provided by the Libyan government. The memorial can be seen from Google Earth. Origins: On 19 September 1989 a DC-10 operated by the French airline UTA (Union des Transports Ariens) as Flight 772 between Brazzaville, Congo and Paris, France with a stop in N'Djamena, Chad, exploded 46 minutes after taking off from N'Djamena International Airport. The explosion blew apart the plane over the Sahara Desert, killing all 170 persons aboard (155 passengers and 15 crew members). An investigation by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) determined the deadly explosion had been caused by a bomb placed in a suitcase which was stored in the forward cargo hold. Six Libyans were eventually tried and convicted at the Paris Assize Court in absentia (because Libya declined to allow their extradition to France) for their participation in the bombing. The motives behind the bombing were somewhat murky, but they have generally been ascribed to a desire for punishing France due to that country's opposition to Libyan intervention in Chad's civil war. The Paris Assize Court awarded the families of the UTA bombing victims amounts ranging from about $4,000 to $40,000 each, and an association representing the victims' families, Les Familles de l'Attentat du DC10 d'UTA, negotiated a separate settlement with the Gaddafi International Foundation for Charity Associations in 2004 for $170 million ($1 million for each of the 170 victims). As well, in 2008 Libya paid $1.5 billion into a fund to compensate the relatives of persons killed in several terrorism-related events, including the 1988 bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 (also known as the Lockerbie bombing), the 1986 bombing of a Berlin discotheque, and the 1989 UTA Flight 772 bombing. Les Familles de l'Attentat du DC10 d'UTA In 2007 Les Familles de l'Attentat du DC10 d'UTA, using compensation funds paid by the Libyan government, financed the construction of a memorial to the victims shown above, made of dark rocks which form the shape of a DC-10 inside a compass: It was constructed by 100 people working largely by hand under the desert sun. The life-size silhouette of the aircraft lies inside a circle more than 200ft in diameter, created using dark stones set into the sand. Surrounding this circle are 170 broken mirrors, representing those who died, and arrows marking the points of the compass. At the northern point, part of the right wing of the DC-10 has been erected as a monument, with a plaque commemorating the victims. This memorial has garnered additional visibility in recent years because it can be clearly seen in satellite imagery viewable through Google Earth and has been chronicled in web sites such as Google SightSeeing. Google Earth Google SightSeeing Last updated: 4 September 2015

True

The Paris Assize Court awarded the families of the UTA bombing victims amounts ranging from about $4,000 to $40,000 each, and an association representing the victims' families, Les Familles de l'Attentat du DC10 d'UTA, negotiated a separate settlement with the Gaddafi International Foundation for Charity Associations in 2004 for $170 million ($1 million for each of the 170 victims). As well, in 2008 Libya paid $1.5 billion into a fund to compensate the relatives of persons killed in several terrorism-related events, including the 1988 bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 (also known as the Lockerbie bombing), the 1986 bombing of a Berlin discotheque, and the 1989 UTA Flight 772 bombing.This memorial has garnered additional visibility in recent years because it can be clearly seen in satellite imagery viewable through Google Earth and has been chronicled in web sites such as Google SightSeeing.

FMD_train_1051

Were the Trumps Pictured With the Owner of a Massage Parlor Where Robert Kraft Was Arrested?

03/12/2019

In early to mid-March 2019, photographs of President Donald Trump and members of his family posing with Li Yang, a political donor and spa entrepreneur, circulated on social media. The images were used to link the Trumps with a sting operation in Florida. Yang, who posted a widely seen selfie taken at Trump's 2019 Super Bowl party to her Facebook account, once owned what is now the Orchids of Asia massage parlor in Jupiter, Florida. New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft was one of 25 men arrested in February 2019, accused of soliciting sex there in a sweeping human-trafficking sting that targeted that site and others. Kraft, a self-described friend of Trump, faces two counts of misdemeanor solicitation, to which he has pleaded not guilty. Yang no longer owns the establishment in which police say Kraft was caught on camera paying for sex. She has not been charged with a crime. Nevertheless, the images of Yang, Trump, and members of his family were picked up and used to create an inaccurate meme claiming she is the spa's owner, which was shared with nearly 8 million followers on the Facebook page belonging to Occupy Democrats on March 8, 2019. Although the Occupy Democrats Facebook page sarcastically discouraged followers from sharing the meme, its administrators also added a "correction" in the post above the image. Yang was swept into the lurid story after images of her with Trump and his family members surfaced on her Facebook page, which, as the Miami Herald reported, "raised questions about who can gain access to the president at his resorts and other private businesses, as well as at official venues like fundraisers." Some news stories linked Yang to the day spa raided by police by describing her as the "founder," although when the site changed ownership in 2012, its name also changed. Yang sold the business, which at the time was called the Tokyo Day Spa, to Hua Zhang, who changed the name of the establishment to Orchids of Asia upon incorporation in 2012, according to Florida state business records. Zhang, 58, has been charged with prostitution-related counts and has pleaded not guilty. Yang, who goes by Cindy, wasn't charged in the multi-agency anti-human trafficking operation that resulted in 25 arrests and shut down 10 Asian day spas in South Florida. None of the spas are registered to Yang or her family. She sold the Jupiter spa around 2013 to Hua Zhang, who has pleaded not guilty to racketeering and running a house of prostitution. Yang's family still owns several South Florida spas. The family's Tokyo Day Spa branches have attracted the attention of at least two police agencies, the Herald reported. Yang told the Herald, which published the photo of her with Trump on March 8, that she and her

False

In early-to-mid-March 2019, photographs of President Donald Trump and members of his family posing with Li Yang, a political donor and spa entrepreneur, circulated on social media. The images were used to link the Trumps with a sting operation in Florida.Yang, who posted a widely seen selfie taken at Trump's 2019 Super Bowl party to her Facebook account, once owned what is now the Orchids of Asia massage parlor in Jupiter, Florida. New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft was one of 25 men arrested in February 2019, accused of soliciting sex there in a sweeping, human-trafficking sting that targeted that site and others.Kraft, a self-described friend of Trump, faces two counts of misdemeanor solicitation, to which he has pleaded not guilty.Yang no longer owns the establishment in which police say Kraft was caught on camera paying for sex. She has not been charged with a crime.Nevertheless, the images of Yang, Trump and members of his family were picked up and used to create an inaccurate meme claiming she is the spa's owner, which was shared with the nearly 8 million followers on the Facebook page belonging to Occupy Democrats on 8 March 2019.Although the Occupy Democrats Facebook page sarcastically discourages followers to share the meme, its administrators also added a "correction" in the post above the image:Yang was swept into the lurid story after images of her with Trump and his family members surfaced on her Facebook page, which, as the Miami Herald reported, "raised questions about who can gain access to the president at his resorts and other private businesses, as well at official venues like fundraisers."Yang sold the business, which at the time was called the Tokyo Day Spa, to Hua Zhang, who changed the name of the establishment to Orchids of Asia upon incorporation in 2012, according to Florida state business records. Zhang, 58, has been charged with prostitution-related counts and has pleaded not guilty. As the Associated Press reported:Yang told the Herald, which published the photo of her with Trump on Friday (March 8), that she and her family havent broken the law. She said she is out of the business, would soon be relocating to Washington and didnt want any negative news media attention.

FMD_train_940

Does Biden's Climate Plan Include Cutting 90% of Red Meat From Our Diets?

04/25/2021

On April 22, 2021, U.S. President Joe Biden gave remarks at the "Virtual Leaders Summit on Climate" in which he framed a nationwide effort to curb greenhouse gas emissions as an opportunity for "millions of good-paying, middle-class, union jobs." By investing in these new jobs, Biden said, he hopes the United States can cut its greenhouse gas emissions in half by 2030: Joe Biden remarks The United States isnt waiting. We are resolving to take action not only the our federal government, but our cities and our states all across our country; small businesses, large businesses, large corporations; American workers in every field. I see an opportunity to create millions of good-paying, middle-class, union jobs. I see line workers laying thousands of miles of transmission lines for a clean, modern, resilient grid. I see workers capping hundreds of thousands of abandoned oil and gas wells that need to be cleaned up, and abandoned coal mines that need to be reclaimed, putting a stop to the methane leaks and protecting the health of our communities. I see auto workers building the next generation of electric vehicles, and electricians installing nationwide for 500,000 charging stations along our highways. I see engineers and the construction workers building new carbon capture and green hydrogen plants to forge cleaner steel and cement and produce clean power. I see farmers deploying cutting-edge tools to make soil of our of our Heartland the next frontier in carbon innovation. By maintaining those investments and putting these people to work, the United States sets out on the road to cut greenhouse gases in half in half by the end of this decade. Thats where were headed as a nation, and thats what we can do if we take action to build an economy thats not only more prosperous, but healthier, fairer, and cleaner for the entire planet. At no point in this speech did Biden announce any initiative to impose a limit on red meat consumption. At no point in his presidency has Biden suggested policies aimed at limiting red meat consumption. Despite these facts, right-wing news outlets and politicians began aggressively repeating the claim that Biden's plan included "cutting 90% of red meat from our diets by 2030." This false notion stems from the British tabloid the Daily Mail, which in lieu of actual details the Biden administration has not yet provided took it upon themselves to speculate about what terrible things "could" be theoretically included in the plan: to speculate The Daily Mail cited a report published by the University of Michigan Center for Sustainable Systems that looked, in extremely simplified terms, how much of a reduction would result from various dietary changes. As reported by the Center for Biological Diversity, the researchers concluded: reported That replacing half of all animal-based foods with plant-based alternatives would reduce diet-related emissions by 35%. And if half of all animal-based foods were replaced with plant-based alternatives and beef consumption fell by 90%, dietary emissions would drop by 51%. If American diets remain unchanged, emissions associated with producing the food we eat will climb 9% by 2030. The University of Michigan exercise is, in their words, "reliant on a number of simplifying assumptions" and designed to show the impact of various diet change scenarios on climate. It is not, in any way, a policy suggestion or proposal. As you may recall, the Biden announcement was about green jobs and did not once mention initiatives to change the diet of Americans. Despite this, Biden's critics used the Daily Mail's baseless speculation as if it were actual scientific analysis of a plan whose details Biden has not yet released. their words Former Fox News pundit Todd Starnes argued on his show that the January 2020 Michigan study was actually an analysis of a Biden plan that, at the time of this reporting in April 2021, has not been released: argued The claim that Biden's plan includes this 90% red meat reduction is often paired with a Fox News screen capture: often paired As it is clear by the citation, this information comes from the same University of Michigan study the Daily Mail relied on to speculate about potential paths to carbon emission reductions. It is not, as suggested, a "requirement" for Biden's climate plan. Fox's reporting made it all the way to the halls of Congress. On April 24, 2021, Rep. Lauren Boebert, R-Colo., asserted in a viral tweet that the Daily Mail's speculation was an actual policy proposal by Biden: viral tweet Because the Daily Mail is a British tabloid and not involved in American climate policy discussions, and because Biden's plan has not yet been released, claims that it includes a policy that requires a 90% reduction in red meat are

False

On April 22, 2021, U.S. President Joe Biden gave remarks at the "Virtual Leaders Summit on Climate" in which he framed a nationwide effort to curb greenhouse gas emissions as an opportunity for "millions of good-paying, middle-class, union jobs." By investing in these new jobs, Biden said, he hopes the United States can cut its greenhouse gas emissions in half by 2030: Despite these facts, right-wing news outlets and politicians began aggressively repeating the claim that Biden's plan included "cutting 90% of red meat from our diets by 2030." This false notion stems from the British tabloid the Daily Mail, which in lieu of actual details the Biden administration has not yet provided took it upon themselves to speculate about what terrible things "could" be theoretically included in the plan:The Daily Mail cited a report published by the University of Michigan Center for Sustainable Systems that looked, in extremely simplified terms, how much of a reduction would result from various dietary changes. As reported by the Center for Biological Diversity, the researchers concluded:The University of Michigan exercise is, in their words, "reliant on a number of simplifying assumptions" and designed to show the impact of various diet change scenarios on climate. It is not, in any way, a policy suggestion or proposal. As you may recall, the Biden announcement was about green jobs and did not once mention initiatives to change the diet of Americans. Despite this, Biden's critics used the Daily Mail's baseless speculation as if it were actual scientific analysis of a plan whose details Biden has not yet released.Former Fox News pundit Todd Starnes argued on his show that the January 2020 Michigan study was actually an analysis of a Biden plan that, at the time of this reporting in April 2021, has not been released:The claim that Biden's plan includes this 90% red meat reduction is often paired with a Fox News screen capture:As it is clear by the citation, this information comes from the same University of Michigan study the Daily Mail relied on to speculate about potential paths to carbon emission reductions. It is not, as suggested, a "requirement" for Biden's climate plan. Fox's reporting made it all the way to the halls of Congress. On April 24, 2021, Rep. Lauren Boebert, R-Colo., asserted in a viral tweet that the Daily Mail's speculation was an actual policy proposal by Biden:

FMD_train_16

5% Downpayment Quote

06/18/2010

Senator Chris Dodd opined that a 5% down payment requirement "would restrict home ownership to only those who can afford it." In a bid to stem taxpayer losses from bad loans guaranteed by federal housing agencies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, Senator Bob Corker (R-Tenn) proposed that borrowers be required to make a 5% down payment in order to qualify. His proposal was rejected 57-42 on a party-line vote because, as Senator Chris Dodd (D-Conn) explained, "passage of such a requirement would restrict home ownership to only those who can afford it." One factor that fueled the subprime mortgage crisis of the 2000s was the easy access given to home loans for those who were poor risks. As these loans almost inevitably failed, mortgage delinquencies and foreclosures not only rose but spiraled dramatically upwards, seriously affecting banking and financial markets around the world. Many people believe that a tightening of lending practices would prevent similar economic collapses in the housing market from occurring again, with one proposed tightening being the imposition of a five percent down payment requirement upon prospective home buyers. However, not everyone believes such a requirement would be the best way to address the issue. Although the debate was real, the quote was a fabrication penned by John Semmens of Semi-News, an online publication billed as "A Satirical Look at Recent News," and it appeared as the final item in his 15 May 2010 column. Other offerings from that column include "Election Officials to Bar Voluntary Showing of ID by Voters" (an item that included the made-up statement of a Wisconsin Election Board official: "Allowing those who have valid IDs to show them would intimidate those without IDs. They might be discouraged from attempting to vote. This would lower turnout and threaten the democratic process") and "Crist Refuses to Return GOP Donations" (which quoted Crist as saying: "Look, my view has always been caveat emptor"). Semi-News is a satirical publication, albeit one that draws upon the news of the day. Senator Bob Corker had proposed an amendment (S.A. 3955) to the Restoring American Financial Stability Act of 2010, which would have instituted a residential mortgage underwriting standard requiring a five percent down payment from prospective home buyers. Democrats did oppose the amendment, with one reason given by Dodd being that it would have disadvantaged home buyers who had good credit and solid incomes but lacked the cash to make the required down payments. S.A. 3955 Stability Act Last updated: 20 June 2010.

NEI

publication billed as "A Satirical Look at Recent News," and appeared as the final item in his 15 May 2010 column. Other offerings from that column include "Election Officials to Bar Voluntary Showing of ID by Voters" (an item that included the made-up statement of a Wisconsin Election Board official: "Allowing those who have valid IDs to show them would intimidate those without IDs. They might be discouraged from attempting to vote. This would lower turnout and threaten the democratic process") and "Crist Refuses to Return GOP Donations" (which quoted Crist as saying: "Look, my view has always been caveat emptor").Semi-News is a satire publication, albeit one which draws upon the news of the day. Senator Bob Corker had proposed an amendment (S.A. 3955) to the Restoring American Financial Stability Act of 2010 which would have (among other things) instituted a residential mortgage underwriting standard requiring a five percent down payment from prospective home buyers. Democrats did oppose the amendment, with one reason given by Dodd being that it would have disadvantaged home buyers who had good credit and solid incomes but lacked the cash to make required down payments.

FMD_train_1516

Was Barack Obama the First Ex-President to 'Publicly Speak Against' His Successor?

11/06/2018

In the lead-up to the 2018 U.S. midterm elections, an old meme re-emerged on social media which claimed that former president Barack Obama had displayed an unprecedented level of partisanship and opportunism in his criticisms of President Donald Trump, in that Obama was "the first ex president to publicly speak against a successor" re-emerged social media The meme was actually an edited form of an earlier version which first emerged on social media in 2017. The original included only the phrase "First Ex President to Publicly Speak Against a Successor": 2017 The claim, that no ex-president before Barack Obama ever publicly criticized his immediate successor is false. There is ample historical evidence of ex-presidents doing just that. Here are a few instances: Barack Obama The 44th president offered what were widely perceived as thinly-veiled criticisms of President Donald Trump when he spoke in Johannesburg, South Africa, in July 2018, railing against what he called "strongman politics," whereby "those in power seek to undermine every institution or norm that gives democracy meaning." He also criticized "far-right parties" with a platform of "protectionism and closed borders" as well as "barely-hidden racial nationalism." perceived Speaking at the University of Illinois in September, Obama criticized Trump by name, saying he was a "symptom, not a cause" of an effort by powerful elites to engender fear and division in the face of social change and progress: Obama had declined to openly attack Trump for the first 18 months of his presidency, following what, in his University of Illinois speech, he called the "wise American tradition of ex-presidents gracefully exiting the political stage." Obama said he had changed his mind because, in his view, the 2018 mid-term elections represented "one of those pivotal moments when every one of us, as citizens of the United States, need to determine just who it is that we are, just what it is that we stand for." speech Bill Clinton In July 2007, the 42nd president took aim at the administration of his successor, George W. Bush, in its handling of the Iraq war, telling Good Morning America's Diane Sawyer "There is no military victory here" and criticizing Bush for attempting to filibuster Congressional efforts to bring about a withdrawal of troops: took aim efforts George H.W. Bush Although George H.W. Bush had a general policy of not speaking publicly against his successor, the 41st president did just that more than once while campaigning for Republican candidates during the 1994 mid-term elections. The Daily Oklahoman newspaper reported that Bush Sr. had offered a stinging counter-attack against Clinton during a visit to the state capital on 4 November 1994: reported Saying he was breaking his policy against criticizing President Clinton, former President George Bush said Friday in Oklahoma City he was tired of his Democratic successor criticizing Republicans ... Bush told the crowd ... that Clinton was stumping about blaming Republicans in Congress "for his demise or things that weren't going right." "He blames us and he is wrong. I'm so tired of it," Bush told about 5,000 noisy GOP supporters at Oklahoma Christian University of Sciences and Arts. "I think America is a little tired of it." During a Republican rally in Omaha, Nebraska, the same week, Bush attacked Clinton for having "the nerve" to blame the GOP for "his own failures," the Pittsburgh Post-Gazettereported: reported Former President George Bush broke a self-imposed silence yesterday and attacked President Clinton for taking credit for the U.S. economic recovery. Bush has been stumping for Republican candidates in the Mid-west this week. "He has the nerve to blame Republicans for his own failures and the shortcomings of the Democratic Congress," the former president told a crowd of about 1,500 people in Omaha. In 1999, during the Monica Lewinsky scandal and Clinton's impeachment by the U.S. House of Representatives, Bush even appeared to accuse his successor of behaving in a way which demonstrated a lack of respect for the U.S. presidency, as the Associated Press reported: reported Former President Bush thinks Bill Clinton lacks respect for the presidency, but Bush predicts the country will bounce back after Clinton's impeachment trial ends. "I have tried to stay out of all the Washington mess," Bush said Saturday at the end of a keynote address to the Safari Club International's 27th annual hunters' convention. "But I must confess I have been deeply concerned by what appears to be a lack of respect for the office I was so very proud to hold." Jimmy Carter The 39th president more than once criticized Ronald Reagan, the man who defeated him in the 1980 presidential campaign, firmly defending his own record and offering relatively barbed comments about his successor. In September 1982, Carter responded to Reagan's earlier criticisms of the Democrat's legacy, accusing his rival of failing to "accept his responsibilities as president," the New York Times reported: New York Times Former President Jimmy Carter, responding to criticism from President Reagan, said tonight that while his Administration made mistakes, "we did not spend four years blaming our mistakes on our predecessors" ... Mr. Carter accused Mr. Reagan of not accepting his responsibilities. The former President said that after his defeat in 1980, he resolved to pledge Mr. Reagan "my help, my support when he was ready to accept the awesome responsibilities of the Presidency." "My offer still stands," Mr. Carter said at a Democratic National Committee fund-raising dinner. "When he is ready to accept those responsibilities, I'll be there to help him." At a press conference two months later, Carter continued that theme, saying Reagan's efforts to deflect criticism onto him were "irresponsible and ill-advised" and that his Republican successor had made "radical" and unwelcome changes to U.S. foreign policy, United Press International reported: reported Jimmy Carter criticized President Reagan for making 'radical' changes in U.S. foreign and domestic policy, and said Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin is responsible in part for failure of the Camp David accords. In a wide-ranging news conference, Carter also twitted Reagan for trying to lay the blame for the nation's problems on the previous administration. 'There is always the temptation for an incumbent politician to blame all his mistakes on his predecessor. Most are willing to withstand the temptation. Mr. Reagan, apparently, is not,' Carter said. 'The public sees through that and the results of the (midterm) election proves I'm right' ... Speaking typically with a soft voice but strong words, Carter said: "Most of the quite radical departures in foreign, domestic and economic policy have not been good for the country. We have an unprecedented number of people unemployed; bankruptcies are the highest in years; farm income is at the lowest level ever; the deficits have never been so high, and so forth" ... "It's true President Reagan inherited some serious problems from my administration. I inherited some from President Ford. But to try to forego blame and say all these problems are my predecessor's fault is patently irresponsible and ill-advised," he said. Carter called Reagan's nuclear policies 'ill-advised.' Gerald Ford Just as Carter publicly took aim at the man who replaced him in the White House, he was also the subject of repeated and sometimes very strong criticism by Republican Gerald Ford, whom Carter had defeated in the 1976 election. In April 1977, less than three months after Carter succeeded him, Ford ridiculed the Democrat's economic policies in a widely-syndicated interview with the Washington Post: interview "Mr. Carter's anti-inflation program came in like a lion," Ford said. "It's going out like a mouse" ... The former president, looking relaxed, voiced his criticism of Carter in a brief interview following a speech to a Republican group here [in Los Angeles, California.] Over the next three years, Ford also took aim at Carter's handling of negotiations over the Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty (SALT), his handling of the economic crisis, and in the summer of 1980 he launched a devastating attack on his successor's legacy at a Republican event in Indianapolis, as the Associated Press reported: negotiations crisis reported "The Carter economic policies have been a catastrophe. They've been disasters. We handed them the economy on a silver platter," Ford said, arguing that the rate of inflation was less than 5 percent when he left office and that unemployment was going down. "The president blew it." Ford predicted that Carter will go into the November election with a national unemployment rate of 9 percent, double-digit inflation and double-digit interest rates. "He'll be defending the worst economic policy of any president since the Depression of 1932. That's bad. And he's responsible." Conclusion The examples highlighted above are far from exhaustive but serve to illustrate that Barack Obama's recent criticisms of President Donald Trump are far from unique or unprecedented and, especially when compared to the pronouncements of Gerald Ford, could even be argued to have been relatively tame. As such, the claim in the 2017 meme which re-emerged in November 2018, that Obama is "the first ex-president to publicly speak against a successor" is false. Wintour, Patrick. "Obama Criticises 'Strongman Politics' in Coded Attack on Trump." The Guardian. 17 July 2018. Reuters. "Bill Clinton Criticizes Bush on Iraq." 19 July 2007. Stolberg, Sheryl Gay and Jeff Zeleny. "Clash Over Iraq Becomes Bitter Between Bush and Congress." The New York Times. 12 July 2007. Zizzo, David. "Bush Criticizes Clinton During Stop in City." The Daily Oklahoman. 5 November 1994. The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. "Bush Criticizes Clinton." 5 November 1994. Associated Press. "Bush Criticizes Clinton, But Says Scandal Will Fade." The Atlanta Constitution 25 January 1999. Clymer, Adam. "Carter Says Reagan Has Failed to Accept His Responsibilities." The New York Times. 1 October 1982. Pippert, Wesley G. "Jimmy Carter Criticized President Reagan Wednesday for Making 'Radical'..." United Press International. 10 November 1982. Cannon, Lou. "Ford Criticizes Carter Economics." The Tampa Bay Times. 17 April 1977. Associated Press. "Ford Criticizes Carter's Policy." The [Uniontown] Evening Standard. 8 April 1977. Associated Press. "Ford Criticizes Carter's Economic Policies." The [Staunton] News Leader. 11 October 1979. Carrol, Jan. "Former President Ford Criticizes Carter for 'Flip-Flopping' Policies." The [Lousiville] Courier-Journal. 27 June 1980.

False

In the lead-up to the 2018 U.S. midterm elections, an old meme re-emerged on social media which claimed that former president Barack Obama had displayed an unprecedented level of partisanship and opportunism in his criticisms of President Donald Trump, in that Obama was "the first ex president to publicly speak against a successor"The meme was actually an edited form of an earlier version which first emerged on social media in 2017. The original included only the phrase "First Ex President to Publicly Speak Against a Successor":The 44th president offered what were widely perceived as thinly-veiled criticisms of President Donald Trump when he spoke in Johannesburg, South Africa, in July 2018, railing against what he called "strongman politics," whereby "those in power seek to undermine every institution or norm that gives democracy meaning." He also criticized "far-right parties" with a platform of "protectionism and closed borders" as well as "barely-hidden racial nationalism."Obama had declined to openly attack Trump for the first 18 months of his presidency, following what, in his University of Illinois speech, he called the "wise American tradition of ex-presidents gracefully exiting the political stage." Obama said he had changed his mind because, in his view, the 2018 mid-term elections represented "one of those pivotal moments when every one of us, as citizens of the United States, need to determine just who it is that we are, just what it is that we stand for."In July 2007, the 42nd president took aim at the administration of his successor, George W. Bush, in its handling of the Iraq war, telling Good Morning America's Diane Sawyer "There is no military victory here" and criticizing Bush for attempting to filibuster Congressional efforts to bring about a withdrawal of troops:The Daily Oklahoman newspaper reported that Bush Sr. had offered a stinging counter-attack against Clinton during a visit to the state capital on 4 November 1994:During a Republican rally in Omaha, Nebraska, the same week, Bush attacked Clinton for having "the nerve" to blame the GOP for "his own failures," the Pittsburgh Post-Gazettereported:In 1999, during the Monica Lewinsky scandal and Clinton's impeachment by the U.S. House of Representatives, Bush even appeared to accuse his successor of behaving in a way which demonstrated a lack of respect for the U.S. presidency, as the Associated Press reported:In September 1982, Carter responded to Reagan's earlier criticisms of the Democrat's legacy, accusing his rival of failing to "accept his responsibilities as president," the New York Times reported:At a press conference two months later, Carter continued that theme, saying Reagan's efforts to deflect criticism onto him were "irresponsible and ill-advised" and that his Republican successor had made "radical" and unwelcome changes to U.S. foreign policy, United Press International reported:In April 1977, less than three months after Carter succeeded him, Ford ridiculed the Democrat's economic policies in a widely-syndicated interview with the Washington Post:Over the next three years, Ford also took aim at Carter's handling of negotiations over the Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty (SALT), his handling of the economic crisis, and in the summer of 1980 he launched a devastating attack on his successor's legacy at a Republican event in Indianapolis, as the Associated Press reported:

FMD_train_920

Rewrite this item "Dennis Guthrie's Letter to Nancy Pelosi".

09/02/2009

On 10 August 2009, U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer published an op-ed piece in USA Today titled "'Un-American' attacks can't derail health care debate," in which they criticized those who had been engaging in efforts to disrupt the debate over health insurance reform legislation (which later became widely known as "Obamacare"). In the op-ed, Reps. Pelosi and Hoyer wrote (in part): [I]t is now evident that an ugly campaign is underway not merely to misrepresent the health insurance reform legislation, but to disrupt public meetings and prevent members of Congress and constituents from conducting a civil dialogue. These tactics have included hanging in effigy one Democratic member of Congress in Maryland and protesters holding a sign displaying a tombstone with the name of another congressman in Texas, where protesters also shouted "Just say no!" drowning out those who wanted to hold a substantive discussion. These disruptions are occurring because opponents are afraid not just of differing views but of the facts themselves. Drowning out opposing views is simply un-American. Drowning out the facts is how we failed at this task for decades. That op-ed prompted Dennis L. Guthrie, an attorney with the Charlotte, North Carolina, law firm of Guthrie, Davis, Henderson & Staton, to pen a (primarily ad hominem) critical letter to Rep. Pelosi the following day, images of which soon began circulating online. Dear Ms. Pelosi: I write to you out of utter disdain! You are as despicable and un-American as the traitor Jane Fonda. I am a soon-to-be 65-year-old who has voted in every state and local election since 1966. I have voted for both Republicans and Democrats alike. I have worked on campaigns for both Republicans and Democrats, white and black. I served the country that I love in Vietnam, as my son did in the Middle East. I was awarded two bronze stars. I have been involved in politics since age 6 when my father was campaign manager for a truly great American Congressman, Charles Raper Jonas, who worked for his constituents and his country and was to be admired, unlike you. You obviously haven't read the Constitution recently, if ever, the Federalist Papers, or even David McCullough's book on John Adams. You ought to take the time while riding around in your government-provided luxury executive jet to do just that. You represent socialistic and even Marxist principles that our founding fathers tried to avoid when setting out the capitalistic republican form of government represented by our Constitution. I find it interesting that you and your husband are multi-millionaires, with much of your fortune being made as a result of your public service. You have controlled legislation that has enhanced your husband's investments both on and offshore. At the same time, you redistributed the wealth of others. Our system of a free market economy is being destroyed by the likes of you. You ride around in a Gulfstream airplane at the taxpayers' expense while criticizing the presidents of companies who produced something for the economy. You add nothing to the economy of the United States; you only subtract from it. I would like to suggest that you return to the city of fruitcakes and nuts and eat your husband's canned tuna and pineapple—produced by illegal immigrants and by workers who have been excluded from the protection that 90% of the legal workers in the United States have. I await your defeat in the next election with glee. Don't ever use the term un-American again for protesters who love this country and are exercising their rights upon which this country was founded. By the way, while I served in the Army, I was spit on by the same type of lunatics who support you and whom you probably supported in the 60s and 70s. You are an embarrassment to all of us who served so that you would have the protected right of free speech to call us un-American. But at the same time, I have the right to write to you to notify you that I consider you to be un-American, as do the majority of the people of this formerly great country. You are a true disgrace to most of the people who served this country by offering themselves for public service in the United States Congress. I feel certain your aides will not share this letter with you, but I intend to share it with many. We contacted Mr. Guthrie at the address included in the letterhead on which the letter was printed, and he confirmed that he did indeed write and send such a letter to Rep. Pelosi. The letter circulated again in 2019 via social media, with one minor revision: The line "I am a soon to be 65 year-old" was changed to "I am a soon to be a [sic] 75 year-old." Pelosi, Nancy and Steny Hoyer. "'Un-American' Attacks Can't Derail Health Care Debate." USA Today. 10 August 2009.

True

On 10 August 2009, U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer published an op-ed piece in USA Today under the title "'Un-American' attacks can't derail health care debate," in which they criticized those who had been engaging in efforts to disrupt debate over health insurance reform legislation (which later became widely known as "Obamacare").

FMD_train_1644

Who exactly was Michael Myers?

10/26/2015

One of the most iconic masks in movie history is that worn by the crazed killer character Michael Myers in the Halloween franchise of slasher films, the first installment of which was released in 1978. According to rumor, this frightful face originated with a character from a very different series and medium: Captain Kirk from television's Star Trek. The 1978 horror film Halloween was produced on a very limited budget, and director John Carpenter didn't have the funds to create a custom mask. Carpenter told the Hollywood Reporter in a 2015 interview that the movie's art director instead picked up a mask of Captain Kirk at a magic shop and made a few alterations to create the iconic look of Michael Myers. He explained, "There was a choice we had to make because we didn't have any money to make a mask. So the art director went up to Bert Wheeler's magic shop on Hollywood Boulevard, which was right up the street from our offices, and he got two masks. One was a clown mask, and one was a Captain Kirk mask. It was supposed to be Captain Kirk. It looked nothing like William Shatner, nothing like anybody, really. It was just a strange mask, which was perfect for us. So we spray-painted it, altered the eye holes, and just did a couple of things with the hair, and there you had it. I like to think it's Shatner, but it's not really." Similar versions of the story have been told by other members of the crew, including Rick Sternbach, who worked as an illustrator/designer on Halloween 2, and William Shatner (who portrayed Captain Kirk) himself. Sternbach's account is of particular interest because he was one of the first to transition this movie legend into a movie fact. He stated, "I was hired as an illustrator on Halloween 2 in 1981, working for production designer J. Michael Riva. In a supply cabinet at Pumpkin Pie Productions, we had one mask left from the original Halloween and no idea where to get any others for the sequel. It appeared that we'd need to check out some of the toy stores and such, but I noticed that there was some wording molded into the neck area. There was a model number and the words 'Don Post Studios.' I made a call, read off the model number, and the word came back, 'It's our Captain Kirk mask.' I asked if we could buy a number of them, and was told, 'We'll give you a box, just give us credit.' With that, I turned the official dealings over to the higher-ups."

True

The 1978 horror film Halloween was produced on a very limited budget, and director John Carpenter didn't have funds for creating a custom mask. Carpenter told the Hollywood Reporter in a 2015 interview that the movie's art director instead picked up a mask of Captain Kirk at a magic shop and applied a few alterations to it to create the iconic look of Michael Myers:Sternbach's story is of particular interest because he was one of the first to transition this movie legend into a movie fact:

FMD_train_1417

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

10/18/2018

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

NEI

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

FMD_train_290

Dispensation Decoy

09/25/2015

FACT CHECK Did the Obama administration deliberately and unexpectedly release Abdul Shalabi from detention at Guantanamo Bay while the news media were distracted by the Pope's visit to the U.S.? Claim: The Obama administration deliberately and unexpectedly released Abdul Shalabi from detention at Guantanamo Bay while the news media were distracted by the Pope's visit to the U.S. : WHAT'S Guantanamo detainee Abdul Shalabi was repatriated to Saudi Arabia on 22 September 2015, the day on which Pope Francis arrived in Washington, D.C. WHAT'S Abdul Shalabi's release was sudden and unexpected, and it occurred under the radar of the news media due to coverage of the Pope's visit. Example: [Collected via e-mail, September 2015] Rumor has it that while the pope was in DC that POTUS released Abdul Shalabi from Gitmo. Did Obama really release Abdul Shalabi will everyone was watching the pope in DC? Origins: Pope Francis' "Apostolic Journey to the United States of America" that began on 22 September 2015 marked the pontiff's first visit to the U.S. On 24 September 2015, the web site of former one-term congressman and conservative political commentator Allen B. West published a blog post with the clickbait headline of "While the Media Obsessed Over the Pope, Look What Obama Just Did" that asserted: While Pope Francis was in Washington smooching with the president and giving speeches about global warming, income inequality and the evils of capitalism (while being ominously silent about the persecution and slaughter of his Christian brethren around the world), the Obama administration released Abdul Shalabi from the Guantanamo Bay detainment center. That Shalabi was released yesterday as the country was focused on Pope Francis arrival in the United States could well be the administration's most blatant "Look, over theresquirrell!!" [sic] moment ever. The very idea that this man who worked side-by-side with Osama bin Laden can somehow be "rehabilitated" to no longer want to kill infidels, and, be rehabbed by the Muslim government of an Islamic nation is beyond laughable. What does Obama think hes going to do there now, train to become a valet? Take up needlepoint? Oh, I know, maybe open a bakery and make cakes for gay weddings. The excerpt quoted above suggests that Shalabi's release was unexpected and deliberately coordinated so as to go unnoticed during media coverage of Pope Francis' arrival in Washington D.C. However, Shalabi's release was neither unexpected, nor was it ignored by the media. A widely-reproduced Associated Press article published three months earlier had announced that Shalabi, who had been on a nine-year hunger strike, had been approved for release from Guantanamo by a government review board: article A prisoner who has been on a nine-year hunger strike to protest his confinement at the U.S. base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, can now return to his native Saudi Arabia, a government review board said. The Periodic Review Board, which has been re-evaluating dozens of Guantanamo prisoners previously deemed too dangerous to release, said in a statement published on its website that Abdul Rahman Shalabi can be released to take part in a Saudi government rehabilitation program for militants and would be subject to monitoring afterward. Shalabi began a hunger strike in 2005. He and another prisoner, who since has been released, maintained the protest longer than any others held at the base. Court records show Shalabi occasionally consumed food but also dropped to as little as 101 pounds (46 kilograms). His lawyer told the review board in April [2015] that prison officials had fed him with a nasogastric tube daily for nine years. The U.S. now holds 116 men at Guantanamo, including 52 cleared for transfer or release. Similarly, an 8 August 2015 New York Post article reported that Shalabi was due to be released soon (partly to care for his mother): article Take detainee Abdul Shalabi. His lawyers in June pleaded that the former bin Laden bodyguard was sufficiently reformed and wanted only to reunite with his family in Saudi Arabia and take care of his ailing mother. The board subsequently agreed Shalabi was no longer a significant threat to the security of the United States, and rubber-stamped his release even though the al Qaeda operative conspired with Khalid Sheikh Mohammed while plotting the 9/11 attacks from Karachi, Pakistan. Shalabi also was said to have trained at al Qaeda camps to participate in a suicide attack or deployment to the West. The UK newspaper The Guardian also reported on Shalabi's then-pending release on 13 August 2015, and the claim that "the media" ignored Shalabi's release in favor of Papal visit coverage conflicted with the 22 September 2015 publication in the New York Times of an article reporting that: reported Although a six-agency task force decided in 2009 that Mr. Shalabi was too dangerous to release, a parolelike panel called the Periodic Review Board, consisting of representatives from the same six agencies, decided in June [2015] that he could now be safely repatriated to Saudi Arabia. In a statement explaining its reasoning, the board said Mr. Shalabi had terrorist-related activities and connections in the past, but said it was confident that the Saudi governments rehabilitation program and its ability to monitor former detainees would mitigate the risks. The board also cited the fact that Mr. Shalabis nephew, who was repatriated from Guantnamo in President George W. Bushs second term and went through the Saudi rehabilitation program, has apparently lived quietly ever since. Mr. Shalabi appeared before the board at a hearing in April [2015]. He asked that his statements not be made public. But a lawyer helping to represent him, Julia Tarver-Mason Wood, told the board that he just wanted to settle down, get married and have a family of his own, and put the past behind him. The New York Times wasn't the only high-profile U.S. news outlet to cover Shalabi's release, as a 22 September 2015 Reuters piece also announced the imminent transfer of Shalabi to Saudi Arabia. piece As noted above, it was a review board comprising officials from several different military, legal, and intelligence agencies who recommended Shalabi's repatriation to Saudi Arabia, as explained on the Department of Defense Periodic Review Secretariat's web site: explained The Periodic Review Board (PRB) is a body comprised of senior officials from the Departments of Defense, Homeland Security, Justice, and State; the Joint Staff; and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence that will review whether continued detention of particular individuals held at Guantanamo remains necessary to protect against a continuing significant threat to the security of the United States. Articles published three months in advance of Shalabi's repatriation acknowledged that (despite his never having been charged with a crime) he had links to Osama bin Laden al-Qaida and had "not been cleared of wrongdoing": Shalabi, 39, was among the first prisoners taken to Guantanamo in January 2002. He was never charged with a crime but the government said he had been a bodyguard for Osama bin Laden and had links to the external operations chief for al-Qaida, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who is facing trial by military commission at Guantanamo. The board, which was created by the administration of President Barack Obama in 2011 as part of the effort to close the prison at Guantanamo, did not clear Shalabi of wrongdoing and said it "acknowledges the detainees past terrorist-related activities." So while it's true that Abdul Shalabi was transferred from Guantanamo to Saudi Arabia on 22 September 2015, the formal decision to do so was made well in advance of the Pope's September 2015 visit to the U.S., and news of Shalabi's hearing, review, and release was reported by major news outlets (inside and outside the United States) both before and during the event. Last updated: 25 September 2015 First published: 25 September 2015

True

The excerpt quoted above suggests that Shalabi's release was unexpected and deliberately coordinated so as to go unnoticed during media coverage of Pope Francis' arrival in Washington D.C. However, Shalabi's release was neither unexpected, nor was it ignored by the media. A widely-reproduced Associated Press article published three months earlier had announced that Shalabi, who had been on a nine-year hunger strike, had been approved for release from Guantanamo by a government review board:Similarly, an 8 August 2015 New York Post article reported that Shalabi was due to be released soon (partly to care for his mother):The UK newspaper The Guardian also reported on Shalabi's then-pending release on 13 August 2015, and the claim that "the media" ignored Shalabi's release in favor of Papal visit coverage conflicted with the 22 September 2015 publication in the New York Times of an article reporting that:The New York Times wasn't the only high-profile U.S. news outlet to cover Shalabi's release, as a 22 September 2015 Reuters piece also announced the imminent transfer of Shalabi to Saudi Arabia.As noted above, it was a review board comprising officials from several different military, legal, and intelligence agencies who recommended Shalabi's repatriation to Saudi Arabia, as explained on the Department of Defense Periodic Review Secretariat's web site:

FMD_train_1567

No, Walmart is not cancelling the donations you make at the checkout.

06/29/2021

In late June 2021, social media users shared a meme misinforming viewers that Walmart and other large businesses were taking customers' point-of-sale charitable donations and writing them off on their taxes. Readers have been asking Snopes about this meme since at least August 2020. The meme addresses a phenomenon called "checkout charity," in which many large businesses ask customers to donate a small amount to a charitable cause upon checkout: according to What happens to the money you donate at the cash register? This is where you round up your bill to give to a charity designated by the retailer, and the donation amount appears on your receipt. The store serves only as a collection agent for your gift. Assuming the business is following the law, it will not include your donation as part of its business receipts, or income, nor will it claim the charitable gift as an expense. In other words, your gift has zero impact on the stores income taxes. Keep in mind that the store chooses the receiving charity, so make sure it is one you can support. As a customer, the donation will appear on your receipt and you can claim it as a charitable deduction when you file your income tax return. But you probably wont. A whopping nine out of ten customers don't write those donations off, even with a receipt, according to the Tax Policy Center, which estimates only 9% of households claim deductions for charitable donations. according to The Tampa Bay Times reported that the practice is gaining in popularity because both charities and businesses benefit from it: reported "Checkout charity, as it's sometimes called, has become big business for nonprofits and retailers. Charities love it because it raises money from the masses at little cost. Companies love it because it makes them look caring and generous, even if it comes on the backs of customers."

False

A whopping nine out of ten customers don't write those donations off, even with a receipt, according to the Tax Policy Center, which estimates only 9% of households claim deductions for charitable donations.The Tampa Bay Times reported that the practice is gaining in popularity because both charities and businesses benefit from it:

FMD_train_1109

Hooters Bans Motorcycle Clubs from All Restaurants

05/27/2015

Claim: Hooters has banned motorcyclists from wearing club patches and colors in all of their locations. Example: [Collected via e-internet, May 2015] I was wondering if there is any truth that Hooters as a National chain was completely banning Motorcycle club colors from every Hooters around or only certain ones like in Atlanta. Origins: Shortly after a deadly motorcycle gang shootout took place in in Waco, Texas, in May 2015, a photograph purportedly showing a "no motorcycle colors or patches" sign outside of a Hooters restaurant began circulating online: Several motorcyclist took to the company's Facebook page to voice their complaints about the new rule, with most posters taking issue with the fact that the preponderance of motorcycle clubs have no gang affiliations. Although many viewers assumed the sign was an expression of a new corporate policy, that was not the case: Hooters has not made any official announcements regarding a newly-imposed ban on motorcycle clubs. The above-displayed photograph is the only image documenting the purported policy; there is no information about where it was taken, nor do any other photographs document that this type of sign has been put on display at other Hooters restaurants across the country. In fact, at least one Hooters location has taken to Facebook to say specifically that they have not been instructed to ban people wearing motorcycle club patches. After hearing about the sign, Hooters McKinney changed their Facebook profile to a Hooters girl washing a motorcycle and posted a message to their customers: Facebook The sign being referred to, that has been passed around the Internet, is not and has not ever been at our location. As far as management knows there is not any in the area of us either. We do not know where the sign was seen but can guarantee it was not with our location. We welcome everyone and will continue to welcome everyone. On 28 May 2015, Hooters confirmed that while the sign is real, it was displayed only at a single location (in Waco, Texas), and the company does not have a chain-wide ban on the display of motorcycle patches and colors: confirmed In light of the tragic events of May 17, the Hooters restaurant in Waco, Texas, has posted a sign requesting that patrons refrain from displaying their motorcycle club affiliation while dining with us. Even though none of our restaurants were involved in the incident, the safety and wellbeing of our guests and employees are always our top priorities and we believe special precautions are warranted in this situation, at least for now. This is not a system-wide policy. Although a similar request was made of guests last year in one East Coast location, we have no plans of implementing it elsewhere at this time. We fully understand that the majority of motorcycle enthusiast organizations are comprised of upstanding folks that share a passion for riding and a common interest in our community. It has been and will continue to be our privilege to welcome and serve them, along with all of our other guests, in our restaurants. Hooters will continue to work with local authorities to preserve a safe environment for our guests and employees. Last updated: 28 May 2015

False

In fact, at least one Hooters location has taken to Facebook to say specifically that they have not been instructed to ban people wearing motorcycle club patches. After hearing about the sign, Hooters McKinney changed their Facebook profile to a Hooters girl washing a motorcycle and posted a message to their customers:On 28 May 2015, Hooters confirmed that while the sign is real, it was displayed only at a single location (in Waco, Texas), and the company does not have a chain-wide ban on the display of motorcycle patches and colors:

FMD_train_249

Barack Obama and the National Anthem

10/26/2007

Although the custom is sometimes more honored in the breach than in the observance, the U.S. Flag Code states that "During a rendition of the national anthem when the flag is displayed, all present except those in uniform should stand at attention facing the flag with the right hand over the heart." Given how finely attuned candidates for high office usually are to the importance of symbolism, Illinois Senator (and Democratic presidential hopeful) Barack Obama caused something of a stir in September 2007 when he was seemingly spotted not observing the hand-over-heart protocol during a playing of "The Star-Spangled Banner" at an Indianola, Iowa, steak fry attended by the six top Democratic presidential candidates. The photograph itself is real, one of several images of the Iowa steak fry event published by Time, and shows then-Senator Barack Obama standing with his hands clasped just below his waist, while New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson, New York Senator Hillary Clinton, and Ruth Harkin (wife of Iowa Senator Tom Harkin) stand with their hands held over their hearts. It's difficult to establish context from a single still image, but other accounts (including ABC News video of the event) documented that the picture was as described. The Flag Code advises that they should be "standing at attention facing the flag," but none of them is facing the flag displayed behind the platform on which they're standing. Presumably, another flag was in place off to the right of the platform, since most of the candidates were facing that direction. As we noted earlier, although the U.S. Flag Code still specifies that those present should stand "with the right hand over the heart" during the playing of the U.S. national anthem, that particular form is one that has generally come to be observed less and less consistently among the general public over the decades. Experts on the national anthem say the law seems a bit out of date, given its reference to a man's "headdress." Yet it's still cited in several military manuals found on the Web. Modern custom does not require a hand over the heart, said Anne Garside, director of communication for the Maryland Historical Society, home of the original manuscript of The Star-Spangled Banner. "I think the bottom line is that you show respect with your demeanor," she said. "Whether you put your hand over your heart, hold your hat at shoulder level or waist level, is really in this day and age irrelevant." An Obama campaign spokesperson responded: "Sometimes he does, sometimes he doesn't. In no way was he making any sort of statement, and any suggestion to the contrary is ridiculous." The senator himself said, "My grandfather taught me when I was two. During the Pledge of Allegiance, you put your hand over your heart. During the national anthem, you sing." When television's Inside Edition ran a segment on this issue, they included some images (supplied by the Obama campaign) of the senator standing with his hand over his heart during other playings of the national anthem. The activity taking place during the scene in the photograph involved the playing of the U.S. national anthem, not a recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance. During the Democratic candidates' debate on 15 January 2008, Senator Obama directly refuted the three primary rumors about him that were then circulating via e-mail: that he is a Muslim, that he was sworn in to Congress on the Quran, and that he refuses to say the Pledge of Allegiance. This item saw renewed interest in April 2017, when First Lady Melania Trump seemingly had to nudge her husband, President Donald Trump, to place his hand over his heart during the playing of the national anthem while celebrating the annual White House Easter Egg Roll. A spoof article about Barack Obama's stance on the U.S. national anthem was later circulated via e-mail as a genuine statement by the then-senator.

True

Although the custom is sometimes more honored in the breach than in the observance, the U.S. Flag Code states that "During a rendition of the national anthem when the flag is displayed all present except those in uniform should stand at attention facing the flag with the right hand over the heart."The photograph itself is real, one of several images of the Iowa steak fry event published by Time, and shows then-Senator Barack Obama standing with his hands clasped just below his waist, while New Mexico governor Bill Richardson, New York senator Hillary Clinton, and Ruth Harkin (wife of Iowa senator Tom Harkin) stand with their hands held over their hearts. It's difficult to establish context from a single still image, but other accounts (including ABC News video of the event) documented that the picture was as described:A spoof article about Barack Obama's stance on the U.S. national anthem was later circulated via e-mail as a genuine statement the then-senator.

FMD_train_1463

Complimentary lifetime access to fast food.

01/24/2016

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

False

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

FMD_train_1238

Is there a photo depicting Ice Cube and 50 Cent wearing hats that support Trump?

10/20/2020

Voting in the 2020 U.S. Election may be over, but misinformation continues to spread. Never stop fact-checking. Follow our post-election coverage here. On Oct. 20, 2020, U.S. President Donald Trump's son Eric Trump posted an image to social media that supposedly showed musicians Ice Cube and Curtis "50 Cent" Jackson wearing "Trump 2020" hats. This is not a genuine photograph of 50 Cent and Ice Cube wearing "Trump 2020" hats; it is a doctored image created from a photograph of Ice Cube and 50 Cent at a BIG3 basketball game in Las Vegas, Nevada, in 2017. In the original image, Ice Cube is wearing a hat with the BIG3 logo, while 50 Cent is wearing a hat with a New York Yankees logo. Ice Cube shared the original photograph on his Twitter page in July 2020, along with a birthday message for his friend 50 Cent. Getty Images has archived a few other photographs taken at this event. The image at the top of this article, for example, carries the caption: "LAS VEGAS, NV - AUGUST 26: BIG3 founder and recording artist Ice Cube and Curtis '50 Cent' Jackson attend the BIG3 three-on-three basketball league championship game on August 26, 2017, in Las Vegas, Nevada. (Photo by Sean M. Haffey/BIG3/Getty Images)." Ice Cube confirmed that the image was fake in a message posted to Twitter, and Trump has since deleted his tweet. Although this image is fake, both musicians have indeed aligned themselves, at least in part, with the Trump administration. While Ice Cube has not endorsed Trump for 2020, he did work with the president's administration to create a "Contract With Black America." Ice Cube stated that he would "advise anyone on the planet who has the power to help Black Americans close the enormous wealth gap." 50 Cent's support for Trump was more explicit. On Oct. 19, 50 Cent took to Instagram and shared a message endorsing Trump, along with a screenshot from CNBC's "Power Lunch" concerning a report that Biden's tax plan would raise the tax rate to as much as 62% on Americans who make more than $400,000 a year. This screenshot comes from a segment of "Power Lunch" that aired on Oct. 19. During this segment, CNBC's Robert Frank explained how people earning more than $400,000 a year could pay income taxes at a rate of more than 62%. Interestingly, Ice Cube and 50 Cent appear to be aligning themselves with Trump for polar opposite reasons. Ice Cube, for instance, said that he was willing to work with either presidential campaign in order to improve the lives of Black Americans and to "close the enormous wealth gap." 50 Cent, on the other hand, stated he didn't care that "Trump doesn't like Black people" and that he was endorsing the incumbent because his opponent's tax plan would increase taxes on wealthy Americans.

False

Voting in the 2020 U.S. Election may be over, but the misinformation keeps on ticking. Never stop fact-checking. Follow our post-election coverage here.On Oct. 20, 2020, U.S. President Donald Trump's son Eric Trump posted an image to social media that supposedly showed musicians Ice Cube and Curtis "50 Cent" Jackson wearing "Trump 2020" hats:Getty Images has archived a few other photographs taken at this event. The image at the top of this article, for example, carries the caption:Ice Cube confirmed that the image was fake in a message posted to Twitter and Trump has since deleted his tweet.Although this image is fake, both of these musicians have truly aligned themselves, at least in part, with the Trump administration. While Ice Cube has not endorsed Trump for 2020, he did work with the president's administration to create a "Contract With Black America." Ice Cube said that he would "advise anyone on the planet who has the power to help Black Americans close the enormous wealth gap."50 Cent's support for Trump was more explicit. On Oct. 19, 50 Cent took to Instagram and shared a message endorsing Trump along with a screenshot from CNBC's "Power Lunch" concerning a report that Biden's tax plan would raise the tax rate to as much as 62% on Americans who make more than $400,000 a year:This screenshot comes from a segment of "Power Lunch" that aired on Oct. 19. During this segment, CNBC's Robert Frank explained how people earning more than $400,000 a year could pay income taxes at rate of more than 62%. Here's a video of Frank on another CNBC show, "Squawk Box," talking about Biden's tax plan:

FMD_train_814

The photo does not depict a crowd saluting Obama with the Nazi gesture.

03/08/2016

Shortly after Donald Trump asked his supporters to raise their hands and pledge that they would vote for him in the 2016 Presidential election (drawing comparisons to Nazi Germany), an image purportedly showing President Obama making a similar request to a crowd began circulating online. While the image is real, it does not show President Obama asking his supporters to pledge allegiance to him. This photograph was taken in Columbus, Ohio, in November 2008, and shows a crowd raising their hands after Obama asked how many people in the audience made less than $250,000 per year. People raise their hands as Democratic presidential nominee U.S. Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) asks the audience how many of them make less than $250,000 a year while speaking during a campaign rally at the Ohio State House on November 2, 2008, in Columbus, Ohio. Obama continued to campaign against Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) as Election Day drew near. A video on PBS showed President Obama asking the audience to raise their hands if they made less than $250,000: "Let me just see a show of hands. How many people make less than $250,000 a year? Raise your hands. All right, now, I want you to be very clear here. Here are the facts. There was another report in the New York Times this morning that laid out the fact that I give much more relief to middle-income people and also that I will not raise taxes for anybody making under $250,000 a year, not your capital gains tax, not your payroll tax, not your income tax, no taxes. The middle class doesn't need a tax hike. I want to give you a tax cut. So don't be confused by what John McCain says. My tax rates will be lower than they were under Ronald Reagan."

False

While the image is real, it does not show President Obama asking his supporters to pledge allegiance to him. This photograph was takenin Columbus, Ohio in November 2008, and shows a crowd raising their hands after Obama asked how many people in the audience made less than $250,000 per year:

FMD_train_1366

Americas federal business tax rate is the highest in the world.

12/15/2016

Duringa speechin which he warmed up to U.S. House SpeakerPaul Ryan, gave a shout-out toVince Lombardiand even name-droppedKanye West, president-electDonald Trumpalso reaffirmed his promise to cut taxes. Trump appeared Dec. 13, 2016 with vice president-electMike Penceand a host of Badger State Republicans, including Ryan, at the Wisconsin State Fair Park Exposition Center. This stop on his multi-state thank-you tour was mostly a campaign-style rally, but there was some policy, too. Midway into his remarks,Trump said: Were going to undertake one of the great tax reforms and simplifications in American history. This includes a massive tax cut for themiddle-classand middle-class families from Wisconsin, too. Were also going to lower ourbusiness tax rateso that new companies will come to our shores and hire workers in cities like right here. Is that OK? Thats what we want. Were going to bring our rates down from 35 percent, were going to try to get it down to 15 percent. So, right now -- and by the way the jobs will pour in -- so, right now, were the highest-taxed nation in the world. And when we finish, well be one of the lower taxed, one of the lower. Whether the president-elect keeps his promises on taxes will be something to be determined by PolitiFact Nationals Trump-O-Meter, whichwill be launchedin 2017. But we can answer now whether Americas business tax rate is the highest in the world. Top U.S. rate: 35% The corporate income tax rates in the United States range from15 to 35 percent. And that 35 percent top rate -- at least as a statutory rate (more on that below) -- is relatively high. The Paris-based Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development publishesthe top corporate tax ratesfor the35 countriesthat belong to its organization, which includes most advanced, industrialized nations. The U.S top rate of 35 percent ranks first, just ahead of France, 34.4 percent; Belgium, 33 percent; and Australia and Mexico, 30 percent. On the low end: Switzerland, 8.5 percent; Ireland, 12.5 percent; Latvia and Canada, 15 percent; and Germany, 15.8 percent. Sometimes references are made to a combined corporate tax rate, which includes federal and state corporate taxes; the U.S. combined rate is38.9 percent. But Trump was referring to the 35 percent federal rate, the one he vows to reduce. There are, however, two clarifying points to make. Other nations, and what is paid To back Trumps statement, his campaign cited aForbes articlethat noted the United States has the highest corporate rate among industrialized nations. But Trump didnt limit his statement to industrialized nations. The accounting firm PwC tracks the top federal corporate tax rates for155 countries.That listshows five other countries that also have a top rate of 35 percent: Argentina, Chad, Congo, Malta and Zambia. And there are two countries with higher top corporate tax rates: United Arab Emirates, 55 percent; and Puerto Rico, 39 percent. It also needs to be understood that Americas 35 percent top rate is the statutory rate -- before deductions -- but U.S. companies arent actually taxed at that rate. Tax deductions -- on health insurance, pensions and investment returns, for example -- allow corporations to reduce the pool of taxable profits. Indeed, aMarch 2016 reportby the U.S. Government Accountability Office found that in each year from 2006 to 2012, at least two-thirds of all active corporations had no federal income tax liability, although larger corporations were more likely to owe tax. And aMay 2016 paperby Reed College economics professor Kimberly Clausing found U.S. multinational firms have used tax planning to generate effective tax rates that are far lower than the statutory rate, and often in the single digits. Our rating Trump said Americas federal business tax rate is the highest in the world. The top corporate tax in the United States is 35 percent, highest among the worlds industrialized nations. But five smaller nations have the same rate and two smaller ones, United Arab Emirates and Puerto Rico, have rates above 35 percent. Also, the 35 percent U.S. rate is only the starting point, given that corporations can use exemptions and deductions to effectively reduce that rate and pay lower taxes. For a statement that is accurate but needs clarification, our rating is Mostly True.

True

Duringa speechin which he warmed up to U.S. House SpeakerPaul Ryan, gave a shout-out toVince Lombardiand even name-droppedKanye West, president-electDonald Trumpalso reaffirmed his promise to cut taxes.Trump appeared Dec. 13, 2016 with vice president-electMike Penceand a host of Badger State Republicans, including Ryan, at the Wisconsin State Fair Park Exposition Center. This stop on his multi-state thank-you tour was mostly a campaign-style rally, but there was some policy, too.Midway into his remarks,Trump said:Were going to undertake one of the great tax reforms and simplifications in American history. This includes a massive tax cut for themiddle-classand middle-class families from Wisconsin, too.Were also going to lower ourbusiness tax rateso that new companies will come to our shores and hire workers in cities like right here. Is that OK? Thats what we want. Were going to bring our rates down from 35 percent, were going to try to get it down to 15 percent. So, right now -- and by the way the jobs will pour in -- so, right now, were the highest-taxed nation in the world. And when we finish, well be one of the lower taxed, one of the lower.Whether the president-elect keeps his promises on taxes will be something to be determined by PolitiFact Nationals Trump-O-Meter, whichwill be launchedin 2017.The corporate income tax rates in the United States range from15 to 35 percent. And that 35 percent top rate -- at least as a statutory rate (more on that below) -- is relatively high.The Paris-based Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development publishesthe top corporate tax ratesfor the35 countriesthat belong to its organization, which includes most advanced, industrialized nations.Sometimes references are made to a combined corporate tax rate, which includes federal and state corporate taxes; the U.S. combined rate is38.9 percent. But Trump was referring to the 35 percent federal rate, the one he vows to reduce.To back Trumps statement, his campaign cited aForbes articlethat noted the United States has the highest corporate rate among industrialized nations. But Trump didnt limit his statement to industrialized nations.The accounting firm PwC tracks the top federal corporate tax rates for155 countries.That listshows five other countries that also have a top rate of 35 percent: Argentina, Chad, Congo, Malta and Zambia.Indeed, aMarch 2016 reportby the U.S. Government Accountability Office found that in each year from 2006 to 2012, at least two-thirds of all active corporations had no federal income tax liability, although larger corporations were more likely to owe tax.And aMay 2016 paperby Reed College economics professor Kimberly Clausing found U.S. multinational firms have used tax planning to generate effective tax rates that are far lower than the statutory rate, and often in the single digits.

FMD_train_1121

Organ Trail

07/13/2015

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

False

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

FMD_train_695

Has Target Discontinued Its 'Shop with a Cop' Program?

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_1621

Did Trump Watch 'The Gorilla Channel' in the White House?

01/05/2018

Michael Wolff's bombshell bookFire and Fury: Inside the Trump White Houseis full of salacious stories from President Donald Trump's first year in office. As media outlets published excerpts from the book in early January 2018, Twitter user PixelatedBoat took advantage of the frenzy to share a fake passage in which White House aides purportedly confessed that they had created a "Gorilla Channel" in order to placate a furious Trump: book share (@pixelatedboat/Twitter) This fake excerpt ended up getting mixed in with real excerpts from the book, effectively fooling some readers into believing (in not such an unlikely turn of events, given how improbable much of 2016 and 2017 were) that the White House had actually created a "Gorilla Channel" to entertain the President of the United States. Twitter user @PixelatedBoat is best known for creating the internet phrase"Milkshake Duck," which refers to a beloved entity that the Internet quickly turns on and devours after damaging information about it is revealed; they frequently post humorous and obviously satirically content on their feed. After the Gorilla Channel joke was mistaken for a genuine excerpt, they changed their handle to "the gorilla channel thing is a joke" and posted a message expressing remorse: @PixelatedBoat phrase Milkshake Duck tfw you parody a guy making up shit about Trump but people believe it so you become part of the problem PixelatedBoat's "Gorilla Channel" joke is reminiscent of the fake transcripts between President Bill Clinton and Prime Minister Tony Blair that were created by comedian Michael Spicer. In case you were curious, Bill Clinton never said that he punchesslabs of ham to work through his frustrations. punches

False

Michael Wolff's bombshell bookFire and Fury: Inside the Trump White Houseis full of salacious stories from President Donald Trump's first year in office. As media outlets published excerpts from the book in early January 2018, Twitter user PixelatedBoat took advantage of the frenzy to share a fake passage in which White House aides purportedly confessed that they had created a "Gorilla Channel" in order to placate a furious Trump:Twitter user @PixelatedBoat is best known for creating the internet phrase"Milkshake Duck," which refers to a beloved entity that the Internet quickly turns on and devours after damaging information about it is revealed; they frequently post humorous and obviously satirically content on their feed. After the Gorilla Channel joke was mistaken for a genuine excerpt, they changed their handle to "the gorilla channel thing is a joke" and posted a message expressing remorse:PixelatedBoat's "Gorilla Channel" joke is reminiscent of the fake transcripts between President Bill Clinton and Prime Minister Tony Blair that were created by comedian Michael Spicer. In case you were curious, Bill Clinton never said that he punchesslabs of ham to work through his frustrations.

FMD_train_1390

Where's the Outrage - Alisa Wilson

04/30/2009

Claim: Letter to the Wall Steet Journal responds to a "Where's the Outrage?" editorial. CORRECTLY ATTRIBUTED Example: [Collected via e-mail, April 2009] This letter was sent to the Wall Street Journal on August 8, 2008 by Alisa Wilson, Ph.D. Of Beverly Hills, CA, in response to the Wall Street Journal article titled "Where's The Outrage?" that appeared July 31, 2008. Really. I can tell you where the outrage is. The outrage is here, in this middle-aged, well-educated, upper-middle class woman. The outrage is here, but I have no representation, no voice. The outrage is here, but no one is listening for who am I? I am not a billionaire like George Soros that can fund an entire political movement. I am not a celebrity like Barbra Streisand that can garner the attention of the press to promote political candidates. I am not a film maker like Michael Moore or Al Gore that can deliver misleading movies to the public. The outrage is here, but unlike those with money or power, I don't know how to reach those who feel similarly in order to effect change. Why am I outraged? I am outraged that my country, the United States of America, is in a state of moral and ethical decline. There is no right or wrong anymore, just what's fair. Is it fair that millions of Americans who overreached and borrowed more than they could afford are now being bailed out by the government and lending institutions to stave off foreclosure? Why shouldn't these people be made to pay the consequences for their poor judgment? When my husband and I purchased our home, we were careful to purchase only what we could afford. Believe me, there are much larger, much nicer homes that I would have loved to have purchased. But, taking responsibility for my behavior and my life, I went with the house that we could afford, not the house that we could not afford. The notion of personal responsibility has all but died in our country. I am outraged, that the country that welcomed my mother as an immigrant from Hitler's Nazi Germany and required that she and her family learn English now allows itself to be overrun with illegal immigrants and worse, caters to those illegal immigrants. I am outraged that my hard-earned taxes help support those here illegally. That the Los Angeles Public School District is in such disarray that I felt it incumbent to send my child to private school, that every time I go to the ATM, I see "do you want to continue in English or Spanish?", that every time I call the bank, the phone company, or similar business, I hear "press 1 for English or press 2 for Spanish". WHY? This is America, our common language is English and attempts to promote a bi- or multi-lingual society are sure to fail and to marginalize those who cannot communicate in English. I am outraged at our country's weakness in the face of new threats on American traditions from Muslims. Just this week, Tyson's Food negotiated with its union to permit Muslims to have Eid-al-Fitr as a holiday instead of Labor Day. What am I missing? Yes, there is a large Somali Muslim population working at the Tyson's plant in Tennessee. Tennessee, last I checked, is still part of the United States. If Muslims want to live and work here they should be required to live and work by our American Laws and not impose their will on our long history. In the same week, Random House announced that they had indefinitely delayed the publication of The Jewel of Medina, by Sherry Jones, a book about the life of Mohammed's wife, Aisha due to fear of retribution and violence by Muslims. When did we become a nation ruled by fear of what other immigrant groups want? It makes me so sad to see large corporations cave rather than stand proudly on the principles that built this country. I am outraged because appeasement has never worked as a political policy, yet appeasing Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is exactly what we are trying to do. An excellent article, also published recently in the Wall Street Journal, went through over 20 years of history and why talking with Iran has been and will continue to be ineffective. Yet talk, with a madman no less, we continue to do. Have we so lost our moral compass and its ability to detect evil that we will not go in and destroy Iran 's nuclear program? Would we rather wait for another Holocaust for the Jews one which they would be unlikely to survive? When does it end? As if the battle for good and evil isn't enough, now come the Environmentalists who are so afraid of global warming that they want to put a Bag tax on grocery bags in California; to eliminate Mylar balloons; to establish something as insidious as the recycle police in San Francisco. I do my share for the environment: I recycle, I use water wisely, I installed an energy efficient air conditioning unit. But when and where does the lunacy stop? Ahmadinejad wants to wipe Israel off the map, the California economy is being overrun by illegal immigrants, and the United States of America no longer knows right from wrong, good from evil.. So what does California do? Tax grocery bags. So, America , although I can tell you where the outrage is, this one middle-aged, well-educated, upper middle class woman is powerless to do anything about it. I don't even feel like my vote counts because I am so outnumbered by those who disagree with me. Alisa Wilson, Ph.D.Beverly Hills, California Origins: On 31 July 2008, the Wall Street Journal published an editorial by Arthur C. Brooks, a professor at Syracuse University's Maxwell School of Public Affairs, entitled "Where's the Outrage? Really." The gist of Mr. Brooks' commentary was to note that"virtually every group in the [U.S.] population [was] less angry" in 2008 than in 1996 with the exception of those who identify themselves as "very liberal," and to question why "folks outside their ranks (including moderate liberals) are failing so miserably to muster up much rage in the current environment." editorial In response to Mr. Brooks' opinion piece, Beverly Hills, California, resident Dr. Alisa Wilson penned the above-quoted letter, which was submitted to (but not published by) the Wall Street Journal. As Dr. Wilson told us: a) I did indeed write that letter in August 2008. Please note, however, that although I submitted the letter to the Wall Street Journal, the Wall Street Journal did not publish my letter. b) The thoughts and sentiments in that article are my own, but apparently have resonated with many people. c) I have seen some people in the "blog-o-sphere" question whether I am a real person. Yes, indeed, I exist. Last updated: 19 May 2009

True

Origins: On 31 July 2008, the Wall Street Journal published an editorial by Arthur C. Brooks, a professor at Syracuse University's Maxwell School of Public Affairs, entitled "Where's the Outrage? Really." The gist of Mr. Brooks' commentary was to note that"virtually every group in the [U.S.] population [was] less angry" in 2008 than in 1996 with the exception of those who identify themselves as "very liberal," and to question why "folks outside their ranks (including moderate liberals) are failing so miserably to muster up much rage in the current environment."

FMD_train_791

Says About 7 in 10 of Oregons inmates are in prison for violent crimes and serious sex offenses.

08/03/2012

Frankly, PolitiFact Oregon was surprised to spota press release fora new radio campaign ad designed to set the record straight on Oregons prisons laws. We didnt know there was a need. Was there another ballot measure pending? Was somebody spreading falsehoods about prison laws? Didnt Oregonians vote on sentencing back in 2008? What was going on?Steve Doell is a longtime advocate of crime victims and president ofCrime Victims United, which helped get Measure 11 passed in 1994. This ad campaign is his latest venture, a nonprofit that he says is separate from Crime Victims and one that he said is aimed at giving people the facts about prison statistics.He wants to remind voters through the Truth in Sentencing Project that fewer than one in four convicted felons is sent to prison. Less than one-half of one-percent are in prison for drug possession. And this:About 7 in 10 of Oregons inmates are in prison for violent crimes and serious sex offenses including felony assault, armed robbery, kidnapping, manslaughter, child molestation, rape, attempted murder, and murder, he writes in the press release.In the accompanying radio ad, he says two-thirds of prisoners are violent criminals. In short, Oregons system works, he said. Doell got his numbers from theOregon Criminal Justice Commission, which administers Oregon's felony sentencing guidelines and serves as a statistical and data clearinghouse. Off we went, with a detour stop at the Department of Corrections.According to theagencys July 2012 inmate population profile, 9,878 of the 14,186 people in prison were there because of crimes against a person. That is 70 percent, or more than two-thirds. Hold on to the idea of a person crime.The same population profile also tells us that nearly 9,300 of those inmates are in prison for crimes one could describe as violent: Assault, homicide, rape, kidnapping, robbery, sodomy and sex abuse. Thats about 65 percent, which is about two-thirds.We caught up with Craig Prins, the criminal justice commissions executive director, who confirms that 70 percent of inmates have committed a crime against a person -- but he wanted to make sure we understand that that doesnt mean they are all necessarily violent criminals, on par with murderers and child molesters.For example, a drunken driver who doesnt kill anyone is categorized as committing a crime against a person, even though no one was hurt. A drunken driver who hits and kills another person has definitely committed a crime against a person, even though there was no intent to commit homicide. For Prins there is a distinction. For Doell, there isnt. We offer the information for readers to assess.We also have another point that readers may want to keep in mind: More non-violent offenders are being admitted into prison -- which means that the ratio of violent offenders may drop in the future.Thats because in 2008, Oregon voters approved Ballot Measure 57, which increased sentences for drug and property offenders. It was a legislative proposal drafted in response to a more punishing measure sponsored by Doell and others. Property and drug offenders sentenced under Measure 57 are expected to add 1,000 beds to the prison system over 10 years with overall bed growth closer to 2,000.Prins and others onGov. John Kitzhabers Commission on Public Safety have been tasked with finding ways to improve public safety and save money. The commission is to come up with ideas for the 2013 Legislature. And while Doell insists the Truth in Sentencing Project is not in response to an outside force, its clear this governor wants to make changes in state prisons.A June report by the Pew Center on the States, which is providing technical help to Oregon to review numbers and tease out prison growth drivers, states thatOregon in 2011 admitted more low-risk offenders than in 2000. Also, the share ofproperty, drug and other offenders increased from 53 percent of new admits in 2000 to 59 percent in 2011. (p.20) In other words, trends are changing and they may change more with the approval of Measure 57, which went into effect in January.Doell says the state doesnt have the greatest record on correctly projecting bed additions. He also doesnt think Measure 57 will change the ratio that much. I dont think theres going to be a significant change, I think it could be a percentage point or points here and there, he said.We think readers should be mindful that there is a forecast and new sentencing guidelines that may change the ratio in the future, but we dont know for sure by how much, if at all. The state would not hazard a projection other than the overall increase of 2,000 beds, of which at least 1,000 come from Measure 57.As for a ruling? It is factually correct that as of now, 70 percent of inmates are in prison for crimes against a person, and that 65 percent are in there for crimes we can see are violent in nature. That is about seven in 10 or two-thirds. We rate the statement True.

True

Frankly, PolitiFact Oregon was surprised to spota press release fora new radio campaign ad designed to set the record straight on Oregons prisons laws. We didnt know there was a need. Was there another ballot measure pending? Was somebody spreading falsehoods about prison laws? Didnt Oregonians vote on sentencing back in 2008? What was going on?Steve Doell is a longtime advocate of crime victims and president ofCrime Victims United, which helped get Measure 11 passed in 1994. This ad campaign is his latest venture, a nonprofit that he says is separate from Crime Victims and one that he said is aimed at giving people the facts about prison statistics.He wants to remind voters through the Truth in Sentencing Project that fewer than one in four convicted felons is sent to prison. Less than one-half of one-percent are in prison for drug possession. And this:About 7 in 10 of Oregons inmates are in prison for violent crimes and serious sex offenses including felony assault, armed robbery, kidnapping, manslaughter, child molestation, rape, attempted murder, and murder, he writes in the press release.In the accompanying radio ad, he says two-thirds of prisoners are violent criminals. In short, Oregons system works, he said. Doell got his numbers from theOregon Criminal Justice Commission, which administers Oregon's felony sentencing guidelines and serves as a statistical and data clearinghouse. Off we went, with a detour stop at the Department of Corrections.According to theagencys July 2012 inmate population profile, 9,878 of the 14,186 people in prison were there because of crimes against a person. That is 70 percent, or more than two-thirds. Hold on to the idea of a person crime.The same population profile also tells us that nearly 9,300 of those inmates are in prison for crimes one could describe as violent: Assault, homicide, rape, kidnapping, robbery, sodomy and sex abuse. Thats about 65 percent, which is about two-thirds.We caught up with Craig Prins, the criminal justice commissions executive director, who confirms that 70 percent of inmates have committed a crime against a person -- but he wanted to make sure we understand that that doesnt mean they are all necessarily violent criminals, on par with murderers and child molesters.For example, a drunken driver who doesnt kill anyone is categorized as committing a crime against a person, even though no one was hurt. A drunken driver who hits and kills another person has definitely committed a crime against a person, even though there was no intent to commit homicide. For Prins there is a distinction. For Doell, there isnt. We offer the information for readers to assess.We also have another point that readers may want to keep in mind: More non-violent offenders are being admitted into prison -- which means that the ratio of violent offenders may drop in the future.Thats because in 2008, Oregon voters approved Ballot Measure 57, which increased sentences for drug and property offenders. It was a legislative proposal drafted in response to a more punishing measure sponsored by Doell and others. Property and drug offenders sentenced under Measure 57 are expected to add 1,000 beds to the prison system over 10 years with overall bed growth closer to 2,000.Prins and others onGov. John Kitzhabers Commission on Public Safety have been tasked with finding ways to improve public safety and save money. The commission is to come up with ideas for the 2013 Legislature. And while Doell insists the Truth in Sentencing Project is not in response to an outside force, its clear this governor wants to make changes in state prisons.A June report by the Pew Center on the States, which is providing technical help to Oregon to review numbers and tease out prison growth drivers, states thatOregon in 2011 admitted more low-risk offenders than in 2000. Also, the share ofproperty, drug and other offenders increased from 53 percent of new admits in 2000 to 59 percent in 2011. (p.20) In other words, trends are changing and they may change more with the approval of Measure 57, which went into effect in January.Doell says the state doesnt have the greatest record on correctly projecting bed additions. He also doesnt think Measure 57 will change the ratio that much. I dont think theres going to be a significant change, I think it could be a percentage point or points here and there, he said.We think readers should be mindful that there is a forecast and new sentencing guidelines that may change the ratio in the future, but we dont know for sure by how much, if at all. The state would not hazard a projection other than the overall increase of 2,000 beds, of which at least 1,000 come from Measure 57.As for a ruling? It is factually correct that as of now, 70 percent of inmates are in prison for crimes against a person, and that 65 percent are in there for crimes we can see are violent in nature. That is about seven in 10 or two-thirds. We rate the statement True.

FMD_train_890

Baseball's Jim Gentile Received $5K 'Bonus' – 50 Years Late

05/01/2021

How would you feel if you had qualified for a performance bonus at your job, but nobody recognized you'd met your goal until half a century later? Just ask former baseball pro Jim Gentile. Jim Gentile was a slugging first baseman of the 1950s who had the misfortune of being signed to the Dodgers organization at a time when perennial all-star Gil Hodges had a lock on the first base position. Gentile spent several years in the Dodgers' minor league system with little opportunity to play for the big club until he was finally traded to the Baltimore Orioles after the 1959 season. Jim Gentile Gil Hodges Gentile had a few solid seasons as a full-time player in Baltimore, including a monster year in 1961 when he hit .302 with 46 home runs and 141 RBI. Unfortunately for Gentile, a few other players had monster years in 1961 as well, so he didn't lead the league in any offensive category: He was fifth in batting average (far behind Norm Cash's impressive .361), finished third in the home run race behind the Yankees' Roger Maris and Mickey Mantle (the former of whom broke Babe Ruth's single-season home run record that year with 61), and was one RBI shy of Maris' league-leading total of 142. Brooklyn Dodger Gil Hodges poses for a portrait after clubbing four home runs in a game in 1950. But ... thirty-four years later, in 1995, a researcher discovered that Maris had erroneously been credited with an extra RBI, which meant that Gentile had actually tied for the American League lead in that category in 1961: researcher discovered Ron Rakowski, a member of the Society for American Baseball Research, maintains that Maris mistakenly was credited with an extra RBI July 5 against the Cleveland Indians at Yankee Stadium. Therefore, Rakowski says, Gentile and Maris should be co-leaders at 141. In the third inning, with Tony Kubek on first, Maris singled to right. Third baseman Bubba Phillips took the throw from Willie Kirkland, then threw to first trying to catch Maris rounding the base. Phillips' throw went into the seats, allowing Kubek to score. Maris later hit a bases-empty homer, but the official scorer reported two RBIs for him, one on Phillips' error that enabled Kubek to score. Reached for comment, Gentile recognized that Major League Baseball doesn't necessarily adjust its record books when statistical discrepancies are found many years after the fact. And, he wryly noted, he might have received an extra $5,000 in pay if the correct RBI totals had been reported back in 1961: "After 34 years, no one is likely to change it," said Gentile, who lives in Edmond, Okla., and helps conduct the Orioles Fantasy Camp as well as baseball camps for youngsters in Oklahoma. "Well, maybe it's worth an asterisk." "I wish I'd known that then," said Gentile, whose 141 are an Orioles record. "The next winter, [general manager] Lee MacPhail said if I had led the league in RBIs, that alone would have been worth an extra $5,000." Laughing, Gentile added, "Maybe I should write the Orioles a letter." But ... another fifteen years later, in 2010, the corrected statistic was finally recognized, and Gentile became the official American League co-leader in RBI for 1961. corrected statistic was finally recognized Gentile received another boost in August 2010, when -- nearly fifty years late -- the Orioles came through and presented him with a check for $5,000 in recognition of his newfound status: presented him with a check for $5,000 It took almost 50 years, and there was no interest added. But a promise is a promise, and Jim Gentile finally got his $5,000 bonus from the Baltimore Orioles. The Orioles honored Gentile, now 76, for his achievement before their game at Camden Yards on [Aug. 6]. Andy MacPhail, the Orioles president of baseball operations whose father made that long-ago promise, presented him with a $5,000 check. It should be noted that no "promise" had actually been made to Gentile back in 1961, nor did his contract for that year include any clause calling for payment of a $5,000 bonus if he led the league in RBI. According to Gentile, the Orioles' general manager merely quipped to him during the next year's salary negotiations that Gentile's being the league leader in the RBI category might have prompted the club to offer him a somewhat higher salary for 1962. Nonetheless, Gentile didn't appear to have fared too badly in the pay department. According to a Feb. 14, 1962, report in The Sporting News, Gentile's 1962 salary of $30,000 was double his 1961 figure. Brown, Doug. "Diamond Jim Hit $$ Jackpot with New Oriole Pact." The Sporting News. 14 February 1962. Brown, Doug. '61 RBI Race Resumes: Researcher Says O's Gentile Tied Maris at 141." The Baltimore Sun. 26 July 1995. Kepner, Tyler. "For Jim Gentile, A Long-Awaited Bonus." The New York Times. 6 August 2010.

True

Jim Gentile was a slugging first baseman of the 1950s who had the misfortune of being signed to the Dodgers organization at a time when perennial all-star Gil Hodges had a lock on the first base position. Gentile spent several years in the Dodgers' minor league system with little opportunity to play for the big club until he was finally traded to the Baltimore Orioles after the 1959 season. Brooklyn Dodger Gil Hodges poses for a portrait after clubbing four home runs in a game in 1950.But ... thirty-four years later, in 1995, a researcher discovered that Maris had erroneously been credited with an extra RBI, which meant that Gentile had actually tied for the American League lead in that category in 1961:But ... another fifteen years later, in 2010, the corrected statistic was finally recognized, and Gentile became the official American League co-leader in RBI for 1961.Gentile received another boost in August 2010, when -- nearly fifty years late -- the Orioles came through and presented him with a check for $5,000 in recognition of his newfound status:

FMD_train_868

Did a Holocaust Museum Display a Poster Listing 'Early Warning Signs of Fascism'?

03/01/2017

In January 2017, a photograph appeared to show a poster on display at the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, D.C., listing off early warning signs of looming fascism: In the US Holocaust Museum.I'm shook. pic.twitter.com/EeuHEXWusE pic.twitter.com/EeuHEXWusE Sarah Rose (@RaRaVibes) January 30, 2017 January 30, 2017 The picture wasshared with criticism of President Donald Trump, as people claimed that his administration had alreadychecked off several of the boxes on the list: shared checked The posteris real, in the sense that it exists in a physical form; however, it was not created by the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, nor was it on display at one of the museum's exhibits. You can see a price tag in the bottom right corner of the viral image. Sarah Rose, who first shared the photograph on social media, confirmed to us that she took thepicture in the museum's gift shop. We reached out to the USHHM to confirm that it sold a poster showing "early warning signs of fascism," and they told us that themuseum no longer carries theposter. The list was originally created by Laurence Britt in 2003, for an article published by Free Inquiry magazine (a publication for secular humanist commentary and analysis). While subsequent postings of thelist often attribute it to "Dr. Laurence Britt," the author saidthat he was not actually a doctor (nor did he claim to be). Britt himself said that he could be more accuratelydescribed as an amateur historian: Laurence Britt said I've read this thread with interest. For your information I never made a claim that I was a "Dr." Someone on the internet made that ASSUMPTION when they passed on the artice. I am a retired bsunessman with a life long interst in history and current events. I have a personal book collection on these subjects of over 3000 volumes. I've contributed chapters to three books, written another, and am working on a second. I've written aproximately 25 magazine and newespaper articles on political and econmic affairs. I spent about 200 hours researching the fascism article building on a lifetime interst in the subject. My novel, "June , 2004" was written in 1997 and published in 1998. It was a fictional treatment of a future of fascism in America, which has turned out quite predictive of actual events since it was published.Regards, Larry Britt Britt created this list during George W. Bush's tenure as president of the United States. While he did not actually nameBush, he wrotein theoriginal articlethat some of the early warning signs had alreadymanifested in the United States: Does any of this ring alarm bells? Of course not. After all, this is America, officially a democracy with the rule of law, a constitution, a free press, honest elections, and a well-informed public constantly being put on guard against evils. Historical comparisons like these are just exercises in verbal gymnastics. Maybe, maybe not. While the text in the image is difficult to read, another version of theposter sold bySyracuse Cultural Workers carries the same (more legible) disclaimer: Syracuse Cultural Workers Laurence W. Britt wrote about the common signs of fascism in April 2003, after researching seven fascists regimes. Those were Adolf Hitler's Nazi Germany, Benito Mussolini's Italy, Francisco Franco's Spain, Antontio de Oliveira Salazar's Portual, George Papadopoulos's Greece, August Pinochet's Chile, Mohamed Suharto's Indonesia. These signs resonate with the political and economic direction of the United states under Bush/Cheney. Get involved in reversing this anti-democratic direction while you still can! While it is true that this poster exists, it was not displayedtheUnited States Holocaust Memorial Museum, and has since been removed from its gift shop. Riese, Monica. "Holocaust Museum Poster on 'Warning Signs of Fascism' Goes Viral." The Daily Dot. 30 January 2017. Britt, Lawrence. "Fascism Anyone?" Free Inquiry. 31 March 2003. The Right Stuff. "14 Warning Signs of Nothing in Particular." 22 January 2014.

NEI

In the US Holocaust Museum.I'm shook. pic.twitter.com/EeuHEXWusE Sarah Rose (@RaRaVibes) January 30, 2017The picture wasshared with criticism of President Donald Trump, as people claimed that his administration had alreadychecked off several of the boxes on the list:The posteris real, in the sense that it exists in a physical form; however, it was not created by the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, nor was it on display at one of the museum's exhibits.The list was originally created by Laurence Britt in 2003, for an article published by Free Inquiry magazine (a publication for secular humanist commentary and analysis). While subsequent postings of thelist often attribute it to "Dr. Laurence Britt," the author saidthat he was not actually a doctor (nor did he claim to be). Britt himself said that he could be more accuratelydescribed as an amateur historian:While the text in the image is difficult to read, another version of theposter sold bySyracuse Cultural Workers carries the same (more legible) disclaimer:

FMD_train_1650

Austin is number one in Texas in startups, venture capital and patents.

05/13/2016

Austins typically soft-spoken mayor recently popped a big-as-Texas boast. Theres a reason Austin is number one in Texas in startups and venture capital and patents, Steve Adler said. Adler, speaking outside City Hall, went on: Theres a reason that tech and transportation companies come to Austin to roll out their new initiatives. And thats because Austin is where good ideas become real. Claiming that Austin is anti-innovation has no basis in fact. Hear hear! Still, we wondered about the rankings Adler declared whilerevealing his plansto vote against a ballot proposition, later rejected by voters, affecting background checks of drivers for ride-hailing services. Startups Adler's office didn't immediately offer his backup. Meantime, our online search for information on startups led us to a June 2015 report from the Kansas City-based Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation stating that in the last year, the Austin metropolitan area ranked No. 1 nationally for the areas pace launching startups, which the foundation defined as firms less than one-year old employing at least one person besides the owner. Asked what last year means in the report, foundation researcher E.J. Reedy advised by phone the conclusion tied to data from 2012 and 2014. According to the foundation,which saysit focuses on improving lives through education and entrepreneurship, the nations top 10 metropolitan areas for startup activity among the 40 most-populous metropolitan areas were:Austin;Miami, Fla.;San Jose, Calif.;Los Angeles;Denver;San Francisco;New York;Houston;San Diego; andSan Antonio. Per Adlers Texas point, the Austin area had 180.8 startups per 100,000 residents, the foundation says, outpacing theDallas-Fort Worth-Arlington area(142.5 startups per 100,000 residents),Houston-Sugar Land-Baytown(136.9 startups per 100,000 residents) and the San Antonio-New Braunfels area (111.9 startups per 100,000 residents). By email, foundation spokeswoman Lacey Graverson told us the presented concentrations drew on the U.S. Census BureausBusiness Dynamics Statisticsto tally startups matched with population data from the Bureau of Economic Analysis. Reedy agreed by phone that among the big Texas cities, the Austin area had the greatest concentration of startups. But generally, Reedy indicated, counts of startups can vary, partly because theres no single accepted definition of startups, which inherently come and go at a rapid pace. The government has official measures, Reedy added, but each one captures an aspect -- for instance new employer businesses or newly self-employed individuals. Also, Reedy said, observers differ over what merits counting. Some stress large firms that employ many, he said, others urge a fix on technology firms and others say that any count should recognize small businesses (including one-person endeavors) that grow by an employee or two a year. A foundation chart presenting Austins startup density since the late 1970s indicates the area has had peppier times--including in 2008 (201.7 startups per 100,000 residents), 2006 (214.9), 1999 (217.9) and, the charts high point, 1981 (499.5), which was up a huge measure from 1980 (31.4): SOURCE:Web page,Startup Activity, Austin Area, 2015,Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation, June 4, 2015 (viewed May 5, 2016) Venture capital Next, we turned to exploring Austins ranking for venture capital, which describes money invested in a business or project at considerable risk. A January 2016Austin American-Statesmannews story, citing a survey by PricewaterhouseCoopers and the National Venture Capital Association, said Austin entities in 2015 were by far the states largest recipients of venture capital, with $740 million; Dallas firms placed second, fielding $214.4 million, ahead of Houston outfits, at $160 million. The Austin-connected investments added up to the largest annual dollar figure for Austin since 2001, the newspaper said, when 127 companies received $1.14 billion. By email, mayoral spokesman Jason Stanford pointed out another account of the survey results; a Silicon Hills Newsstorysaid the 99 Austin deals in 2015, mostly to develop software, were down from 114 in 2014. Also, the story said, Austins number one deal for the latest year was Civitas Learning, attracting $60 million in venture capital, followed by Aeglea Biotherapeautics with $44 million, Mirna Therapeutics with $41.8 million and SpareFoot with $30 million, the story said. Nationally in 2015, theStatesmanstory said, venture capital investments rose to $58.8 billion, up 22 percent from the year before. Silicon Valley, as usual, took in the most money, with the San Jose area receiving $27.3 billion in 1,333 deals, the story said. Patents Stanford said Adler made his claim about Austin leading Texas in patents based on a May 2010Forbes.com articleby Andy Greenberg stating that Austin and neighboring Round Rock had produced an impressive average 1.7 patents for every thousand residents over the last 12 months, the second-most per-capita of any metro area in the country, he wrote. Greenberg elaborated: Austins culture of innovation may be boosted by well-known tech credentials like the South by Southwest (SXSW) Web startup and music festival held annually in March, as well as the nearby headquarters of hardware industry giants Dell and Freescale Semiconductor. But they also have two secret weapons in the innovation race: the University of Texass Cockrell School of Engineering, and IBMs Austin research lab. IBM produces more patents than any other company in the world, and for the last seven years Austin has produced more of those patents than any other IBM office. In total the lab produced 880 patents in 2009. Thats just 30 less than all of Cisco, and 300 more than Sun Microsystems, Boeing, AT&T or Toyota. We were unable to confirm or duplicate Greenbergs Austin conclusion. To get our own sense of how Texas cities stand in patents originated, we reached out to the Dallas-basedregional officeof the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. By email, spokesman Ryan Elliott pointed outpatent counts posted by the officeindicating that in 2012-13 and from 2000 through 2013, the Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington area generated more patents than the Austin-Round Rock-San Marcos area. However, the regions raw counts were close, according to the agency, while the Austin area was responsible for more patents than any other Texas area from 2009, 2010 and 2011 through 2013, by our reckoning. Snapshot: The Austin area was responsible for 12,387 patents from 2009 through 2013, according to the office, with the Dallas area accounting for 11,546 patents -- which we took to mean that the less populous Austin area ran well ahead of the Dallas area in patents per 1,000 residents. Our search for relevant analyses led to a2013 reportby the Brookings Institution finding that from 1980 to 2012, most U.S. patents--63 percent--had been developed by people living in just 20 metro areas home to 34 percent of the U.S. population. Reflecting the advantages of large metropolitan economies, the report said, 92 percent of U.S. patents are concentrated in just 100 metro areas, with 59 percent of the population. For patents applied for from 2007 to 2011, the metro areas with the highest number per capita are San Jose; Burlington, VT; Rochester, MN; Corvallis, OR; and Boulder, CO. The authors wrote: From 1980 to 2011, a few large metros notably changed their share of U.S patents. At the top, San Jose moved up from ninth to first, and San Francisco moved from seventh to fourth, moving ahead of Chicago, Philadelphia, Detroit, and Boston. Seattle and San Diego moved up 15 and nine places, respectively, to become seventh and eighth. Meanwhile, Austin and Raleigh moved up 41 and 55 places, respectively, to become 11th and 20th. Cleveland fell 10 slots from 13th to 23rd, while Philadelphia fell from fourth to 13th. Not only did Austin surge in total patents, it lately achieved a high ranking in per-capita patents. From 2007 through 2011, a chart in the report indicates, the Austin metro area had 1,503 patents per million residents, tops in Texas and placing the area fourth nationally among high-patent areas behind San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, California (5,066 patents per million residents); Poughkeepsie-Newburgh-Middletown, New York (1,829); and San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont (1,638). In Texas, the Houston-Sugar Land-Baytown metro area had 379 patents per million residents and the Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington area had 310 per million, according to Brookings. Next, we heard back from Mark Muro of Brookings who shared a chart that he said was based on a different data source -- global PCT patents,meaningthe international patent system rather than the U.S. PTO. By that metric, the chart suggests that from 2008 through 2012, the Houston metropolitan area generated more cutting-edge technology patents per 1,000 residents (1,598) than the Austin area (1,294). An excerpt: SOURCE:Chart ranking 100 U.S. Core Based Statistical Areas in tech patents invented per 1,000 population, 2008-2012 (received by email from Mark Muro, senior fellow and policy director, Metropolitan Policy Program, Brookings, May 5, 2016) Regardless of those results, Muro and a Brookings colleague, Nick Marchio, suggested we hew to the U.S. patent office counts as the best general way of assessing the mayors claim. Marchio even volunteered toadjust the patent offices raw counts for the population of each metropolitan area. Result: In 2013, the latest year of tabulated patents, the Austin area ranked No. 11 nationally with 1.55 patents per 1,000 residents, far outpacing the No. 2 Texas metro, Dallas, at 51st with 0.44 patents per 1,000 residents. Also, from 2009 through 2013, the Austin area ranked 10th nationally with 6.95 patents per 1,000 residents, far ahead of the No. 2 Texas metro, in this case the Houston area, which landed 52nd nationally with 1.81 patents per 1,000 residents. Our ruling Adler said: Austin is number one in Texas in startups, venture capital and patents. Houston has been running ahead in international technology patents, it looks to us, but Austin lately leads the state in overall patents, startups and venture capital. We rate the claim True. TRUE The statement is accurate and theres nothing significant missing. Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check.

True

Still, we wondered about the rankings Adler declared whilerevealing his plansto vote against a ballot proposition, later rejected by voters, affecting background checks of drivers for ride-hailing services.According to the foundation,which saysit focuses on improving lives through education and entrepreneurship, the nations top 10 metropolitan areas for startup activity among the 40 most-populous metropolitan areas were:Austin;Miami, Fla.;San Jose, Calif.;Los Angeles;Denver;San Francisco;New York;Houston;San Diego; andSan Antonio.Per Adlers Texas point, the Austin area had 180.8 startups per 100,000 residents, the foundation says, outpacing theDallas-Fort Worth-Arlington area(142.5 startups per 100,000 residents),Houston-Sugar Land-Baytown(136.9 startups per 100,000 residents) and the San Antonio-New Braunfels area (111.9 startups per 100,000 residents). By email, foundation spokeswoman Lacey Graverson told us the presented concentrations drew on the U.S. Census BureausBusiness Dynamics Statisticsto tally startups matched with population data from the Bureau of Economic Analysis.SOURCE:Web page,Startup Activity, Austin Area, 2015,Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation, June 4, 2015 (viewed May 5, 2016)Next, we turned to exploring Austins ranking for venture capital, which describes money invested in a business or project at considerable risk. A January 2016Austin American-Statesmannews story, citing a survey by PricewaterhouseCoopers and the National Venture Capital Association, said Austin entities in 2015 were by far the states largest recipients of venture capital, with $740 million; Dallas firms placed second, fielding $214.4 million, ahead of Houston outfits, at $160 million.By email, mayoral spokesman Jason Stanford pointed out another account of the survey results; a Silicon Hills Newsstorysaid the 99 Austin deals in 2015, mostly to develop software, were down from 114 in 2014. Also, the story said, Austins number one deal for the latest year was Civitas Learning, attracting $60 million in venture capital, followed by Aeglea Biotherapeautics with $44 million, Mirna Therapeutics with $41.8 million and SpareFoot with $30 million, the story said.Stanford said Adler made his claim about Austin leading Texas in patents based on a May 2010Forbes.com articleby Andy Greenberg stating that Austin and neighboring Round Rock had produced an impressive average 1.7 patents for every thousand residents over the last 12 months, the second-most per-capita of any metro area in the country, he wrote.To get our own sense of how Texas cities stand in patents originated, we reached out to the Dallas-basedregional officeof the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. By email, spokesman Ryan Elliott pointed outpatent counts posted by the officeindicating that in 2012-13 and from 2000 through 2013, the Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington area generated more patents than the Austin-Round Rock-San Marcos area.Our search for relevant analyses led to a2013 reportby the Brookings Institution finding that from 1980 to 2012, most U.S. patents--63 percent--had been developed by people living in just 20 metro areas home to 34 percent of the U.S. population. Reflecting the advantages of large metropolitan economies, the report said, 92 percent of U.S. patents are concentrated in just 100 metro areas, with 59 percent of the population. For patents applied for from 2007 to 2011, the metro areas with the highest number per capita are San Jose; Burlington, VT; Rochester, MN; Corvallis, OR; and Boulder, CO.Next, we heard back from Mark Muro of Brookings who shared a chart that he said was based on a different data source -- global PCT patents,meaningthe international patent system rather than the U.S. PTO. By that metric, the chart suggests that from 2008 through 2012, the Houston metropolitan area generated more cutting-edge technology patents per 1,000 residents (1,598) than the Austin area (1,294).Marchio even volunteered toadjust the patent offices raw counts for the population of each metropolitan area. Result: In 2013, the latest year of tabulated patents, the Austin area ranked No. 11 nationally with 1.55 patents per 1,000 residents, far outpacing the No. 2 Texas metro, Dallas, at 51st with 0.44 patents per 1,000 residents. Also, from 2009 through 2013, the Austin area ranked 10th nationally with 6.95 patents per 1,000 residents, far ahead of the No. 2 Texas metro, in this case the Houston area, which landed 52nd nationally with 1.81 patents per 1,000 residents.TRUE The statement is accurate and theres nothing significant missing. Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check.

FMD_train_953

Did Amazon Solicit Donations to Help Pay Worker Sick Leave?

03/25/2020

Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And, please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease. fighting Find out Read Submit Become a Founding Member CDC WHO In early March 2020, amid the COVID-19 coronavirus disease outbreak that would later grow into a pandemic, the massive retail and delivery company Amazon launched the Amazon Relief Fund, which among other things, offers grants to contract and seasonal workers so they can receive sick pay if they contract the coronavirus. The $25 million fund established by Amazon sparked an online backlash after a liberal newsletter pointed out that seasonal and contract workers would have to file an application to receive the funds, and that Amazon, a behemoth corporation whose founder and CEO Jeff Bezos is the richest person in the world, solicited public donations for the program. Anger over the idea that a famously profitable corporation was soliciting donations from the public to fund sick leave for some of its workforce during a pandemic was initiated by reporting from Popular Information, described as a "newsletter about politics and power." The letter's founder, Judd Legum, posted this Twitter thread on March 24, 2020:We reached out to Amazon for comment and received the following statement: reporting Twitter thread We are not and have not asked for donations and the Amazon Relief Fund has been funded by Amazon with an initial donation of $25 million. The structure to operate a fund like this, which hundreds of companies do through the same third-party, requires the program to be open to public contributions but we are not soliciting those contributions in any way. Amazon truly did launch a $25 million fund to provide sick leave for contract workers and seasonal employees through a grant program to which those workers must file applications before receiving benefits. Although the wording on the page has since been updated to indicate that donations are not expected, initially the language did indicate that Amazon was seeking or at the very least suggesting donations. An archived version of the page from March 19, 2020, included this statement (shown in the screen capture below): "The Fund relies primarily on individual donations from individuals and support from Amazon.com Services LLC to fund this program."The page has since been updated. The highlighted sentence above was removed and the page now explicitly states that donations from the public are not expected, as follows:We reached out to Legum, who told us via email that he believed Amazon changed the wording on the relief fund page "because the optics were clearly bad and the company is trying to cover up its actions." Legum added that in his view, "Amazon has ample resources to simply pay their contractors while they are out sick during this pandemic." updated archived version updated According to Amazon's announcement, the Amazon Relief Fund will provide their delivery partners and drivers "the ability to apply for grants approximately equal to up to two-weeks of pay if diagnosed with COVID-19 or placed into quarantine by the government or Amazon." announcement Additionally, the statement reads, "this fund will support our employees and contractors around the world who face financial hardships from other qualifying events, such as a natural disaster, federally declared emergency, or unforeseen personal hardship. Applicants can apply and receive a personal grant from the fund ranging from $400 to $5,000 USD per person." The company also announced it is offering unlimited unpaid time off for hourly staff during the month of March. announced Whether or not Amazon actively solicited donations, the original wording on its Amazon Relief Fund page did call for individuals to donate to the fund. Even though the wording has been updated to state explicitly that no donations from the public are expected, a "Donate" button still exists on the page, which could be interpreted as an invitation to do so. We therefore rate this claim Legum, Judd. "Amazon Soliciting Public Donations to Pay Workers' Sick Leave." Popular Information.24 March 2020. Galetti, Beth. "COVID-19 Update: More Ways Amazon Is Supporting Employees and Contractors." DayOne, the Amazon blog.11 March 2020. Palmer, Annie. "Amazon Launches $25 Million Relief Fund for Delivery Drivers and Seasonal Employees Amid Coronavirus Outbreak." CNBC. 11 March 2020. Greene, Jaye. "Amazon Workers Test Positive for Covid-19 at 10 U.S. Warehouses." Washington Post.25 March 2020. [CORRECTION 03/25/20]: A previous version of this article erroneously stated that Amazon was offering "unlimited paid time off" to hourly staff during the month of March; that has been corrected to "unlimited unpaid time off."

True

Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And, please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease. Anger over the idea that a famously profitable corporation was soliciting donations from the public to fund sick leave for some of its workforce during a pandemic was initiated by reporting from Popular Information, described as a "newsletter about politics and power." The letter's founder, Judd Legum, posted this Twitter thread on March 24, 2020:We reached out to Amazon for comment and received the following statement:Although the wording on the page has since been updated to indicate that donations are not expected, initially the language did indicate that Amazon was seeking or at the very least suggesting donations. An archived version of the page from March 19, 2020, included this statement (shown in the screen capture below): "The Fund relies primarily on individual donations from individuals and support from Amazon.com Services LLC to fund this program."The page has since been updated. The highlighted sentence above was removed and the page now explicitly states that donations from the public are not expected, as follows:We reached out to Legum, who told us via email that he believed Amazon changed the wording on the relief fund page "because the optics were clearly bad and the company is trying to cover up its actions." Legum added that in his view, "Amazon has ample resources to simply pay their contractors while they are out sick during this pandemic."According to Amazon's announcement, the Amazon Relief Fund will provide their delivery partners and drivers "the ability to apply for grants approximately equal to up to two-weeks of pay if diagnosed with COVID-19 or placed into quarantine by the government or Amazon."Additionally, the statement reads, "this fund will support our employees and contractors around the world who face financial hardships from other qualifying events, such as a natural disaster, federally declared emergency, or unforeseen personal hardship. Applicants can apply and receive a personal grant from the fund ranging from $400 to $5,000 USD per person." The company also announced it is offering unlimited unpaid time off for hourly staff during the month of March.

FMD_train_1064

Data that has been altered in a dishonest or unethical way.

07/22/2015

FACT CHECK: Is President Obama compiling a "secret race database" comprised of "sensitive personal data"? Claim: President Obama is compiling a secret race database comprising Americans' sensitive personal data. MOSTLY WHAT'S : Extant data collection methods used by agencies such as HUD track demographic patterns, including race and integration trends. WHAT'S /CONJECTURE: The Obama administration is collecting demographic data for a broader racial purpose, the practice is new, and the openly-compiled data comprises a "secret race database." Example: [Collected via e-mail and Twitter, July 2015] According to an article in the New York Post, President Obama is collecting a nefarious "secret race database." How much of this is true, and how much is misleading hype? So who are the racists again? Obama collecting personal data for a secret race database https://t.co/63VmYIXqNE via @nypost https://t.co/63VmYIXqNE @nypost Yes, Nick $earcy! (@yesnicksearcy) July 19, 2015 July 19, 2015 This is movie level horror material yet it's happening. It's real life. https://t.co/LxxvA7EpyE https://t.co/LxxvA7EpyE Anthony Cumia (@AnthonyCumia) July 19, 2015 July 19, 2015 I favor equal opportunity, not govt forcing equal results. This is Affirmative Action on steroids: https://t.co/N3snUnie67 #WakeUpAmerica https://t.co/N3snUnie67 #WakeUpAmerica Senator Dick Black (@SenRichardBlack) July 19, 2015 July 19, 2015 Obama collecting Americans' personal info for a secret race database https://t.co/1VNJqRsqQf This makes my skin crawl @RandPaul https://t.co/1VNJqRsqQf @RandPaul Alexis In NH (@AlexisinNH) July 18, 2015 July 18, 2015 Origins: On 18 July 2015, the New York Post published an article titled "Obama Collecting Personal Data for a Secret Race Database." The article made vague claims that President Obama (or agents of the government working on his behalf, described as "racial bean counters") had been quietly collecting sensitive, personal data about American citizens for purposes of racial justice: Unbeknown to most Americans, Obama's racial bean counters are furiously mining data on their health, home loans, credit cards, places of work, neighborhoods, even how their kids are disciplined in school all to document "inequalities" between minorities and whites. This Orwellian-style stockpile of statistics includes a vast and permanent network of discrimination databases, which Obama already is using to make "disparate impact" cases against: banks that don't make enough prime loans to minorities; schools that suspend too many blacks; cities that don't offer enough Section 8 and other low-income housing for minorities; and employers who turn down African-Americans for jobs due to criminal backgrounds. The paper offered up one example of the purported secret racial database's reach, pertaining to Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) data collection practices: The granddaddy of them all is the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing database, which the Department of Housing and Urban Development rolled out earlier this month to racially balance the nation, ZIP code by ZIP code. It will map every US neighborhood by four racial groups white, Asian, black or African-American, and Hispanic/Latino and publish geospatial data pinpointing racial imbalances. No explanatory links to this nefarious database were provided, but we managed to hack our way into the program to get the full scoop. Actually, we entered "Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing" into Google's search box and immediately found HUD's page explaining the program and its purposes. program So secretive is this database that HUD has made numerous documents available describing its overall progress, including links to the Federal Register [PDF] and its most current Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing policy. (They even tried to bury it by issuing a press release about it.) A portion of that openly published, available for all to view documentation is described by HUD as "[updated data use methods] on affirmatively furthering fair housing (AFFH) [aim] to provide all HUD grantees with clear guidelines and the data that will help them to achieve those goals": PDF current press release HUDs rule clarifies and simplifies existing fair housing obligations for HUD grantees to analyze their fair housing landscape and set locally-determined fair housing priorities and goals through an Assessment of Fair Housing (AFH). To aid communities in this work, HUD will provide open data to grantees and the public on patterns of integration and segregation, racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty, disproportionate housing needs, and disparities in access to opportunity. This improved approach provides a better mechanism for HUD grantees to build fair housing goals into their existing community development and housing planning processes. In addition to providing data and maps, HUD will also provide technical assistance to aid grantees as they adopt this approach. In short, HUD will be using extant data to identify areas in which fair housing laws may not be functionally applied. Similarly, the Federal Register's lengthy (public, easy to find) summary stated: Through this rule, HUD commits to provide states, local governments, public housing agencies (PHAs), the communities they serve, and the general public, to the fullest extent possible, with local and regional data on integrated and segregated living patterns, racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty, the location of certain publicly supported housing, access to opportunity afforded by key community assets, and disproportionate housing needs based on classes protected by the Fair Housing Act. Through the availability of such data and available local data an knowledge, the approach provided by this rule is intended to make program participants better able to evaluate their present environment to assess fair housing issues such as segregation, conditions that restrict fair housing choice, and disparities in access to housing and opportunity, identify the factors that primarily contribute to the creation or perpetuation of fair housing issues, and establish fair housing priorities and goals. The New York Post cited another shadowy instance of "racial bean counting": Meanwhile, the Federal Housing Finance Agency, headed by former Congressional Black Caucus leader Mel Watt, is building its own database for racially balancing home loans. The so-called National Mortgage Database Project will compile 16 years of lending data, broken down by race, and hold everything from individual credit scores and employment records. Again, the National Mortgage Database was hidden in plain sight. In seconds on Google, intrepid searchers could locate the Federal Housing Finance Agency's page devoted to the National Mortgage Database (upon which no mentions of race or racial equality appeared): page In 2012, FHFA began a major initiative to build a national mortgage database on first-lien single-family mortgages in existence any time from January 1998 forward. This project is being jointly funded and managed by FHFA and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. The information will primarily be used to support the agencies' policy making and research efforts and help regulators better understand emerging mortgage and housing market trends in this evolving and changing finance market. Like the AFFH, the National Mortgage Database was also buried deep in the annals of the publicly accessible and searchable Federal Register. Federal Register From that point on, the Post's article primarily focused on purportedly nefarious and racially motivated actions by "Obama's brainchild," the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). (In actuality, the CFPB was primarily the "brainchild" of Elizabeth Warren and came into existence as part of Dodd-Frank related financial reforms.) The article claimed the CFPB was compiling separate databases for credit profiles and employment. We were able to locate a Government Accountability Office (GAO) document dated September 2014 [PDF] concerning collection of credit data. However, no portion of that document mentioned race, and we were unable to locate any documents, articles, or other information relating to race-based initiatives and employment efforts undertaken by the CFPB as suggested by the New York Post's article. Elizabeth Warren PDF A final portion of the article claimed that the Department of Education was enforcing segregation by way of race-based data collection (implicitly, at the behest of President Obama). However, a (not secret) page on the U.S. Department of Education's web site indicated that data collection of that description had been ongoing since at least 2000 (eight years before the election of Barack Obama to the presidency). page Last updated: 22July 2015 Originally published: 22July 2015

False

So who are the racists again? Obama collecting personal data for a secret race database https://t.co/63VmYIXqNE via @nypost Yes, Nick $earcy! (@yesnicksearcy) July 19, 2015This is movie level horror material yet it's happening. It's real life. https://t.co/LxxvA7EpyE Anthony Cumia (@AnthonyCumia) July 19, 2015I favor equal opportunity, not govt forcing equal results. This is Affirmative Action on steroids: https://t.co/N3snUnie67 #WakeUpAmerica Senator Dick Black (@SenRichardBlack) July 19, 2015Obama collecting Americans' personal info for a secret race database https://t.co/1VNJqRsqQf This makes my skin crawl @RandPaul Alexis In NH (@AlexisinNH) July 18, 2015No explanatory links to this nefarious database were provided, but we managed to hack our way into the program to get the full scoop. Actually, we entered "Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing" into Google's search box and immediately found HUD's page explaining the program and its purposes.So secretive is this database that HUD has made numerous documents available describing its overall progress, including links to the Federal Register [PDF] and its most current Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing policy. (They even tried to bury it by issuing a press release about it.) A portion of that openly published, available for all to view documentation is described by HUD as "[updated data use methods] on affirmatively furthering fair housing (AFFH) [aim] to provide all HUD grantees with clear guidelines and the data that will help them to achieve those goals":Again, the National Mortgage Database was hidden in plain sight. In seconds on Google, intrepid searchers could locate the Federal Housing Finance Agency's page devoted to the National Mortgage Database (upon which no mentions of race or racial equality appeared):Like the AFFH, the National Mortgage Database was also buried deep in the annals of the publicly accessible and searchable Federal Register.From that point on, the Post's article primarily focused on purportedly nefarious and racially motivated actions by "Obama's brainchild," the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). (In actuality, the CFPB was primarily the "brainchild" of Elizabeth Warren and came into existence as part of Dodd-Frank related financial reforms.) The article claimed the CFPB was compiling separate databases for credit profiles and employment. We were able to locate a Government Accountability Office (GAO) document dated September 2014 [PDF] concerning collection of credit data. However, no portion of that document mentioned race, and we were unable to locate any documents, articles, or other information relating to race-based initiatives and employment efforts undertaken by the CFPB as suggested by the New York Post's article.A final portion of the article claimed that the Department of Education was enforcing segregation by way of race-based data collection (implicitly, at the behest of President Obama). However, a (not secret) page on the U.S. Department of Education's web site indicated that data collection of that description had been ongoing since at least 2000 (eight years before the election of Barack Obama to the presidency).

FMD_train_1154

Ed Koch on Anti-Semitism

09/29/2003

Claim: Former New York mayor Ed Koch delivered a radio address on anti-semitism. Example: [Collected on the Internet, 2002] We are now going through the most virulent anti-Semitic period since Hitler and Stalin. Nearly 60 years after the end of World War II almost every country on the European continent, including England, France, Germany, Holland, Belgium and the Scandinavian countries, has seen major outbreaks of physical violence against their Jewish citizens, and against Jewish institutions, including synagogues and cemeteries. At the same time, open hostility toward the State of Israel is at an all-time high. Only in the United States have we seen a full acceptance of Jews as citizens and the Jewish state treated as a friend and ally by an overwhelming number of fellow citizens. In the U.S., Jews have been permitted to rise and fall based on their individual talents, virtues and faults. In one elite bastion after another, Jews have been selected to head institutions heretofore seen as beyond their reach. Today the presidents of Harvard and Yale Universities are Jews, as are recent former presidents of Columbia and Princeton. Having been elected three times as mayor of the City of New York, I have been the beneficiary of this country's generosity and freedom from bigotry, and I will be eternally grateful. Americans traditionally make New Years resolutions. Before I list my own resolutions, I want to thank President George W. Bush and his advisers, Vice President Dick Cheney, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of State Colin Powell and National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice for their support of the State of Israel. They could easily have jettisoned Israel as a liability in their efforts to forge an international coalition against worldwide terrorism. I will be forever grateful to them, and I hope that many other supporters of the State of Israel will recognize and appreciate what they have done. Fortunately for Jews and the State of Israel, American support of the Jewish nation has been bipartisan. Particularly helpful has been the Democratic leadership in both houses including Senator Tom Daschle, outgoing Minority Leader Dick Gephardt, as well as former President Bill Clinton and Senator Hillary Clinton. There are many others on both sides of the political aisle who deserve similar praise. In the religious sector, I am grateful to the Reverends Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell, both of whom have stood up time and again in support and defense of the Jewish nation. Regrettably, there have been many clergy who have unfairly attacked Israel for attempting to defend itself against near-daily terrorist acts against its citizens. We were made privy to the true thoughts of Rev. Billy Graham caught on tape telling President Nixon his real feelings about Jews and Israel. He has since apologized, but what is an apology without contrition and efforts to right the wrong done? Worthless. Now to my personal New Years resolutions. I will avoid France as a place to vacation. France leads those countries in the Security Council who are the enemies of the State of Israel. So too is Mexico, joining as a consistent supporter of resolutions unfairly denouncing Israel at the U.N. Security Council. I will not support National Public Radio in any way. NPRs reporters and management delight in unfairly attacking Israel. I will no longer lend financial support to New Yorks Channel Thirteen public television station. That station recently showed a documentary that was blatantly biased against Israel and has refused to acknowledge the bias or to try to correct it. I will not watch ABCs World News Tonight anchored by Peter Jennings. For many years, Jennings has specialized in vicious and unfair portrayals of Israel intended to injure the Jewish state and lionize Palestinians. BBC News is horrifically anti-Israel and I will shun it completely. Susan Sontag will occupy the Ninth Circle of Hell for her outrageous assaults on Israel. I will no longer read her works. Regrettably, there are many others whom I could include on this list, but I will leave that for another day. I must confess I got enormous pleasure from the defeat of Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney and her father in the recent primary elections in Georgia. In my view, both are anti-Semitic and anti-Israel. No longer able to feed at the public trough, I doubt that either will make a comparable living in the private sector. I must close now to get ready for my Chanukah and Christmas shopping. I enjoy celebrating those holidays with Jewish and Christian friends whose goodwill and affection I will always cherish. Origins: Ed Koch, mayor of New York City from 1978 to 1989, mayor was a regular commentator on Bloomberg Radio until his death in 2013. On 7 December 2002, he delivered a commentary dealing with his perception that western society is experiencing its most"virulent anti-Semitic period since Hitler and Stalin" and offered a list of new year's resolutions regarding people and institutions he would shun for being anti-Israel. Transcripts of that commentary (reproduced above) have since been posted to a variety of web sites. Bloomberg Radio Just to be sure this information was accurate, we contacted Bloomberg Radio for verification and received an affirmative response: Hello and thank you for your inquiry. Former Mayor Ed Koch is a regular commentator on Bloomberg Radio. On 7 December 2002, Mr. Koch delivered a commentary on our "Bloomberg On the Weekend" broadcast in which he postulated a growing anti-semitism in America and elsewhere in the western world. He asserted that public broadcasting had an anti-Israeli attitude and declared he would no longer contribute. I hope this answers your question, and I invite you to listen to us each weekend for Ed Koch and much more. If you are in the greater New York area you will find us on Bloomberg Radio, WBBR, 1130 on your AM radio dial. Elsewhere we can be heard on the internet at http:/www.bloomberg.net/radio. http:/www.bloomberg.net/radio Sincerely,Wes Richards, Host. Last updated: 6 January 2014

False

Origins: Ed Koch, mayor of New York City from 1978 to 1989, was a regular commentator on Bloomberg Radio until his death in 2013. On 7 December 2002, he delivered a commentary dealing with his perception that western society is experiencing its most"virulent anti-Semitic period since Hitler and Stalin" and offered a list of new year's resolutions regarding people and institutions he would shun for being anti-Israel. Transcripts of that commentary (reproduced above) have since been posted to a variety of web sites.I hope this answers your question, and I invite you to listen to us each weekend for Ed Koch and much more. If you are in the greater New York area you will find us on Bloomberg Radio, WBBR, 1130 on your AM radio dial. Elsewhere we can be heard on the internet at http:/www.bloomberg.net/radio.

FMD_train_1474

Communication from the employer

11/20/2011

Claim: An employer issued a missive to his employees stating that any additional taxes on his business would result in his shutting the company down. To All My Valued Employees, There have been some rumblings around the office about the future of this company, and more specifically, your jobs. As you know, the economy has changed for the worse and presents many challenges. However, the good news is this: The economy doesn't pose a threat to your jobs. What does threaten your jobs, however, is the changing political landscape in this country. Of course, as your employer, I am forbidden to tell you whom to vote for—it is against the law to discriminate based on political affiliation, race, creed, religion, etc. Please vote for whom you think will serve your interests best. However, let me share some facts that might help you decide what is in your best interest. First, while it is easy to spew rhetoric that casts employers against employees, you must understand that for every business owner, there is a backstory. This backstory is often neglected and overshadowed by what you see and hear. Sure, you see me park my Mercedes outside. You've seen my big home at last year's Christmas party. I'm sure all these flashy icons of luxury conjure up some idealized thoughts about my life. However, what you don't see is the backstory. I started this company 12 years ago. At that time, I lived in a 300-square-foot studio apartment for three years. My entire living space was converted into an office so I could put forth 100% effort into building a company that would eventually employ you. My diet consisted of Ramen Pride noodles because every dollar I spent went back into this company. I drove a rusty Toyota Corolla with a defective transmission. I didn't have time to date. Often, I stayed home on weekends while my friends went out drinking and partying. In fact, I was married to my business—hard work, discipline, and sacrifice. Meanwhile, my friends got jobs. They worked 40 hours a week, made a modest $50K a year, and spent every dime they earned. They drove flashy cars, lived in expensive homes, and wore fancy designer clothes. Instead of hitting Nordstrom's for the latest hot fashion item, I was trolling through the Goodwill store, extracting any clothing item that didn't look like it was birthed in the '70s. My friends refinanced their mortgages and lived a life of luxury. I, however, did not. I put my time, my money, and my life into a business with a vision that someday I too would be able to afford these luxuries my friends supposedly had. So, while you physically arrive at the office at 9 a.m., mentally check in at about noon, and then leave at 5 p.m., I don't. There is no "off" button for me. When you leave the office, you are done, and you have a weekend all to yourself. I, unfortunately, do not have that freedom. I eat, sleep, and breathe this company every minute of the day. There is no rest. There is no weekend. There is no happy hour. Every day, this business is attached to my hip like a one-year-old special-needs child. You, of course, only see the fruits of that labor—the nice house, the Mercedes, the vacations... you never realize the backstory and the sacrifices I've made. Now, the economy is falling apart, and I, the guy who made all the right decisions and saved his money, have to bail out all the people who didn't. The people who overspent their paychecks suddenly feel entitled to the same luxuries that I earned and sacrificed a decade of my life for. Yes, business ownership has its benefits, but the price I've paid is steep and without wounds. Unfortunately, the cost of running this business and employing you is starting to eclipse the threshold of marginal benefit, and let me tell you why: I am being taxed to death, and the government thinks I don't pay enough. I have state taxes, federal taxes, property taxes, sales and use taxes, payroll taxes, workers' compensation taxes, unemployment taxes, and taxes on taxes. I have to hire a tax man to manage all these taxes, and then guess what? I have to pay taxes for employing him. Government mandates, regulations, and all the accounting that goes with it now occupy most of my time. On October 15th, I wrote a check to the U.S. Treasury for $288,000 for quarterly taxes. You know what my "stimulus" check was? Zero. Nada. Zilch. The question I have is this: Who is stimulating the economy? Me, the guy who has provided 14 people with good-paying jobs and serves over 2,200,000 people per year with a flourishing business? Or the single mother sitting at home, pregnant with her fourth child, waiting for her next welfare check? Obviously, the government feels the latter is the economic stimulus of this country. The fact is, if I deducted (read: stole) 50% of your paycheck, you'd quit, and you wouldn't work here. I mean, why should you? That's nuts. Who wants to be rewarded with only 50% of their hard work? Well, I agree, which is why your jobs are in jeopardy. Here is what many of you don't understand: to stimulate the economy, you need to stimulate what runs the economy. Had the government suddenly mandated that I didn't need to pay taxes, guess what? Instead of depositing that $288,000 into the Washington black hole, I would have spent it, hired more employees, and generated substantial economic growth. My employees would have enjoyed the wealth of that tax cut in the form of promotions and better salaries. But you can forget it now. When you have a comatose man on the verge of death, you don't defibrillate and shock his thumb, thinking that will bring him back to life, do you? Or do you defibrillate his heart? Business is at the heart of America and always has been. To restart it, you must stimulate it, not kill it. Suddenly, the power brokers in Washington believe the masses of America are the essential drivers of the American economic engine. Nothing could be further from the truth, and this is the type of change you can keep. So where am I going with all this? It's quite simple. If any new taxes are levied on me or my company, my reaction will be swift and simple: I will fire you. I will fire your co-workers. You can then plead with the government to pay for your mortgage, your SUV, and your child's future. Frankly, it isn't my problem anymore. Then, I will close this company down, move to another country, and retire. You see, I'm done. I'm done with a country that penalizes the productive and gives to the unproductive. My motivation to work and to provide jobs will be destroyed, and with it, my citizenship. While tax cuts to 95% of America sound great on paper, don't forget the backstory: If there is no job, there is no income to tax. A tax cut on zero dollars is zero. So, when you make the decision to vote, ask yourself who understands the economics of business ownership and who doesn't. Whose policies will endanger your job? Answer those questions, and you should know who might be the one capable of saving your job. While the media wants to tell you, "It's the economy, stupid," I'm telling you it isn't. If you lose your job, it won't be at the hands of the economy; it will be at the hands of a political hurricane that swept through this country, steamrolled the Constitution, and changed its landscape forever. If that happens, you can find me in the South Caribbean, sitting on a beach, retired, and with no employees to worry about. Signed, Your Boss

False

Origins: In the ramp-up towards the 2008 Presidential election and in its wake, a number of anonymous "Here's how you, the ones who voted for him, will directly suffer from a Barack Obama presidency" missives landed in inboxes everywhere. One such was putatively from a hard-working and generous grandfather telling his beloved liberal granddaughter that her support for Obama meant Grandpa was no longer going to be in a position to help her financially. Another was supposedly penned by CEO to his 140 employees informing them that thanks to the new taxes now surely headed his way, he'd have to lay off a few of them, so he was starting with those whose cars sported Obama bumper stickers."The response to the missive falsely attributed to him prompted Michael Crowley to pen his own letter on the plight of the small business owner, which can be read here.In October 2012, David Siegel, the founder and CEO of Westgate Resorts, sent a modified version of this letter to all of his employees. He based his missive on that much-circulated 2008 piece, saying of his offering: "I did use the letter that had circulated before as a guideline, but I changed it [to fit my circumstances]. It speaks the truth and it gives [employees] something to think about when they go to the polls."

FMD_train_98

'Hello Barbie' Eavesdropping Doll

03/12/2015

Claim: Mattel's new Hello Barbie toy will record and transmit children's conversations. Example: [Collected via e-mail, March 2015] I just read an article (sent by Campaign for a Commercial-FreeChildhood) about a new Barbie Doll made by Mattel that is sent to hitmarkets this fall. This doll records the child's conversations, transmitsthem to Mattel's technology partner "Toy Talk" and they can then use thatinfo..........this all sounds so far out! ? Origins: On 14 February 2015, Mattel introduced a new Barbie model at the New York Toy Fair. In initial media reports, Hello Barbie was simply described as an innovation based upon feedback from young customers who wished to interact with their beloved Barbie dolls, and one of a number of planned interactive toys from Mattel: "The number one request we hear from girls around the world is that they want to have a conversation with Barbie. Now, for the first time ever, Barbie can have a two-way conversation," said a spokeswoman for Mattel. The Hello Barbie will be able to play interactive games and tell stories and jokes. A dinosaur, connected to one of the world's cleverest machines, is also being developedIt will also listen to the child's conversation and adapt to it over time so, for instance, if a child mentions that they like to dance, the doll may refer to this in a future chat. The doll requires a wi-fi connection and can provide an hour's worth of playtime when fully charged. On 15 February 2015, video footage from the New York Toy Fair that demonstrated how Hello Barbie worked was posted on YouTube: Interest in Hello Barbie waned until 11 March 2015, when the group Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood (CCFC) published a petition that called upon Mattel to cancel the doll's production based upon the notion that the toy would be recording children's conversations and transmitting them to Mattel: petition Imagine your children playing with a doll that records everything they say (and other nearby conversations) and transmits it all to a corporation which analyzes every word to learn "all of [your child's] likes and dislikes." That's exactly what Mattel's eavesdropping "Hello Barbie" does. Unless we take action, it will be in toy stores this autumn. Kids using "Hello Barbie"' won't only be talking to a doll, they'll be talking directly to a toy conglomerate whose only interest in them is financial. It's creepy- and creates a host of dangers for children and families. Please join CCFC in demanding that Mattel halt marketing and production of "Hello Barbie." By Mattel's own description, Hello Barbie will record and process portions of ambient conversation. However, the petition ascribed a number of additional functions to Hello Barbie which have not been confirmed, such as analysis of captured audio for marketing purposes. While the technology involved alarmed many consumers once the petition began to circulate, it didn't differ meaningfully from the functionality of smart TVs or other popular interactive gadgetry such as Apple's Siri virtual assistant. (iPads and iPhones are not infrequently used by small children despite their similar ability to record and transmit ambient conversation to a third party.) smart TVs ToyTalk, the company that partnered with Mattel to produce Hello Barbie, attempted to assuage parental fears about the new product: In an interview, ToyTalk chief executive Oren Jacob stressed that the audio files the doll collects will be used only to improve the product, including helping it build better speech recognition models for children. "The data is never used for anything to do with marketing or publicity or any of that stuff. Not at all," Jacob said. While it's true that Hello Barbie can record and transmit household conversations, the same could be said for nearly every smartphone, almost all newer televisions, and a number of other personal gadgets. Hello Barbie's interactivity may have alarmed some parents, but it is similar to voice recognition features included on many popular technological devices and by itself presents no more risk or exposure than an iPad or a smart TV. Last updated: 12 March 2015 "Barbie Doll Will Be Internet Connected to Chat to Kids" BBC News. 17 February 2015.

NEI

Interest in Hello Barbie waned until 11 March 2015, when the group Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood (CCFC) published a petition that called upon Mattel to cancel the doll's production based upon the notion that the toy would be recording children's conversations and transmitting them to Mattel:By Mattel's own description, Hello Barbie will record and process portions of ambient conversation. However, the petition ascribed a number of additional functions to Hello Barbie which have not been confirmed, such as analysis of captured audio for marketing purposes. While the technology involved alarmed many consumers once the petition began to circulate, it didn't differ meaningfully from the functionality of smart TVs or other popular interactive gadgetry such as Apple's Siri virtual assistant. (iPads and iPhones are not infrequently used by small children despite their similar ability to record and transmit ambient conversation to a third party.)

FMD_train_1588

Is West Virginia constructing a residential project for Syrian refugees that is being likened to a 'Sharia Zone'?

03/14/2019

On 5 March 2019, a conspiracy-minded Twitter account shared a video purporting to be from the site of a construction project funded by West Virginia taxpayer money for the purpose of housing 321 Syrian refugees. The video also claimed this was being done at the expense of regular Americans who, the man asserted, were being pushed into substandard housing. He stated that the area he was standing in would become a sharia zone, where no non-Muslims would be allowed to enter. Several factual problems exist with the assertions in this video. Chief among them is the fact that this video shows the Littlepage Terrace housing project, a low-income housing tax-credit property allocated through the West Virginia Housing Development Fund, which houses zero Syrian refugees and many regular Americans. Several lines of evidence support this conclusion. First, someone who works next to the project refers to it as Littlepage Terrace. Second, a wider, composite view of the man's video shows clearly identifiable markers of the Littlepage housing complex, including a tell-tale smokestack and buildings that exactly match the structures built at Littlepage. Third, Mark Taylor, the chief executive officer of the Charleston-Kanawha Housing Authority, which works with the Littlepage Terrace project, confirmed to us by email that the suspect video was taken at that site during renovations that likely occurred in May 2017. He also confirmed that the community houses no Syrian refugees. Another significant oversight in the tweeted narrative is that the entire state of West Virginia has taken in far fewer than 321 Syrian refugees in total. In 2016, the year the United States took in the largest number of Syrian refugees, West Virginia resettled only five of them. On 1 February 2017, the Trump Administration announced Executive Order 13769, commonly referred to as the "travel ban," which indefinitely suspended the admission of Syrian refugees to the United States. In 2017, West Virginia took in 13 refugees, but these individuals were not necessarily Syrian. It is true that Littlepage was torn down and rebuilt, but that decision had nothing to do with refugee housing. Instead, the renovations aimed to reduce crime and revitalize the area, as reported by West Virginia's WCHS television station in 2016. The Charleston-Kanawha Housing Authority is now in the last phase of revitalizing three housing projects. Similar to Orchard Manor and Washington Manor, Littlepage Terrace will be demolished and rebuilt as two-story townhomes. This housing project was built nearly 80 years ago with no air conditioning and poor visibility. Now it is simply not a secure living space. The goal for these new developments is to reduce crime and revitalize the area. Because the housing complex displayed was not built for Syrian refugees, and because the state has taken virtually no Syrian refugees at all, we rank the claims made in this video as aggressively and demonstrably false.

False

On 5 March 2019, a conspiracy-minded Twitter account shared a video purporting to be from the site of a construction project funded by West Virginia taxpayer money for the purpose of housing 321 Syrian refugees. The video also claimed this was being done at the expense of regular Americans who, the man claims, were being pushed into substandard housing. He asserted that the area he was standing in will be a sharia zone, and no non-Muslims will be allowed to enter:Several factual problems exist with assertions in this video. Chief among them is the fact that this video shows the Littlepage Terrace housing project, a low-income, housing tax-credit property allocated through the West Virginia Housing Development Fund, which houses zero Syrian refugees and many regular Americans. Several lines of evidence support this conclusion. First, someone who works next to the project refers to it as Littlepage:Another significant oversight in the tweeted narrative is that the entire state of West Virginia has taken in far less than 321 Syrian refugees in total. In 2016, the year the United States took in the largest number of Syrian refugees, West Virginia resettled only five of them in their state. On 1 February 2017, the Trump Administration announced Executive Order 13769, commonly referred to as the travel ban," which indefinitely suspended the admission of Syrian refugees to the United States. In 2017, West Virginia took in 13 refugees, but these individuals were not necessarily Syrian.It is true that Littlepage was torn down and rebuilt, but that decision had nothing to do with refugee housing. Instead, the renovations aimed to reduce crime and revitalize the area, as reported by West Virginias WCHS television station in 2016:

FMD_train_1192

Is Marlboro distributing cartons of cigarettes for free on Facebook?

10/23/2015

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

False

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

FMD_train_1535

If Texas were a country our economy would rank # 10...in the WORLD.

09/15/2016

CORRECTION, 2:50 p.m., Sept. 15, 2016:After this fact check posted, readers pointed out we'd presented Texas and California GDP figures in billions of dollars when relevant figures actually reflected productivity in the trillions of dollars. We made appropriate changes. Our rating of the claim didn't change. In a tweet adorned with images of a rocket, a wind turbine, a steer, a factory and a microscope, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott declared: If Texas were a country, it would have the 10th highest GDP in the world. If so, thats gained ground.When we looked into a 2012 claimcomparing productivity in Texas versus the nations of the world, Texas ranked 14th internationally. So, we decided to put Abbotts statement to the Texas Truth-O-Meter. The fine print in Abbotts tweet states that it's based on information from Glenn Hegar, the Texas state comptroller, and from the International Monetary Fund and Bureau of Economic Analysis. When we asked, Lauren Willis of the comptrollers office emailed usits chartindicating that in 2015, Texas had a gross domestic product of $1.59 trillion -- placing it 10th among countries behind the U.S. ($17.95 trillion) and eight countries including Brazil ($1.77 trillion). The chart shows Texas ahead of No. 11 Canada ($1.55 trillion) as well as Korea, Russia, Australia, Spain, Mexico and four other countries. GDP, the most-used measure of national economic output, isdefinedas the market value of goods and services produced by labor and property in country. SOURCE:Email, Lauren Willis, director of communications, Office of Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts, Sept. 6, 2016 For our part, we found 2015GDP figures posted in April 2016by the International Monetary Fund matching the GDP figures in the comptrollers chart. Willis also pointed out aWorld Bank breakoutof GDPs by nation for 2015; the presented figures didnt perfectly align with the comptrollers chart, we found, though the ranking of the top 10 countries did. Willis also sent a web link to the bureaus U.S. and state-by-state GDP figures for 2015 and previous years. From the BEA, we downloaded figures indicating that in 2015, Texas had the GDP of $1.59 trillion that Abbott relied on. Then again, more populous California had a GDP of $2.46 trillion, which would have placed the Golden State No. 6 in the world if it were a nation, nudging Texas to No. 11.We recently found toothat California in 2015 had greater per-capita productivity than Texas. SOURCE:Website,Regional Economic Accounts, Gross Domestic Product, Interactive TablesBureau of Economic Analysis, last updated June 14, 2016 (GDP figures downloaded Sept. 6, 2016) Our ruling Abbott said that if Texas were a country, its economy would rank 10th in the world. Thats so, figures show, if you leave out a bigger state, California. Considering California, in fairness, Texas would rank 11th in the world. 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. https://www.sharethefacts.co/share/cdc4ac03-aab9-4c82-b255-b39c9f4656db

True

If so, thats gained ground.When we looked into a 2012 claimcomparing productivity in Texas versus the nations of the world, Texas ranked 14th internationally.When we asked, Lauren Willis of the comptrollers office emailed usits chartindicating that in 2015, Texas had a gross domestic product of $1.59 trillion -- placing it 10th among countries behind the U.S. ($17.95 trillion) and eight countries including Brazil ($1.77 trillion). The chart shows Texas ahead of No. 11 Canada ($1.55 trillion) as well as Korea, Russia, Australia, Spain, Mexico and four other countries.GDP, the most-used measure of national economic output, isdefinedas the market value of goods and services produced by labor and property in country.For our part, we found 2015GDP figures posted in April 2016by the International Monetary Fund matching the GDP figures in the comptrollers chart. Willis also pointed out aWorld Bank breakoutof GDPs by nation for 2015; the presented figures didnt perfectly align with the comptrollers chart, we found, though the ranking of the top 10 countries did.Willis also sent a web link to the bureaus U.S. and state-by-state GDP figures for 2015 and previous years. From the BEA, we downloaded figures indicating that in 2015, Texas had the GDP of $1.59 trillion that Abbott relied on. Then again, more populous California had a GDP of $2.46 trillion, which would have placed the Golden State No. 6 in the world if it were a nation, nudging Texas to No. 11.We recently found toothat California in 2015 had greater per-capita productivity than Texas.SOURCE:Website,Regional Economic Accounts, Gross Domestic Product, Interactive TablesBureau of Economic Analysis, last updated June 14, 2016 (GDP figures downloaded Sept. 6, 2016)MOSTLY TRUE The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information. Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check.https://www.sharethefacts.co/share/cdc4ac03-aab9-4c82-b255-b39c9f4656db

FMD_train_1221

Did you know Wisconsin's AFSCME union has lost 50%+ of its members since no longer requiring membership?

06/22/2012

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker survived a recall vote this month, prompting pundits to weigh in on what that means for public sector unions that had campaigned aggressively for his ouster. Remember, Walker is the Republican governor who pushed through a number of changes unfriendly to organized labor in the Badger State, including an end to automatic union dues deductions from public paychecks.Here in the Beaver State,Steve Bucksteinof theCascade Policy Institute, a think tank that promotes limited government,tweeted: Did you know Wisconsin's AFSCME union has lost 50%+ of its members since no longer requiring membership? The tweet links to a June 14 online post by Buckstein called End Forced Unionism Now, where he quotes from an opinion column by syndicated writerCharles Krauthammer, also published in The Oregonian:Without the thumb of the state tilting the scale by coerced collection, union membership became truly voluntary. Result? Newly freed members rushed for the exits. In less than one year, AFSCME, the second largest public-sector union in Wisconsin, has lost more than 50 percent of its membership.The question is a simple one: Did membership in Wisconsins American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees drop by 50 percent since dues became optional?Heres a quick reminder of what happened in Wisconsin: In March 2011, Walker signed a bill that drastically changed bargaining rights for some but not all state, local and school employees. As pointed out by Krauthammer, dues are no longer taken out of paychecks automatically, curtailing the unions money base.According to PolitiFact Wisconsin, the law limits the ability of public unions to bargain collectively for anything except raises controlled for inflation. It ended bargaining over benefits, overtime and work conditions. Unions have to recertify every year with fresh votes. And he increased employee contributions for pensions and health care.We asked Buckstein for his sourcing; he said he relied on the Krauthammer column. Krauthammer cites no source for the information, but a quick check online shows a May 30 news article in the Wall Street Journal: Wisconsin Unions See Ranks Drop Ahead of Recall Vote.The reporters write that membership in the states second-largest public-sector union fell to 28,745 in February from 62,818 in March 2011, according to a person who has viewed AFSCME's figures. That is indeed more than half its membership. Another story in the Wall Street Journal a few days later puts the drop at 45 percent.The union disputed the figures then, and disputes them now to PolitiFact Oregon. However, Wisconsin State Employees Union, AFSCME Council 24, declined to give updated figures, saying that even people on the inside dont have an accurate count. Certainly numbers are down, they say. (A spokesman for Walker said the state does not have figures. )But what the union really objects to is the underlying premise in the syndicated column, and by association, Bucksteins post: That premise is that union membership numbers dropped dramatically because people were given a choice between joining a union or not joining a union.According to the original Wall Street Journal news article, some members didnt re-up because of the financial pinch of health care and pension costs. Bargaining was so curtailed that anotherfact check by PolitiFact Wisconsinfound four experts who agreed the law could mean the end of some public unions in Wisconsin.Buckstein acknowledges that numbers probably went down more in Wisconsin because of the changes as a whole. But he stands by the idea that more members may opt out when deductions become optional.Oregon is a great example, he says. A check with the Department of Administrative Services finds that 24 percent of the more than 24,000 people eligible to be represented by the states two biggest state government unions pay a share in lieu of member dues. In other words, they pay in, but are not members. The fair-share option may not be available to all employees, and depends on the terms of the bargaining contract. In either case, the money is deducted automatically from workers paychecks.People on various sides of the political spectrum have their own theories about why there was a decrease in Wisconsin: higher premiums, limited bargaining subjects, complicated recertification votes, optional dues, all or some, or none of the above. We cant rule on reason.What we can rule on is that membership has gone down about 50 percent, according to news reports, since Walker implemented his changes. That decrease may or may not hold when numbers finally shake out. The tweet is accurate, but needs additional information.We rule the statement Mostly True.

True

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker survived a recall vote this month, prompting pundits to weigh in on what that means for public sector unions that had campaigned aggressively for his ouster. Remember, Walker is the Republican governor who pushed through a number of changes unfriendly to organized labor in the Badger State, including an end to automatic union dues deductions from public paychecks.Here in the Beaver State,Steve Bucksteinof theCascade Policy Institute, a think tank that promotes limited government,tweeted: Did you know Wisconsin's AFSCME union has lost 50%+ of its members since no longer requiring membership? The tweet links to a June 14 online post by Buckstein called End Forced Unionism Now, where he quotes from an opinion column by syndicated writerCharles Krauthammer, also published in The Oregonian:Without the thumb of the state tilting the scale by coerced collection, union membership became truly voluntary. Result? Newly freed members rushed for the exits. In less than one year, AFSCME, the second largest public-sector union in Wisconsin, has lost more than 50 percent of its membership.The question is a simple one: Did membership in Wisconsins American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees drop by 50 percent since dues became optional?Heres a quick reminder of what happened in Wisconsin: In March 2011, Walker signed a bill that drastically changed bargaining rights for some but not all state, local and school employees. As pointed out by Krauthammer, dues are no longer taken out of paychecks automatically, curtailing the unions money base.According to PolitiFact Wisconsin, the law limits the ability of public unions to bargain collectively for anything except raises controlled for inflation. It ended bargaining over benefits, overtime and work conditions. Unions have to recertify every year with fresh votes. And he increased employee contributions for pensions and health care.We asked Buckstein for his sourcing; he said he relied on the Krauthammer column. Krauthammer cites no source for the information, but a quick check online shows a May 30 news article in the Wall Street Journal: Wisconsin Unions See Ranks Drop Ahead of Recall Vote.The reporters write that membership in the states second-largest public-sector union fell to 28,745 in February from 62,818 in March 2011, according to a person who has viewed AFSCME's figures. That is indeed more than half its membership. Another story in the Wall Street Journal a few days later puts the drop at 45 percent.The union disputed the figures then, and disputes them now to PolitiFact Oregon. However, Wisconsin State Employees Union, AFSCME Council 24, declined to give updated figures, saying that even people on the inside dont have an accurate count. Certainly numbers are down, they say. (A spokesman for Walker said the state does not have figures.)But what the union really objects to is the underlying premise in the syndicated column, and by association, Bucksteins post: That premise is that union membership numbers dropped dramatically because people were given a choice between joining a union or not joining a union.According to the original Wall Street Journal news article, some members didnt re-up because of the financial pinch of health care and pension costs. Bargaining was so curtailed that anotherfact check by PolitiFact Wisconsinfound four experts who agreed the law could mean the end of some public unions in Wisconsin.Buckstein acknowledges that numbers probably went down more in Wisconsin because of the changes as a whole. But he stands by the idea that more members may opt out when deductions become optional.Oregon is a great example, he says. A check with the Department of Administrative Services finds that 24 percent of the more than 24,000 people eligible to be represented by the states two biggest state government unions pay a share in lieu of member dues. In other words, they pay in, but are not members. The fair-share option may not be available to all employees, and depends on the terms of the bargaining contract. In either case, the money is deducted automatically from workers paychecks.People on various sides of the political spectrum have their own theories about why there was a decrease in Wisconsin: higher premiums, limited bargaining subjects, complicated recertification votes, optional dues, all or some, or none of the above. We cant rule on reason.What we can rule on is that membership has gone down about 50 percent, according to news reports, since Walker implemented his changes. That decrease may or may not hold when numbers finally shake out. The tweet is accurate, but needs additional information.We rule the statement Mostly True.

FMD_train_341

McCain and Bush are millionaires who are for tax cuts for millionaires.

03/17/2008

An ad goes after Sen. John McCain for being just like President George W. Bush, hitting McCain onIraq, oil companies and health care.It also criticizes him on tax policy. A millionaire who's for tax cuts for millionaires. McSame as Bush, the ad states. It's true that Bush and McCain are both millionaires, with McCain being somewhat wealthier. Bush's net worth in 2006 was between $7.6-million and $20.1-million, based on his personal financial disclosures required by law and analyzed by the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics. McCain, meanwhile, is worth somewhere between $27.8-million and $45-million. (Sen. Hillary Clinton's net worth is between $10.4-million and $51-million, while Sen. Barack Obama's is between $456,012 and $1.1-million.) So McCain and Bush are both millionaires, and that part of the statement is correct. We couldn't find any proposals John McCain supports that offer new tax cuts for millionaires, so we suspect this is a reference to McCain's support of the Bush tax cuts. Bush's tax cuts lowered rates across the board for those who pay federal income taxes, so they benefited both millionaire and nonmillionaire taxpayers. But data compiled from the Congressional Budget Office indicate that millionaires saw the most sizable drops to their tax rates measured as a share of income. Those tax cuts will expire during the next presidential administration unless Congress acts to keep them in place. McCain actually opposed the Bush tax cuts before changing his mind and supporting them now. He said the reason for his change of heart is that rescinding the tax cuts would be the equivalent of a tax increase after they had been in effect for so long. (Both Obama and Clinton want to roll back the Bush tax cuts for higher incomes.) If you're trying to identify the candidate who supports the Bush tax cuts, McCain is your man. But we're concerned that the ad leaves the impression that McCain advocates new, additional tax cuts for millionaires rather than keeping the present situation in place. For that reason, we knock this claim down one peg on the Truth-O-Meter and find it Mostly True.

True

An ad goes after Sen. John McCain for being just like President George W. Bush, hitting McCain onIraq, oil companies and health care.It also criticizes him on tax policy.

FMD_train_880

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

11/27/2023

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

False

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

FMD_train_1306

Did the picture depict Stephen Hawking attending a conference in the Caribbean organized by Jeffrey Epstein?

05/20/2023

On May 18, 2023, a Twitter user shared a photograph of the late physicist Stephen Hawking sitting with a group of people in what appeared to be a tropical setting. The user claimed that Hawking was on the Caribbean island owned by convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. In a tweet, @dom_lucre asked, "Serious question, why the hell was Stephen Hawking on Jeffrey Epstein's Island?" asked (@@dom_lucre/X) This is a real photograph of Hawking that shows him either on one of Epstein's private islands or on nearby St. Thomas Island, at an Epstein-sponsored conference. It was taken in March 2006, a few months before Epstein was charged with multiple counts of unlawful sex with a minor. March 2006 charged Epstein, a financier who was later charged with sex trafficking, died in his prison cell in 2021 while awaiting trial (he previously had been convicted of other sex offenses). But before his fall, he was known for his parties and his extensive connections with high-profile celebrities, politicians, and intellectuals. He owned two private islands, Great St. James and Little St. James, which were prominent features in the civil and criminal cases against him. Numerous young women said in court papers that they were taken via private jet to Little St. James, where they were ordered to perform sex acts with Epstein and other men. died owned said Hawking was just one of many scientists and intellectuals invited to these islands for less-sinister reasons a scientific conference Epstein paid for. So how was Hawking brought into Epstein's orbit? For years, Epstein financed the Edge Foundation, billed as a salon for elite thinkers, which hosted prominent gatherings of scientists and intellectuals, and gave Epstein access to such circles. According to a Buzzfeed News investigation, Epstein's donations helped Edge carry out most of its activities, including an annual "billionaires dinner" that ceased to take place after his last contribution in 2015. financed billed investigation An archived page from Edge.org describing Epstein's involvement can be seen here, where he was described as "a financier and science philanthropist." The website stated, "He is one of the largest supporters of individual scientists, including theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking and Nobel Laureates Gerard 't Hooft, David Gross and Frank Wilczek." Edge.org here In 2006, Epstein sponsored a conference at the neighboring St. Thomas Island. Per a March 2006 report in the St. Thomas Source, a local newspaper, prominent scientists gathered in a series of private meetings dubbed "Confronting Gravity: A workshop to explore fundamental questions in physics and cosmology." Among those scientists was Hawking. March 2006 Epstein was also described by the local report as the "driving force behind the conference." He reportedly said to the paper that he brought the group to St. Thomas with hopes that the relaxed setting would free the physicists' minds to explore one of the 20th century's last unanswered physics questions: What is gravity? described "There is no agenda except fun and physics, and that's fun with a capital 'F,'" Epstein reportedly said. reportedly The New York Times also reported in 2019 on Hawking's trip to this island (emphasis, ours): reported It was a five-day gathering in the Caribbean of some of the world's top scientists, including Dr. Hawking, to share ideas about gravity and cosmology, with scuba and catamaran excursions on the side. One evening, the participants had dinner on the beach at Mr. Epstein's private island. Some of the scientists noticed that Mr. Epstein "was always followed by a group of something like three or four young women," as Alan Guth, a physicist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, put it in an email to The Times, but they did not probe further. In another 2019 report, The New York Times described how, "Once, the scientists including Mr. Hawking crowded on board a submarine that Mr. Epstein had chartered." 2019 report But where did the photograph come from? In 2006, The Edge Foundation also published a blog post on the conference and interviewed an attendee and organizer, theoretical physicist Lawrence Krauss. Per the post (emphasis, ours): The Edge Foundation post The topic of the meeting was "Confronting Gravity." Krauss intended to have "a meeting where people would look forward to the key issues facing fundamental physics and cosmology". They could meet, discuss, relax on the beach, and take a trip to the nearby private island retreat of the science philanthropist Jeffrey Epstein, who funded the event. We scrolled to the bottom of the page and found photographs of Hawking and more from the gathering. The photograph in question showed Hawking seated alongside Nobel Prize winner David Gross, and physicists Kip Thorne and Lisa Randall. Yet another shows Hawking on what appears to be the interior of a boat, captioned, "Lawrence Krauss and Stephen Hawking on the way to Atlantis Submarine." page (Screenshot via Edge.org) The New York Times described Epstein's allure for these scientists: The New York Times The lure for some of the scientists was Mr. Epstein's money. He dangled financing for their pet projects. Some of the scientists said that the prospect of financing blinded them to the seriousness of his sexual transgressions, and even led them to give credence to some of Mr. Epstein's half-baked scientific musings. The photograph of Hawking has been disseminated in the media, and is also publicly available on the website of the foundation once financed by Epstein, along with a description of the conference he attended, with the dates and details of the gathering matching up with reliable media reports. We thus rate this claim "A Timeline of the Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell Scandal." AP NEWS, 28 June 2022, https://apnews.com/article/epstein-maxwell-timeline-b9f15710fabb72e8581c71e94acf513e. Accessed 19 May 2023. Aldhous, Peter. "How Jeffrey Epstein Bankrolled An Exclusive Intellectual Boys Club And Reaped The Benefits." BuzzFeed News, 26 Sept. 2019, https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/peteraldhous/jeffrey-epstein-john-brockman-edge-foundation.Accessed 19 May 2023. Chappell, Bill. "Financier Buys Jeffrey Epstein's Private Islands, with Plans to Create a Resort." NPR, 4 May 2023. NPR, https://www.npr.org/2023/05/04/1173956903/jeffrey-epstein-island-sold-st-james.Accessed 19 May 2023. "Jeffrey Epstein." Edge.Org. 5 Apr. 2019, https://web.archive.org/web/20190405211237/https:/www.edge.org/memberbio/jeffrey_epstein.Accessed 19 May 2023. Kantor, Jodi, et al. "Jeffrey Epstein Was a Sex Offender. The Powerful Welcomed Him Anyway." The New York Times, 13 July 2019. NYTimes.com, https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/13/nyregion/jeffrey-epstein-new-york-elite.html.Accessed 19 May 2023. "Physicists Debate Gravity at St. Thomas Symposium." St. Thomas Source, 17 Mar. 2006, https://stthomassource.com/content/2006/03/17/physicists-debate-gravity-st-thomas-symposium/.Accessed 19 May 2023. "Pictured: Stephen Hawking on Jeffrey Epsteins 'Sex-Slave Island.'" The Independent, 13 Jan. 2015, https://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/stephen-hawking-pictured-on-jeffrey-epstein-s-sex-slave-caribbean-island-9974955.html.Accessed 19 May 2023. "Stephen Hawking Pictured on Jeffrey Epstein's "Island of Sin."" Telegraph, 12 Jan. 2015. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/stephen-hawking/11340494/Stephen-Hawking-pictured-on-Jeffrey-Epsteins-Island-of-Sin.html. Accessed 19 May 2023. Stewart, James B., et al. "Jeffrey Epstein Hoped to Seed Human Race With His DNA." The New York Times, 31 July 2019. NYTimes.com, https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/31/business/jeffrey-epstein-eugenics.html.Accessed 19 May 2023. "THE ENERGY OF EMPTY SPACE THAT ISN'T ZERO." Edge.Org. 6 Mar. 2023, https://web.archive.org/web/20230306164658/https://www.edge.org/conversation/lawrence_m_krauss-the-energy-of-empty-space-that-isnt-zero.Accessed 19 May 2023. "Who Was Jeffrey Epstein? The Financier Charged with Sex Trafficking." BBC News, 8 July 2019. www.bbc.com, https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-48913377.Accessed 19 May 2023.

True

In a tweet, @dom_lucre asked, "Serious question, why the hell was Stephen Hawking on Jeffrey Epstein's Island?"This is a real photograph of Hawking that shows him either on one of Epstein's private islands or on nearby St. Thomas Island, at an Epstein-sponsored conference. It was taken in March 2006, a few months before Epstein was charged with multiple counts of unlawful sex with a minor. Epstein, a financier who was later charged with sex trafficking, died in his prison cell in 2021 while awaiting trial (he previously had been convicted of other sex offenses). But before his fall, he was known for his parties and his extensive connections with high-profile celebrities, politicians, and intellectuals. He owned two private islands, Great St. James and Little St. James, which were prominent features in the civil and criminal cases against him. Numerous young women said in court papers that they were taken via private jet to Little St. James, where they were ordered to perform sex acts with Epstein and other men. For years, Epstein financed the Edge Foundation, billed as a salon for elite thinkers, which hosted prominent gatherings of scientists and intellectuals, and gave Epstein access to such circles. According to a Buzzfeed News investigation, Epstein's donations helped Edge carry out most of its activities, including an annual "billionaires dinner" that ceased to take place after his last contribution in 2015. An archived page from Edge.org describing Epstein's involvement can be seen here, where he was described as "a financier and science philanthropist." The website stated, "He is one of the largest supporters of individual scientists, including theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking and Nobel Laureates Gerard 't Hooft, David Gross and Frank Wilczek." In 2006, Epstein sponsored a conference at the neighboring St. Thomas Island. Per a March 2006 report in the St. Thomas Source, a local newspaper, prominent scientists gathered in a series of private meetings dubbed "Confronting Gravity: A workshop to explore fundamental questions in physics and cosmology." Among those scientists was Hawking. Epstein was also described by the local report as the "driving force behind the conference." He reportedly said to the paper that he brought the group to St. Thomas with hopes that the relaxed setting would free the physicists' minds to explore one of the 20th century's last unanswered physics questions: What is gravity?"There is no agenda except fun and physics, and that's fun with a capital 'F,'" Epstein reportedly said.The New York Times also reported in 2019 on Hawking's trip to this island (emphasis, ours):In another 2019 report, The New York Times described how, "Once, the scientists including Mr. Hawking crowded on board a submarine that Mr. Epstein had chartered." But where did the photograph come from? In 2006, The Edge Foundation also published a blog post on the conference and interviewed an attendee and organizer, theoretical physicist Lawrence Krauss. Per the post (emphasis, ours):We scrolled to the bottom of the page and found photographs of Hawking and more from the gathering. The photograph in question showed Hawking seated alongside Nobel Prize winner David Gross, and physicists Kip Thorne and Lisa Randall. Yet another shows Hawking on what appears to be the interior of a boat, captioned, "Lawrence Krauss and Stephen Hawking on the way to Atlantis Submarine." The New York Times described Epstein's allure for these scientists:

FMD_train_520

Florida has the third most-regressive tax structure.

07/22/2014

When it comes to taxes, Democratic candidate for governor Nan Rich wants to make things more fair for the little guy in Florida. Rich, a former state senator from Weston, faced a question about whether Floridas tax system should be changed during a Florida Press Association event July 11 at the swanky Biltmore Hotel in Coral Gables. I think it's a regressive tax base, and when you look at some of the studies saying its the third most-regressive tax base -- I don't want you to quote me on that because PolitiFact may get me, I'm not sure if its (No.) three -- but I think there are things we need to do to make a more equitable and fair tax structure. At PolitiFact Florida, our ears perk up when we hear rankings that put Florida near the top or bottom. As for her request for us not to PolitiFact her, well, we couldnt help but take that as a friendly challenge. Studies about regressive taxes Rich told PolitiFact Florida in an interview, dont hold me to third regressive.... I did not say third definitively... We are one of the most regressive. Rich cited a 2013reportby The Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, which partners withCitizens for Tax Justice, a group that advocates for fair taxation of middle- and low-income families. The report concluded that all states have regressive tax systems. It means that state taxes come more from the poor and middle class than from the rich. Virtually every states tax system is fundamentally unfair, taking a much greater share of income from middle- and low-income families than from wealthy families, the report says. The absence of a graduated personal income tax and the over reliance on consumption taxes exacerbate this problem in many states. The report measures property, sales and excise taxes on gasoline and cigarettes paid by different income groups in each state in 2013 and concludes Florida isNo. 2 of the terrible 10-- the second most-regressive tax system in the country. (No. 1 wasWashington state.) The No. 1 and No. 2 predictor of a very unfair tax system is not having a personal income tax of any kind and an above-average sales tax, and Florida has both of those things, said Matt Gardner, the institutes executive director. The report found that for non-elderly taxpayers, the bottom 20 percent pay 13.2 percent of their income toward state and local taxes. Meanwhile, the top 1 percent of earners only pay about 2.3 percent of their income toward state and local taxes. The report gives a nod to one progressive feature of Floridas taxes: We dont have sales taxes on groceries. We were unable to find any other entity that included Florida in a state-by-state comparison of regressivity and taxes. The Tax Foundation, a business-backed group that analyzes tax policy, wrote areportcriticizing the institutes study, but their points were not specifically about the states rankings. Instead, they criticized the report for promoting income taxes. The foundation does its own ranking of states in terms ofbusiness climate-- Florida placed fifth. We interviewed a few experts on taxes, and they were not surprised by Floridas ranking when it comes to regressive taxes. Not that many states dont have an income tax, so that puts us in a small group that looks more regressive, said University of Central Florida economist Sean Snaith. However, he said, regressive and burdensome are separate issues. The tax burden in Florida is still very low, despite being regressive. Aaron Twait, research director at the Minnesota Center for Fiscal Excellence, said there are only two taxes that are progressive: the income tax and the estate tax. States that dont have the income tax -- they just dont have that lever to pull, he said. Sales taxes, property taxes, and excise taxes run from moderately regressive to really regressive. Our ruling Rich said that there is evidence that Florida has the third most-regressive tax base, though she acknowledged when she spoke she wasnt certain if she had the number right. She was close: A study placed Florida No. 2 in terms of its regressive tax base. Florida has a regressive tax base because we lack a state income tax. Though the Tax Foundation criticized the report, it didnt dispute the states rankings, and other experts we interviewed also had no qualms about Floridas placement. Richs number of third place was just a smidgen low, so we rate this claim Mostly True.

True

Rich cited a 2013reportby The Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, which partners withCitizens for Tax Justice, a group that advocates for fair taxation of middle- and low-income families.The report measures property, sales and excise taxes on gasoline and cigarettes paid by different income groups in each state in 2013 and concludes Florida isNo. 2 of the terrible 10-- the second most-regressive tax system in the country. (No. 1 wasWashington state.)The Tax Foundation, a business-backed group that analyzes tax policy, wrote areportcriticizing the institutes study, but their points were not specifically about the states rankings. Instead, they criticized the report for promoting income taxes.The foundation does its own ranking of states in terms ofbusiness climate-- Florida placed fifth.

FMD_train_491

"Is Ukraine planning to legalize the production of pornography in order to generate funds for the military?"

10/19/2023

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

False

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

FMD_train_1735

Hawker Beechcraft can be rephrased as Beechcraft aircraft manufacturer.

01/02/2012

Claim: The U.S. government unfairly excluded Hawker Beechcraft from bidding to supply military aircraft for Afghanistan. Examples: [Collected via e-mail, December 2011] "Any president whose actions so consistently refute his own words must have deep contempt for the intelligence of the American public." The obama administration told U.S. owned Hawker Beechcraft earlier this week they are being excluded from bidding on the US Air Force contract for a light attack aircraft. That leaves Brazilian owned Embraer as the likely recipient of the lucrative deal. I found this one hard to believe so I did a little research. It was tough because this was completely ignored by the main stream media. This is a double slap in the face of the United States. At a time when jobs, the economy, and security are the most critical priorities for our country, the Obama administration decides to send a defense contract to a foreign owned company. This has to be the stupidest thing this administration has done to date. This is not just a dumb decision, it is a perfect example of why this president is such a poor leader. He talks about wanting jobs. He says we need to force companies to repatriate billions of dollars that Americans keep overseas. He wants to raise taxes so he can spend billions on stimulus that does nothing to stimulate anything. And when it's time to act, he sends our tax dollars overseas at the expense of American jobs and income for an American company. This is nothing more than a Chicago-style political pay back; but this time it is at the expense of our national security. How much more damage will obama be allowed to do in the next 14 months? One of the lead stories in the media this week blasted congress for insider trading. If this contract goes to Embraer it will be a huge pay off to another George Soros company. When will the 4th estate do it's constitutionally protected job and expose the real obama to the American people? Origins: On 30 December 2011, the U.S. Department of Defense announced that it had awarded a $355 million contract to Sierra Nevada Corp. (SNC) for 20 light air-support/single-engine turboprop aircraft that will serve as both trainers and ground-attack planes for Afghanistan's air force. Wichita-based aircraft manufacturer Hawker Beechcraft (HBDC) had hoped that their AT-6 aircraft, an armed version of their T-6 trainer which is currently used by the U.S. military, would be chosen for the contract, but the U.S. Air Force (USAF) excluded the AT-6 from the running, leaving the A-29 Super Tucano built by Sierra Nevada Corp. in partnership with Brazil-based Embraer as the lone eligible supplier. Hawker Beechcraft Corp. has since filed suit against the U.S. government over the exclusion, maintaining that the Air Force had not provided them with sufficient detail about the reasons behind their exclusion and that Embraer had been unfairly favored: The suit alleges the exclusion was "arbitrary and capricious" and seeks to prevent the government from awarding a contract until Beechcraft can make its case in court. "This is yet another example of the Air Force's lack of transparency throughout this competition," said Bill Boisture, Hawker Beechcraft chairman and CEO, in a statement. "With this development, it now seems even clearer that the Air Force intended to award the contract to Embraer from early in this process." "We think we were wrongfully excluded from the competition," Boisture said. "We don't understand the basis for the exclusion, and frankly, we think we've got the best airplane. "So we're going to take every avenue available to us to make sure our product is fully evaluated and recognized for what it is. There are several issues here that just, frankly, don't make sense." The Air Force maintains that the process was fair, that Hawker Beechcraft was excluded because "multiple deficiencies and significant weaknesses found in HBDC's proposal make it technically unacceptable and results in unacceptable mission capability risk," and that the company failed to respond to its notice of exclusion in time to request a debriefing or file a protest: respond Lt. Col. Wesley Miller, an Air Force spokesman, said the contest "was conducted in accordance with all applicable laws and regulations" and that the evaluation of the aircraft "was fair, open and transparent." In dismissing Hawker Beechcraft Corp from the competition, the Air Force found Hawker Beechcraft's bid "technically unacceptable," one that would result in an "unacceptable mission capability risk." The Air Force said the company missed a three-day deadline to file a request for a debriefing and a 10-day deadline to file a protest. It is not possible at this point to definitively determine why the USAF excluded Hawker Beechcraft from the Light Aircraft Support (LAS) bidding, as ongoing litigation prevents the Air Force from releasing information regarding the competition, but according to industry observers the primary issue behind Hawker Beechcraft's disqualification was that the LAS contract called for a non-developmental, production-ready aircraft, and Hawker Beechcraft's AT-6 was still a developmental aircraft. observers According to SNC's own statement on the issue: statement In its Request for Proposal, the Air Force specifically sought a non-developmental, in-production aircraft so that warfighters in-theater could have an advanced solution quickly and so that American taxpayers would not have to pay development costs. The plane proposed by SNC's competitor is a developmental aircraft that is not in production and has never been used for light air support or any other purpose. The AT-6 is a developmental aircraft. With only two prototypes in existence, it has never been in production. In contrast, the aircraft selected by the Air Force and to be provided by SNC, Embraer's A-29 Super Tucano, is a light air support aircraft that is currently in use with six air forces around the world. Unlike the AT-6, the A-29 Super Tucano has more than seven years of real-world combat and training experience behind it. This means that its operational costs are known and that all costly development issues related to weapons load, maneuverability and operations have already been worked out. Only the A-29 Super Tucano has actually flown in combat. More significantly, only the A-29 was built from the ground up to perform counterinsurgency and light air support operations. The A-29 is larger in size allowing it to make full use of the 1,600-hp engine without power limitations due to torque. It sits higher off the ground and has a broader stance, increasing stability on unprepared airfields. The A-29's longer tail section increases longitudinal stability and provides exceptional accuracy for the delivery of weapons. Only the A-29 delivery system is specifically designed with the five NATO hard points for external stores, translating into maximum operational flexibility for the war fighters in the theater. The AT-6 carries no munitions in its native configuration. This is a critical difference. The A-29 also is munitions-certified with over 130 operational external load configurations. The AT-6 is not yet munitions-certified. In February 2012, the Air Force announced it was canceling the contract with Sierra Nevada Corp. pending an investigation of the award: General Donald Hoffman, commander of the Air Force Materiel Command, has started an investigation, Jennifer Cassidy, an Air Force Spokeswoman, said. She said she didn't know whether the contract would be re-opened for competition and didn't elaborate on the reason for the cancellation. "While we pursue perfection, we sometimes fall short, and when we do we will take corrective action," Michael B. Donley, the Air Force secretary, said in a statement. "Since the acquisition is still in litigation, I can only say that the Air Force Senior Acquisition Executive, David Van Buren, is not satisfied with the quality of the documentation supporting the award decision." The awarding of the Air Force contract to a partner of Brazil-based Embraer did not necessarily mean that all the jobs connected with the contract would be sent overseas, as Embraer said that its partner, Nevada-based Sierra Nevada Corp., would build the turboprops in Jacksonville, Florida, if it won the contract: The A-29 Super Tucano will be built in America. Embraer will make the plane at a new production facility in Jacksonville, Fla. Over 88 percent of the dollar value of the A-29 Super Tucano comes from components supplied by U.S. companies or countries that qualify under the Buy America Act. No new jobs are being created in Brazil as a result of this contract. Despite the claim made in the example text reproduced above that the subject of Hawker Beechcraft's exclusion was "completely ignored by the mainstream media," it has in fact received widespread news coverage in a variety of media sources, including at least five of the nine highest-circulation newspapers in the U.S. (The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, the San Jose Mercury News, the New York Post, and the Chicago Tribune). widespread Also, we found no evidence to support the claim that "If this contract goes to Embraer it will be a huge pay off to another George Soros company," as we turned up no information indicating that George Soros holds an ownership stake in Embraer. The closest connection we found between George Soros and Embraer seems to be that the former is one of the leading shareholders in China's Hainan Airlines Group (HNA), and HNA bought ERJ-145 jets from Harbin Embraer, a partnership between Embraer and the Harbin Aircraft Manufacturing Corporation of Harbin, China. However, that connection makes Soros a customer of Embraer, not an owner, and therefore does not put him in a position to profit from the awarding of an Air Force contact to Embraer. shareholders Last updated: 5 March 2012 Hodge, Nathan. "Hawker Beechcraft Sues Over Air Force Bidding." The Wall Street Journal. 28 December 2011. Hodge, Nathan. "Embraer Hits Defense Barrier." The Wall Street Journal. 11 January 2012. Ivory, Danielle. "Air Force Cancels Contract to Sierra After Hawker Protest." San Francisco Chronicle. 1 March 2012. McMillin, Molly. "Hawker Requests GAO Review of Air Force Deal." The Wichita Eagle. 22 November 2011. McMillin, Molly. "Hawker Beechcraft Files Suit Over Air Force Contract." The Wichita Eagle. 28 December 2011. Associated Press. "Hawker Beechcraft Sues Over Air Force Contract." 28 December 2011. Associated Press. "Air Force Temporarily Halts Work After Hawker Beechcraft Lawsuit." The Washington Post. 5 January 2012.

NEI

The Air Force maintains that the process was fair, that Hawker Beechcraft was excluded because "multiple deficiencies and significant weaknesses found in HBDC's proposal make it technically unacceptable and results in unacceptable mission capability risk," and that the company failed to respond to its notice of exclusion in time to request a debriefing or file a protest:It is not possible at this point to definitively determine why the USAF excluded Hawker Beechcraft from the Light Aircraft Support (LAS) bidding, as ongoing litigation prevents the Air Force from releasing information regarding the competition, but according to industry observers the primary issue behind Hawker Beechcraft's disqualification was that the LAS contract called for a non-developmental, production-ready aircraft, and Hawker Beechcraft's AT-6 was still a developmental aircraft. According to SNC's own statement on the issue:Despite the claim made in the example text reproduced above that the subject of Hawker Beechcraft's exclusion was "completely ignored by the mainstream media," it has in fact received widespread news coverage in a variety of media sources, including at least five of the nine highest-circulation newspapers in the U.S. (The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, the San Jose Mercury News, the New York Post, and the Chicago Tribune).Also, we found no evidence to support the claim that "If this contract goes to Embraer it will be a huge pay off to another George Soros company," as we turned up no information indicating that George Soros holds an ownership stake in Embraer. The closest connection we found between George Soros and Embraer seems to be that the former is one of the leading shareholders in China's Hainan Airlines Group (HNA), and HNA bought ERJ-145 jets from Harbin Embraer, a partnership between Embraer and the Harbin Aircraft Manufacturing Corporation of Harbin, China. However, that connection makes Soros a customer of Embraer, not an owner, and therefore does not put him in a position to profit from the awarding of an Air Force contact to Embraer.

FMD_train_1385

Harvard Science Endowment

03/27/2010

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

True

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

FMD_train_1415

Did Ben Shapiro Get PPP Loan Forgiveness?

08/25/2022

In late August 2022, the internet was awash in heated commentary about the Biden administration's plan to forgive some federal student loan debt. For example, after conservative commentator Ben Shapiro voiced his opinion against student loan forgiveness, others clapped back with the accusation that he himself had received a federal loan that was later forgiven. The viral news site Uproxx published a headline that read, "Student Loan Debt Forgiveness Hater Ben Shapiro Got His Ass Handed To Him By Someone Who Pointed Out That He Had Over $20K Of PPP Loan Debt Forgiven." Many on social media shared a partial screenshot from a database tracking Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) loans provided by the non-profit news agency ProPublica. Here is one example from Twitter, with the Twitter user's name cropped out for privacy: The ProPublica database entry has much more information that would clarify that the "Ben Shapiro" in question is not Ben Shapiro the commentator. The person with that name who received $20,832 in PPP loans is a Los Angeles real estate agent. We reached out to real estate agent Ben Shapiro for comment and will update this story if and when we receive a response. We searched both the U.S. Small Business Administration's PPP database and ProPublica's database to see whether Shapiro's network of websites (The Daily Wire) received any PPP money and found no evidence that they did. We reached out to Daily Wire Editor-in-Chief John Bickley and will update when and if we receive a response. Shapiro called the allegation a "lie" in a Twitter post responding to the rumor. There is additional context to this controversy, namely that the loans in question are very different in purpose and structure. PPP loans were given out during the COVID-19 pandemic lockdowns, with the intent of preventing businesses from shedding employees or going under. They were designed to be forgiven; that is, if businesses used the money to pay workers and bills like rent and utilities, they didn't have to pay the loan back, and their debt would be considered satisfied. Student loans, on the other hand, were designed to fund higher education, with the expectation that they would be paid back in full.

False

In late August 2022, the internet was awash in heated commentary abut the Biden administration's plan to forgive some federal student loan debt.For example, after conservative commentator Ben Shapiro voiced his opinion against student loan forgiveness, others clapped back with an accusation that he himself had received a federal loan that was later forgiven. The viral news site Uproxx, for example, published a headline that read, "Student Loan Debt Forgiveness Hater Ben Shapiro Got His Ass Handed To Him By Someone Who Pointed Out That He Had Over $20K Of PPP Loan Debt Forgiven."The ProPublica database entry has much more information that would make it clear that the "Ben Shapiro" in question is not Ben Shapiro the commentator. The person with that name who received $20,832 in PPP loans is a Los Angeles real estate agent. We reached out to real estate agent Ben Shapiro for comment, and will update this story if and when we receive a response.PPP loans were given out during the COVID-19 pandemic lockdowns, with the intent of preventing businesses from shedding employees or going under. They were designed to be forgiven that is, if businesses used the money to pay workers and bills like rent and utilities, they didn't have to pay the loan back, and their debt would be considered satisfied. (Snopes received PPP money). Student loans, on the other hand, were designed to fund higher education, with the expectation that they would be paid back in full.

FMD_train_1606

When a Writer Falls in Love with You

02/10/2015

Claim: The viral quote "If a writer falls in love with you, you can never die" was written by Canadian rapper Drake. Example: [Collected via Twitter, January 2015] If a Writer Falls in Love with you, You shall Never Die #ReadSomewhere #ReadSomewhere Gaonka6hhora (@Gaonka6hhora) February 9, 2015 February 9, 2015 Origins: In January 2015, Canadian musician Aubrey Drake Graham, better known as the rapper Drake, incorrectly attributed a viral Tumblr quote about a writer's falling in love to Mustafa the Poet when he posted the meme to his Instagram page: @mustafathepoet A photo posted by champagnepapi (@champagnepapi) on Jan 14, 2015, at 9:11 PM PST. Hundreds of thousands of viewers liked the photo, and many who saw the above-displayed Instagram post believed it was written by Drake, while others noticed the musician's attempt to credit the original author and praised Mustafa the Poet for penning the viral phrase. However, the phrase "If a writer falls in love with you, you can never die" was written neither by Drake nor by Mustafa the Poet. The true author is Mik Everett, who first published the quote back in 2011 on her blog: Mik Everett blog. Lots of things might happen. That's the thing about writers. They're unpredictable. They might bring you eggs in bed for breakfast, or they might all but ignore you for days. They might bring you eggs in bed at three in the morning, or they might wake you up for sex at three in the morning, or make love at four in the afternoon. They might not sleep at all, or they might sleep right through the alarm and forget to get you up for work, or call you home from work to kill a spider, or refuse to speak to you after finding out you've never seen To Kill a Mockingbird, or spend the last of the rent money on five kinds of soap, or sell your textbooks for cash halfway through the semester, or leave you love notes in your pockets, or wash your pants with Post-It notes in the pockets so your laundry comes out covered in bits of wet paper. They might cry if the Post-It notes are unread all over your pants. It's an unpredictable life. But what happens if a writer falls in love with you? This is a little more predictable. You will find your hemp necklace with the glass mushroom pendant around the neck of someone at a bus stop in a short story. Your favorite shoes will mysteriously disappear and show up in a poem. The watch you always wear, the watch you own but never wear, the fact that you've never worn a watch: they suddenly belong to characters you've never known. And yet they're you. They're not you; they're someone else entirely, but they toss their hair like you. They use the same colloquialisms as you. They scratch their nose when they lie like you. Sometimes they will be narrators; sometimes protagonists, sometimes villains. Sometimes they will be nobodies, an unimportant, static prop. This might amuse you at first or confuse you. You might be bewildered when books turn into mirrors. You might try to see yourself as your beloved writer sees you when you read a poem about someone who has your middle name or prose about someone who has never seen To Kill a Mockingbird. These poems and novels and short stories will scatter into the wind. You will wonder if you're wandering through the pages of some story you've never even read. There's no way to know and no way to erase it. Even if you leave, a part of you will always be left behind. If a writer falls in love with you, you can never die. Vibe NY Mag On 23 January 2015, Mik Everett took to her website to express her frustrations with being a virally famous yet unknown author. A portion of Everett's article is republished below: website Last Monday, I woke up to something weirder than I could possibly imagine. I woke up to find that Drake had posted a quote by me on Instagram and that he'd credited the quote to another author. There is no Thought Catalog article entitled What to Do If a Famous Rapper Steals Your Quote. There is no Buzzfeed article on how to cope with the rabid fans of a rockstar insisting that you've stolen from him. To the best of my knowledge, this isn't a very common problem to have. Sure, I've heard of academic and artistic plagiarism before, usually involving two high-profile entertainment news celebrities. But I'm not a celebrity. I've sold, like, two hundred copies of each of my books. I live well below the poverty line. I'm a regular person who said something kinda catchy once on the internet, and lots of people liked it. And Drake liked it. I am so disconnected from that quote and the people who use it; I am simultaneously on the outside looking in on the very idea of fame and in the very middle of it. To be clear here, nobody broke any laws. Drake did not take credit for the quote. He attempted to cite the quote, like we all learned how to do in middle school. He just cited the wrong poet. That poet (he goes by Mustafa) did give me appropriate credit for the quote eventually. After Drake had reposted the quote and attributed it to Mustafa, I think it kinda blew up in his face, and people started hounding him to give me credit. And he did add my name in. But on the internet, that doesn't matter. Everyone else is still attributing the quote to Mustafa. And there's no way to fix it. Just try messaging Drake on Instagram. On one hand, it's not that big of a deal. The quote has been used several million times on the internet and is rarely credited to me. On the other hand, I would really, really, really like to make a living as an author. And in our day and age, there are no more camera-shy Thomas Pynchons. To be a financially successful author is inextricable from being a famous author. We hope this helps Mik Everett garner some of the recognition she deserves. Last updated: 10 February 2015.

False

If a Writer Falls in Love with you, You shall Never Die #ReadSomewhere Gaonka6hhora (@Gaonka6hhora) February 9, 2015 @mustafathepoetBut the phrase "If a writer falls in love with you, you can never die" was written neither by Drake nor by Mustafa the Poet. The true author is Mik Everett, who first published the quote back in 2011 on her blog: On 23 January 2015, Mik Everett took to her website to express her frustrations with being a virally famous, yet unknown, author. A portion of Everett's article is republished below:

FMD_train_1073

Did the Mayor of Minneapolis Cancel 4th of July Fireworks But Allow a Muslim Animal Sacrifice at 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_204

Is This Lev Parnas at a Family Birthday Party with Donald Trump?

01/20/2020

On Jan. 16, 2020, Lev Parnas, the American businessman who allegedly worked with U.S. President Donald Trump's attorney Rudy Giuliani to pressure the Ukraine to investigate the president's political rivals, appeared on "The Rachel Maddow Show" to tell his version of events that led to the president's impeachment. While Trump would later say "I dont know who this man is," the photographic record appears to tell a different story. The Rachel Maddow Show I dont know who this man is As Parnas' name moved from obscurity to infamy, photographs showing Parnas with various members of the Trump family, the Trump administration, and the president himself started to circulate on social media. While most of these images are genuine, some social media users attempted to strengthen the connection between Trump and Parnas by sharing a photograph that allegedly showed Parnas and Trump at a family birthday party when their children were young: photographs showing Parnas Trump family Trump administration president himself photograph The claim that the man in this photograph is Lev Parnas is not based on any credible information. This claim is based solely on the notion that the man in the photograph bears a passing resemblance to Parnas. However, Parnas' name was not attached to this picture until close to three decades after it was taken. And from what we can tell, Parnas is too young to be the man pictured here. This photograph was not taken at a party for "Lev's kid." It was actually taken in 1990 at a birthday party for Trump's son, Eric, who had just turned 6. The picture first received media attention in 2017 with the release of the book "Raising Trump" by Ivana Trump, the president's first wife. Raising Trump ABC News published this photograph in an article about the book with the caption: "Ivana Trump shares a family photo from Eric Trump's sixth birthday party at the Plaza Hotel in New York City in 1990." ABC News Here's the full photograph: Parnas was born in 1972 and would have been approximately 18 when this photograph was taken. The man in this photograph, however, appears to be much older than a teenager. By comparison, Donald Trump, who was born in 1946, was approximately 44 when this photograph was taken. born in 1972 Some social media users have pointed to a report in the New Yorker to bolster the claim that Parnas is indeed the man in this photograph. While the The New Yorker reported that Parnas started selling Trump Organization co-ops for Kings Highway Realty when he was 16, there's no indication that Parnas had a familiar relationship with the Trump family at that time. In fact, Parnas said that while he bumped into Trump occasionally at events in New York over the years, he didn't get to know the president until the 2016 presidential campaign (emphasis ours): The New Yorker Parnas soon became a regular at Trumps rallies and other gatherings. I started donating. We started to help raise money, he said. Gradually, Parnas said that he got to know other Trump donors, including Tommy Hicks, Jr., a private-equity investor in Texas who is close to Donald Trump, Jr. (Hicks has since become the co-chair of the Republican National Committee.)We became one big family, Parnas said. You got to understand, he didnt have a real campaign, a traditional campaign. It was make-it-up, you know. Like him or not, you understand what it is. It was more, like, you know, wed bump into each other constantly because it was all the same people, there were not that many of us. Parnas told me that he bumped into Trump plenty of times at events in New York over the years, but that they didnt get to know each other until the 2016 campaign. (Trump recently distanced himself from Parnas and [businessman Igor] Fruman, saying, I dont know those gentlemen. Now, its possible I have a picture with them, because I have a picture with everybody.) In sum, the claim that the above-displayed picture shows Parnas with the Trumps at a family birthday party in the 1990s is not supported by evidence. This claim is based solely on the notion that the pictured man and Parnas bear a passing resemblance to one another. However, Parnas was only 18 at the time this photograph was taken (while the pictured man looks much older), his name wasn't attached to this image until it became a political weapon 30 years later, and Parnas himself said that he didn't get to know Trump until 2015. Ward, Myah. "Trump Vigorously Denies Knowing Lev Parnas After Explosive Claims." Politico. 16 January 2020. Raymond, Adam. "Lev Parnas and His Powerful Republican Friends: A Photo Album." The Intelligencer. 16 January 2020. Baragona, Justin. "Don Jr. Admits Meeting Lev Parnas: I Thought He Was Israeli." Daily Beast. 19 January 2020. Benen, Steve. "Why It's So Hard to Believe Trump's Denials About Lev Parnas." MSNBC. 17 January 2020. Blake, Aaron. "The Trump Team Keeps Denying it Knows Lev Parnas, Despite Growing Photographic Evidence." Washington Post. 16 January 2020. Kindelan, Katie. "Ivana Trump Says She is 'First Lady.'" ABC News. 9 October 2017. Smith, David and Andrew Roth. "Who is Lev Parnas? Soviet-Born Operator Thrust Into Trump Impeachment Scandal." The Guardian. 16 January 2020. Primm, Katie. "Trump Lawyer Dismisses New Evidence, Including Photos of the President with Lev Parnas.'" CBS News. 18 January 2020. Entous, Adam. "How Lev Parnas Became Part of the Trump Campaign's 'One Big Family.'" New Yorker. 15 October 2019.

False

On Jan. 16, 2020, Lev Parnas, the American businessman who allegedly worked with U.S. President Donald Trump's attorney Rudy Giuliani to pressure the Ukraine to investigate the president's political rivals, appeared on "The Rachel Maddow Show" to tell his version of events that led to the president's impeachment. While Trump would later say "I dont know who this man is," the photographic record appears to tell a different story. As Parnas' name moved from obscurity to infamy, photographs showing Parnas with various members of the Trump family, the Trump administration, and the president himself started to circulate on social media. While most of these images are genuine, some social media users attempted to strengthen the connection between Trump and Parnas by sharing a photograph that allegedly showed Parnas and Trump at a family birthday party when their children were young:This photograph was not taken at a party for "Lev's kid." It was actually taken in 1990 at a birthday party for Trump's son, Eric, who had just turned 6. The picture first received media attention in 2017 with the release of the book "Raising Trump" by Ivana Trump, the president's first wife. ABC News published this photograph in an article about the book with the caption: "Ivana Trump shares a family photo from Eric Trump's sixth birthday party at the Plaza Hotel in New York City in 1990."Parnas was born in 1972 and would have been approximately 18 when this photograph was taken. The man in this photograph, however, appears to be much older than a teenager. By comparison, Donald Trump, who was born in 1946, was approximately 44 when this photograph was taken. Some social media users have pointed to a report in the New Yorker to bolster the claim that Parnas is indeed the man in this photograph. While the The New Yorker reported that Parnas started selling Trump Organization co-ops for Kings Highway Realty when he was 16, there's no indication that Parnas had a familiar relationship with the Trump family at that time. In fact, Parnas said that while he bumped into Trump occasionally at events in New York over the years, he didn't get to know the president until the 2016 presidential campaign (emphasis ours):

FMD_train_72

Lithium Mine vs. Oil Sands Extraction

06/02/2016

In May 2016, an image purportedly showing the visual difference between lithium mines (from which a key element of rechargeable batteries is extracted) and oil sands (i.e., an unconventional type of petroleum deposit) began circulating online, with text suggesting that using the latter as a fuel source was actually less harmful to the environment than electric or hybrid automobiles: The image, however, does not feature a photograph of a lithium mine. The top portion of the image shows BHP's Escondida copper mine in Chile, one of the largest such mines in the world: largest Rio Tinto has a 30% interest in Chile's Escondida, the worlds largest copper-producing mine, which is managed by BHP Billiton. The bottom photograph was taken in Canada, but it shows a type of oil sands drilling site that isn't really comparable to a copper mine. Instead of selecting a picture of an open tar sand pit, the creator of this image chose a "cleaner" photograph showing an in situ oil sands facility that operates deep underground with little surface impact: Canada operates MEG Energy uses steam-assisted gravity drainage, or SAGD, technology to recover bitumen from the oil sands. In SAGD operations, pairs of stacked horizontal wells are drilled into the reservoir about 400 metres beneath the surface. The top well injects steam to heat the bitumen, which separates from the sand and collects with the produced water in the lower well, approximately five metres below. The bitumen is then pumped to the surface, where it is separated from the water. The water is treated and recycled into the system: Other pictures show very different views of oil sands extraction sites, such as this 2009 National Geographic photograph of an Alberta oil sands site: photograph Dust clouds the sunset above this open-pit mine, a close up view of a small fraction of the areas surveyed in the Landsat satellite images. Oil sands mining operations are conducted on a massive scale. Similarly, this photograph shows an aerial view of Syncrude Aurora tar sands mine in the Boreal Forest north of Fort McMurray, Alberta: tar sands In short, this attempt to portray oil sands as an energy source much more environmentally-friendly than (batteries derived from) lithium mines used a photograph of a completely different type of mine for the latter, and a misleading photograph of a non-representative site for the former.

False

The image, however, does not feature a photograph of a lithium mine. The top portion of the image shows BHP's Escondida copper mine in Chile, one of the largest such mines in the world:The bottom photograph was taken in Canada, but it shows a type of oil sands drilling site that isn't really comparable to a copper mine. Instead of selecting a picture of an open tar sand pit, the creator of this image chose a "cleaner" photograph showing an in situ oil sands facility that operates deep underground with little surface impact:Other pictures show very different views of oil sands extraction sites, such as this 2009 National Geographic photograph of an Alberta oil sands site:Similarly, this photograph shows an aerial view of Syncrude Aurora tar sands mine in the Boreal Forest north of Fort McMurray, Alberta:

FMD_train_1382

Did Someone Once Write a Check on the Side of a Cow?

12/30/1998

Although nearly everyone who still writes checks uses the sequentially numbered forms torn from books of blanks ordered from a printing company, there is no requirement that a bank customer must use such forms. Indeed, that fact has given rise to a number of tales about checks written on surfaces other than paper: surfaces other than paper A check doesn't necessarily have to be written on paper. There are legends, probably apocryphal, of checks written on the backs of shirts (by tax protesters) and on watermelon rinds (by goodness knows whom -- maybe madcap farmers), even on skin. If they were written in the right format, they could be cashed. [A check] can be written on anything. As long as it has the elements, the surface doesn't make a difference. A check is an order to pay someone, that's all it is. "It has to contain certain features, and it can be written on anything," says Brian Black, managing director of operations and technology for the Bank Administration Institute. "As long as it has the elements, the surface doesn't make a difference. A check is an order to pay someone, that's all it is." In that vein, the story of the check written on the side of a cow is so widespread that major banks reportedly make reference to it in pamphlets given out to new depositors as an example of some of the unusual things people have used as checks. Nonetheless, it's a completely fabricated tale, and it sprang straight from the adventures of one Albert Haddock, the fictitious and fanciful creation of British writer A.P. Herbert. Herbert's book Uncommon Law was first published in 1935. Herbert himself was called to the English Bar but never practiced, choosing another career path instead. He was a regular contributor to Punch for more than fifty years and the author of eight novels. He became a member of Parliament in 1935 and fought successfully for the reform of many licensing, divorce, and obscenity laws. Okay, now you know a bit about the author. As for his wondrous creation, Albert Haddock, here's a bit from the introduction to Uncommon Law: Albert Haddock made his first public appearance in Punch about 1924. I have always understood that I invented him, but he has made some disturbing escapes into real life. The first of the first series of Misleading Cases shown by the BBC on television in 1967 was No. 32 "Board of Inland Revenue v. Haddock" where Haddock, in payment of income tax, made out a cheque on a cow and led it to the office of the Collector of Taxes. Some weeks later I received a spacious cutting from an American newspaper (the Memphis Press-Scimitar) headed: A CHECK CAN BE WRITTEN ON A COW The article made not the slightest reference to me, my work, or the BBC, but used as news all Haddock's arguments and opinions on unconventional cheques. Halfway through, it suddenly claimed the authority of the Chase Manhattan Bank for the particular case of the cow: 'In the 19th century an Englishman named Albert Haddock got mad at the local tax collector over his bill and conceived a most ingenious idea for getting even.' Then followed the whole story. 19th century indeed! Haddock wasn't a real person any more than Sherlock Holmes was. A.P. Herbert loved writing about the law, so he created Haddock as an ongoing character upon whom he could hang his fanciful stories. The BBC's Misleading Cases comedy series, based on the exploits of the fictional Albert Haddock, used this one of Herbert's tales for its premier episode ("The Negotiable Cow," originally aired 20 June 1967), and someone at the Memphis Press-Scimitar picked up on it, didn't get the joke, and presented it as something that really happened. Not content to leave well enough alone, the Press-Scimitar threw in the bit about the Chase Manhattan Bank to lend an extra bit of believability to the tale. Misleading Cases One wonders how many cattle have been led into the Chase Manhattan Bank over the years thanks to the Press-Scimitar's gullibility. (NOTE: A number of Internet sources cite the 1985 edition of Michael Liepner's Applying the Law as documentation of the claim that "In Canada during the 1930s, a farmer painted a cheque on the side of a cow and cashed it." This citation is erroneous: the referenced book contains no such statement.) Herbert, A.P. Uncommon Law. New York: International Polygonics, 1935. ISBN 1-55882-107-4. Wansell, Geoffrey. "Cash on the Hoof for A.P. Herbert." The [London] Times. 27 August 1990. CNN Money. "Giant Cardboard Checks." 22 March 2001.

False

Although nearly everyone who still writes checks uses the sequentially numbered forms torn from books of blanks ordered from a printing company, there is no requirement that a bank customer must use such forms. Indeed, that fact has given rise to a number of tales about checks written on surfaces other than paper:Haddock wasn't a real person any more than Sherlock Holmes was. A.P. Herbert loved writing about the law, so he created Haddock as an ongoing character upon whom he could hang his fanciful stories. The BBC's Misleading Cases comedy series, based on the exploits of the fictional Albert Haddock, used this one of Herbert's tales for its premier episode ("The Negotiable Cow," originally aired 20 June 1967), and someone at the Memphis Press-Scimitar picked up on it, didn't get the joke, and presented it as something that really happened. Not content to leave well enough alone, the Press-Scimitar threw in the bit about the Chase Manhattan Bank to lend an extra bit of believability to the tale.

FMD_train_20

Did a Drag Queen in a 'Demonic' Outfit Read a Sexually Explicit Book to Children at a Public Library?

10/18/2017

In October 2017, right-wing websites reported with a significant degree of alarm that a drag queen in a "Satan-inspired costume" had read to children at a California public library associated with former First Lady Michelle Obama. In their headline, Conservative Fighters falsely claimed that Xochi Mochi had read a "sexually explicit" book to the children. World News Daily reported: "The Michelle Obama public library in Long Beach, California, has presented to children who are part of its young readers program a huge array of diversity and inclusion agendas." It was during Xochi Mochi's visit that the program was described as pro-LGBTQ, transgender, drag queen-friendly, and Satanist-approved, with characters featuring red-tipped, demon-like horns, all to read to children for LGBTQ History Month. The right-wing Media Research Center wrote: "In a nightmare-inducing vision that's likely spawned years of intense psychological therapy, children at the Michelle Obama Public Library in Venice Beach, California, were forced to endure being read kids' books by a five-horned drag queen in the most terrifying clown makeup known to man. And no, not for Halloween. For diversity." Setting aside the alarmist language used to describe this event, the Los Angeles drag performer Xochi Mochi (also known as Jorge Alcantar) did read to children at the Michelle Obama Neighborhood Library in Long Beach, California, on October 14. The reading was part of a series called Drag Queen Story Hour, which is run by the writer Michelle Tea and the literary and arts non-profit Radar Productions. Here's how the Drag Queen Story Hour website describes the project: "

NEI

In their headline, Conservative Fighters falsely claimed that Xochi Mochi had read a "sexually explicit" book to the children. World News Daily reported:The right-wing Media Research Center wrote:The reading was part of a series called Drag Queen Story Hour, which is run by the writer Michelle Tea and the literary and arts non-profit Radar Productions. Here's how the Drag Queen Story Hour web site describes the project:The photograph used in the reports mentioned above is authentic, and was posted to Facebook and Instagram by Xochi Mochi, who added:Long Beach Public Library also posted the photograph to its Twitter account, but has since deleted that tweet. (An archived version can be viewed here.)Republican candidate for Congress Omar Navarro asked in a tweet "what are we teaching kids in school?" and claimed the photograph of Xochi Mochi showed "demonic teachings." Setting aside the fact that the event took place at a library, not a school, the book Xochi Mochi is reading in the photograph is Todd Parr's children's book "It's Okay to be Different," which includes the following lines:Finally, Michelle Obama had no role in the event. The Conservative Fighters web site misleadingly referred to "Michelle Obama's public library" in its headline, suggesting that the former First Lady owns or operates the institution. She doesn't, but the library was named in her honor in September 2016.

FMD_train_176

Hillary Clinton's Premature Victory Celebration

12/19/2016

A video purportedly showing Chelsea, Bill, and Hillary Clinton prematurely celebrating a presidential election victory was widely shared on the internet in the wake of the Democratic nominee's loss on 8 November 2016: While this video was distributed by several web sites along with the assertion that it showed the Clintons prematurely celebrating a victory on election night that proved to be unrealized, little evidence was provided to back up this claim. The video contains no audio, is only a few seconds long, and as of this writing the sourceis still unknown. The earliest version we could uncover was published by LiveLeak on 16 November 2016, but that video was also lacking context. The Gateway Pundit attempted to prove to their readers (or possibly to mislead them into believing) that the video was takenon election night by providing a photograph ofBill, Chelsea, and Hillary Clinton in similar clothing at an 8 November 2016 campaign event: Although that photograph was taken on Election Day 2016, there were some obvious differences between the clothes the Clintons were wearing in that image and the ones they are seen wearing in the video. Mainly, Chelsea Clinton was garbed a sort of aqua sleeveless dress in the still photograph, but she sports a dark blue long-sleeved dress in the video: photograph Perhaps more telling is the change in Bill Clinton's attire. Photographs from Election Day 2016 show that Bill Clinton was wearing a light blue shirt with a dark blue and white tie, but in the video he is seen clothed in a white shirt with a salmon-colored tie: In addition to the optical discrepancies, the narrative behind the claim doesn't quite add up. Clinton was likely confident heading into the election since most polls showed her with a large advantage, so it's hard to fathom a moment which would have elicited such an act of jubilation in the course of an election night in which she lost. So when was this video taken? Bill, Hillaryand Chelsea Clinton were wearing outfits that match those shown in the video at the first presidential debate of 2016 at Hofsfra University: Embed from Getty Images It's plausible that the Clintons would have engaged a short but jubilant celebration after this event, as many observed felt that Clinton had won the debate. won The "premature celebration" video is frequently shared in close proximity to a similar claim holding that Clinton threw a tantrum following her election night loss. This rumor, too, is largelyunfounded. unfounded The Economist. "A Win for Hillary Clinton: The First Presidential Debate." 27 September 2016.

NEI

Although that photograph was taken on Election Day 2016, there were some obvious differences between the clothes the Clintons were wearing in that image and the ones they are seen wearing in the video. Mainly, Chelsea Clinton was garbed a sort of aqua sleeveless dress in the still photograph, but she sports a dark blue long-sleeved dress in the video:It's plausible that the Clintons would have engaged a short but jubilant celebration after this event, as many observed felt that Clinton had won the debate.The "premature celebration" video is frequently shared in close proximity to a similar claim holding that Clinton threw a tantrum following her election night loss. This rumor, too, is largelyunfounded.

FMD_train_1788

Is the CDC considered a 'Private Nonprofit Corporation'?

05/05/2021

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

False

Since November 2020, an identically worded bit of text alleging that the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) "is a private nonprofit corporation" has been shared across multiple social media platforms. The claim has its origins on the website Armstrong Economics which sells a variety of self-published conspiracy books by the titular Martin Armstrong and would become a well-shared bit of copy-and-paste "copypasta," reproduced in part below:Natural News, which boasts a massive audience of conspiracy theorists, republished it in December 2020. At the time of this writing, versions of this copypasta still creep up on various social media platforms. On May 3, 2021, a Facebook account named The Daily Callout published it along with a picture of purported CDC funding sources. Commenters to that post were evidently confused:The CDC is a federal agency housed in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). The confusion stems from the fact that, in 1992, Congress mandated the creation of a non-profit foundation the CDC Foundation that would "not be an agency or instrumentality of the Federal Government" and whose purpose would be "to support and carry out activities for the prevention and control of diseases, disorders, injuries, and disabilities, and for promotion of public health." As part of that goal, the foundation has an endowment and accepts charitable gifts from a variety of entities, including corporations, which are forwarded to the CDC to support specific initiatives. "The government has unique capacities as well as limitations. The same is true for the private and philanthropic sectors," the CDC Foundation argues on its website. "We believe that people, groups and organizations have greater positive impact and can accomplish more collectively than individually." Funds raised by the CDC foundation are donated to various programs and initiatives within the CDC.The CDC Foundation is one of two ways corporations can legally provide funds to the CDC. Donations to the CDC foundation are an indirect route as, by law, "officers, employees, and members of the board of the Foundation shall not be officers or employees of the Federal Government." Direct gifts by corporations to the CDC are also allowed under a portion of the U.S. Code that authorizes the secretary of HHS "to accept on behalf of the United States gifts made ... for the benefit of the Service or for the carrying out of any of its functions."For both direct gifts to the CDC and gifts made via the CDC Foundation, conditional funding is allowed so long as those requirements are not, as outlined in CDC policy documents:The acceptance of corporate donations earmarked for specific causes both to the CDC Foundation and to the CDC itself have caused apparent conflicts of interest. In 2015, the medical journal BMJ published an editorial outlining several examples of potential conflicts, including these examples:The CDC argues that it has policies in place to prevent such conflicts. Its website states that "when we engage with the private sector we maintain our scientific integrity by participating in a gift review process that is rigorous and transparent. CDCs gift acceptance policy requires a comprehensive gift review prior to accepting a gift. This includes CDC Foundation (CDCF) gifts and gifts given directly to [the] CDC, whether they are monetary or non-monetary." These processes have been refined and standardized several times since 2014.While the issue of potential corporate influence over public health policy merits scrutiny, it is also important to consider the scale of private funding compared to the overall congressionally appropriated budget of the CDC. In the 2020 fiscal year, the CDC received $13 million in conditional gifts from the CDC Foundation and $10 million in conditional and unconditional direct contributions from the private sector. This is a drop in the bucket compared to the nearly $8 billion in funding the CDC receives from Congress:

FMD_train_299

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

01/21/2017

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

True

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

FMD_train_962

Does NASA Data Show That Global Warming Isn't Causing a Sea Level Rise?

08/01/2017

On 26 July 2017, supplement and paranoia peddling website NaturalNews.com made a sweeping conclusion about climate change based on a portion of a single chart they found. The post, by Mike "Health Ranger" Adams, uses a time series of satellite sea level data from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration to argue that climate change is no big deal and that the mainstream media is ignoring data that proves him right: post NASAs own data reveal that world-wide ocean levels have been falling for nearly two years, dropping from a variation of roughly 87.5mm to below 85mm. These data, of course, clearly contradict the false narrative of rapid, never-ending rising ocean levels that flood continents and drown cities a key element of the climate change boogeyman fiction thats used to scare gullible youth into making Al Gore rich. To "prove" this, Adams points to NASAs satellite altimetry data used by scientists to precisely measure global average sea level change since 1993 which he says busts the whole global warming thing wide open, despite its fairly unambiguous long-term upward trend: The NASA chart allegedly showing that sea level is not rising. Credit: NASA. The region of the chart around the last two years of the record that allegedly proves global warming is a lie is highlighted above. It shows a period of generally flat sea level rise. Astute chart readers, however, may note that there have been a number of times throughout the record in which sea level rise has been flat, or even briefly reversed, before continuing the more dominant rising trend. According to University of New South Wales climatologist and sea level expert John Church, this is the reason the "media" is "silent" on the issue; in fact, it is in no way newsworthy: The short term fall over the last year or so reported on the Natural News website is nothing out of the ordinary and in fact the fall seems less than several previous examples of sea level fall, such as [the drop documented in 2010-2011]. It does not seem to be a particularly noteworthy event. To understand why the event is not noteworthy, one needs to understand both the short- and long-term drivers of sea level change. From a long-term global perspective, there are two primary drivers of sea level rise: the first is the balance between water trapped in ice and water contained within the ocean itself. Simply put, when ice that is trapped on land melts, it increases the volume of water in the ocean, causing sea level to rise. primary drivers The second major driver is known as thermal expansion when water gets warmer it expands, increasing its volume. Research suggests that these two contributors alone explain 75 percent of the observed sea level rise since 1971. suggests These larger trends, however, can be dampened (or enhanced) by shorter term weather patterns. The most important factors to consider on this time-scale are the El Nio-La Nia cycle (which affects both water temperature, as well as evaporation and precipitation of moisture) and the hydrological issues associated with where rainwater falls on land. The best illustration of these factors combining to alter the overall trend of sea level rise is the 2010-2011 drop in sea level mentioned above. factors In this instance, the confluence of La Nia and a number of other atmospheric circulation patterns forced an anomalously large amount of rain to fall over the uniquely bowl-shaped continent of Australia, as described by Scientific American: described In most cases, though, water that falls on land eventually drains into the ocean. Even if a whole lot of rain fell in South America's Amazon, for example, it could slow sea-level rise for only about a couple of months, as it slowly made its way to the sea. So in order to make sea levels fall, the water had to be stored in a place where it didn't reach the ocean for a long while. That place, it turns out, was Australia. [...] Lake Eyre is the lowest point in Australia. It's usually a dry, salty flat. But when it rains heavily, the basin fills, and the lake teems with new life, as long-dormant seeds spring to life and birds flock to the lake. From 2010 to 2011, enough rain fell on Australia to fill the lower part of the lake almost completely, and the upper portion at least 75 percent. Australia got about a foot of rain more than normal over that period, said [National Center for Atmospheric Research scientist John] Fasullo. The continent stored that excess water for long enough to change global sea levels. That the world's smallest continent can affect global sea levels this way is pretty extraordinary, said Fasullo. It's also rare. [...] In addition to La Nia, other climate variations also played a role. Together, they forced the extraordinary rainfall and water storage in the Australian continent. Eventually, of course, this water evaporates and returns to the ocean, where it joins the expanding and increasing global ocean reservoir. We spoke to Fasullo the lead author on the study that documented the cause of the 2010-2011 drop in sea level about this current hiatus, and he told us it in no way conflicts with our understanding of the connection between global warming and sea level rise: Of course, this leveling does not conflict with our understanding of sea level rise and its main drivers. It is well known for example that sea level falls (in an anomalous sense) at the end of an El Nio due to drought subsiding over many tropical land areas such as the Amazon (water moves from the ocean to land surface) and heat being released from the ocean (as the tropical upper Pacific Ocean releases heat to the atmosphere, causing contraction). [The] recent leveling of sea level rise comes on the heels of an unprecedented rate of rise during the four years that preceded it (2011-14). In addition to global warming, this rise was also strongly influenced by the El Nio-La Nia cycle and so it too should not be oversold. Ultimately, the story published by Adams attempts to disguise a weather as a climatological trend, University of California, Santa Cruz Climatologist Gary Griggs told us: One or two or three years of weather means very little in the long-term record of sea-level rise just as it would have very little meaning for global temperature records. Due to a variety of atmospheric circulation patterns and variations, temperatures vary from year to year as does rainfall, etc., the recent 4 year drought in the west is a good example. Using two years of data to make sweeping claims about trends in the global climate system, especially when such fluctuations are known and understood by science, is misleading and inaccurate, and as such we rank this claim as false. Adams, Mike. "NASA Confirms: Sea Levels Have Been Falling Across the Planet for Two Years Media Silent." Natural News. 26 July 2017. NASA. "Understanding Sea Level" Accessed 1 August 2017. IPCC. "Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Core Writing Team, R.K. Pachauri and L.A. Meyer (eds.)]" 2014 (Chapter 13). Boening, Carmen, et al. "The 2011 La Nia: So Strong, the Oceans Fell." Geophysical Research Letters. 4 October 2012. Ogburn, Stephanie Page. "A Scientist Explains the Mystery of Recent Sea-Level Drop." Scientific American. 20 August 2013.

False

On 26 July 2017, supplement and paranoia peddling website NaturalNews.com made a sweeping conclusion about climate change based on a portion of a single chart they found. The post, by Mike "Health Ranger" Adams, uses a time series of satellite sea level data from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration to argue that climate change is no big deal and that the mainstream media is ignoring data that proves him right: The NASA chart allegedly showing that sea level is not rising. Credit: NASA.To understand why the event is not noteworthy, one needs to understand both the short- and long-term drivers of sea level change. From a long-term global perspective, there are two primary drivers of sea level rise: the first is the balance between water trapped in ice and water contained within the ocean itself. Simply put, when ice that is trapped on land melts, it increases the volume of water in the ocean, causing sea level to rise.The second major driver is known as thermal expansion when water gets warmer it expands, increasing its volume. Research suggests that these two contributors alone explain 75 percent of the observed sea level rise since 1971.These larger trends, however, can be dampened (or enhanced) by shorter term weather patterns. The most important factors to consider on this time-scale are the El Nio-La Nia cycle (which affects both water temperature, as well as evaporation and precipitation of moisture) and the hydrological issues associated with where rainwater falls on land. The best illustration of these factors combining to alter the overall trend of sea level rise is the 2010-2011 drop in sea level mentioned above.In this instance, the confluence of La Nia and a number of other atmospheric circulation patterns forced an anomalously large amount of rain to fall over the uniquely bowl-shaped continent of Australia, as described by Scientific American:

FMD_train_150

Was JFK Jr. a U.S. Senate Frontrunner Before His 'Suspicious' Plane Crash?

08/29/2016

John F. Kennedy Jr. was a popular public figure from his childhood until he died in a plane crash at the age of 38 in 1999. While there is never a shortage of conspiracy theories surrounding the Kennedys, or for that matter, the Clintons, an unfounded rumor circulating in political circles during the 2016 presidential election claimed that John-John was on the cusp of a successful U.S. Senate bid until Hillary Clinton threw her hat in the ring, with the insinuation that Kennedy was killed to clear the way for her candidacy. There is no evidence that Kennedy had definitively decided to stage a U.S. Senate run in 1999 in the face of Hillary Clinton's similar interest in the New York seat. Days after Kennedy's death on July 16, 1999, the New York Daily News ran a story quoting two unnamed friends of Kennedy who stated that he had considered running for the seat about to be vacated by retiring Senator Daniel Moynihan but had already dropped the idea when Hillary Clinton also expressed interest in it. Earlier that year, in one of the best-kept secrets in state politics, friends confirmed that Kennedy had considered seeking the seat of retiring Sen. Daniel Moynihan in 2000. The idea became moot once First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton signaled her interest in running, but the two friends said they expected the son of the slain President would eventually jump into politics as a candidate. One friend, who expected Kennedy to seek office in the "foreseeable future," also spoke of a conversation with Kennedy earlier that year about the Moynihan seat. "I asked him if he was casually thinking about it or if he was serious. He sort of said, 'I'm not sure. Let me think about it.' But the second friend called Kennedy's interest 'pretty serious,' adding, 'I think he was intrigued by the idea... Would he have decided in the end to go for it? I don't know. But he was clearly thinking about it. He talked to a few people about it. Then the Hillary thing ended it pretty quickly.' Clinton won the Senate election on November 7, 2000, beating Republican Rick Lazio more than a year after Kennedy Jr. was killed along with his wife, Carolyn Bessette Kennedy, 33, and his sister-in-law, Lauren G. Bessette, 34, in the crash of the single-engine plane he was flying to Martha's Vineyard. The implication that the Clintons had somehow engineered the death of Kennedy Jr. to prevent him from challenging her in her first bid for elective office is contradicted by the National Transportation Safety Board's (NTSB) report on the accident, which assigned the probable cause to pilot error. The probable cause of the accident, as stated in the report, is the pilot's failure to maintain control of the airplane during a descent over water at night, which was a result of spatial disorientation. Factors in the accident included haze and the dark night. There was nothing suspicious about the circumstances of the crash. Kennedy was an inexperienced pilot, and he chose to take his plane up despite questionable weather that caused haze to obscure the view of the horizon. The New York Times reported in 2000 that one of his instructors had offered to accompany him on the flight, but he declined. Kennedy only had about 72 flying hours logged without an instructor at the time of the accident. Weather reports on the night of the crash, July 16, 1999, cited haze or mist and visibility as low as four miles. Pilots who flew over the Cape Cod-Martha's Vineyard area that night reported serious haze; one told investigators he had flown over Martha's Vineyard and thought there was a power failure on the island because he could not see any lights. It's not inconceivable that the Kennedy family at one time eyed the seat being vacated by Moynihan. JFK Jr.'s death seemed to put a final nail in the coffin of the Kennedy myth known as "Camelot" and the family's political star power, but a July 25, 1999, Washington Post article on the family's future political prospects suggested that his cousin, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (who did not "conveniently" die), had been approached about entering the New York senatorial race. But there are suggestions among liberal Democrats that it is a fervent desire that Joseph P. Kennedy II's brother Robert F. Kennedy Jr., 45, might become a candidate. The environmental lawyer from the Hudson River Valley has some of the electricity of his martyred father and has said in the past that he could be interested in being governor of New York. According to one Kennedy insider, leading Democrats unsuccessfully approached RFK Jr. to run for the Senate seat being vacated by retiring Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan. John Kennedy Jr. had won the nation's heart when, at two years old, he was seen on camera saluting his father's coffin during the nationally televised funeral procession after President Kennedy's November 1963 assassination. Nicknamed John-John, he grew up handsome and charismatic and was thus seen as a potential heir to the family's glory days of political influence and celebrity. While his death was untimely and no doubt a tragedy, it was ruled an accident. And though Kennedy may have been personally popular and polled well, it is misleading to describe him as a "frontrunner" in a Senate race in which he was never actually a candidate.

False

There is no evidence that Kennedy had definitively decided to stage a U.S. Senate run in 1999 in the face of Hillary Clinton's similar interest in the New York seat. Days after Kennedy's 16 July 1999 death, the New York Daily News ran a story quoting two unnamed friends of Kennedy's who stated that Kennedy had mulled over running for the seat about to be vacated by retiring Senator Daniel Moynihan but had already dropped the idea when Hillary Clinton also expressed interest in it:Clinton won the Senate election on 7 November 2000, beating Republican Rick Lazio more than a year after Kennedy Jr. was killed along with his wife, Carolyn Bessette Kennedy, 33, and his sister-in-law, Lauren G. Bessette, 34, in the crash of the single-engine plane he was flying to Martha's Vineyard.The implication that the Clintons had somehow engineered the death of Kennedy Jr. to prevent him from challenging her in her first bid for elective office is contradicted by the National Transportation Safety Board's (NTSB) report on the accident, which assigned the probable cause to pilot error:There was nothing suspicious about the circumstances of the crash. Kennedy was an inexperienced pilot, and he chose to take his plane up despite questionable weather that caused haze to obscure the view of the horizon. The New York Times reported in 2000 that one of his instructors had offered to accompany him on the flight, but he declined. Kennedy only had about 72 flying hours logged without an instructor at the time of the accident:It's not inconceivable that the Kennedy family at one time eyed the seat being vacated by Moynihan. JFK Jr.'s death seemed to put a final nail in the coffin of the Kennedy myth known as "Camelot" and the family's political star power, but a 25 July 1999 Washington Post article on the family's future political prospects suggested that his cousin, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. (who did not "conveniently" die), had been approached about entering the New York senatorial race:

FMD_train_1398

Is it advisable to refrain from receiving a flu vaccination?

10/08/2016

Every flu season sees an increase in viral web stories making largely unsubstantiated allegations about the health risks of the flu shot that include claims about their scary-sounding ingredients, connections to a variety of diseases (including Alzheimer's), and their supposed lack of efficacy in general: The pharmaceutical industry, medical experts and the mainstream media are candid in telling us that flu vaccines contain strains of the flu virus. What they are less likely to reveal though is the long list of other ingredients that come with the vaccine. It is now a known fact that flu vaccines contain mercury, a heavy metal known to be hazardous for human health. Mercury toxicity can cause depression, memory loss, cardiovascular diseases, respiratory problems, ADD, oral health problems, digestive imbalances and other serious health issues. The article quoted above, which is representative of the text and claims that appear nearly identically in hundreds of Facebook posts, makes a number of claims that need to be investigated on their own merits: identically Claim: The flu shot makes you sick to begin with. Flu shots work by introducing dead (inactivated) strains of influenza virus, which trigger your immune system to create antibodies to fight those strains. These antibodies make your body more prepared to fight if should it be exposed to an active strain in the future. Because the strains are inactive, any sickness you develop after the shot is not caused by influenza, according to the Harvard Medical School: according The vaccine is made from an inactivated virus that can't transmit infection. So people who get sick after receiving a flu vaccination were going to get sick anyway. It takes a week or two to get protection from the vaccine. But people assume that because they got sick after getting the vaccine, the shot caused their illness. It is, of course, possible that feelings of sickness come from some of the side effects of the injection, but the vaccine itself is not infecting you in any way. side effects Claim: Flu vaccines contain other dangerous ingredients such as mercury. false Flu shots administered from multi-use vials may contain a preservative called thimerosal, which breaks down into ethylmercury in the body. Mercury is an element and as such it can be found in many different chemical forms. But when people are concerned about mercury toxicity, they are concerned about methylmercury, which is indeed toxic at high levels and could cause some of the problems listed above. may contain methylmercury Ethylmercury, on the other hand, passes through your body quickly, and numerous studies have found it safe for use in vaccines (though there is some evidence that its use could be problematic for infants a population that CDC does not recommend for flu shots anyway). Saying ethylmercury is dangerous because is contains mercury is like saying that your table salt is at risk of spontaneous combustion because it contains sodium. passes for infants recommend spontaneous combustion Thimerosal, additionally, has been used for decades by the anti-vaccine movement to stoke vaccination fear by suggesting it causes by suggesting it causes autism. This link has been discredited over, and over, and over, and over, and over again and is further compromised by the fact that autism rates are still climbing despite the fact that childhood vaccines no longer contain this ingredient. over over over over over climbing contain Claim: The flu shot can give you Alzheimer's disease. false The leading immunogeneticist Dr. Hugh Fudenberg, whom the article cites as the authority on this claim, had his medical license revoked in 1995 for ethical misconduct and was an outspoken proponent of the widely discredited MMR-autism link. His claim of the link between Alzheimer's and vaccines, though hard to trace, may or may not come from a talk he gave at the 1997 NVIC International Vaccine Conference. The statement has not been backed up by any published peer-reviewed research since then. In fact, a 2001 study found that adults exposed to vaccines were at a lower risk of Alzheimers. revoked in 1995 may or may not study Claim: The very people pushing flu vaccinations are making billions of dollars each year. Pharmaceutical companies (sometimes) profit from vaccines, but the fact that a company makes a profit is an appeal to emotion and is not evidence to support the claim of a faulty product or of nefarious intent. It also may not be accurate. A recent Atlantic article covered this question extensively, stating: article Not only do pediatricians and doctors often lose money on vaccine administration, it wasn't too long ago that the vaccine industry was struggling with slim profit margins and shortages. The Economist wrote that "for decades vaccines were a neglected corner of the drugs business, with old technology, little investment and abysmal profit margins. Many firms sold their vaccine divisions to concentrate on more profitable drugs." The suggestion of massive profits from flu shots ignores the fact that profits margins are generally much higher for other drugs than for flu vaccines, as well. The same Atlantic article cites one estimate that puts the vaccine market at around $24 billion. This sounds like a large number, but it would, in fact, account for only two to three percent of the pharmaceutical market worldwide. article Claim: There is a lack of real evidence that young children even benefit fromflu shots. Many anti-vaccine articles parrot the claim that "51 studies involving 260,000 children showed no benefit compared to a placebo for children under the age of two". This stems from a 2008 meta-analysis that did indeed conclude that there is less efficacy for children under the age of two, something the CDC already recognizes on their website. However, of the 51 studies analyzed and the 260,000 observations those studies included, only one study (at the time) was performed on children below the age of two using inactive strains (the kind found in flu shots). A later study in 2011 that reviewed over 5,000 research articles concluded that flu shots consistently show highest efficacy in young children (aged 6 months to 7 years), categorically rejecting the claim that there is a lack of real evidence that young children benefit from the shot. 2008 meta-analysis recognizes study Claim: The flu shot makes you more susceptible to pneumonia and other contagious diseases. false People with compromised immune systems are at higher risk of complications from vaccines when those vaccines contain live strains (which, again, the flu shot does not), and some skin reactions are possible immediately following an injection. risk possible However, the notion that the flu shot weakens the immune system is false. According to a review paper in the journal Pediatrics: paper Vaccines may cause temporary suppression of delayed-type hypersensitivity skin reactions or alter certain lymphocyte function tests in vitro. However, the short-lived immunosuppression caused by certain vaccines does not result in an increased risk of infections with other pathogens soon after vaccination. Claim: The flu shot causes vascular disorders such as fever, jaw pain, muscle aches, pain and stiffness in the neck, upper arms, shoulder and hips and headache. MISLEADING While the term vascular disorder is fear-inducing, it merely describes anything having to do with veins and arteries. The flu shot does not, de facto, cause any of these problems, but all the complications listed above are listed by the CDC as possible side effects. It is worth noting, however, that the flu will almost certainly give you some or all of these symptomsand with a much greater intensity than the symptoms resulting from a flu shot. CDC almost certainly give you some or all Claim: Children under the age of 1 are at risk of a neurotoxic breach of the blood-brain barrier. The blood-brain barrier is the medical term for the chemical and physical adaptations humans and other animals have that prevent pathogens and other chemicals in the body from entering the central nervous system. For this claim about neurotoxic breach be true, an infant would have to have a relatively weaker blood-brain barrier than an adult. The idea that the barrier is weaker in young infants, however, is a long-held but unsubstantiated myth. Numerous studies have refuted the claim, showing that the blood-brain barrier is fully developed in the womb, long before a child is born. blood-brain barrier myth fully developed Claim: Flu shots carry an increased risk of narcolepsy. false There is a well-documented, though statistically minor, connection between a specific H1N1 flu vaccine (Pandemrix) and narcolepsy. But such reports concerned only that one vaccine, which was produced for a specific flu strain, and have limited relevance to the seasonal flu shot. Pandemrix is available in Europe but not the United States or Canada. well-documented connection not Claim: The flu shot weakens immunological responses. This claim, from a scientific standpoint, is a repeat of the earlier false claim (above) that suggests your body is more susceptible to infection or disease after a flu shot. Harmful immunological responses is a broad and unhelpful term that, while it may have aided in turning up literally thousands of responses in an academic search, is not really all that surprising as the term would includes the already documented risk of a skin and allergic reactions that come with pretty much any injection. already documented Claim: The flu shot can cause serious neurological disorders. false The neurological disorder specifically associated with flu vaccines is the Guillain-Barr Syndromea terrifying disease that causes nerve damage and sometimes paralysis. A widely cited study on a population of individuals who received the H1N1 vaccine in 1976 showed an increased risk of contracting this disease whose cause is unknown compared to those who did not receive the vaccine: Guillain-Barr Syndrome The Institute of Medicine (IOM) conducted a scientific review of this issue in 2003 and found that people who received the 1976 swine influenza vaccine had an increased risk for developing GBS. The increased risk was approximately one additional case of GBS for every 100,000 people who got the swine flu vaccine. Scientists have several theories about the cause, but the exact reason for this link remains unknown. The link between GBS and flu vaccination in other years is unclear, and if there is any risk for GBS after seasonal flu vaccines it is very small, about one in a million. Studies suggest that it is more likely that a person will get GBS after getting the flu than after vaccination. It is important to keep in mind that severe illness and death are associated with flu, and getting vaccinated is the best way to prevent flu infection and its complications. This topic has been heavily researched for decades, and no specific consensus regarding the link or mechanism behind the flu virus and the disease has been established. What has been established, however, is how small the risk is relative to the risks of contracting complications from flu itself. A 2013 study in The Lancet stated that: study The relative and attributable risks of Guillain-Barr syndrome after seasonal influenza vaccination are lower than those after influenza illness. Patients considering immunisation should be fully informed of the risks of Guillain-Barr syndrome from both influenza vaccines and influenza illness. Current iterations of the seasonal flu shot do not have any live strains in them (though the nasal spray includes weakened strains), nor do they have any mercury (in the United States), detergent, antifreeze, or aluminum. They contain, at most, 50 times less formaldehyde than a pear. nasal spray nor aluminum pear We, of course, are not healthcare providers and cannot make any medical decisions for you. The purpose of this post is to correct misinformation on the Internet, and there are few topics that lend themselves to as much misinformation as vaccines. All healthcare decisions, however, should be made between you and your doctor. Harvard Medical School. "10 Flu Myths." November 2009. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. "Possible Side-Effects from Vaccines." Accessed 8 October 2016. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. "Vaccine Excipient & Media Summary." Accessed 8 October 2016. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. "Thimerosal in Vaccines." Accessed 8 October 2016. World Health Organization. "Statement on Thimerosal." July 2006. Dorea, J.G. "Low-Dose Mercury Exposure in Early Life: Relevance of Thimerosal to Fetuses, Newborns and Infants." Current Medical Chemistry. 2013. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. "Key Facts About Seasonal Flu Vaccine." Accessed 8 October 2016. Verreault, Rene et al. "Past Exposure to Vaccines and Subsequent Risk of Alzheimer's Disease." CMAJ. 27 November 2001. Gorski, David. "Oh, Come On, Superman!: Bill Maher Versus 'Western Medicine.'" Science Based Medicine. 7 September 2009. Casewatch. "Disciplinary Actions Against Herman Hugh Fudenberg, M.D." 20 April 2005. Pediatrics. "Joint Statement of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) and the United States Public Health Service (USPHS)." September 1999. Taylor. Luke E. et al. Vaccines Are Not Associated with Autism: An Evidence-Based Meta-Analysis of Case-Control and Cohort Studies." Vaccine. 17 June 2014. Ball, L.K. et al. An Assessment of Thimerosal Use in Childhood Vaccines." Pediatrics. May 2001. Madsen, Kreesten, M. et al. A Population-Based Study of Measles, Mumps, and Rubella Vaccination and Autism." New England Journal of Medicine. 7 November 2002. Hviid, Anders et al. Association Between Thimerosal-Containing Vaccine and Autism." New England Journal of Medicine. October 2003. The National Academies. "Immunization Safety Review: Vaccines and Autism." 2004. Vaccine Knowledge Project. "Vaccine Ingredients." Accessed 8 October 2016. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. "Vaccines Adjuvants." Accessed 8 October 2016. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. "Flublok Seasonal Influenza (Flu) Vaccine." Accessed 8 October 2016. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. "Guillain-Barre Syndrome." Accessed 8 October 2016. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. "Narcolepsy Following Pandemrix Influenza Vaccination in Europe." Accessed 8 October 2016. Miller, Elizabeth et al. Risk of Narcolepsy in Children and Young People Receiving As03 Adjuvanted Pandemic A/h1n1 2009 Influenza Vaccine: Retrospective Analysis." BMJ. 26 February 2013. Moretti, Raffella et al. Blood-Brain Barrier Dysfunction in Disorders of the Developing Brain." Frontiers in Neuroscience. 17 February 2015. Volodin, N.N. et al. Status of the Blood-brain Barrier in Newborn Infants of Various Gestational Ages in the Normal State and in Pathology." Pediatriia. 1989. Saunders, Norman R. et al. The Rights and Wrongs of Blood-brain Barrier Permeability Studies: S Walk Through 100 Years of History." Frontiers in Neuroscience. 16 December 2014. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. "Flu Symptoms & Complications." Accessed 8 October 2016. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. "Key Facts About Seasonal Flu Vaccine." Accessed 8 October 2016. Osterholm, Michael T. et al. Efficacy and Effectiveness of Influenza Vaccines: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis." The Lancet. January 2012. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. "Vaccine Effectiveness How Well Does the Flu Vaccine Work?" Accessed 8 October 2016. Jefferson, T. et al. Vaccines for Preventing Influenza in Healthy Children." Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 16 April 2008. Lam, Bourree. Vaccines Are Profitable, So What?" The Atlantic. 10 February 2015.

False

The article quoted above, which is representative of the text and claims that appear nearly identically in hundreds of Facebook posts, makes a number of claims that need to be investigated on their own merits:Flu shots work by introducing dead (inactivated) strains of influenza virus, which trigger your immune system to create antibodies to fight those strains. These antibodies make your body more prepared to fight if should it be exposed to an active strain in the future. Because the strains are inactive, any sickness you develop after the shot is not caused by influenza, according to the Harvard Medical School:It is, of course, possible that feelings of sickness come from some of the side effects of the injection, but the vaccine itself is not infecting you in any way.Flu shots administered from multi-use vials may contain a preservative called thimerosal, which breaks down into ethylmercury in the body. Mercury is an element and as such it can be found in many different chemical forms. But when people are concerned about mercury toxicity, they are concerned about methylmercury, which is indeed toxic at high levels and could cause some of the problems listed above.Ethylmercury, on the other hand, passes through your body quickly, and numerous studies have found it safe for use in vaccines (though there is some evidence that its use could be problematic for infants a population that CDC does not recommend for flu shots anyway). Saying ethylmercury is dangerous because is contains mercury is like saying that your table salt is at risk of spontaneous combustion because it contains sodium.Thimerosal, additionally, has been used for decades by the anti-vaccine movement to stoke vaccination fear by suggesting it causes by suggesting it causes autism. This link has been discredited over, and over, and over, and over, and over again and is further compromised by the fact that autism rates are still climbing despite the fact that childhood vaccines no longer contain this ingredient.The leading immunogeneticist Dr. Hugh Fudenberg, whom the article cites as the authority on this claim, had his medical license revoked in 1995 for ethical misconduct and was an outspoken proponent of the widely discredited MMR-autism link. His claim of the link between Alzheimer's and vaccines, though hard to trace, may or may not come from a talk he gave at the 1997 NVIC International Vaccine Conference. The statement has not been backed up by any published peer-reviewed research since then. In fact, a 2001 study found that adults exposed to vaccines were at a lower risk of Alzheimers.It also may not be accurate. A recent Atlantic article covered this question extensively, stating:The suggestion of massive profits from flu shots ignores the fact that profits margins are generally much higher for other drugs than for flu vaccines, as well. The same Atlantic article cites one estimate that puts the vaccine market at around $24 billion. This sounds like a large number, but it would, in fact, account for only two to three percent of the pharmaceutical market worldwide.Many anti-vaccine articles parrot the claim that "51 studies involving 260,000 children showed no benefit compared to a placebo for children under the age of two". This stems from a 2008 meta-analysis that did indeed conclude that there is less efficacy for children under the age of two, something the CDC already recognizes on their website. However, of the 51 studies analyzed and the 260,000 observations those studies included, only one study (at the time) was performed on children below the age of two using inactive strains (the kind found in flu shots). A later study in 2011 that reviewed over 5,000 research articles concluded that flu shots consistently show highest efficacy in young children (aged 6 months to 7 years), categorically rejecting the claim that there is a lack of real evidence that young children benefit from the shot.People with compromised immune systems are at higher risk of complications from vaccines when those vaccines contain live strains (which, again, the flu shot does not), and some skin reactions are possible immediately following an injection.However, the notion that the flu shot weakens the immune system is false. According to a review paper in the journal Pediatrics:While the term vascular disorder is fear-inducing, it merely describes anything having to do with veins and arteries. The flu shot does not, de facto, cause any of these problems, but all the complications listed above are listed by the CDC as possible side effects. It is worth noting, however, that the flu will almost certainly give you some or all of these symptomsand with a much greater intensity than the symptoms resulting from a flu shot.The blood-brain barrier is the medical term for the chemical and physical adaptations humans and other animals have that prevent pathogens and other chemicals in the body from entering the central nervous system. For this claim about neurotoxic breach be true, an infant would have to have a relatively weaker blood-brain barrier than an adult. The idea that the barrier is weaker in young infants, however, is a long-held but unsubstantiated myth. Numerous studies have refuted the claim, showing that the blood-brain barrier is fully developed in the womb, long before a child is born.There is a well-documented, though statistically minor, connection between a specific H1N1 flu vaccine (Pandemrix) and narcolepsy. But such reports concerned only that one vaccine, which was produced for a specific flu strain, and have limited relevance to the seasonal flu shot. Pandemrix is available in Europe but not the United States or Canada.This claim, from a scientific standpoint, is a repeat of the earlier false claim (above) that suggests your body is more susceptible to infection or disease after a flu shot. Harmful immunological responses is a broad and unhelpful term that, while it may have aided in turning up literally thousands of responses in an academic search, is not really all that surprising as the term would includes the already documented risk of a skin and allergic reactions that come with pretty much any injection.The neurological disorder specifically associated with flu vaccines is the Guillain-Barr Syndromea terrifying disease that causes nerve damage and sometimes paralysis. A widely cited study on a population of individuals who received the H1N1 vaccine in 1976 showed an increased risk of contracting this disease whose cause is unknown compared to those who did not receive the vaccine:This topic has been heavily researched for decades, and no specific consensus regarding the link or mechanism behind the flu virus and the disease has been established. What has been established, however, is how small the risk is relative to the risks of contracting complications from flu itself. A 2013 study in The Lancet stated that:Current iterations of the seasonal flu shot do not have any live strains in them (though the nasal spray includes weakened strains), nor do they have any mercury (in the United States), detergent, antifreeze, or aluminum. They contain, at most, 50 times less formaldehyde than a pear.

FMD_train_562

Is Six Flags Closing Their Theme Parks to the Public to Host 'Muslim Family Day?'

10/16/2015

In September and October 2015, a flyer for an event called "Muslim Family Day" (most commonly specific to an 11 October 2015 event at the Six Flags Over Georgia theme park) began circulating among social media users. Many tweets and Facebook comments indicated users were unfamiliar with Muslim Family Day, its scope, or its purpose. According to the event's web site, the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA) began organizing Muslim Family Day outings across the United States in 2000: web site This event was first held at Six Flags Great Adventure, NJ, in September 2000. The event was immediately a huge success. The tragic events of 9/11 that resulted in the loss of thousands of innocent lives, also affected this event directly. The chief organizer, Tariq Amanullah, who worked on the 96th floor of WTC, Tower 2, passed away. The team was unable to come together again till year 2004, when the event came back bigger than ever before. In 2015, ICNA organized at least two Muslim Family Day events at Six Flags theme parks. On 14 September 2015, Six Flags Great Adventure in Jackson, New Jersey, was reserved for the event, as shown by a flyer available on the park's web site: Great Adventure flyer The 11 October 2015 Muslim Family Day at Six Flags Over Georgia was listed on the park's web site along with several other separate private events held there, such as "Math and Science Day," "Physics Day," "Relay for Life American Cancer Society Luminara Ceremony," and the "Scream Out Loud LGBT Pride Party": Muslim Family Day listed Six Flags Over Georgia will host Muslim Friends and Family Day, a private event in the Picnic Pavilions, presented by ICNA, Sunday, October 11, 2015. During this private event, Muslims and their friends, families, and all guests will be able to enjoy Halal foods, open-air bazaars featuring Muslim merchants, congressional prayers, informative lectures, our thrilling roller coasters and a stream of Islamic nasheed. Buy your tickets below, or enter promo code muslim on our website. Among rumors circulating on social media were claims that Six Flags locations were "closed" to non-Muslims on Muslim Family Day events, or that Christians were denied permission to organize similar events: denied WTF is this??! #SixFlagsBaltimore CLOSED TODAY TO ALL NON MUSLIMS! #RT AND SPREAD THE WORD #BoycottSixFlags#BREAKINGpic.twitter.com/btDYRKaywI #SixFlagsBaltimore #RT #BoycottSixFlags #BREAKING pic.twitter.com/btDYRKaywI Anonymous (@exposes_racism) September 19, 2015 September 19, 2015 Six Flags Baltimore is closed to non-Muslims on September 19! FUCK Six Flags and FUCK the Muslim Family Day! Dr. Frank Corleone (@DaGodfather907) September 18, 2015 September 18, 2015 Both inferences were misleading. Muslim Family Day is one of several private events organized by a variety of groups at Six Flags locations across the United States; when a group pays to rent a Six Flags park for a private event, it's up to that group to determine how to distribute tickets for the event. Moreover, most Six Flags parks have a "Religious Group Events" page, and Six Flags St. Louis, for example, features a description geared towards attracting private events for Christian groups: page Six Flags is the place for friends, fellowship and fun. Whether youre looking for a way to bring your church community together in a new and thrilling setting or celebrating with your youth group after a mission trip, Six Flags provides entertainment for guests of all ages. We offer a variety of programs that can enhance your visit to the park including concerts by the hottest names in Christian talent and catered options in our private picnic grove. If youre looking for a special way to celebrate, host a Sunday service at Six Flags. We offer a variety of venues and amenities, giving you the unique opportunity to combine your praise time and play time. Six Flags St. Louis will make your visit to the park one that your church members will be talking about all year long. The wording appears to be part of a general Six Flags template, as a nearly identical page was found on the web site for Six Flags Magic Mountain in California. One such upcoming event slated for that venue is the 7 November 2015 "Life Teen Catholic Youth Rally," and a flyer [PDF] for an August 2015 event at Six Flags St. Louis definitively answers the question of when "Christian Family Day" would be held by the amusement park chain: Magic Mountain event PDF In addition, there was "Christian Family Night" at Magic Mountain on 11 September 2015 (and a Hallelujah Jubilee the following day), a Christian music festival at Six Flags over Washington, D.C. in August 2015 [PDF], an April 2015 Christian Concert Weekend, and a Christian Fellowship Day hosted at Six Flags Over Georgia in July 2015. Many of the Christian-themed Six Flags events prior to July 2015 were subsequently archived and can no longer be accessed (so those events are likely just a handful of many that have occurred over the years). Christian Family Night Hallelujah Jubilee PDF Christian Concert hosted So while it's true that at least three Six Flags parks hosted a Muslim Family Day in 2015, many more Christian-themed private events have been held at the chain's parks (and contrary to some rumors, no "uproar" of "offended Muslims" has sought to stop them or threatened a boycott). Muslim Family Day (like any other private event) is for ticket-holders only, but non-Muslims who wished to attend were neither prohibited from doing so nor "banned" from the parks. Each Six Flags location features a page inviting groups to book religious events, and those pages primarily focus on Christian groups, churches, and organizations in their wording.

NEI

Many tweets and Facebook comments indicated users were unfamiliar with Muslim Family Day, its scope, or its purpose. According to the event's web site, the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA) began organizing Muslim Family Day outings across the United States in 2000:In 2015, ICNA organized at least two Muslim Family Day events at Six Flags theme parks. On 14 September 2015, Six Flags Great Adventure in Jackson, New Jersey, was reserved for the event, as shown by a flyer available on the park's web site:The 11 October 2015 Muslim Family Day at Six Flags Over Georgia was listed on the park's web site along with several other separate private events held there, such as "Math and Science Day," "Physics Day," "Relay for Life American Cancer Society Luminara Ceremony," and the "Scream Out Loud LGBT Pride Party":Among rumors circulating on social media were claims that Six Flags locations were "closed" to non-Muslims on Muslim Family Day events, or that Christians were denied permission to organize similar events:WTF is this??! #SixFlagsBaltimore CLOSED TODAY TO ALL NON MUSLIMS! #RT AND SPREAD THE WORD #BoycottSixFlags#BREAKINGpic.twitter.com/btDYRKaywI Anonymous (@exposes_racism) September 19, 2015Six Flags Baltimore is closed to non-Muslims on September 19! FUCK Six Flags and FUCK the Muslim Family Day! Dr. Frank Corleone (@DaGodfather907) September 18, 2015Both inferences were misleading. Muslim Family Day is one of several private events organized by a variety of groups at Six Flags locations across the United States; when a group pays to rent a Six Flags park for a private event, it's up to that group to determine how to distribute tickets for the event. Moreover, most Six Flags parks have a "Religious Group Events" page, and Six Flags St. Louis, for example, features a description geared towards attracting private events for Christian groups:The wording appears to be part of a general Six Flags template, as a nearly identical page was found on the web site for Six Flags Magic Mountain in California. One such upcoming event slated for that venue is the 7 November 2015 "Life Teen Catholic Youth Rally," and a flyer [PDF] for an August 2015 event at Six Flags St. Louis definitively answers the question of when "Christian Family Day" would be held by the amusement park chain:In addition, there was "Christian Family Night" at Magic Mountain on 11 September 2015 (and a Hallelujah Jubilee the following day), a Christian music festival at Six Flags over Washington, D.C. in August 2015 [PDF], an April 2015 Christian Concert Weekend, and a Christian Fellowship Day hosted at Six Flags Over Georgia in July 2015. Many of the Christian-themed Six Flags events prior to July 2015 were subsequently archived and can no longer be accessed (so those events are likely just a handful of many that have occurred over the years).

FMD_train_224

Jimmy Carter on Helping the Poor

02/26/2014

A purported quote from Jimmy Carter admonishing, "If you don't want your tax dollars to help the poor, then stop saying that you want a country based on Christian values. Because you don't!" sounds to many like something the former U.S. president would have said, as he has long exhibited a deep commitment to Christianity, established himself as an international humanitarian (including founding the Carter Center, an organization dedicated to advancing human rights), and was the recipient of the 2002 Nobel Peace Prize for his work "to find peaceful solutions to international conflicts, to advance democracy and human rights, and to promote economic and social development." However, as much as this sentiment might sound like something Jimmy Carter could have or would have said, he didn't originate the wording used here. The quote, as presented in the above graphic, appears to have originated with comedian John Fugelsang, who at one time presented a segment on Current TV's Viewpoint program entitled "Viewpoint's Revoltingly Fake Christian of the Week." The segment for the week of May 29, 2013, targeted Tennessee congressman Stephen Fincher, of whom Fugelsang said: "Congressman Stephen Fincher, a Republican from Tennessee, just took the Bible so far out of context he had to apply for a visa. Fincher is a fierce opponent of food aid for poor Americans. You know, like Jesus. He recently fought to cut $4.1 billion from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. If you only watch Fox, that means 'food stamps.' And thanks to the fine work of Fincher and his colleagues, 2 million working American families, children, and seniors have already been cut off from food assistance. So during a recent House agricultural committee debate, he decided to show how Christian it is to turn your back on unemployed suffering Americans by quoting one of the favorite Bible passages of revoltingly fake right-wing Christians: 2 Thessalonians 3:10, 'anyone unwilling to work should not eat.' Fincher and the GOP cut services for the poor and taxes for the rich. And it's a free country. They're allowed. But if you don't want your tax dollars to help the poor, then stop saying you want a country based on Christian values. Because you don't. And that's why Representative Fincher is our 'revoltingly fake Christian of the week'!"

False

However, as much as this sentiment might sound like something Jimmy Carter could have or would have said, he didn't originate the wording used here. The quote in the version presented in the above graphic appears to have originated with comedian John Fugelsang, who at one time presented a segment on Current TV's Viewpoint program entitled "Viewpoint's Revoltingly Fake Christian of the Week." The segment for the week of 29 May 2013 targeted Tennessee congressman Stephen Fincher, of whom Fugelsang said:

FMD_train_647

Bovine Unite

04/19/2005

Claim: Bovine Unite is a viral marketing campaign for a chain of chicken restaurants. . Example: [Collected on the Internet, 2005] I had just left my friends downtown when apparently a van pulled up and cows jumped out and started handing out bells with BovineUnite.com printed on them. I'm not sure what to make of the website. Apparently C-Day is on May 5th. I'm not sure if it's a clever campagin from Chick-Fil-A or what. But the whole thing is kinda funny. Origins: In April 2005, reports began flowing out of Maryland regarding innocent bystanders being cowed by groups of roaming bovines. These bovines were not rampaging bulls let loose on city streets ( la Pamplona), however, but humans in cow suits who traveled in vans and trucks and handed out free goodies such as bells, all emblazoned with the words "Bovine Unite" and/or the domain name BovineUnite.com. Pamplona Intrigued visitors who surf the BovineUnite.com web site (Cows only! Humans get kicked out.) are greeted with a manifesto of bovine revolt, presented to the strains of martial music layered with moos: manifesto My fellow bovines. Every day the humans chase us with horses, rope us, and milk us for all they're worth. Quite frankly, I've had it up to my udders. All work and no play makes Buttercup a mad cow. So, we must take action. And we must take action now. The time has come to rise up and take destiny into our own hooves. The time has come to claim our right to play in greener pastures. It's time to live, cows. Oh yes. It's time to live. The interior of the site includes links for "Propaganda" (downloads), a hangman game, a Bovine Blog, and a "Talk to the Herd" message board. Bovine Blog Talk to the Herd What's it all about? The only hint is a notice informing fellow bovines: "The plan goes into effect on C-Day 05.05.05 Tune into the networks between 8:45 and 9:00 PM for further instructions." There seems little doubt that BovineUnite.com is a viral marketing campaign being conducted on behalf of some corporate client, but who that client might be remains a mystery. A couple of creative agencies have been fingered for possible involvement: A poster at Ask Metafilter reported that a classified ad run in the Baltimore section of Craigslist seeking to employ cow-suit wearers in Baltimore included a Ask Metafilter contact e-mail address at RedPeg Marketing, so one presumption is that RedPeg is handling the campaign (especially since they've created viral efforts for other major corporate clients). RedPeg Marketing The registrant of the BovineUnite.com domain name (Will Davis) is Vice President, Director of Operations of Eisner Interactive, so that firm might also be involved. Eisner Interactive, Guesses about the type of business engaged in by the mystery client include chicken restaurants (such as KFC or Chick-fil-A), cow-derived food products (e.g., milk), or animal rights campaigns. (We'd venture that the campaign seems a little too obvious to be connected with the food or restaurant industry, and too whimsical to be the effort of an animal rights group.) The restriction (so far) of the BovineUnite campaign to Maryland indicates it may be advertising something of regional rather than national interest, such as the Maryland state lottery an outfit which appears in Eisner Interactive's list of clients. (Cash cows, anyone?) clients We'll just have to wait and watch to see if any more clues slip out before C-Day. Update: Looks like we guessed right: Bovine Unite was an ad campaign for the Maryland Lottery. Maryland Lottery Last updated: 5 May 2005

False

Origins: In April 2005, reports began flowing out of Maryland regarding innocent bystanders being cowed by groups of roaming bovines. These bovines were not rampaging bulls let loose on city streets ( la Pamplona), however, but humans in cow suits who traveled in vans and trucks and handed out free goodies such as bells, all emblazoned with the words "Bovine Unite" and/or the domain name BovineUnite.com.Intrigued visitors who surf the BovineUnite.com web site (Cows only! Humans get kicked out.) are greeted with a manifesto of bovine revolt, presented to the strains of martial music layered with moos:The interior of the site includes links for "Propaganda" (downloads), a hangman game, a Bovine Blog, and a "Talk to the Herd" message board. A poster at Ask Metafilter reported that a classified ad run in the Baltimore section of Craigslist seeking to employ cow-suit wearers in Baltimore included a contact e-mail address at RedPeg Marketing, so one presumption is that RedPeg is handling the campaign (especially since they've created viral efforts for other major corporate clients). The registrant of the BovineUnite.com domain name (Will Davis) is Vice President, Director of Operations of Eisner Interactive, so that firm might also be involved.The restriction (so far) of the BovineUnite campaign to Maryland indicates it may be advertising something of regional rather than national interest, such as the Maryland state lottery an outfit which appears in Eisner Interactive's list of clients. (Cash cows, anyone?)Update: Looks like we guessed right: Bovine Unite was an ad campaign for the Maryland Lottery.

FMD_train_757

Are Pins Placed in the Collars of Chinese Officers to Correct Posture?

08/26/2019

On Aug. 26, 2019, the Twitter account Discover and Know (@myth_vs_facts) posted a photograph that supposedly showed "how Chinese soldiers keep their posture" by placing a pin or needle in their uniform collars with the point facing toward the neck skin. This is a genuine photograph. It was taken in Beijing in February 2012 and shows a Chinese paramilitary policeman preparing for the National People's Congress. The picture is available via Getty Images with the following caption: A pin, used for training purposes, is placed on the collar of a Chinese paramilitary policeman undergoing a drill to prepare for the upcoming National People's Congress (NPC) in Beijing on February 28, 2012. China's parliament, the National People's Congress, is set to open its annual session on March 5. CHINA OUT AFP PHOTO (Photo credit should read STR/AFP/Getty Images). While this is a genuine photograph of a pin being used to correct posture, this is not a training method that all soldiers have to endure. A 2009 article from The New York Times indicated that this is a corrective measure for soldiers whose postures aren't up to standards: The New York Times The Olympics that dazzled spectators last year showed China's knack for meticulous preparation. Participants in the Thursday parade have engaged in similarly intense drills for months, according to reports in the Chinese news media. Soldiers have practiced endless hours to hold their rifles at precisely the same level. Photos show their instructors holding threads as rifle guides or sticking needles in soldiers' shirt collars, pointed at their necks, to correct poor posture. They have trained to stand motionless for a solid hour, to refrain from swaying during the second hour, and not to collapse after three hours, reported Xinhua, the state-run news agency. We found one other photograph from Getty Images showing a Chinese officer with a pin being placed in his collar in an attempt to correct posture. The following picture is available with the caption: "An officer sticks a needle in the collar of a paramilitary policeman to correct his posture during a training session in Hefei, Anhui province, September 13, 2009. VCP (Photo by Jie Zhao/Corbis via Getty Images)." LaFraniere, Sharon. "No Detail Is Overlooked as China Prepares to Celebrate." The New York Times. 28 September 2009.

True

This is how Chinese soldiers keep their posture. pic.twitter.com/WU8Y9DDLf5 Discover and Know (@myth_vs_facts) August 26, 2019While this is a genuine photograph of a pin being used to correct posture, this is not a training method that all soldiers have to endure. A 2009 article from The New York Times indicated that this is a corrective measure for soldiers whose postures aren't up to standards (emphasis ours):We found one other photograph from Getty Images showing a Chinese officer with a pin being placed in his collar in an attempt to correct posture. The following picture is available with the caption: "An officer sticks a needle in the collar of a paramilitary policeman to correct his posture during a training session in Hefei, Anhui province September 13, 2009.VCP (Photo by Jie Zhao/Corbis via Getty Images)."

FMD_train_1464

Facebook Appeal for Baby Born with Heart Outside Body

04/21/2015

Claim: Facebook is donating $1 per share to a medical fund for a baby born with his heart outside his body. Example: [Collected via e-mail, April 2015] The photo looks unreal, stating that "Fb" will donate $1 for each share of the photo showing a baby born with his heart outside of its body. Origins: In April 2015, an image urging viewers to share a photograph of a baby born with his heart outside his body in order to raise funds for his medical care was circulated widely via Facebook. However, neither the image nor its claim was new; the tandem was simply a reiteration of a hoax that had circulated more than a year earlier involving the same photograph and plea. This "raise money for a child's medical care by sharing this photo on Facebook" format of hoax is common. Previous variations include a child purportedly shot by a family member, a toddler who needed a heart transplant, and a little girl from Poland in desperate need of money for burn treatment. As is often the case with these popular social media hoaxes, the image used was of a real child suffering from a real medical condition, and that image was deliberately selected with the intent of tugging at the heartstrings of Facebook users for purposes unconnected to the depicted child's recovery or well-being. The photograph used in this case is one that was widely reproduced in conjunction with 2012 news coverage about the case of Hayes Davis, who was born with omphalocele, a birth defect in which the fetus's intestines and other abdominal organs stick out from the belly button. After a pregnancy filled with seemingly endless appointments and ultrasounds, [Kelly] Davis gave birth to Hayes on March 25, 2011, via Cesarean section at Children's Memorial Hermann Hospital in Houston, TX. "I was so excited to meet him, but the anxiety was almost overwhelming," the new mom said. "I didn't know if he would breathe on his own or eat on his own or whether the omphalocele would stay intact." In January 2012, doctors successfully corrected Davis's condition. After his mom spent months treating the condition and even documenting her world on her blog, "O Baby," Hayes underwent surgery to correct the organs. "The surgery went perfectly," Davis said. "Both surgeons were incredibly pleased. We're looking forward to a simpler way of life." Images such as the one of the "baby born with his heart outside his body" are carefully selected by Facebook scammers preying on the sympathies of social media users. Many people believe that sharing the image is harmless: If the claim is true, the baby is helped; and if it's false, only a small amount of their time was wasted. However, these types of hoaxes are typically lures for the distribution of malware as well as clickjacking, clickbaiting, and like-farming activities, made all the more reprehensible for their dishonest and unauthorized use of such photographs. In any case, Facebook does not directly donate money based on likes or shares generated for any purpose. Facebook's advice for charitable giving on the social network can be found here. Last updated: 21 April 2015.

False

This "raise money for a child's medical care by sharing this photo on Facebook" format of hoax is common: Previous variations include a child purportedly shot by a family member, a toddler who neededa heart transplant, and a little girl from Poland in desperate need of money for burn treatment.The photograph used in this case is one that was widely reproduced in conjunction with 2012 news coverage about the case of Hayes Davis, who was born with omphalocele, a birth defect in which the fetus' intestines and other abdominal organs stick out from the belly button:In any case, Facebook does not directly donate money based upon likes or shares generated for any purpose. Facebook's advice for charitable giving on the social network can be found here.

FMD_train_1275

Ronald Reagan Beat Jimmy Carter in a Landslide Despite Trailing 6% in Polls?

10/23/2016

Two and a half weeks before the 2016 presidential election, GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump trailed behind Democrat Hillary Clinton by an average of 6% in national polls, a statistic that buoyed Clinton supporters yet failed to rattle diehard supporters of Trump, who had managed, as The Guardian put it, to "confound expectations" all year. As the smoke clears from weeks of political bombardment, White House watchers are convinced the only questions now are how big Hillary Clinton's win will be and whether the Democrats can take Congress, too. Those Republicans still loyal to Trump cling to the hope that all the polls are wrong and that in barely two weeks' time, angry voters will again stun the world. Over and over, Donald Trump is saying one word: Brexit. "We will win," he told a rally in Pennsylvania on Friday. "We will shock the world. This is going to be Brexit-plus." Hubris aside, some of his supporters remained worried about voter defections in the wake of the Trump "groping" scandal, prompting calls for an eleventh-hour get-out-the-vote drive, not to mention homebrew efforts to rally people to the polls, like the image macro below: groping drive. The Internet meme was accurate insofar as public opinion polls taken in October 1980 showed Democrat Jimmy Carter holding as much as an eight-point lead over Republican Ronald Reagan (a Gallup poll two weeks before the election had Carter at 47% and Reagan at 39%), yet Reagan won a landslide victory in the general election, beating Carter 489 to 49 in electoral votes and by almost 10% in the popular vote. (It should be noted that 6.6% of the popular vote also went to a third-party candidate, John Anderson.) To conclude from that single example that polls simply ought not to be believed is a stretch, however. The 1980 upset was anomalous, the polling organization Gallup says, and based on factors unique to that year's campaign. Reagan's late-breaking surge that year is generally attributed to the only presidential debate between Carter and Reagan, held one week before the election on Oct. 28, which seemed to move voter preferences in Reagan's direction, as well as the ongoing Iran hostage crisis, which reached its one-year anniversary on Election Day. After trailing Carter by 8 points among registered voters (and by 3 points among likely voters) right before their debate, Reagan moved into a 3-point lead among likely voters immediately afterward, and he won the Nov. 4 election by 10 points. By contrast, in 2016, the two major party candidates had already faced off in three head-to-head debates, all held well before Election Day, that resulted in little or no improvement in Trump's underdog position in the polls. Among the many issues and challenges facing America, none looms in the forefront the way the Iranian hostage crisis (and the Iranian Revolution in general) did throughout the final year of Jimmy Carter's presidency. As Jonathan Chait noted back in 2012 when Republican challenger Mitt Romney found himself in a similar underdog position against incumbent president Barack Obama in that year's campaign home stretch: "In 1980, the economy cratered (nothing remotely comparable has occurred this year), and then the Iranian hostage crisis, after an initial rally-around-the-flag blip, steadily corroded Carter's popularity." No equivalent of those factors can be seen yet today, and pinning your hopes on a scenario where your campaign suddenly picks up ten points in the final month seems to be either an act of self-delusion or a ploy to keep anxious conservatives at bay. John Sides similarly observed when commenting on the 2012 presidential race that the notion President Carter held a polling lead over Ronald Reagan in 1980 right up until the very end of the campaign is something of a misconception: "1980 is a poor comparison with 2012 for many reasons. One is simply that the economy is not as bad in 2012 as it was in 1980. But there is another apparent misconception in the Romney campaign, which Nate Silver rightly picked up on: Carter didn't lead Reagan for much of the campaign. The [poll tracking] plot shows what Chait describes, which is the ebbing of Carter's poll standing throughout 1980. Indeed, Reagan didn't need his convention bump—which he certainly got—to put him in the lead. The Democratic convention helped erode Reagan's lead, but it never closed it altogether. At the end of the campaign, Reagan did surge, but this only increased his lead. His surge appears to have been brought on first by the debate, and then perhaps by several other events in the final week of the campaign: "On Friday of that week, the final economic indicator of the campaign showed inflation still seriously on the rise. And on Sunday morning, November 1, the Iranian parliament announced their conditions for freeing the American hostages. Jimmy Carter immediately abandoned campaigning and appeared on national television in the early evening to repeat much of what the public had been hearing all day. It was a week, in effect, with much that could affect the choices made by voters." Carter's pollster, Patrick Caddell, believed that Iran's rebuff doomed Carter, saying, "It was all related to the hostages and events overseas." Harry Enten of the statistical analysis website FiveThirtyEight confirmed that in ordinary circumstances, October public opinion polls are usually reliable and highly predictive of final election results: "In most years, the early-October polls [since 1952] were pretty close to the mark, with a correlation of +0.96 between the polls and the final result. Ten of the 16 elections featured errors of 3 percentage points or less, and in all but three campaigns, the polls were within 5 percentage points of the final outcome. Even in 2012, when Mitt Romney closed his deficit against President Obama after the first debate, the polls at this point still showed Obama leading. At this point in the election cycle, the average error of polls for all elections is just 3.3 percentage points (much lower than the 4.7-point error we found for just after the conventions), and every candidate who's been ahead in the popular vote in mid-October went on to win the election." Given the rarity of last-minute upsets, did Enten think Donald Trump still had a chance to stage a comeback and win the general election despite lagging 6% in the polls? "It's possible," he wrote. "But it would be basically unprecedented." Is that an excuse for anyone, regardless of party affiliation, not to turn out to vote? No, it is not.

NEI

Two-and-a-half weeks before the 2016 presidential election, GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump trailed behind Democrat Hillary Clinton by an average of 6% in national polls, a statistic that buoyed Clinton supporters, yet failed to rattle diehard supporters of Trump, who had managed, as The Guardian put it, to "confound expectations" all year:Those Republicans still loyal to Trump cling to the hope that all the polls are wrong that in barely two weeks time, angry voters will again stun the world. Over and over, Donald Trump is saying one word: Brexit.Hubris aside, some of his supporters remained worried about voter defections in the wake of the Trump "groping" scandal, prompting calls for an eleventh-hour get-out-the vote drive, not to mention homebrew efforts to rally people to the polls like the image macro below:The Internet meme was accurate insofar as public opinion polls taken in October 1980 showed Democrat Jimmy Carter holding as much as an eight-point lead over Republican Ronald Reagan (a Gallup poll two weeks before the election had Carter at 47% and Reagan at 39%), yet Reagan won a landslide victory in the general election, beating Carter 489 to 49 in electoral votes and by almost 10% in the popular vote. (It should be noted that 6.6% of the popular vote also went to a third-party candidate, John Anderson.)To conclude from that single example that polls simply ought not to be believed is a stretch, however. The 1980 upset was anomalous, the polling organization Gallup says, and based on factors unique to that year's campaign:John Sides similarly observed when commenting on the 2012 presidential race that the notion President Carter held a polling lead over Ronald Reagan in 1980 right up until the very end of the campaign is something of a misconception: Harry Enten of the statistical analysis web site FiveThirtyEight confirmed that in ordinary circumstances, October public opinion polls are usually reliable and highly predictive of final election results:Given the rarity of last-minute upsets, did Enten think Donald Trump still had a chance to stage a comeback and win the general election despite lagging 6% in the polls?

FMD_train_342

ALDI Coupons Facebook Scam

12/19/2015

In July 2019, an $80 coupon began circulating on Facebook for the ALDI grocery store chain. These shared posts were the latest iteration of the common "free coupon" or "free gift card" scams that frequently plague social media and have also targeted shoppers of chains such as Kroger and Target. A different scam coupon offer also circulated with the ALDI logo in December 2015, advertising a "get 40% off all purchases in store" promise. Another displayed what appeared to be a free coupon for "$60 off a minimum $70 purchase," and even one for $75 off: "Aldi has a coupon for $60 off a minimum $70 purchase. Aldi has verified this is a scam, but people are sharing it all over Facebook." These coupons are not legitimate, as ALDI themselves noted on their Facebook page. These coupon offers are a form of survey scams that direct victims to either a survey on a website not owned by ALDI or what looks like a Facebook page for ALDI. The survey pages and the Facebook page have no affiliation with the company, despite being adorned with the ALDI logo. Both instruct people to share the bogus ALDI coupon offer on their Facebook timelines and submit comments about it. This page instructs shoppers to follow these "two simple steps" in order to get their coupons. Once the steps are completed, however, users are not greeted with information explaining how to claim their coupons. Instead, they're asked to take a brief survey that entails providing personal information such as home address, telephone number, email address, and date of birth, and are required to sign up for credit cards or enroll in a number of subscription programs to obtain their "free" gift cards. A version of the scam also surfaced in May 2016, and another later in 2018. ALDI responded to frustrated consumers on Facebook. In June 2017, a version of the scam touting discounts in honor of ALDI's purported anniversary also appeared on Facebook: "HEY FRIENDS CHECK THIS OUT!!!!! Aldi is giving Free $75 Coupon to Everyone to celebrate 103rd Anniversary! Each Person (1)- Go & get yours! ALDI-COM.COM." However, attempting to visit the linked domain (ALDI-COM.com) led to a "deceptive site ahead" warning and not to ALDI's official website. If you frequently use Facebook, there is a good chance that you'll encounter one of these survey scams again. A July 2014 article from the Better Business Bureau lists key factors for identifying fraudulent Facebook posts: "

False

In July 2019, an $80 coupon began making the rounds on Facebook for the ALDI grocery store chain. These shared posts were the latest iteration of the common "free coupon" or "free gift card" scams that frequently plague social media and have also preyed on shoppers of chains such as Kroger and Target:If you frequently use Facebook, there is a good chance that you'll run into one of these survey scams again. A July 2014 article from the Better Business Bureau lists key factors for identifying fraudulent Facebook posts:

FMD_train_1164

Most Americans dont own stocks.

09/18/2018

The Dow Jones Industrial Average hasrisen by 32 percentsince President Donald Trump took office. But are Americans overall benefiting? U.S. Rep. Ro Khanna. D-Calif., suggested that they are not ina Facebook postspotted by a PolitiFact reader. Khannas post featured the headline, Most Americans dont own stocks. He repeated that point in his message, which accompanied a bar graph: FACT: Most Americans dont own any stocks. Instead of celebrating whenever the Dow Jones goes up, we need to focus on bringing investment and good jobs to the areas of this country that havent been part of the economic recovery. The accompanying graph details the distribution of stock ownership by wealth percentile, specifically 84 percent for the top 10 percent, 9.3 percent for the next 10 percent and 6.7 percent for the bottom 80 percent. The data in the graph stems from a peer-reviewed academic paper. However, when we took a closer look, we found the data in the graph doesnt directly support the claim that most Americans dont own stocks. In fact, the actual data on that question shows that a small majority of Americans do have a stake in the stock market. The data in the graph comes from apaperpublished in November 2017 by New York University professor Edward N. Wolff. One of the papersfindingswas that despite the fact that almost half of all households owned stock shares either directly or indirectly through mutual funds, trusts, or various pension accounts, the richest 10 percent of households controlled 84 percent of the total value of these stocks in 2016. This line by Wolff presents a key contrast that Khannas post glosses over: While about half of households own stocks in one way or another, the richest Americans hold the lions share of the value. Khanna uses a bar graph that highlights the imbalance in thevalueof stock holdings, but his headline claim is about thereachof stock ownership throughout the population. Those are two different things. When we contacted Wolff, he agreed that Khannas headline was wrong. So what does the data show on the reach of stock ownership? Its a bit wider than Khanna suggests. Even if you dont own or trade individual stocks, theres a decent chance you have a 401(k) account or an Individual Retirement Account or belong to a pension fund that is invested in stocks. Many individuals have an indirect interest in the stock market by means of their claims on pension funds that own stocks and use these stock positions to fund pension payments, said Hendrik Bessembinder, a professor at Arizona State Universitys W.P. Carey School of Business. A once-every-three-yearsstudyby the Federal Reserve Board found that in 2016, 51.9 percent of families owned stocks, either directly or as part of a fund. And in 2017,Gallupfound that 54 percent of respondents owned stocks either directly or as part of a fund. Those findings show a majority owning stocks a modest majority, but still a majority. In an email interview, Khanna told PolitiFact that he still feels the essence of the post is accurate but added that a better headline would have been, Most Americans Dont Have a Real Stake in the Stock Market. Khanna has a point that a households affluence does help determine how vested they are in the stock market. The Federal Reserve Board study found that about one-third of families in the lower half of the income scale had stock holdings. In the next 40 percent of the income scale, about 70 percent of households held stocks, while households in the top 10 percent of the income scale had stock ownership rates above 90 percent. Here's a chart from the Fed's report, showing how stock ownership rates vary depending on income level. Gallup, meanwhile, found that certain subgroups were notably less likely to own stocks, including those without a college education, younger Americans, unmarried Americans, African-Americans, and Hispanics. Khanna wrote that most Americans dont own stocks. To be precise, a narrow majority of Americans does own stocks, according to credible recent studies. But Khanna has a point that Americans of modest incomes are significantly less invested in the stock market than wealthier Americans are. Other large groups, including minorities and those without a college education, also lag in stock ownership, meaning that the stock rally is largely passing them by. We rate the statement Half True.

NEI

The Dow Jones Industrial Average hasrisen by 32 percentsince President Donald Trump took office. But are Americans overall benefiting?U.S. Rep. Ro Khanna. D-Calif., suggested that they are not ina Facebook postspotted by a PolitiFact reader.The data in the graph comes from apaperpublished in November 2017 by New York University professor Edward N. Wolff.One of the papersfindingswas that despite the fact that almost half of all households owned stock shares either directly or indirectly through mutual funds, trusts, or various pension accounts, the richest 10 percent of households controlled 84 percent of the total value of these stocks in 2016.A once-every-three-yearsstudyby the Federal Reserve Board found that in 2016, 51.9 percent of families owned stocks, either directly or as part of a fund.And in 2017,Gallupfound that 54 percent of respondents owned stocks either directly or as part of a fund.

FMD_train_956

Does Amazon Station Paramedics at Hot Warehouses Rather Than Install Air Conditioning?

08/18/2015

On 15 August 2015, the New York Times published an in-depth, widely discussed piece about online retailing giant Amazon.com titled "Inside Amazon: Wrestling Big Ideas in a Bruising Workplace" (subtitled "The company is conducting an experiment in how far it can push white-collar workers to get them to achieve its ever-expanding ambitions"). The Times' article focused renewed attention on Amazon.com for its perennially controversial labor practices. An Allentown Morning Call article titled "Inside Amazon's Warehouse," written by Spencer Soper and published on 18 September 2011, had covered much of the same territory. Elmer Goris spent a year working in Amazon.com's Lehigh Valley warehouse, where books, CDs, and various other products are packed and shipped to customers who order from the world's largest online retailer. The 34-year-old Allentown resident, who has worked in warehouses for more than 10 years, said he quit in July because he was frustrated with the heat and the demands that he work mandatory overtime. Working conditions at the warehouse worsened earlier that year, especially during summer heat waves when temperatures soared above 100 degrees, he said. He felt light-headed and experienced leg cramps, symptoms he had never encountered in previous warehouse jobs. One hot day, Goris said, he saw a co-worker pass out at the water fountain. On other hot days, he witnessed paramedics bringing people out of the warehouse in wheelchairs and on stretchers. During summer heat waves, Amazon arranged to have paramedics parked in ambulances outside, ready to treat any workers who became dehydrated or suffered other forms of heat stress. Those who couldn't quickly cool off and return to work were sent home or taken out on stretchers and wheelchairs to be transported to area hospitals. New applicants were ready to begin work at any time. Clearly, interest in a 2015 exposé on Amazon's treatment of white-collar workers revived attention on a 2011 story about Amazon's blue-collar (often temporary) workers. The outcome of the overheated workers' scenario described in the above-quoted excerpt was also addressed in a Reuters op-ed published on 17 June 2015. Meanwhile, Amazon's treatment of warehouse workers has been under scrutiny since 2011, when an investigation by the Allentown Morning Call newspaper revealed what were quite literally sweatshop conditions. When summer temperatures exceeded 100 degrees inside the company's Breinigsville, Pennsylvania, warehouse, managers would not open the loading bay doors for fear of theft. Instead, they hired paramedics to wait outside in ambulances, ready to extract heat-stricken employees on stretchers and in wheelchairs, the investigation found. Workers also reported being pressured to meet ever-greater production targets, a strategy colloquially known as "management by stress." Amazon declined to answer the newspaper's specific questions about working conditions in the warehouse, but eight months after the story was released, company officials announced that they had spent $52 million to retrofit warehouses with air conditioning. The New York Times article also revisited that earlier controversy: In Amazon warehouses, employees are monitored by sophisticated electronic systems to ensure they are packing enough boxes every hour. The Morning Call reiterated that issue in a 17 August 2015 article: in the case of the Pennsylvania warehouse, after The Morning Call published an in-depth look at the appalling conditions, the company spent $52 million adding air conditioners there and at other facilities around the country. It had been mistreating low-wage workers who had few options, and it deserved to be shamed into changing its behavior. While Amazon was widely criticized in 2011 (and afterwards) for heat conditions in a Pennsylvania warehouse, the company has since installed air conditioning at that warehouse and several other facilities.

NEI

The Times' article focused renewed attention on Amazon.com for its perennially controversial labor practices. An Allentown Morning Call article titled "Inside Amazon's Warehouse" written by Spencer Soper and published on 18 September 2011 had covered much of the same territory:Clearly, interest in a 2015 expos on Amazon's treatment of white-collar workers revived interest in a 2011 story on Amazon blue-collar (often temporary) workers. The outcome of the overheated workers scenario described in the above-quoted excerpt was also addressed in a Reuters op-ed published on 17 June 2015:The Morning Call reiterated that issue in a 17 August 2015 article:

FMD_train_51

No, Walmart is not providing a complimentary $50 'Anniversary' voucher on Facebook.

12/03/2019

In March 2020, Facebook posts offering free coupons supposedly worth $50 in merchandise from Walmart began circulating with the claim that the company was celebrating its anniversary: Users who clicked on the offer were taken to an external website where they were instructed to answer survey questions in order to receive their coupon: After completing the questionnaire, however, users are then required to click a button to share the "offer" with all their Facebook friends before they can retrieve their coupon. Those who comply by spamming their friends are then allowed to click a "Receive the Coupon" button. However, there is no actual coupon to receive. Like innumerable other "free merchandise" offers on Facebook (including previous examples targeting Walmart customers), this one is a scam. We've had many occasions to alert readers to this kind of fraud: other free merchandise offers targeting These types of viral coupon scams often involve websites and social media pages set up to mimic those of legitimate companies. Users who respond to those fake offers are required to share a website link or social media post in order to spread the scam more widely and lure in additional victims. Then those users are presented with a survey that extracts personal information such as email addresses, telephone numbers, dates of birth, and even sometimes credit card numbers. Finally, those who want to claim their free gift cards or coupons eventually learn they must first sign up to purchase a number of costly goods, services, or subscriptions. The Better Business Bureau offers consumers several general tips to avoid getting scammed: offers consumers Better Business Bureau. Scam Alert: Giveaway Scam Poses as Facebook. 14 April 2017.

False

After completing the questionnaire, however, users are then required to click a button to share the "offer" with all their Facebook friends before they can retrieve their coupon. Those who comply by spamming their friends are then allowed to click a "Receive the Coupon" button. However, there is no actual coupon to receive. Like innumerable other "free merchandise" offers on Facebook (including previous examples targeting Walmart customers), this one is a scam. We've had many occasions to alert readers to this kind of fraud:The Better Business Bureau offers consumers several general tips to avoid getting scammed:

FMD_train_1320

Jesus Statue 'Miraculously' Opens Eyes

08/10/2016

A viral video purporting to show a statue of Jesus Christ in Mexico miraculously opening and closing its eyes captured a fair amount of international media attention in early August 2016. "SPOOKY footage has emerged of a statue of Jesus appearing to open its eyes, with many believers claiming the spectacle is a miracle," UK tabloid The Sun reported on 10 August. The coverage continued: reported Investigators have scoured over the vision which appears to show the figure quickly open its eyes at a church in Mexico. Social media users were quick to comment on the clip filmed in the Chapel of Saltillo, saying it was merely an optical illusion or Photoshop job. What a coincidence that there was someone there to record it, one person wrote. Paranormal investigator Ivan Escamilla of the web site Adimensional, where the video was first posted, was undaunted by the skeptical reaction, claiming the video had been examined "for weeks" by more than 20 specialists, including priests, who "found no proof it had been doctored," the Mirror reported. According to the Argentinian newspaper El Ancasti, officials of the Diocese of Saltillo, who were the first to receive the video, declined to even view it, much less issue a statement about its authenticity. Adimensional reported El Ancasti As an exercise in documenting paranormal activity, there is frankly very little to recommend the footage. It's dark, blurry, shaky and low-resolution. As has been pointed out, the serendipitous timing of the video is suspicious. One does see the statue apparently open and close its eyes, but the sequence is more apt to bring to mind the cheesy special effects in a low-budget horror film than the impression that a miracle has occurred. The most striking thing is how thoroughly creepy and terrifying Jesus Christ's eyes look when they're open. If it is a miracle, it's a very odd miracle indeed. The best clue to the fact that the video was doctored is the fact that alterations in other areas of the image occur at precisely the same moments the eyes open and close. For example, here, in sequence, are three frames showing the statue's eyes wide open, in the process of closing, and completely closed. Observe the changes in the shadows around the eyes and not to be indelicate, but this is a giveaway the change in the shape of Jesus' right nipple: If the only thing happening in these relatively stable frames were the closing of the statue's eyes, no other changes ought to be visible. But changes are visible, especially when the footage is viewed at slow speed or frame-by-frame. For a much better demonstration of this than we can provide here, please give your attention to the video below uploaded by the Australian Phenomena YouTube channel. It seems the maker of this video, a UFO researcher named Dylan, had no trouble whatsoever finding the evidence of fakery that 20 previous experts (and priests) failed to detect. video

False

"SPOOKY footage has emerged of a statue of Jesus appearing to open its eyes, with many believers claiming the spectacle is a miracle," UK tabloid The Sun reported on 10 August. The coverage continued:Paranormal investigator Ivan Escamilla of the web site Adimensional, where the video was first posted, was undaunted by the skeptical reaction, claiming the video had been examined "for weeks" by more than 20 specialists, including priests, who "found no proof it had been doctored," the Mirror reported. According to the Argentinian newspaper El Ancasti, officials of the Diocese of Saltillo, who were the first to receive the video, declined to even view it, much less issue a statement about its authenticity.If the only thing happening in these relatively stable frames were the closing of the statue's eyes, no other changes ought to be visible. But changes are visible, especially when the footage is viewed at slow speed or frame-by-frame. For a much better demonstration of this than we can provide here, please give your attention to the video below uploaded by the Australian Phenomena YouTube channel. It seems the maker of this video, a UFO researcher named Dylan, had no trouble whatsoever finding the evidence of fakery that 20 previous experts (and priests) failed to detect.

FMD_train_1180

Here in California, Donald Trump has given $12,000 to Jerry Brown, Gavin Newsom and Kamala Harris.

05/03/2016

Texas Republican Sen. Ted Cruz is no ally of California Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown. However, Cruz is attempting to portray his rival for the GOP presidential nomination, Donald Trump, as a political friend of Brown and two other prominent Democrats in the Golden State: Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom and Attorney General Kamala Harris. During his speech on April 30 at the California Republican Party Convention south of San Francisco, Cruz stated, "Here in California, Donald Trump has given $12,000 to Jerry Brown, Gavin Newsom, and Kamala Harris." He went on to tell the GOP audience in California, "Y'all are experiencing firsthand the consequences of those misguided liberal policies." We wondered if Cruz's claim about Trump funding three top California Democrats was accurate, and if so, how recently Trump had supported these Democrats. Our research revealed that Cruz's claim is indeed accurate, based on campaign finance data from the California Secretary of State's website. However, Trump's donations to the Democrats are not recent. The GOP frontrunner contributed $3,500 to Brown's campaign for state attorney general in 2004 and 2006. He gave $2,500 to Newsom's truncated run for governor in 2009, and he contributed a total of $6,000 to Harris in 2011 and 2013 for her successful re-election campaign for attorney general. Trump has acknowledged financing both Republicans and Democrats throughout his long business career, all to gain political influence. Records show he gave $25,000 to the California Republican Party in 2005 and $12,000 to Arnold Schwarzenegger, the state's former Republican governor, a couple of years later. What Cruz does not mention about Trump's donations to the Democrats is that they occurred before Trump's run for the GOP presidential nomination. A Cruz campaign press release included a timeline for the donations, but we are fact-checking what Cruz said during his speech. Our ruling: Ted Cruz stated that Donald Trump gave $12,000 to three top California Democrats, including Gov. Jerry Brown. Campaign finance data confirm that Cruz's claim is accurate. However, Cruz omits the fact that the donations to the California governor took place a decade ago, before the Democrat ran for re-election to the state's top office. Trump's contributions to the other Democrats occurred in 2009, 2011, and 2013. In the end, we rate the claim Mostly True.

True

Here in California,Donald Trumphas given $12,000 toJerry Brown,Gavin Newsomand Kamala Harris, Cruz said during his speech on April 30 at the California Republican Party Convention south of San Francisco.Turns out, Cruzs claim is accurate, based on campaign finance data on the California Secretary of Stateswebsite.Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check.

FMD_train_1805

Ohio's (payday lending) laws are now the worst in the nation. Things have gotten so bad that it is legal to charge 594 percent interest on loans.

06/08/2018

Though consumer advocates have long called for changing the payday lending law in Ohio, a criminal investigation has resulted in the resignation of the state House speaker. Republican Cliff Rosenberger resigned in April as the FBI was investigating his foreign travel sponsored by payday-lending lobbyists. He denied wrongdoing. Rosenbergers resignation brought votes on legislation screeching to a halt, including aproposed bill to strengthen consumer protections for payday loans. Consumer advocates are collecting signatures to put similar language before voters on the ballot, likely in 2019. The Ohio Consumer Lenders Association, which represents the industry,opposes the measures. Richard Cordray, the Democrat running for governor against Republican Mike DeWine, has criticized the state law. The current shutdown of the State House has delayed legislation addressing payday lending, where Ohio's laws are now the worst in the nation, CordraytweetedMay 17. Things have gotten so bad that it is legal to charge 594 percent interest on loans that end up ruining peoples lives. Unconscionable. Cordrays statement comparing Ohios payday industry to the nation comes from a 2014 report by Pew Charitable Trusts. Cordray worked on changing rules on payday lending on a national level when he was the first director of the federal Consumer Finance Protection Bureau. The bureaufinalized ruleson payday lending in October 2017, several weeks before he resigned to run for governor.Cordray has attacked his successor, Mick Mulvaney,for attempting to roll back the rules. Payday loans are small, short-term loans that borrowers promise to repay out of their next paycheck at ahigh rateof interest. Aboutthree dozen stateshave their own payday laws, including Ohio. Proponents argue that the working poor need payday loans to cover their bills, while opponents argue that they trap borrowers in a cycle of debt. Aboutone in 10 adults in Ohiohave taken out a payday loan. In 2008, Ohio lawmakers approved the Short Term Loan Act. The law, opposed by the industry, includedprotections for borrowers, such as capping the loan at $500 and the annual interest rates for payday loans at 28 percent. However, payday lenders found a loophole: They registered as mortgage lenders instead. TheOhio Supreme Courtupheld the law in 2014, prompting one concurring judge to ask, Were the lobbyists smarter than the legislators? Did the legislators realize that the bill was smoke and mirrors and would accomplish nothing? Ohio is the only state where lenders operate under such a statute that was not intended for payday loans, said Alex Horowitz, senior research officer for Pew Charitable Trust's consumer finance project, which has researched payday laws in the states for many years. In a2014 analysisof states payday lending laws, Pew didnt flat-out label Ohio as the worst in the nation for payday lending. But it did find that borrowers were charged much more than their peers in many other states. By examining payday loan prices in each state from the four largest lenders, Pew found that over five months a $300 payday loan would cost an Ohio borrower $680 in interest and fees, which equals an average annual percentage rate of 591 percent (which is close to the 594 percent figure cited by Cordray.) No other state had a higher rate, according to the Pew analysis. The interest and fees amount in Ohio was slightly exceeded by Texas, but Texas has more protections for consumers, including a 180-day loan limit that Ohio doesnt have. While the typical loan is technically two weeks, in the majority of cases the borrower ends up in a cycle of loans for several months. While most states that allow payday lending cap loans at $500, Ohio lenders dont operate under the Short Term Loan Act, so they can make loans that are double or even triple the amount of conventional payday loans. The Center for Responsible Lending, an organization that calls for more safeguards for consumers,found in 2015that payday loan storefronts in Ohio advertised rates of more than 600 percent annual percentage rate. Diane Standaert, director of state policy, said that since that time some storefronts now reflect rates between 300 and 400 percent for some loans. But this is basically comparing the differences between (1) a very bad loan, and (2) another very bad loan, she said. The effort to change Ohios payday lending law gained steam in March 2017 whenHouse Bill 123was introduced by State Reps.Kyle Koehler,a Republican of Springfield, and Michael Ashford, a Toledo Democrat. The bill is similar toColorados payday lending lawwhich consumer advocates have upheld as a model example. After languishing for a year, itpassed a House committeein April 2018 about a week after Rosenberger resigned, but a full vote was placed on hold while lawmakers deadlocked over picking a new speaker. On June 7, theHouse passed the bill and it now heads to the Senate. The bill would cap the interest rate at 28 percent and a fee of up to $20 a month, which would mean that a borrower of $300 would pay $96 in interest and fees. Cordray said, Ohio's (payday lending) laws are now the worst in the nation. Things have gotten so bad that it is legal to charge 594 percent interest on loans. Pew Charitable Trusts found in 2014 that over five months a $300 payday loan would cost an Ohio borrower $680 in interest and fees, which equals an average annual percentage rate of 591 percent. While the report didnt call out Ohio as the worst in the nation, no other state had a rate that was higher, according to the report. The difference between the 591 percent cited in the report and the 594 percent tweeted by Cordray is negligible. We rate this statement True. '

True

Rosenbergers resignation brought votes on legislation screeching to a halt, including aproposed bill to strengthen consumer protections for payday loans. Consumer advocates are collecting signatures to put similar language before voters on the ballot, likely in 2019. The Ohio Consumer Lenders Association, which represents the industry,opposes the measures.The current shutdown of the State House has delayed legislation addressing payday lending, where Ohio's laws are now the worst in the nation, CordraytweetedMay 17. Things have gotten so bad that it is legal to charge 594 percent interest on loans that end up ruining peoples lives. Unconscionable.Cordray worked on changing rules on payday lending on a national level when he was the first director of the federal Consumer Finance Protection Bureau. The bureaufinalized ruleson payday lending in October 2017, several weeks before he resigned to run for governor.Cordray has attacked his successor, Mick Mulvaney,for attempting to roll back the rules.Payday loans are small, short-term loans that borrowers promise to repay out of their next paycheck at ahigh rateof interest. Aboutthree dozen stateshave their own payday laws, including Ohio.Proponents argue that the working poor need payday loans to cover their bills, while opponents argue that they trap borrowers in a cycle of debt. Aboutone in 10 adults in Ohiohave taken out a payday loan.In 2008, Ohio lawmakers approved the Short Term Loan Act. The law, opposed by the industry, includedprotections for borrowers, such as capping the loan at $500 and the annual interest rates for payday loans at 28 percent.However, payday lenders found a loophole: They registered as mortgage lenders instead. TheOhio Supreme Courtupheld the law in 2014, prompting one concurring judge to ask, Were the lobbyists smarter than the legislators? Did the legislators realize that the bill was smoke and mirrors and would accomplish nothing?In a2014 analysisof states payday lending laws, Pew didnt flat-out label Ohio as the worst in the nation for payday lending. But it did find that borrowers were charged much more than their peers in many other states.The Center for Responsible Lending, an organization that calls for more safeguards for consumers,found in 2015that payday loan storefronts in Ohio advertised rates of more than 600 percent annual percentage rate. Diane Standaert, director of state policy, said that since that time some storefronts now reflect rates between 300 and 400 percent for some loans.The effort to change Ohios payday lending law gained steam in March 2017 whenHouse Bill 123was introduced by State Reps.Kyle Koehler,a Republican of Springfield, and Michael Ashford, a Toledo Democrat. The bill is similar toColorados payday lending lawwhich consumer advocates have upheld as a model example.After languishing for a year, itpassed a House committeein April 2018 about a week after Rosenberger resigned, but a full vote was placed on hold while lawmakers deadlocked over picking a new speaker. On June 7, theHouse passed the bill and it now heads to the Senate. The bill would cap the interest rate at 28 percent and a fee of up to $20 a month, which would mean that a borrower of $300 would pay $96 in interest and fees.

FMD_train_1566

Financial conflict-of-interest laws don't apply to the president, right? So, the president doesn't have to have a blind trust.

11/16/2016

How President-elect Donald Trump will handle his extensive businesses and financial holdings and the potential conflict of interest that comes with them when he gets into the Oval Office remains an open question. Trump has said his children will manage his business dealings. Many presidents in the past have put their assets in ablind trust, which is when an independent trustee manages another persons assets without the persons input. But Trump doesnt actually have to do any of this because the financial conflict-of-interest laws dont apply to him as president, said former New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, who is reportedly on the short list for a seat on Trumps cabinet. Well, first of all, you realize that those laws don't apply to the president, right? Giuliani toldCNNs Jake Tapper Nov. 13. So, the president doesn't have to have a blind trust. For some reason, when the law was written, the president was exempt. Giuliani has the law pretty much right. Trump, as president, has no legal obligation to detach himself from his businesses and financial interests. The law at issue isTitle 18 Section 208of the U.S. code. Itsaysfederal executive branch employees cant participate in government matters in which they or their immediate family has a financial interest. Because of this law, some federal employees put their investments in a blind trust. This allows them to sidestep the regulation and participate in a matter that might otherwise pose a conflict of interest. But the president and the vice president, despite being executive branch employees, are exempt. According tothe laws definitions, Title 18 Section 208 does not apply to them, nor does it apply to members of Congress or federal judges. It appears that presidents have mostly escaped the normal web of ethics and conflict-of-interest laws, said Scott Amey, general counsel at the Project on Government Oversight, a nonpartisan government accountability watchdog. Amey added that presidents are allowed to accept gifts in many cases, too. Its been this way since at least 1974, when theJustice Department issued a lettersaying Title 18 Section 208 did not apply to the president. Congress expressly codified the exemptions in 1989. In the 1974 letter, the Justice Department said the legislative history of this conflict-of-interest provision indicated that it was never intended to apply to the president. Additionally, the Justice Department said placing conflict-of-interest laws on the president could constrain him in a potentially unconstitutional manner, though it did not give specific examples. As the head of the executive branch, the president may not be able to and arguably under the Constitution it might not be possible to require the president to recuse from government decisions, said Richard Briffault, a professor of legislation at Columbia Law School. While Title 18 Section 208 is the primary conflict-of-interest provision, there are other relevant rules, including a couple that dont exempt the president. Trump and Vice President Mike Pence will have to disclose their finances, which is required of all high-level federal employees, Briffault said. But the disclosures are not as detailed as federal tax returns, which Trump has not released. Then theres the Constitutions Emoluments Clause, which bans U.S. government employees from accepting presents or compensation from foreign governments, noted Kathleen Clark, an expert on legal ethics and a law professor at Washington University in St. Louis. The Trump Organization has numerous foreign ties, includingseveral overseasreal estate deals with possible foreign government connections.In 2012, for example, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan attended a ribbon cutting ceremony for Trump Towers Mall in Istanbul. If any of Trumps business arrangements involve the receipt of payments from foreign governments, I believe that he, or his entities from which he receives money, would have to forgo those payments, or he would have to detach from those entities, Clark said. But it's not fully clear that presidents are bound by the Emoluments Clause, and no court has weighed into answer this question. The way the clause is constructred that it doesn't specify the president, unlike other provisions in the Constitution, for example and the fact that President George Washington himself took gifts from the French government without asking Congress for permission, together make a good case that it doesn't apply to presidents, saidSeth Barrett Tillman, a professor at Maynooth University in Ireland who has studied the clause. Our ruling Giuliani said financial conflict-of-interest laws don't apply to the president, right? So, the president doesn't have to have a blind trust. The president is, in fact, exempt from the primary conflict-of-interest provision in the U.S. code. So presidents do not have any legal obligation to put their financial holdings in a blind trust or to detach themselves from their financial interests in any way. As president, Trump will have to comply with financial disclosure requirements, however, and it's possible he is constrained by a clause in the Constitution regarding income from foreign governments. We rate Giulianis claim True. Update Jan. 12, 2017: We have updated this story to add more information about the Emoluments Clause. Our rating remains unchanged.

True

Trump has said his children will manage his business dealings. Many presidents in the past have put their assets in ablind trust, which is when an independent trustee manages another persons assets without the persons input.Well, first of all, you realize that those laws don't apply to the president, right? Giuliani toldCNNs Jake Tapper Nov. 13. So, the president doesn't have to have a blind trust. For some reason, when the law was written, the president was exempt.The law at issue isTitle 18 Section 208of the U.S. code. Itsaysfederal executive branch employees cant participate in government matters in which they or their immediate family has a financial interest.But the president and the vice president, despite being executive branch employees, are exempt. According tothe laws definitions, Title 18 Section 208 does not apply to them, nor does it apply to members of Congress or federal judges.Its been this way since at least 1974, when theJustice Department issued a lettersaying Title 18 Section 208 did not apply to the president. Congress expressly codified the exemptions in 1989.The Trump Organization has numerous foreign ties, includingseveral overseasreal estate deals with possible foreign government connections.In 2012, for example, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan attended a ribbon cutting ceremony for Trump Towers Mall in Istanbul.The way the clause is constructred that it doesn't specify the president, unlike other provisions in the Constitution, for example and the fact that President George Washington himself took gifts from the French government without asking Congress for permission, together make a good case that it doesn't apply to presidents, saidSeth Barrett Tillman, a professor at Maynooth University in Ireland who has studied the clause.

FMD_train_418

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

01/24/2021

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

False

On Dec. 20, 2020, the person who controlled the @TeddyFeed Twitter account created a tweet using Twitter Ads. The first of two pictures in the tweet showed actress Rebel Wilson during a 2015 appearance on "The Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon." The second photograph purportedly showed her years before in college wearing a crop top and ripped jeans. The tweet said, "Rebel Wilson Was Stunning In College," and appeared to compare her weight over time:However, the second photograph in this tweet did not accurately depict Wilson's change in weight over time, nor did it show Wilson at all. The woman in the second picture was British model Iskra Lawrence, photographed by Frank Lewis with startraksphoto.com.In the past, Wilson shared a real photograph from her 2009 college graduation. She attended the University of New South Wales.On Dec. 1, 2020, nearly three weeks before the TeddyFeed website's story was last updated, NBC's "Today" show published an article about Wilson's weight loss journey. It reported that the actress had lost 60 pounds:She started calling 2020 her "year of health" in December 2019 and spent the past 12 months losing weight and getting healthy reaching her "goal weight" in late November.Wilson said she'd been getting so many questions about her wellness journey that she decided to do a sit-down Instagram Live on Tuesday night.For further reading, browse our past "Fauxtography" stories for reports on other misleading photographs.Snopes debunks a wide range of content, and online advertisements are no exception. Misleading ads often lead to obscure websites that host lengthy slideshow articles with lots of pages. It's called advertising "arbitrage." The advertiser's goal is to make more money on ads displayed on the slideshow's pages than it cost to show the initial ad that lured them to it. Feel free to submit ads to us, and be sure to include a screenshot of the ad and the link to where the ad leads.

FMD_train_1545

Was there a fine imposed on Donald Trump for allegedly misappropriating funds designated 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, obtain restitution and penalties, and direct the Foundation to cooperate with the Attorney General in the lawful distribution of its remaining assets to qualified charitable entities." The parties to the lawsuit spent around a year negotiating a settlement. In December 2018, for example, all sides agreed that the Foundation would be dissolved and its assets distributed to a list of mutually agreed charities. In November 2019, the New York Supreme Court published the final settlement. As part of that settlement, Trump, his children, and the Foundation stipulated to a set of facts, among them the following section related to the Iowa veterans fundraiser: The website for the Iowa Fundraiser, DonaldTrumpForVets.com, was developed by campaign personnel and, with the agreement of the Foundation, featured the name of the Foundation at the top of the home page and informed visitors that "the Donald J. Trump Foundation is a 501 (c)(3) nonprofit organization"; The campaign planned, organized, and paid for the Iowa Fundraiser, with administrative assistance from the Foundation; and the campaign directed the timing, amounts, and recipients of the Foundation's grants to charitable organizations supporting military veterans. The Iowa Fundraiser raised approximately $5.6 million in donations for veterans' groups, of which $2.823 million was contributed to the Foundation; the balance was contributed by donors directly to various veterans' groups. At campaign events in Iowa on January 30, January 31, and February 1, 2016, Mr. Trump personally displayed presentation copies of Foundation checks to Iowa veterans' groups. On May 31, 2016, at a campaign press conference, Mr. Trump announced the grants the Foundation made to veterans' groups with the proceeds of the Iowa Fundraiser and, on or about the same day, the campaign posted on its website a chart identifying the grant recipients. The New York Attorney General's office objected to the way in which the Trump Foundation had been used to advance the interests of the Trump campaign, and especially the way in which the campaign dictated how more than half of the funds were to be distributed, with Trump at times personally handing out checks at campaign rallies. The Attorney General's Office did not object on the grounds that Trump, his children, or his foundation had stolen or kept the money. Indeed, in an order accompanying the November 2019 settlement, New York Supreme Court Justice Saliann Scarpulla wrote that: "The Attorney General has argued that I should award damages for waste of the entire $2,823,000 that was donated directly to the Foundation at the Fundraiser. In opposition, Mr. Trump notes that the Foundation ultimately disbursed all of the funds to charitable organizations and that he has sought to resolve consensually this proceeding. As stated above, I find that the $2,823,000 raised at the Fundraiser was used for Mr. Trump's political campaign and disbursed by Mr. Trump's campaign staff, rather than by the Foundation, in violation of [New York law]. However, taking into consideration that the funds did ultimately reach their intended destinations, i.e., charitable organizations supporting veterans, I award damages on the breach of fiduciary duty/waste claim against Mr. Trump in the amount of $2,000,000, without interest, rather than the entire $2,823,000 sought by the Attorney General." Trump was ordered to pay $2 million to a list of agreed-upon charities as damages for the waste incurred by the fact that his political campaign orchestrated and benefited from distributing around $2.8 million in donations to veterans' groups. (That $2 million in damages was separate from the roughly $1.7 million the Trump Foundation had already agreed to distribute to various charities as part of the resolution dissolving the Foundation.) Neither Trump, nor his children, nor his charity were found to have "stolen" or kept the funds, and so none "admitted" to such actions. The New York Supreme Court explicitly acknowledged that all the funds raised from the January 2016 Iowa event did ultimately end up with veterans' groups. The irony in those claims was that it was, in fact, the manner in which the Trump Foundation and Trump campaign colluded in distributing the donations to veterans' charities that landed the president in hot water, not his having "stolen" the donations.

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_316

Donald Trump's Outsized Flagpole

09/24/2015

An anecdote about Donald Trump and his outsized U.S. flag and pole neatly encapsulated what so many people found either most appealing or most distasteful about the business magnate and 2016 Republican presidential candidate: to some he was the no-nonsense take-charge type who had the power and influence to thwart those who would insist on allowing the enforcement of petty rules or "political correctness" impede the progress of business and the course of "making America great again"; to others he was a wealthy blowhard who thought the rules didn't apply to him and habitually bullied others into submission to feed his lust for self-aggrandizement and self-enrichment: When Trump purchased and rebuilt Mar-A-Lago the Grand mansion and estate in Palm beach, Florida he got into a dispute with the city, who are well known for being strict on zoning regulations. Trump put up a 50 foot flag pole even though 30 foot is the maximum allowed. The city imposed a 1,000 dollar fine per day. While Trump and the city argued back and forth, finally when the fine had reached 120,000 dollars Trump proposed a solution. He would donate that amount to veterans organizations, would move the flag and pole to a different location in front of the mansion and would only use a 30 foot flag pole. The city agreed. So Trump brought in the company who does Golf course construction had them build a 20 foot high grassy hill and put a 30 foot flag pole on top of it. The basic facts are these: In 1985, Donald Trump paid $10 million for Mar-A-Lago, the name of the Marjorie Merriweather Post estate in Palm Beach, Florida. On 3 October 2006, Trump had an outsized American flag (variously described as being either 15x25 feet or 20x30 feet) installed on an 80-foot-high flagpole at Mar-a-Lago, in violation of local zoning regulations that established a maximum size of 4x6 feet for flags and a maximum height of 42 feet for flagpoles. Trump put up his regulation-violating flag and pole without obtaining either a building permit permit or a variance from local authorities, and the Palm Beach town council accordingly fined him $1,250 (or, in some accounts, $250) for every day the flag remained in place (apparently citing him only for the pole but not the flag itself). Trump in turn filed a $25 million lawsuit against Palm Beach, claiming that the town was selectively enforcing its rules (by not fining other properties that were flying flags in violation of town ordinances) and infringing his constitutional right to free speech. Six months later the two sides finally reached an agreement during "secret, court-ordered negotiations," with the town agreeing to waive all fines against Trump for his code-busting flagpole and to "review its ordinances and codes dealing with flagpoles and flags during the next zoning season," and Trump agreeing to drop his lawsuit, lower the height of his flagpole from 80 to 70 feet, obtain a permit for the pole and move it farther inland, and donate $100,000 "to charities dealing with Iraq War Veterans, [the] American Flag, or the local VA hospital." So, the anecdote reproduced above is true in its broad strokes, although all of the numbers it cites (dollar amounts and dimensions) are inaccurate, the issue was resolved via court-ordered mediation (not by Trump's "proposing a solution"), and the money Trump agreed to donate to settle the matter went to organizations selected by both sides (although Trump had previously stated that if he won his 15x25 feet or $25 million lawsuit, the proceeds would go to military members returning from Iraq). However, the New York state attorney general later sued Trump for paying the fine through his nonprofit Donald J. Trump Foundation instead of from his personal finances: sued The New York state attorney general sued U.S. President Donald Trump, three of his children and his foundation, saying he illegally used the nonprofit as a personal "checkbook" for his own benefit, including his 2016 presidential campaign. Another $100,000 went to another charity in 2007 to settle a legal dispute over a flagpole erected in violation of local ordinances at Mar-a-Lago, Trump's private club and sometime residence in Palm Beach, Florida. We also haven't been able to verify whether Trump connived to maintain (or even exceed) the height of the original pole by installing a 10-foot-shorter pole on a 20-foot-high hill pictures of the estate show the flagpole rising from a mound, but the height of the mound is difficult to estimate from photographs: Trump's lawsuit maintained that he couldn't bring his flag and pole into compliance with regulations because "A smaller flag and pole on Mar-A-Lago's property would be lost given its massive size, look silly instead of make a statement, and most importantly would fail to appropriately express the magnitude of Donald J. Trump's and the Club's members' patriotism." In his statements to the news media at the time he typically framed the issue as being one of his standing up to anti-American, anti-flag, anti-patriotic forces, while acknowledging that he hadn't even bothered applying for a permit first (because he didn't think he'd get one) and stating that he didn't believe rules should apply to the American flag (and therefore to him in this instance): "Well, I put up an American flag on the front of the Mar-a-Lago Club, which is a great house, probably the greatest house in America that I turned into a private club very successfully in Palm Beach, Florida. And the flag is very proudly waving, and the town wants me to take it down. Because they say I put it up without a permit and, frankly, had I gone to the town for a permit they wouldn't have given it to me, probably. But more importantly, I say that you don't need a permit to put up the American flag. I don't think they know what their beef is. I'm not sure they really understand what their beef is. They don't talk about the flag. They only talk about the flagpole because they're afraid politically to mention the word flag and the American flag and take it down. And I'll say it's probably one of the most popular things I've ever done because we've had hundreds and hundreds of letters and thousands of requests for everything supporting the flag. Everybody wants it. Everybody wants it up. But the town wants me to take down the American flag, and I told them I'm not doing that. This is probably the wealthiest town it is the wealthiest town in America, in the United States, and frankly it's a town that wants me to take down a flag and they shouldn't be asking for that. So it's been a very, very problematic situation. I'll be responding to them very shortly. And you know, I'm a big I'm a very patriotic guy. I'm very proud of the country, and I don't want to take down the American flag. And I don't believe you need permits to put up the American flag." Long-time Palm Beach Post correspondent Frank Cerabino opined that the Palm Beach flag brouhaha had little or nothing to do with patriotism, but rather was part of a pattern of Trump's using lawsuits to bend local authorities to his will dredging up excuses to sue them for exorbitant amounts of money, then offering to drop the suits in exchange for agreements that provide him with significant business advantages: Oh, he knew what he was doing. Trump, after all, had been fighting with the town poohbahs from the very moment he'd crashed into the complacent, clubby world of Palm Beach to buy Mar-a-Lago, which turned out to be one of those great deals he couldn't afford. Trump knew from experience that Palm Beach was a stickler for adherence to its ordinances. He had once paid a $5,000 fine to the town for replacing a section of dead hedges with replacements that weren't quite tall enough. But Trump had bigger changes in mind than merely out-flagging his neighbors. He was plainly inviting a lawsuit. The town council took the bait, citing the oversized pole and flag as violations of the town code, and fining Trump $250 a day for every day they remained on the estate. Tucked into his patriotic posturing was a completely unrelated legal matter that he made part of his multi-million lawsuit: a complaint about the town code that requires large commercial enterprises to be "town serving." The town requires proof from local businesses that at least 50 percent of their business comes from town residents. So, for example, when Neiman Marcus opened on Worth Avenue in Palm Beach, it was allowed to do so by promising that it would only advertise in the town's newspaper, and not in publications that circulated to shoppers who don't live on the island. For Trump, eliminating the "town serving" requirement would mean that he could offer more memberships to his Mar-a-Lago social club to people who had no connection to Palm Beach, making it easier for him to keep his club full. Softening up the town on the flag issue to pursue some other angle was a classic Trump move. Though he has yet to get this particular exemption waived, Palm Beach has learned from experience that Trump's lawsuits are never settled, just dormant. One of his Palm Beach lawyers said recently that the "town serving" issue is still unresolved and ripe for more litigation. Trump [initially] couldn't afford [to maintain] Mar-a-Lago as a single family home. His proposed solution was to chop his National Historic Landmark into something he called Mansions of Mar-a-Lago, a development that would put a public road through the middle of the estate, which would lead to the 10 mini-mansions he would build on the property, including one on the front lawn. The Palm Beach Town Council shot down all of Trump's proposed changes to the property, even when he reduced his mini-mansion plans from 10 to seven. Instead, they encouraged him to find a buyer if he couldn't afford to keep the estate intact. When the town's government refused to bend to his demands, Trump sued. The lawsuit against the Town of Palm Beach, which would prove to be not his last, would eventually cause his neighbors to lawyer up against him. After his Mansions of Mar-a-Lago plan was rejected, Trump found another way to salvage his stake in Mar-a-Lago. He offered to drop his lawsuit if council members allowed him to convert his estate into a new private club on the island. The Mar-a-Lago Club. While Trump was playing defense against the town's constant attempt to rein him in, he went on the attack against the county and its airport. Airlines routinely used a flight path in and out of Palm Beach International Airport in nearby West Palm Beach that brought the planes directly over Mar-a-Lago. This didn't sit well with Trump, who argued that the noise and fumes were ruining his investment, and that the decent thing for the county to do was to move the airport farther west. Trump had been arguing this for years, to no avail, while calling the airport director Bruce Pelly, among other things, a "moron" and "the worst airport director in the country." It turned out to be a useful gripe for Trump, one that he could turn into a new business opportunity, because just south of the airport was 214 acres of vacant scrub land owned by Palm Beach County, land he wanted. So Trump sued the county for $75 million over the airport noise, then negotiated to drop that lawsuit in exchange for the county giving him a 75-year lease on the nearby property for $438,000 a year. That land became the Trump International Golf Club, a $40 million, 18-hole, Jim Fazio-designed course that imported nearly 2 million cubic yards of dirt to transform the flat scrub land into hilly terrain with waterfalls, rock formations, and a clubhouse four stories above sea level. This wasn't the only instance of flagpole bickering in Trump's past. He also reached a (non-court) settlement with local government in 2014 after having raised Old Glory on a 70-foot flagpole at the Trump National Golf Course in Rancho Palos Verdes, California, without obtaining a permit first: Signaling a possible resolution to Donald Trump's running flag feud, the California Coastal Commission said the mogul's oversized Old Glory can stay as long as Rancho Palos Verdes revises its municipal height rules. While not the victory city officials had hoped for, the decision allows for a way forward to legally allow the 70-foot-tall flagpole, which was hoisted without a permit nearly 10 years ago. Having gained the support of much of the coastal city as well as two City Councils through the years the flag now likely can get formal state approval provided the city amends its Local Coastal Program that currently limits structure heights to 26 feet. "I'm disappointed at the Trump Organization for putting up that flag without adhering to the rule of law," said Coastal Commissioner Wendy Mitchell. Commission staff members had recommended that the flagpole be reduced in height to 26 feet and moved closer to the clubhouse on the 240-acre Trump National Golf Course property. Apgar, Sally. "Trump Settles Dispute Over Flag." [Palm Beach] Sun Sentinel. 24 April 2007. Cerabino, Frank. "Trump's War with Palm Beach." Politico. 5 September 2015. Gibson, John. "Donald Trump's Flag Fight." FoxNews.com. 2 November 2006. Littlejohn, Donna. "Coastal Commission Lets Donald Trump's Giant Flagpole Stand." The Daily Breeze. 9 July 2014. Associated Press. "Donald Trump Files $10 Million Lawsuit Against Palm Beach." FoxNews.com. 25 December 2006. Associated Press. "City to Trump: You're Fined!" CNN.com. 19 January 2007. Stempel, Jonathan and Jonathan Allen. "New York Sues Trump and His Charity Over 'Self-Dealing.' Reuters. 14 June 2018.

True

However, the New York state attorney general later sued Trump for paying the fine through his nonprofit Donald J. Trump Foundation instead of from his personal finances:

FMD_train_1906

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

01/26/2024

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

True

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

FMD_train_1484

Bernie Sanders opposesthe Trans-Pacific Partnership, and Hillary Clinton supportsit.

09/02/2015

A widespread Internet post claims Democratic presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders have opposing views on a number of issues, including the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a proposed trade deal involving the United States and 11 other nations. The image says Sanders opposes the deal, but Clinton supports it. As part of acouple of fact-checkson the post, we looked into whether the two candidates differ on support for the deal, which has divided Democratic leaders on the Hill. President Barack Obama, the deals primary advocate,has sparred with Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., a longtime ally, andreceived praisefrom Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., a frequent opponent, over the deal. So where do the leading Democratic presidential candidates stand on the Trans-Pacific Partnership? Sanders sides with other members of the Senates progressive caucus invehemently opposingthe deal. In January 2014, he said hes against it primarily because it will allow corporations to move jobs overseas. Clintons position on the proposal is complicated by her time as secretary of state, and shes been careful as a presidential candidate not to express a firm position. Theres evidence to suggest Clinton was deeply involved in the deals formation and promotion as the countrys lead diplomat. In 2011, shetold a congressional committeethat even though the State Department was not in charge of the negotiations, we work closely with the U.S. (Trade Representative).Leaked diplomatic cablesshow Clintons deputies specifically discussed the TPP with foreign heads of state. Clinton openly pushed for the dealat least 45 timesduring her tenure as secretary of state, according to CNNs tally. In 2012, she touted the trade deal, also called TPP, to a group of American and Australian officials as a way to lower trade barriers, raise labor and environmental standards, and drive growth across the region. But since entering the race for president, Clinton has distanced herself from those remarks. I did not work on TPP, shetold reporters in July, saying the deal was the responsibility of the United States Trade Representative. At times, Clinton has echoed Sanders concerns about outsourcing. Any trade deal has to produce jobs and raise wages and increase prosperity and protect our security, she told a reporter from MSNBC in April. We have to do our part in making sure we have the capabilities and the skills to be competitive. It's got to be really a partnership between our business, our government, our workforce, the intellectual property that comes out of our universities, and we have to get back to a much more focused effort in my opinion to try to produce those capacities here at home so that we can be competitive in a global economy. Hopeful comments about job creation and increased wages do not signal a clear position on the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Clintons campaign website lists no official position on the deal. Our ruling The graphic claims Bernie Sanders opposes the Trans-Pacific Partnership, and Hillary Clinton supports it. Sanders has said on multiple occasions that he would oppose the trade deal. Clinton supported it as secretary of state, and theres even evidence to suggest she was an advocate for the deal within the Obama administration. But she has taken a neutral stance on the deal during her campaign for the presidency, voicing some of Sanders same concerns yet refusing to explicitly criticize the proposal. Clinton spoke often in support of the Trans-Pacific Partnership until that backing irritated parts of her Democratic base. We rate the posts claim Mostly True.

True

As part of acouple of fact-checkson the post, we looked into whether the two candidates differ on support for the deal, which has divided Democratic leaders on the Hill.President Barack Obama, the deals primary advocate,has sparred with Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., a longtime ally, andreceived praisefrom Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., a frequent opponent, over the deal.Sanders sides with other members of the Senates progressive caucus invehemently opposingthe deal. In January 2014, he said hes against it primarily because it will allow corporations to move jobs overseas.Theres evidence to suggest Clinton was deeply involved in the deals formation and promotion as the countrys lead diplomat. In 2011, shetold a congressional committeethat even though the State Department was not in charge of the negotiations, we work closely with the U.S. (Trade Representative).Leaked diplomatic cablesshow Clintons deputies specifically discussed the TPP with foreign heads of state.Clinton openly pushed for the dealat least 45 timesduring her tenure as secretary of state, according to CNNs tally.I did not work on TPP, shetold reporters in July, saying the deal was the responsibility of the United States Trade Representative.

FMD_train_841

Did President Trump 'Go Ballistic' on 'Fox and Friends'?

05/21/2019

On 21 May 2019, in the midst of House Judiciary Committee hearings during which chairman Jerrold Nadler threatened to cite former White House counsel Donald F. McGahn for contempt over the latter's defiance of a congressional subpoena -- just a few days after Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin had rejected a House subpoena demanding President Trumps tax returns -- a graphic related to those events was circulated via social media. defiance rejected That graphic purported to be a screenshot from the Fox News Channel, documenting that the president had phoned in to the Fox & Friends morning program and "gone ballistic," declaring that Democrats could "subpoena me and my administration for the next 10, 15, 20 years and we will never capitulate." "I am in charge, this is my country, and I will do as I please," Trump supposedly threw in for good measure: But President Trump made no such pronouncement on Fox & Friends. And many sharp-eyed viewers noticed that the screenshot allegedly documenting the claim did not match the standard Fox News Channel fonts and rendering used for on-screen text and chyrons: The Trump quote going around today is a poorly done Photoshop. I found the original image that was manipulated. Note that the crawl at the bottom of the screen matches. Also, the "Trump goes ballistic" line is the wrong font on the fake version. pic.twitter.com/GTkpp2LXg1 pic.twitter.com/GTkpp2LXg1 David Finster (@d_finster) May 21, 2019 May 21, 2019 The screen crawl seen at the bottom of the image displaying a statement about something that threatens to suppress unpopular ideas and manipulate the public debate through coercion rather than persuasion references a 25 April 2019 federal court decision which blocked enforcement of a Texas law requiring state contractors to certify they dont boycott Israel. enforcement Reuters. "Our Subpoenas Are Not Optional, Nadler Warns McGahn." The New York Times. 21 May 2019. Associated Press. "Federal Judge Blocks Enforcement of Anti-Israel Boycott Law." 25 April 2019.

False

On 21 May 2019, in the midst of House Judiciary Committee hearings during which chairman Jerrold Nadler threatened to cite former White House counsel Donald F. McGahn for contempt over the latter's defiance of a congressional subpoena -- just a few days after Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin had rejected a House subpoena demanding President Trumps tax returns -- a graphic related to those events was circulated via social media. The Trump quote going around today is a poorly done Photoshop. I found the original image that was manipulated. Note that the crawl at the bottom of the screen matches. Also, the "Trump goes ballistic" line is the wrong font on the fake version. pic.twitter.com/GTkpp2LXg1 David Finster (@d_finster) May 21, 2019The screen crawl seen at the bottom of the image displaying a statement about something that threatens to suppress unpopular ideas and manipulate the public debate through coercion rather than persuasion references a 25 April 2019 federal court decision which blocked enforcement of a Texas law requiring state contractors to certify they dont boycott Israel.

FMD_train_775

Did Man Text 'Amazon Won't Let Us Leave' Just Before Warehouse Collapse?

12/13/2021

Around 8:30 p.m. on Dec. 10, 2021, a tornado tore through Madison County, Illinois, before striking an Amazon warehouse in Edwardsville where night workers were beginning their shift. The powerful tornado ripped off the building's roof, caused two of its 40-foot-high concrete walls to collapse, leaving six people dead in its wake. As news of this tragic incident circulated on social media, so did an image supposedly showing a text message thread between Larry Virden, one of the worker's who died, and his girlfriend, Cherie Jones. In one message, Virden writes, "Amazon won't let us leave." This appears to be a genuine image of a text message thread. While many people encountered this as a standalone image on social media, this image was first published in a local news broadcast from Fox 2 News after Jones provided it to the station. You can see the original news report below: Jones spoke more about this text message in an interview with the New York Post: New York Post I got text messages from him. He always tells me when he is filling up the Amazon truck when he is getting ready to go back I was like OK, I love you. Hes like, well Amazon wont let me leave until after the storm blows over.' [...] We heard the tornado didnt touch down until 8:39 so he had 20 minutes to get home ... I messaged him and that was the last text message I got from him ... I told him where we live, it was only lightning at the time. After that, I got nothing from him. Jones, however, didn't fault Amazon for his death. Instead, she said she viewed it as a "what if" situation, saying: "what if they would have let him leave? He could have made it home." It should also be noted that this text message was sent in the brief timespan (about 20 minutes) between the first tornado warning and the tornado striking the warehouse. As New York Times reporter Karen Weise noted, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) guidance is for people to "seek shelter" after these warnings. A spokesperson for Amazon told us that Amazon's leaders on the ground followed this OSHA guidance and worked to get people to take shelter after these warnings were issued. The spokesperson said: OSHA guidance clearly states to take shelter immediately when theres a tornado warning. Our leaders on the ground followed their training and did just that, moving quickly to get people to take shelter immediately. That likely saved many lives from this storm. The site got tornado warnings between 8:06 and 8:16, and site leaders directed people on site to immediately take shelter. At 8:27, the tornado struck the building. Our team worked quickly to ensure employees and partners could get to the designated shelter in place area, and we want to thank them for everything they were able to do. In the wake of the deadly tornado, Amazon faced some criticism for not having an adequate safety plan in place. The BBC reported: reported Now, questions are being raised over whether adequate shelter was available, whether workers were advised to go there immediately, and whether the shifts should have gone ahead that evening at all, given the warnings of severe weather. The Edwardsville site received tornado warnings between 20:06 and 20:16 local time (01:06 and 01:16 GMT) before the tornado struck the building at 20:27, Amazon said in a statement when contacted by the BBC, with events "happening incredibly fast". The company said that the team worked "incredibly quickly" to ensure as many employees and partners could reach the "shelter in place" site. OHSA has opened an investigation into the collapse. OSHA spokesman Scott Allen told ABC News that the investigation will be complete within six months. ABC News OSHA investigates all workplace fatalities, and we are supporting them, an Amazon spokesperson said. Amazon, which is donating $1 million to the Edwardsville Community Foundation to help the community rebuild after the tornado, also said in a statement: statement "Were deeply saddened by the news that members of our Amazon family passed away as a result of the storm in Edwardsville, IL. Our thoughts and prayers are with the victims, their loved ones, and everyone impacted by the tornado. We also want to thank all the first responders for their ongoing efforts on scene. Were continuing to provide support to our employees and partners in the area. 2 Workers Killed after Collapse at Amazon Warehouse in Edwardsville. FOX 2, 11 Dec. 2021, https://fox2now.com/news/illinois/multiple-workers-trapped-after-collapse-at-amazon-warehouse-in-edwardsville/. Amazon Criticised over Safety at Tornado-Hit Warehouse. BBC News, 13 Dec. 2021. www.bbc.com, https://www.bbc.com/news/business-59641784. Amazon Worker Who Died in Warehouse Collapse Wasnt Allowed to Leave, Girlfriend Says. New York Post, 13 Dec. 2021, https://nypost.com/2021/12/12/amazon-worker-texted-girlfriend-he-wasnt-allowed-to-leave-warehouse/. OSHA Investigating after 6 Killed by Tornado at Amazon Facility. ABC News, https://abcnews.go.com/Business/dead-amazon-facility-tornado-pummels-illinois/story?id=81721932. Accessed 14 Dec. 2021. OSHA Opens Investigation after Amazon Warehouse Collapses during Tornado, Killing 6. PBS NewsHour, 13 Dec. 2021, https://www.pbs.org/newshour/economy/osha-opens-investigation-after-amazon-warehouse-collapses-during-tornado-killing-6. Weise, Karen, and Eric Berger. At Amazon Site, Tornado Collided With Companys Peak Delivery Season. The New York Times, 12 Dec. 2021. NYTimes.com, https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/12/technology/amazon-tornado-edwardsville.html. Updated [Dec. 12, 2021]: Added a statement from Amazon about OSHA guidelines.

True

Jones spoke more about this text message in an interview with the New York Post:In the wake of the deadly tornado, Amazon faced some criticism for not having an adequate safety plan in place. The BBC reported:OHSA has opened an investigation into the collapse. OSHA spokesman Scott Allen told ABC News that the investigation will be complete within six months.Amazon, which is donating $1 million to the Edwardsville Community Foundation to help the community rebuild after the tornado, also said in a statement:

FMD_train_1880

Says the military accounts for about 10 percent of Florida's economy.

12/07/2010

Gov.-elect Rick Scott kicked off a five-day, 10-city tour of the state's major industries on Dec. 6, 2010, by meeting with defense contractors and Florida-based military leaders.Scott started the tour in the Panhandle, meeting with about 20 defense contractors, including Boeing, Lockheed Martin, L-3 Communications and InDyne Corp., at the University of Florida Research and Engineering Education Facility in Shalimar, before meeting with military leaders at Eglin Air Force Base.We want to make sure we're always thought of as a very military-friendly state,Scott said to reporters at a brief press conference. We're going to focus on what our strengths are. We're clearly a logical place for the military to expand and for the defense industry to expand. We've got a lot of talent in the state, we like the defense industry and the military, so we're going to figure out where we have the most value.Scott tried to underscore the importance of the military to Florida by noting that the military accounts for about 10 percent of Florida's economy, according to theSt. Petersburg Times.Florida is home to 20 major military installations and three unified combatant commands. The Gulf of Mexico is a key training ground for both the Air Force and the Navy, and the state also has two U.S. Coast Guard air stations and another dozen other Coast Guard stations.But does all of that translate to a 10 percent share of the state's gross domestic product,which was $737 billion in 2009?The answer comes from an arm of Enterprise Florida called theFlorida Defense Alliance, a public/private partnership created in 1998 to help position Florida to keep its military infrastructure in place and expand in other areas when opportunities arise. The group commissioned a study in 2008 to examine the economic impact of Florida's stationed military and auxiliary defense industry work.The study was conducted by Rick Harper, an economist from the University of West Florida, who has studied the economic impact of the film and entertainment industry in Florida and who represented Northwest Florida on former Gov. Jeb Bush's Council of Economic Advisers from 2001-2006. Using 2005 data, Harper concluded that defense-related spending is responsible for $52 billion, or 7.5 percent, of Florida's gross state product that year.The military spent $27 billion across Florida counties in fiscal year 2005, Harper concluded -- $10.4 billion was for goods and services, $12.4 billion for pensions and transfer payments, and $4.3 billion for salaries and wages. The rest of the economic impact is measured in indirect and induced spending, which would include parts of the private defense industry as well as parts of the Florida economy that help service the military, the defense industry and their employees.Harper said that defense and military spending accounted for 732,300 direct and indirect jobs in the state and generated state and local tax revenues of nearly $1 billion.Counties with larger installations enjoy larger impacts, Harper found. Military and defense spending in Duval County had a $12.1 billion impact, a $5.3 billion impact in Hillsborough County and a $6.6 billion impact in Okaloosa County. All but six counties have at least $3 million per year in direct defense-related spending.Harper and Florida Defense Alliance executive director Rocky McPherson noted that the study does not include the economic impact generated by the Florida National Guard or Coast Guard operations. You can see a short synopsis of the study for yourselfhere. Or if you have a lot of time, here's thethree-volume version.Harper's study relies on five-year-old data, so we wanted to see if there was anything more recent. McPherson said Harper and University of West Florida researchers were updating their study using 2008 data but, he said, that report is not available yet. Harper declined to share the results of the study with PolitiFact Florida, but did talk about the results in general terms.Since 2005, Department of Defense spending has risen substantially, particularly in terms of procurement (i.e., contracting), as well as payments to disabled veterans, although active duty military staffing numbers (number of people) have declined somewhat and payments to retirees are not growing as they did earlier due to attrition of WWII and Korean era veterans, Harper wrote. The overall growth in military spending (the study to be released uses 2008 federal spending data), combined with weakness in other areas of the Florida economy in the most recent years, means that DoD (Department of Defense) spending will have risen as a share of the total economy.We searched around for other studies measuring the military's economic impact in Florida, but found none. In examining Harper's study, we found it to be a straightforward, unbiased report. Researchers relied on Department of Defense actual expenditures, precise personnel levels and actual government contracts.Where does it leave us? Scott told reporters military spending makes up about 10 percent of the state's economy. In 2005, military spending accounted for 7.5 percent of the state gross domestic product, but that figure did not include the impact of the Florida National Guard or Coast Guard bases. The author of the study, who is now updating his report using 2008 numbers, said that while he cannot release more up-to-date numbers, that the military's position in the economy has risen since 2005. That will make Scott's point nearly right on. We rate this claim True.

True

Gov.-elect Rick Scott kicked off a five-day, 10-city tour of the state's major industries on Dec. 6, 2010, by meeting with defense contractors and Florida-based military leaders.Scott started the tour in the Panhandle, meeting with about 20 defense contractors, including Boeing, Lockheed Martin, L-3 Communications and InDyne Corp., at the University of Florida Research and Engineering Education Facility in Shalimar, before meeting with military leaders at Eglin Air Force Base.We want to make sure we're always thought of as a very military-friendly state,Scott said to reporters at a brief press conference. We're going to focus on what our strengths are. We're clearly a logical place for the military to expand and for the defense industry to expand. We've got a lot of talent in the state, we like the defense industry and the military, so we're going to figure out where we have the most value.Scott tried to underscore the importance of the military to Florida by noting that the military accounts for about 10 percent of Florida's economy, according to theSt. Petersburg Times.Florida is home to 20 major military installations and three unified combatant commands. The Gulf of Mexico is a key training ground for both the Air Force and the Navy, and the state also has two U.S. Coast Guard air stations and another dozen other Coast Guard stations.But does all of that translate to a 10 percent share of the state's gross domestic product,which was $737 billion in 2009?The answer comes from an arm of Enterprise Florida called theFlorida Defense Alliance, a public/private partnership created in 1998 to help position Florida to keep its military infrastructure in place and expand in other areas when opportunities arise. The group commissioned a study in 2008 to examine the economic impact of Florida's stationed military and auxiliary defense industry work.The study was conducted by Rick Harper, an economist from the University of West Florida, who has studied the economic impact of the film and entertainment industry in Florida and who represented Northwest Florida on former Gov. Jeb Bush's Council of Economic Advisers from 2001-2006. Using 2005 data, Harper concluded that defense-related spending is responsible for $52 billion, or 7.5 percent, of Florida's gross state product that year.The military spent $27 billion across Florida counties in fiscal year 2005, Harper concluded -- $10.4 billion was for goods and services, $12.4 billion for pensions and transfer payments, and $4.3 billion for salaries and wages. The rest of the economic impact is measured in indirect and induced spending, which would include parts of the private defense industry as well as parts of the Florida economy that help service the military, the defense industry and their employees.Harper said that defense and military spending accounted for 732,300 direct and indirect jobs in the state and generated state and local tax revenues of nearly $1 billion.Counties with larger installations enjoy larger impacts, Harper found. Military and defense spending in Duval County had a $12.1 billion impact, a $5.3 billion impact in Hillsborough County and a $6.6 billion impact in Okaloosa County. All but six counties have at least $3 million per year in direct defense-related spending.Harper and Florida Defense Alliance executive director Rocky McPherson noted that the study does not include the economic impact generated by the Florida National Guard or Coast Guard operations. You can see a short synopsis of the study for yourselfhere. Or if you have a lot of time, here's thethree-volume version.Harper's study relies on five-year-old data, so we wanted to see if there was anything more recent. McPherson said Harper and University of West Florida researchers were updating their study using 2008 data but, he said, that report is not available yet. Harper declined to share the results of the study with PolitiFact Florida, but did talk about the results in general terms.Since 2005, Department of Defense spending has risen substantially, particularly in terms of procurement (i.e., contracting), as well as payments to disabled veterans, although active duty military staffing numbers (number of people) have declined somewhat and payments to retirees are not growing as they did earlier due to attrition of WWII and Korean era veterans, Harper wrote. The overall growth in military spending (the study to be released uses 2008 federal spending data), combined with weakness in other areas of the Florida economy in the most recent years, means that DoD (Department of Defense) spending will have risen as a share of the total economy.We searched around for other studies measuring the military's economic impact in Florida, but found none. In examining Harper's study, we found it to be a straightforward, unbiased report. Researchers relied on Department of Defense actual expenditures, precise personnel levels and actual government contracts.Where does it leave us? Scott told reporters military spending makes up about 10 percent of the state's economy. In 2005, military spending accounted for 7.5 percent of the state gross domestic product, but that figure did not include the impact of the Florida National Guard or Coast Guard bases. The author of the study, who is now updating his report using 2008 numbers, said that while he cannot release more up-to-date numbers, that the military's position in the economy has risen since 2005. That will make Scott's point nearly right on. We rate this claim True.

FMD_train_188

If given the opportunity, would you have put your money into it?

06/17/2006

One of the lessons of the personal computer revolution that began in the 1970s was that tremendous business success was no longer entirely the province of staid, conservatively dressed, mature adult males with expensive business school educations. As Microsoft, Apple Computer, and hundreds of other technology-driven companies demonstrated, plenty of young, sartorially questionable, self-taught individuals of both sexes could achieve business success on par with some of the world's oldest and biggest corporations. A photograph of Microsoft staff members in 1978 has circulated online for many years, bearing titles such as "Would you have invested?" It reflects the notion that, back in 1978, not many people might have predicted that a small group of casually dressed, long-haired youngsters was creating a corporation that would, four decades later, reach an estimated market value of $330 billion, with many of them becoming millionaires (and a few even billionaires) in the process. In December 1978, Microsoft had just completed its first million-dollar sales year, and the decision was made to leave the company's Albuquerque, New Mexico, headquarters and relocate to bigger and better digs in the Pacific Northwest state of Washington. The formal studio photograph displayed above was taken on December 7, 1978, shortly before that move, and captured all but a couple of the current Microsoft staff. To suitably immortalize the Albuquerque years, Bob Greenberg cut a deal with a photo studio for a group portrait on December 7. Pearl Harbor Day in Albuquerque featured a snowstorm, but only Miriam Lubow, who was stranded at home with her kids, and Ric Weiland, Microsoft's second employee, out of town on business, failed to make the sitting. All eleven of the employees in the Albuquerque picture, along with Weiland, were about to make the trip to Seattle. Only Miriam Lubow would stay behind reluctantly. Gates offered to pay for her and her family's move to Seattle, but Miriam's husband demurred, saying, "Why are we going to follow this kid to Seattle? It always rains in Seattle." On a Concorde flight to Europe, Gates wrote her a thank-you note for her service to Microsoft. As it turned out, she was merely postponing the inevitable. Three years later, Miriam would move to the Seattle area and work again for Microsoft, this time focusing more narrowly on a skill she had developed in Albuquerque: getting customers to pay up. (Technically, Microsoft wasn't yet "Microsoft Corporation" at the time this photograph was taken; the company was founded as a partnership and officially became a Washington State corporation on July 1, 1981.) As for the identities of the persons pictured and their lives after Microsoft: Bill Gates (front row, left): William Gates III, the Harvard drop-out who at 18 co-founded (and later served as CEO and Chairman of the Board of) Microsoft, the world's largest software company, hardly needs any introduction. He is regularly ranked as one of the richest individuals in the world (with an estimated net worth in 2015 of $78 billion); in 2008 he withdrew from Microsoft's day-to-day operations to focus his attention on the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, which combats diseases such as polio, malaria, and AIDS. Andrea Lewis (front row, second from left): Andrea Lewis was a former MITS technical writer and Computer Notes editor hired in 1978 to produce documentation for Microsoft products as the company's first technical writer. She left her day-to-day job at Microsoft in 1983, has since worked as a freelance journalist and fiction writer, and helped create the Richard Hugo House, a literary center in Seattle. She now lives in Seattle with her husband and two children. Marla Wood (front row, second from right): Marla Wood, wife of Steve Wood, also pictured above, worked as a bookkeeper and administrative assistant at Microsoft until 1980, when she and her husband left the company, becoming the first of the eleven staff members in the photograph to depart Microsoft, in large part due to a dispute regarding payment of overtime wages. Bill's letter confirming a $50,000 offer to Steve Ballmer to become his assistant became a personnel disaster when some disgruntled soul copied it and tacked it on the office bulletin board. Along with his salary, high for Microsoft, Ballmer was to get a 5 to 10 percent cut of the company based on a formula involving the year's revenue growth. It sorely rankled loyalists who had been slaving for the company since the Albuquerque days without so much as a profit-sharing plan to show for it. When it came to clerical help, Gates had been tightfisted beyond the bounds of the law. Overtime had always been paid on a straight-time basis, and though the rules affecting programmers might be debatable, the rules affecting clerical workers were not. Marla Wood and other office staffers had checked into the labor regulations and discovered that they deserved time and a half for overtime, both currently and retroactively. When Steve Wood approached Gates about it, he agreed to start paying time and a half but insisted that back pay was out of the question. If the secretaries wanted to file a complaint, well, let 'em. They did. When the state notified Gates that the back pay was due, it wasn't long before Marla Wood got the news: Bill came storming into my office saying he just had a phone call from these people, just livid. This was the one time I was really on the receiving end of one of his rages—I mean, just screaming about this and how it was going to ruin his reputation... This would be on his reports forever and ever... I was saved by an overseas phone call, which he proceeded to take at my desk, whereupon I ran out, went down to Steve's office, and said, "I'm quitting. I can't stand it here anymore." And he said, "That's all right; I'm seeing a headhunter tomorrow anyway." But before she and her husband departed Microsoft, Marla saw to it that the issue was settled. Although it amounted to only $100 or so for her and as little as $20 for the others, "It was just a matter of principle." Paul Allen (front row, right): Paul Allen, a childhood friend of Bill Gates, co-founded Microsoft with Gates in 1975 and resigned his day-to-day position in 1983 after he was diagnosed with Hodgkin's disease (for which he was successfully treated), although he remained on Microsoft's board of directors until 2000. A variety of post-Microsoft investments, in technology companies and other areas of business (including ownership of the Seattle Seahawks football team and the Portland Trail Blazers basketball team) have helped bring him an estimated net worth of $17 billion. Like Bill Gates, he engages in philanthropic efforts through his chairmanship of the Paul G. Allen Family Foundation. Bob O'Rear (second row, left): In 1978, programmer Bob O'Rear was, at age 35, the oldest of the Microsoft staff members pictured above, and, as a native Texan, one of only two staffers who did not come from the Pacific Northwest area. He was also one of the best-educated employees, a NASA engineer who held degrees in mathematics and physics. He left the company in 1993 and now runs a cattle ranch in Texas in addition to serving on the boards of a variety of high-tech firms. Bob Greenberg (second row, second from left): Bob Greenberg, who arranged the deal for the studio photograph displayed above, was a programmer Bill Gates knew from his Harvard days, hired in 1977 to help Microsoft create a new version of the BASIC programming language for a new Texas Instruments computer. Greenberg proved invaluable for more than just his technical expertise, lending the fledgling company $7,000 during a financial crunch in mid-1977; although he left Microsoft in 1981, he went from one business juggernaut to another, helping the family business, Coleco, launch the Cabbage Patch Kids marketing craze of the 1980s. He now reportedly develops software for golf courses. Marc McDonald (second row, second from right): Marc McDonald is generally identified as Microsoft's (then "Micro-Soft") first employee, hired in 1976 to adapt BASIC for the new NCR 7200 machine. (Although a couple of other people had worked for Microsoft on a contract basis, McDonald was the first hiree to draw a regular salary.) Marc left Microsoft in 1984, reportedly disenchanted with the changes wrought by the company's burgeoning growth, and went to work for fellow ex-Microsoft staffer Paul Allen's new company, Asymetrix. In an amusing coincidence, McDonald eventually ended up back at Microsoft when it acquired Design Intelligence, the Seattle-based software company for which he was then working. Gordon Letwin (second row, right): The initial 1978 meeting between Gordon Letwin and his future employer, Bill Gates, was somewhat contentious, according to the biography Gates. Befitting its role as a haven for soldering-iron types, Heath[kit] was now marketing its own computers, including a Z-80 machine with a homegrown edition of BASIC instead of the Microsoft version. As Bill Gates was attempting to correct this egregious error, he was introduced to a black-haired gnome by the name of Gordon Letwin, who proceeded to chew him out in front of a group of about fifteen people. Letwin, the author of Heath's BASIC, felt his turf was being violated—and by the purveyor of an inferior product to boot. Bill Gates nonetheless prevailed, selling Heath his BASIC and FORTRAN for H-DOS, a proprietary operating system Letwin had developed for Heath. But Letwin had instinctively understood how to win the favor of William Henry Gates: stand up to the guy. By the end of the year, Gordon Letwin would come to work for Microsoft and begin work on a BASIC compiler. Among other projects, Gordon served as Microsoft's chief architect for the development of the infamous OS/2 operating system and stayed with the company longer than any of the other staffers pictured above (with the exception of Bill Gates himself), finally leaving in 1993 to escape the day-to-day tech bustle and enjoy life. He has reportedly contributed a substantial portion of the money he acquired during his tenure at Microsoft to various environmental causes. Steve Wood (top row, left): Steve Wood was Microsoft's first married employee, a Stanford graduate with a master's degree who was hired in 1976 to help create a Microsoft version of FORTRAN. Later, when Steve was serving as Microsoft's office manager, his wife Marla joined the company as a clerical worker, eventually taking over all of Microsoft's bookkeeping chores after Miriam Lubow stayed behind when the firm relocated from New Mexico to Washington. Steve and Marla both left Microsoft in 1980; in 1996, Steve Wood founded Wireless Services Corp. (now SinglePoint), a mobile messaging company. Bob Wallace (top row, center): Bob Wallace joined Microsoft in 1978 after responding to a photocopied ad that Paul Allen had left in the Seattle computer store where he worked. He served as a production manager and software designer until 1983, when he became disenchanted with the changes in the company's culture brought about by Microsoft's success and growth. In March 1983, Bob Wallace, in the best Microsoft tradition, got into a heated dispute with his supervisor over a technical point. The supervisor told him, "There's nothing you can do about it, and you can't talk to Bill about it... I'm the only one who can talk to Bill." For Wallace, being barred from talking with Bill was not just a shock but an insult. He told his supervisor as much, half expecting Gates to intercede. When it didn't happen, he resigned. In 1983, Bob Wallace started his own company, Quicksoft, which marketed the text-processing program PC-Write, generally touted as being the first widely used shareware program. He sold Quicksoft in 1991, moved to northern California a few years later, and, long interested in psychedelic drugs, started Mind Books (a bookstore offering literature about psychoactive plants and compounds) and the Promind Foundation (an organization dedicated to supporting scientific research and public education about psychedelics). In 2002, Bob Wallace became the first (and so far the only) one of the eleven Microsoft staffers pictured above to pass away, succumbing to pneumonia at age 53. Jim Lane (top row, right): Jim Lane, who got his start with microcomputers at the Denver-based Digital Group, was hired by Microsoft in late 1978 (shortly before this picture was taken). As a Microsoft project manager, he was a key figure in forging the partnership between Microsoft software and Intel's microprocessors (a relationship symbolized by the development of the term "Wintel"). He left Microsoft in 1985, reportedly stating that the company had "beat the enthusiasm out of me," to run his own software consultancy business. Nearly thirty years later, just before Bill Gates stepped down from being involved in the day-to-day operations of Microsoft, the eleven staffers pictured above reunited for another photograph, with office manager Miriam Lubow, who missed the original sitting, taking the place of Bob Wallace, who died in 2002.

True

A photograph of Microsoft staff members in 1978 has been circulated online for many years bearing titles such as "Would you have invested?" It reflects the notion that, back in 1978, not many people might have predicted that a small group of casually-dressed, long-haired youngsters was creating a corporation that would, four decades later, reach an estimated market value of $330 billion, themselves becoming millionaires (and a few even billionaires) in the process. Bill Gates (front row, left): William Gates III, the Harvard drop-out who at 18 co-founded (and later served as CEO and Chairman of the Board of) Microsoft, the world's largest software company, hardly needs any introduction. He is regularly ranked as the one of the richest individuals in the world (with an estimated net worth in 2015 of $78 billion); in 2008 he withdrew from Microsoft's day-to-day operations to focus his attention on the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, which combats diseases such as polio, malaria, and AIDS. Andrea Lewis (front row, second from left): Andrea Lewis was a former MITS technical writer and Computer Notes editor hired in 1978 to produce documentation for Microsoft products as the company's first technical writer. She left her day-to-day job at Microsoft in 1983, has since worked as a freelance journalist and fiction writer, and helped create the Richard Hugo House, a literary center in Seattle. She now lives in Seattle with her husband and two children. Paul Allen (front row, right): Paul Allen, a childhood friend of Bill Gates, co-founded Microsoft with Gates in 1975 and resigned his day-to-day position in 1983 after he was diagnosed with Hodgkin's disease (for which he was successfully treated), although he remained on Microsoft's board of directors until 2000. A variety of post-Microsoft investments, in technology companies and other areas of business (including ownership of the Seattle Seahawks football team and the Portland Trail Blazers basketball team) have helped bring him an estimated net worth of $17 billion. Like Bill Gates, he engages in philanthropic efforts through his chairmanship of the Paul G. Allen Family Foundation. Bob Greenberg (second row, second from left): Bob Greenberg, who arranged the deal for the studio photograph displayed above, was a programmer Bill Gates knew from his Harvard days, hired in 1977 to help Microsoft create a new version of the BASIC programming language for a new Texas Instruments computer. Greenberg proved invaluable for more than just his technical expertise, lending the fledgling company $7,000 during a financial crunch in mid-1977; although he left Microsoft in 1981, he went from one business juggernaut to another, helping the family business, Coleco, launch the Cabbage Patch Kids marketing craze of the 1980s. He now reportedly develops software for golf courses. Marc McDonald (second row, second from right): Marc McDonald is generally identified as Microsoft's (then "Micro-Soft") first employee, hired in 1976 to adapt BASIC for the new NCR 7200 machine. (Although a couple of other people had worked for Microsoft on a contract basis, McDonald was the first hiree to draw a regular salary.) Marc left Microsoft in 1984, reportedly disenchanted with the changes wrought by the company's burgeoning growth, and went to work for fellow ex-Microsoft staffer Paul Allen's new company, Asymetrix. In an amusing coincidence, McDonald eventually ended up back at Microsoft when it acquired Design Intelligence, the Seattle-based software company for which he was then working. Steve Wood (top row, left): Steve Wood was Microsoft's first married employee, a Stanford graduate with a master's degree who was hired in 1976 to help create a Microsoft version of FORTRAN. Later, when Steve was serving as Microsoft's office manager, his wife Marla joined the company as a clerical worker, eventually taking over all of Microsoft's bookkeeping chores after Miriam Lubow stayed behind when the firm relocated from New Mexico to Washington. Steve and Marla both left Microsoft in 1980 (as detailed above); in 1996, Steve Wood founded Wireless Services Corp. (now SinglePoint), a mobile messaging company. Jim Lane (top row, right): Jim Lane, who got his start with microcomputers at the Denver-based Digital Group, was hired by Microsoft in late 1978 (shortly before this picture was taken). As a Microsoft project manager, he was a key figure in forging the partnership between Microsoft software and Intel's microprocessors (a relationship symbolized by the development of the term "Wintel"). He left Microsoft in 1985 (reportedly stating that the company had "beat the enthusiasm out of me") to run his own software/consultancy business.

FMD_train_1577

Kohl's $150 'Black Friday' Coupon Scam

08/17/2018

In November 2018, a scam tempting Facebook users with a free Kohl's department store $150 "Black Friday" coupon began spreading on social media: 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 or coupons eventually learn they must first sign up to purchase a number of costly goods, services, or subscriptions (negating the free aspect of the offer). Kohl's current coupon promotions, which are linked from their official Facebook page, are promo codes good for 20% or $10 off purchases of $50 or more. promotions Facebook page The Better Business Bureau offers three tips to identify similar gift card/coupon 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

Kohl's current coupon promotions, which are linked from their official Facebook page, are promo codes good for 20% or $10 off purchases of $50 or more.

FMD_train_1500

Papa John's John Schnatter vs. Little Caesar's Mike Ilitch

11/02/2017

On 2 November 2017, the Facebook page "The Other 98%" shared a meme comparing purported facts about the founder of the Papa John's (John Schnatter) and Little Caesar's (the late Mike Ilitch) pizza chains: purported facts Papa John's John Schnatter Purported facts about Schnatter were accompanied by a red "X" (indicating dispproval) and those about Ilitch with a green check mark (indicating approval). The meme comprised seven claims in total, four about Schnatter and three about Ilitch, which we'll cover one by one: [Papa John's] John Schnatter, Founder [Little Caesar's] Mike Illitch [sic], Founder According to Federal Election Committee (FEC) filings, Schnatter made a total of $85,500 in political contributions in 2016, just over two percent of which went to the Trump campaign. Schnatter donated $1,000 each to two Trump campaign political action committees (PACs), he donated $33,400 to the Republican National Committee (RNC) and the Kentucky Republican Leadership Fund in 2016, and $6,200 to Rand Paul's PACs. As such, the claim was true but somewhat misleading: Schnatter (a resident of Louisville) did donate to the Trump campaign, but the bulk of his financial support went elsewhere, most of it to political activity on the state level. FEC In early November 2012, it was widely reported that Schnatter planned to cut worker hours in response to provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA, or "Obamacare"): reported The CEO of popular pizza chain Papa John's says his employees may face reduced hours and he expects his business costs to rise because President Obama's re-election most likely insures the president's health care reform law will be implemented in full. NaplesNews.com reports John Schnatter made the remarks to a small group at Edison State College's Collier County campus the day after the election. Schnatter, who supported Mitt Romney in the election, said all Americans having health insurance under ObamaCare is a good, but estimates the change will cost Papa John's $5 million to $8 million annually. However, Schnatter asserted that his comments had been misinterpreted in an op-ed piece, explaining that his earlier remarks were speculative and pertained to franchisees of Papa John's (not the corporation itself): misinterpreted Many in the media reported that I said Papa Johns is going to close stores and cut jobs because of Obamacare. I never said that. The fact is we are going to open over hundreds of stores this year and next and increase employment by over 5,000 jobs worldwide. And, we have no plans to cut team hours as a result of the Affordable Care Act. Clearly there was some misunderstanding somewhere. The remarks that generated the headlines were made during an entrepreneur class I was asked to speak to at a Florida college. I was asked to share my experience as an entrepreneur and to provide the students with real-life small business situations. Unbeknownst to me, until she identified herself, a reporter was there. Here is the part of the interchange that was the genesis of the news: Reporter: Do you think your you know franchise owners... are going to cut people hours back to make them part time instead of full time? Me: Well, in Hawaii there is a form of the same kind of health insurance and thats what you do, you find loopholes to get around it. Thats what theyre going to do. Reporter: My understanding is that if youre a full time employee, which is 35 hours or over, youd be covered. Or if youre part time then you wouldnt be. So wouldnt some business owners just cut people down like 34 hours a week so they wouldnt have to pay for health insurance? The reporter asked what I believed Papa Johns franchisees would do in response to Obamacare, not what Papa Johns would do ... Papa Johns, like most businesses, is still researching what the Affordable Care Act means to our operations. Regardless of the conclusion of our analysis, we will honor this law, as we do all laws, and continue to offer 100% of Papa Johns corporate employees and workers in company-owned stores health insurance as we have since the company was founded in 1984. In 2015, a Papa John's franchisee (not the chain, nor Schnatter) was found guilty of wage theft and noncompliance with New York State laws pertaining to overtime: guilty Abdul Jamil Khokhar, who owns nine Papa Johns locations in New York City with BMY Foods, pled guilty to failing to pay workers in compliance with the New York Labor Law, which is a misdemeanor, and to filing false business records, a felony. He will serve 60 days in jail for failing to pay his workers the minimum wage and overtime and has agreed to pay $230,000 in restitution to the workers ... Instead of paying his employees the proper minimum overtime wages according to New York State law, Khokhar paid them the same minimum wage they would make during regular hours. To hide this illegal practice, he created fake names for employees in the computer system and used the fake names to avoid paying the time-and-a-half rate required for overtime. So an employee who worked for more than 40 hours would be paid for regular work hours under his or her own name, and any overtime hours would be paid as straight hours to a fictitious employee. Khokar was an independent franchise owner, and his 2015 conviction was falsely attributed to Schnatter in the meme. Separate instances also involved the actions of independent franchisees, not Papa John's itself. instances In August 2012, news outlets reported that Schnatter was planning to pass increased health insurance costs onto customers in order to protect "shareholders' best interests": reported And if the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act rolls out as planned in 2014, Schnatters strategy is of course ... to pass that cost on the consumer in order to protect our shareholders best interest, he said in a recent conference call. Schnatter estimates that the legislation will cost Papa Johns about 11 cents to 14 cents per pizza, which equates to 15 cents to 20 cents per order. An average delivery charge runs $1.75 to $2.50. Schnatter's claims about an 11- to 14-cent per pizza increase in prices occurred in tandem with his earlier referenced ACA-related remarks. As with those previous comments, Schnatter later maintained his remarks had been misinterpreted: Most visibly, Papa John's CEO John Schnatter repeatedly claimed that Obamacare would increase the price of a pizza by eleven to fourteen cents (even if you accept his numbers, hardly a dramatic setback). CNN did some fact checking, and found that the exact costs of Obamacare for the chain were incalculable thanks to the pizza franchise's refusal to provide pertinent data (such as the number of pizzas they sell, how many full-time employees they have, what their current health care plan is, etc.). However, they rated Schnatter's claims as "false" because Obamacare does not require companies to provide health care plans to part-time employees, as well as exempts many small businesses (such as the local franchises which compose Papa Johns retail locations) from the health care requirements. After being debunked, Papa John's is backing off from its claims that Obamacare would raise prices and potentially cost jobs, now saying Schnatter was quoted incorrectly. Due to the business strength, the company now says, Papa John's could absorb the added costs easily. Schnatter stated that his earlier remarks were misconstrued, and denied pizza prices would go up by the minor amount mentioned. Although it was true Schnatter speculated higher Obamacare-related costs would be "pass[ed] on" to customers, he soon revised his position and no surcharge was added. The meme then turned to Ilitch, who died in February 2017. Back in February 2014, SportsBusiness Daily reported that Ilitch had arranged to pay for housing for civil rights icon Rosa Parks after she was robbed and assaulted in her Detroit home: reported On Aug. 31, 1994, Parks, then 81, was robbed and assaulted in her home in central Detroit. [Judge Damon] Keith called real estate developer Alfred Taubman, the owner of Riverfront Apartments, about finding a safer home for Parks. Taubman pledged to find the best home available. When Ilitch read about Keiths plan and Taubmans promise in the newspaper, he called the judge and said he would pay for Parks housing for as long as necessary. (Parks passed away in 2005 at the age of 92). Keith served as the executor of the trust established for Parks housing. The episode is just one of many throughout Ilitchs life when he stepped forward to help (see box), usually outside of the spotlight. Keith produced a canceled November 1994 check and affirmed that Ilitch had paid Parks' rent from 1994 until her death in 2005, adding that it was "important" people learn of that circumstance. This claim appears to reference Little Caesar's Love Kitchen, described on the company's web site as follows: described THE LITTLE CAESARS LOVE KITCHEN travels across the United States to help those in need. We have two trucks in operation so we can be of service 365 days a year. These restaurants on wheels have served more than three million people. The Love Kitchen has been recognized for its charitable efforts as well, receiving The President's Volunteer Action Award Citation from former Presidents George H. W. Bush and Bill Clinton. The Reagan administration also awarded the Love Kitchen a Presidential Citation for Private Sector Initiatives. Additionally, the Love Kitchen has received a certificate of appreciation from the State of Michigan and was recognized by the Detroit City Council for its efforts in the Gulf Coast region. The Love Kitchens 30th anniversary was recognized when it was listed in the Congressional Record by U.S. Congresswoman Candice Miller, on April 30, 2015. The Love Kitchen charity was founded by Ilitch in 1985. founded Ilitch In September 2007, news outlets reported that Ilitch had "received the U.S. Veterans Affairs Department's top civilian honor for giving war veterans franchise opportunities," with one press release stating: reported stating In recognition of his service to Veterans, Honorable R. James Nicholson, Secretary of Veterans Affairs, will present Little Caesar Enterprises, Inc. founder Michael Ilitch with the Secretary's Award, the highest tribute given to a private citizen by the United States Department of Veterans Affairs. The ceremony, which will take place today in the nation's capitol at the Department of Veterans Affairs at 2:30 p.m. ET, recognizes Mr. Ilitch's industry-leading support of Veterans through the Little Caesars Veterans Program. "Michael Ilitch has demonstrated great patriotism by providing business opportunities to honorably discharged Veterans through the Little Caesars Veterans Program," said Nicholson. "This award, the highest honor my office can bestow, represents the VA's appreciation of a Detroit business leader who is making a difference for U.S. military Veterans as they transition to civilian life or make a career change." Launched on Veterans Day (November 9) 2006, the program provides honorably discharged, service-disabled Veterans who qualify as Little Caesars franchisees a benefit of up to $68,000. Honorably discharged, non service-disabled Veterans who qualify as Little Caesars franchisees are eligible for a benefit of $10,000. Ilitch, a former Marine, has made giving back part of the way Little Caesars has done business since shortly after opening the first store in 1959. "Veterans and their families have made significant sacrifices for our country, and I feel that it's important to acknowledge that, and to thank them for their service," said Michael Ilitch, founder and chairman, Little Caesars. "As I thought about the businesses I own, I thought what better way to say thank you to the men and women who have given so much for our nation than to provide them with a business opportunity: becoming a Little Caesars franchisee. I'm very honored that the program, and the people who created it, are being recognized with this prestigious award." Aside from its literal veracity (or lack thereof), this meme also cherry-picks its "facts" to reflect poorly on Schnatter (whose political positions are well-known) and elides charitable contributions Papa John's has made to causes such as the Red Cross, children affected by domestic violence, and general philanthropic donations that Schnatter estimated to total around $30 million. Red Cross domestic violence Schnatter Hsu, Tiffany. "Papa John's to Raise Pizza Prices If 'Obamacare' Survives: CEO." Los Angeles Times. 8 August 2012. McKay, Tom. "Papa John's Backtracks from Claim That Pizza Prices Will Increase Because of Obamacare." Mic. 27 January 2013. Schnatter, John. "The Real Scoop on Papa Johns and Obamacare." Huffington Post. 13 January 2013. Wolfson, Andrew. "The Real Papa John: Pizza Entrepreneur John Schnatter Makes No Apologies for Wealth, Success, Obamacare Remarks." Courier-Journal. 13 January 2013. Federal Elections Commission. "Individual Contributions: John H. Schnatter/Papa John's International, Inc; 2016." Accessed 2 November 2017. Fox News. "CEO of Papa John's Says Employees' Hours Will Likely Be Cut Due to Obamacare." 11 November 2012. Fox News. "Papa John's Franchisee Gets Jail Time for Illegally Taking Employee Wages." 17 November 2015. RT. "Under Fire: Chipotle, Papa John, Mcdonalds Over Pervasive Wage Theft And Discrimination." 27 August 2016. WXYZ-TV. "Mike Ilitch Paid for Rosa Parks' Housing for More Than a Decade." 11 February 2017. UPI. "Little Caesars Founder Earns Vets Award." 18 September 2007. Press Release. "Veterans Affairs Secretary Honors Little Caesars Founder Michael Ilitch." 17 September 2007. QSR Magazine. "Papa Johns Teams Up with Cowboys for Charity." 9 August 2016. Ilitch Companies. "Mike Ilitch." Accessed 2 November 2016. American Red Cross. "Hawaii Red Cross Is the Papa Johns Charity of the Month!" 27 February 2017.

NEI

On 2 November 2017, the Facebook page "The Other 98%" shared a meme comparing purported facts about the founder of the Papa John's (John Schnatter) and Little Caesar's (the late Mike Ilitch) pizza chains:According to Federal Election Committee (FEC) filings, Schnatter made a total of $85,500 in political contributions in 2016, just over two percent of which went to the Trump campaign. Schnatter donated $1,000 each to two Trump campaign political action committees (PACs), he donated $33,400 to the Republican National Committee (RNC) and the Kentucky Republican Leadership Fund in 2016, and $6,200 to Rand Paul's PACs. As such, the claim was true but somewhat misleading: Schnatter (a resident of Louisville) did donate to the Trump campaign, but the bulk of his financial support went elsewhere, most of it to political activity on the state level.In early November 2012, it was widely reported that Schnatter planned to cut worker hours in response to provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA, or "Obamacare"):However, Schnatter asserted that his comments had been misinterpreted in an op-ed piece, explaining that his earlier remarks were speculative and pertained to franchisees of Papa John's (not the corporation itself):In 2015, a Papa John's franchisee (not the chain, nor Schnatter) was found guilty of wage theft and noncompliance with New York State laws pertaining to overtime:Khokar was an independent franchise owner, and his 2015 conviction was falsely attributed to Schnatter in the meme. Separate instances also involved the actions of independent franchisees, not Papa John's itself.In August 2012, news outlets reported that Schnatter was planning to pass increased health insurance costs onto customers in order to protect "shareholders' best interests":Back in February 2014, SportsBusiness Daily reported that Ilitch had arranged to pay for housing for civil rights icon Rosa Parks after she was robbed and assaulted in her Detroit home:This claim appears to reference Little Caesar's Love Kitchen, described on the company's web site as follows:The Love Kitchen charity was founded by Ilitch in 1985.In September 2007, news outlets reported that Ilitch had "received the U.S. Veterans Affairs Department's top civilian honor for giving war veterans franchise opportunities," with one press release stating:Aside from its literal veracity (or lack thereof), this meme also cherry-picks its "facts" to reflect poorly on Schnatter (whose political positions are well-known) and elides charitable contributions Papa John's has made to causes such as the Red Cross, children affected by domestic violence, and general philanthropic donations that Schnatter estimated to total around $30 million.

FMD_train_1589

Is the IRS confiscating the bank accounts of innocent Americans?

10/28/2014

Claim: The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) is seizing bank accounts from innocent American citizens under civil forfeiture laws. : Civil forfeiture laws enable law enforcement agents and the government to seize the assets of Americans who are neither guilty nor even suspected of any wrongdoing. Civil forfeiture laws are new or exclusive to the IRS. Example: [Collected via e-mail, October 2014] Just read a Facebook post. It was an article regarding the IRS seizing bank accounts of innocent American citizens who have done nothing criminally wrong. Inspite of the problems this has caused individuals the IRS seems relatively unconcerned except they want to collect money for whatever reasons. Is this true? Does the IRS have the right to just take the money of American citizens from their accounts? Are they an acting collections agency for the government now? I found this article a tad disturbing to say the least. Thank you for amy information you might have regarding this article and subject matter. Origins: On 5 October 2014, the issue of civil forfeiture and its effects on American citizens entered the spotlight after HBO host John Oliver addressed the matter at length on his show Last Week Tonight with John Oliver. During the segment, Oliver and guest Jeff Goldblum focused on seemingly arbitrary, unfair, and corrupt civil forfeiture practices allegedly perpetrated by law enforcement agents in a number of jurisdictions. Oliver's civil forfeiture segment sparked a number of conversations about the laws surrounding confiscation of assets under related laws. Then, on 25 October 2014, the New York Times profiled an individual who claimed the IRS had seized more than $30,000 in assets from her checking account under laws meant to ensnare drug cartels and organized criminals: For almost 40 years, Carole Hinders has dished out Mexican specialties at her modest cash-only restaurant. For just as long, she deposited the earnings at a small bank branch a block away until last year, when two tax agents knocked on her door and informed her that they had seized her checking account, almost $33,000. The Internal Revenue Service agents did not accuse Ms. Hinders of money laundering or cheating on her taxes in fact, she has not been charged with any crime. Instead, the money was seized solely because she had deposited less than $10,000 at a time, which they viewed as an attempt to avoid triggering a required government report. Using a law designed to catch drug traffickers, racketeers and terrorists by tracking their cash, the government has gone after run-of-the-mill business owners and wage earners without so much as an allegation that they have committed serious crimes. The government can take the money without ever filing a criminal complaint, and the owners are left to prove they are innocent. Many give up. It seems Hinders' run-in with the IRS was triggered by her practice of keeping deposits under the mandated reporting threshold of $10,000. Deposits that exceed $10,000 must be reported to the government under the Bank Secrecy Act of 1970, but Hinders told the Times that she believed large deposits created unnecessary paperwork for bank employees: Bank Secrecy Act My mom had told me if you keep your deposits under $10,000, the bank avoids paperwork. I didn't actually think it had anything to do with the I.R.S. Former federal prosecutor David Smith, an expert on such seizures, told the paper that the practice of civil forfeiture has shifted to focus on individuals not historically targeted by such laws: They're going after people who are really not criminals. They're middle-class citizens who have never had any trouble with the law. Richard Weber, Chief of Criminal Investigation at the IRS, described the seizures as "structuring" related, referring to suspicion triggered by a large number of deposits near the $10,000 threshold for reporting under the Bank Secrecy Act. In response to sudden interest in the IRS's policies regarding "structuring cases," Weber issued a statement indicating the IRS will curtail its seizure activities in cases where no crime is suspected: statement After a thorough review of our structuring cases over the last year and in order to provide consistency throughout the country (between our field offices and the U.S. attorney offices) regarding our policies, I.R.S.-C.I. will no longer pursue the seizure and forfeiture of funds associated solely with "legal source" structuring cases unless there are exceptional circumstances justifying the seizure and forfeiture and the case has been approved at the director of field operations (D.F.O.) level. While the act of structuring whether the funds are from a legal or illegal source is against the law, I.R.S.-C.I. special agents will use this act as an indicator that further illegal activity may be occurring. This policy update will ensure that C.I. continues to focus our limited investigative resources on identifying and investigating violations within our jurisdiction that closely align with C.I.'s mission and key priorities. The policy involving seizure and forfeiture in "illegal source" structuring cases will remain the same. The IRS is just one of several agencies engaging in civil forfeiture, and Oliver's segment also addressed its application by local and regional law enforcement: Prior to Oliver's segment and the Times' profile, civil forfeiture practices had been extensively profiled in the media: In general, you needn't be found guilty to have your assets claimed by law enforcement; in some states, suspicion on a par with "probable cause" is sufficient. Nor must you be charged with a crime, or even be accused of one. Unlike criminal forfeiture, which requires that a person be convicted of an offense before his or her property is confiscated, civil forfeiture amounts to a lawsuit filed directly against a possession, regardless of its owner's guilt or innocence. One result is the rise of improbable case names such as United States v. One Pearl Necklace and United States v. Approximately 64,695 Pounds of Shark Fins. "The protections our Constitution usually affords are out the window," Louis Rulli, a clinical law professor at the University of Pennsylvania and a leading forfeiture expert, observes. A piece of property does not share the rights of a person. There's no right to an attorney and, in most states, no presumption of innocence. Owners who wish to contest often find that the cost of hiring a lawyer far exceeds the value of their seized goods. Washington, D.C., charges up to twenty-five hundred dollars simply for the right to challenge a police seizure in court, which can take months or even years to resolve. Although the IRS has pledged to restrict its civil forfeiture activity to mainly "illegal source" cases, the practice is not limited to the tax agency and remains legal. Last updated: 28 October 2014 Stillman, Sarah. "Taken." The New Yorker. 12 August 2013.

False

It seems Hinders' run-in with the IRS was triggered by her practice of keeping deposits under the mandated reporting threshold of $10,000. Deposits that exceed $10,000 must be reported to the government under the Bank Secrecy Act of 1970, but Hinders told the Times that she believed large deposits created unnecessary paperwork for bank employees:Richard Weber, Chief of Criminal Investigation at the IRS, described the seizures as "structuring" related, referring to suspicion triggered by a large number of deposits near the $10,000 threshold for reporting under the Bank Secrecy Act. In response to sudden interest in the IRS's policies regarding "structuring cases," Weber issued a statement indicating the IRS will curtail its seizure activities in cases where no crime is suspected:

FMD_train_584

Did Donald Trump's 2018 Budget Proposal Cut Support for Disabled Veterans?

01/23/2018

As a presidential candidate, one of Donald Trump's main campaign promises was to improve the treatment of United States military veterans and initiate major reforms to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). reforms However, the president faced criticism during 2018 budget talks amidst reports that he was proposing significant cuts to benefits for disabled veterans. On 17 January 2018, a meme appeared on social media that specified a facet of that criticism: meme As is usually the case with memes and macros, this was not an entirely accurate summation of the political situation. President Trump did propose cutting a particular benefit for some disabled veterans in his March 2017 federal budget proposal; however, his administration backed away from the plan after an outcry from veterans' groups and abandoned the provisions that would have produced those cuts. The Facebook meme appeared to have originated in an analysis of President Trump's budget plan contained in journalist David Cay Johnston's book It's Even Worse Than You Think: What the Trump Administration is Doing to America. On page 225, Johnston wrote that: journalist book page 225 The biggest cut Trump proposed [in his 2018 budget] was ending a benefit for disabled veterans once they reach the minimum age for Social Security benefits. These veterans would see their income plunge from almost $35,000 annually to less than $13,000 if the Trump plan becomes law. The benefit is called "individual unemployability" (IU) and is paid out (as part of the Department of Veterans Affairs disability compensation program) to military veterans who are unable to find work because they have a relatively high level of disability sustained during service in the armed forces, according to the VA: VA Individual Unemployability ... allows VA to pay certain Veterans disability compensation at the 100% rate, even though VA has not rated their service-connected disabilities at the total level. In order to qualify for IU, a veteran must be assessed as being at least 60 percent disabled due to a service-connected disability or disabilities. As Johnston correctly wrote, Donald Trump's initial 2018 budget proposal ended individual unemployability for disabled veterans once they became eligible to receive Social Security benefits. However, Johnston did not mention that, under President Trump's proposal, disabled veterans who received Social Security benefits would continue to be paid disability benefits by the VA, albeit at their originally-assessed disability rate (rather than at a 100 percent rate), and anyone not eligible for Social Security would continue to receive IU. The 2018 budget proposal outlined the proposed changes: outlined Veterans eligible for Social Security retirement benefits would have their IU terminated upon reaching the minimum retirement age for Social Security purposes, or upon enactment of the proposal if the Veteran is already in receipt of Social Security retirement benefits. These Veterans would continue to receive VA disability benefits based on their original disability rating, at the scheduler evaluation level. IU benefits would not be terminated for Veterans who are ineligible for Social Security retirement benefits, thus allowing them to continue to receive IU past minimum retirement age. The Trump administration estimated that the proposed cuts would save $3.2 billion in 2018 and $40.8 billion over 10 years and had proposed using those savings to help fund a plan to expand and make permanent the Obama administration's Veterans Choice Program, which seeks to improve the availability of care for veterans in their own communities. Veterans Choice Program Veterans organizations strongly criticized the IU proposal in early 2017, with veterans service organization AMVETS warning that it was "deeply concerned" by the cuts, which they said would affect "perhaps the most vulnerable segment of the veterans population": AMVETS warning The argument for this cut is that these senior citizens would be eligible for Social Security retirement benefits at age 65. That argument is flawed because these veterans have largely been disabled, out of the work force and not paying into Social Security for many years before reaching 65. Many have been severely disabled as a result of their military service and unable to work since the day of their discharge. AMVETS estimated that Trump's proposal would affect 225,000 military veterans aged over 65 and would decrease by a full $1,200 a month the disability benefit paid to an unmarried veteran with a 90 percent disabled rating. The payments that veterans receive under IU depends upon their disability rating and family circumstances, as outlined by the VA. For example, a veteran with a 60 percent disability rating who lives alone would theoretically receive $1,083.52 in disability benefits each month. However, under individual unemployability, veterans are treated as if they had a disability rating of 100 percent, meaning they would receive $2,973.86 each month. For veterans eligible to receive Social Security, Trump's plan would have pruned their monthly disability benefit back to the 60 percent rate, a highly significant cut of $1,890.34, or 63.6 percent. Over the course of a year, that would have brought their disability benefits down from $35,686.32 to $13,002.24, roughly the amounts mentioned by David Cay Johnston in his book and in the Facebook meme. VA Such veterans would be in receipt of Social Security benefits as well, but it's easy to see the significant financial effects the plan would have had on an aging veteran who was unable to work and who lived alone. By comparison, a retirement-aged veteran with a 90 percent disability rating and a dependent spouse, a child, and two parents would have seen annual disability benefits cut from $42,326.64 to $27,356.16, a decrease of 35.4 percent. In June 2017, VA Secretary David Shulkin publicly stepped back from the proposed IU cut, telling the Senate Veterans' Affair Committee that: telling As I began to listen to veterans and their concerns and VSOs [Veterans Service Organizations] in particular, it became clear that this would be hurting some veterans, and that this would be a take-away from veterans that can't afford to have those benefits taken away. And I'm really concerned about that...I am not going to support policies that hurt veterans. The following October, Shulkin wrote to veterans service organizations to confirm that the VA no longer supported ending IU for disabled veterans who are eligible to receive Social Security. wrote Johnston's analysis, and the Facebook meme posted by Stacey Sharp, are both true in a narrow sense. The amounts they mentioned were accurate but were based on only one of many possible scenarios for disabled veterans. The latter, published in January 2018, left out that the proposal had been abandoned by then. Merica, Dan. "Trump Signs VA Reform Bill, Making Good on a Campaign Promise." CNN. 23 June 2017. Johnston, David Cay. It's Even Worse Than You Think: What the Trump Administration Is Doing to America. Simon & Schuster, 2018. ISBN 1-501-17416-9 (p. 225). Hoellwarth, John. "AMVETS Deeply Concerned by President's Proposed Cuts to Veteran Benefits." American Veterans. 24 May 2017. Wentling, Nikki. "VA Secretary Promises in Writing Not to Cut Benefit Program for Disabled Vets." Stars and Stripes. 13 October 2017.

NEI

As a presidential candidate, one of Donald Trump's main campaign promises was to improve the treatment of United States military veterans and initiate major reforms to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).However, the president faced criticism during 2018 budget talks amidst reports that he was proposing significant cuts to benefits for disabled veterans. On 17 January 2018, a meme appeared on social media that specified a facet of that criticism:The Facebook meme appeared to have originated in an analysis of President Trump's budget plan contained in journalist David Cay Johnston's book It's Even Worse Than You Think: What the Trump Administration is Doing to America. On page 225, Johnston wrote that:The benefit is called "individual unemployability" (IU) and is paid out (as part of the Department of Veterans Affairs disability compensation program) to military veterans who are unable to find work because they have a relatively high level of disability sustained during service in the armed forces, according to the VA:The 2018 budget proposal outlined the proposed changes:The Trump administration estimated that the proposed cuts would save $3.2 billion in 2018 and $40.8 billion over 10 years and had proposed using those savings to help fund a plan to expand and make permanent the Obama administration's Veterans Choice Program, which seeks to improve the availability of care for veterans in their own communities. Veterans organizations strongly criticized the IU proposal in early 2017, with veterans service organization AMVETS warning that it was "deeply concerned" by the cuts, which they said would affect "perhaps the most vulnerable segment of the veterans population":The payments that veterans receive under IU depends upon their disability rating and family circumstances, as outlined by the VA. For example, a veteran with a 60 percent disability rating who lives alone would theoretically receive $1,083.52 in disability benefits each month. However, under individual unemployability, veterans are treated as if they had a disability rating of 100 percent, meaning they would receive $2,973.86 each month. For veterans eligible to receive Social Security, Trump's plan would have pruned their monthly disability benefit back to the 60 percent rate, a highly significant cut of $1,890.34, or 63.6 percent. Over the course of a year, that would have brought their disability benefits down from $35,686.32 to $13,002.24, roughly the amounts mentioned by David Cay Johnston in his book and in the Facebook meme.In June 2017, VA Secretary David Shulkin publicly stepped back from the proposed IU cut, telling the Senate Veterans' Affair Committee that:The following October, Shulkin wrote to veterans service organizations to confirm that the VA no longer supported ending IU for disabled veterans who are eligible to receive Social Security.

FMD_train_1447

Did Sheep Walk Through Gate Despite There Being No Fence?

09/13/2016

A photograph purportedly showing a group of sheep squeezing through a gate despite the absence of a fence is frequently shared as an example of "the trap of thinking." A herd of sheep is leaving the stall. There is no fence, only the gate... "The Trap of Thinking." However, whether or not the sheep are stopping to think about it, there is actually a fence in the image displayed above. This image was taken by Australian photographer Scott Bridle in 2012 and shows a group of sheep passing through a gate at Brenda Station. While the encircling fence may be hard to see in this particular photograph, fence posts are clearly visible in a higher resolution version. Furthermore, fenced-in sheep can be seen in two other images Bridle took of Brenda Station in 2012. Finally, Carolyn Ferguson of Scott Bridle Photography confirmed to us that there was indeed a fence in this photograph: "Yes, there is definitely a fence." Update [July 6, 2022]: Headline reformatting, SEO/social updates.

False

This image was taken by Australian photographer Scott Bridle in 2012, and shows a group of sheep passing through a gate at Brenda Station. While the encircling fence may be hard to see in this particular photograph, fence posts are clearly visible in a higher resolution version. Furthermore, fenced-in sheep can be seen in two other images Bridle took of Brenda Station in 2012:

FMD_train_961

Was Colin Kaepernick chosen by Ford to be the focal point of their latest advertising initiative?

09/10/2018

As social media users sorted through a flurry of news articles, opinion pieces, calls for boycotts, and other hot takes in September 2018 about Colin Kaepernick's involvement in a new Nike ad campaign, some stumbled across what appeared to be a news article reporting that Ford USA was following Nike's example by making the former NFL quarterback the face of their new ad campaign: articles This item was not a social media link to a genuine news article, nor did the featured image show a genuine Ford advertisement featuring Colin Kaepernick. This item was created as a joke for the political humor section of the Reddit social news site. Kaepernick became a controversial figure in 2016 when he started kneeling during the pre-game performance of the U.S. national anthem in protest of racial inequality and police brutality. A number of conservative football fans, including President Trump, maintained that Kaepernick's protest was disrespectful to veterans, so when Nike announced that the former football star would be featured in their latest ad campaign, social media users urged each other to boycott the brand and started posting images purportedly showing them destroying various pieces of Nike apparel. 2016 Twitter user @Patterico apparently found the videos of people burning their shoes to be amusing but noted that the entertainment value would increase if people were burning Ford F-150 trucks instead: I'll pay Ford $10 if they put Kaepernick in a commercial for F-150s so I can watch some dumbass torch his pickup on Twitter, who's with me Patterico (@Patterico) September 4, 2018 September 4, 2018 Reddit user u/fakenewsanchorman saw this tweet and decided to create a fake news item (note the username) stating that Ford USA had indeed named Kaepernick as their new brand ambassador. On 5 September 2018, his meme was posted to the Political Humor subreddit under the title "Please Make This Actually Happen." Political Humor That Reddit user admitted in the comments section that his image did not reflect a genuine news item, but we double-checked with FoxNews.com to see if reporter Judson Berger had filed any such report. This article does not appear on Berger's author page nor anywhere else on the Fox News web site. author page This bit of fake news may have sparked sparked interest in a genuine, albeit outdated, article about Ford's stance on the national anthem protests. In September 2017, the company officially took the side of the protesting players, saying that they respected the "individuals' right to express their views": article "We respect individuals' rights to express their views, even if they are not ones we share," the company said. "That's part of what makes America great" ... Martha Firestone Ford, owner and chairwoman of the Detroit Lions and a member of the Ford family, issued a statement criticizing President Trump for his comments. "Our game has long provided a powerful platform for dialogue and positive change in many communities throughout our nation," she said. "Negative and disrespectful comments suggesting otherwise are contrary to the founding principles of our country, and we do not support those comments or opinions." Abad-Santos, Alex. "Why the Social Media Boycott Over Colin Kaepernick Is a Win for Nike." Vox. 6 September 2018. Sandritter, Mark. "A Timeline of Colin Kaepernicks National Anthem Protest and the Athletes Who Joined Him." SB Nation. 25 September 2017. Wiener-Bronner, Danielle. "Ford: We Respect the Right of NFL Players to Protest." CNN. 25 September 2017.

False

As social media users sorted through a flurry of news articles, opinion pieces, calls for boycotts, and other hot takes in September 2018 about Colin Kaepernick's involvement in a new Nike ad campaign, some stumbled across what appeared to be a news article reporting that Ford USA was following Nike's example by making the former NFL quarterback the face of their new ad campaign:Kaepernick became a controversial figure in 2016 when he started kneeling during the pre-game performance of the U.S. national anthem in protest of racial inequality and police brutality. A number of conservative football fans, including President Trump, maintained that Kaepernick's protest was disrespectful to veterans, so when Nike announced that the former football star would be featured in their latest ad campaign, social media users urged each other to boycott the brand and started posting images purportedly showing them destroying various pieces of Nike apparel. Patterico (@Patterico) September 4, 2018Reddit user u/fakenewsanchorman saw this tweet and decided to create a fake news item (note the username) stating that Ford USA had indeed named Kaepernick as their new brand ambassador. On 5 September 2018, his meme was posted to the Political Humor subreddit under the title "Please Make This Actually Happen."That Reddit user admitted in the comments section that his image did not reflect a genuine news item, but we double-checked with FoxNews.com to see if reporter Judson Berger had filed any such report. This article does not appear on Berger's author page nor anywhere else on the Fox News web site.This bit of fake news may have sparked sparked interest in a genuine, albeit outdated, article about Ford's stance on the national anthem protests. In September 2017, the company officially took the side of the protesting players, saying that they respected the "individuals' right to express their views":

FMD_train_171

Is Biden From the Same Scranton as 'The Office'?

10/23/2020

Voting in the 2020 U.S. Election may be over, but misinformation continues to spread. Never stop fact-checking. Follow our post-election coverage here. Throughout the 2020 presidential campaign, U.S. Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden frequently referred to his roots in Scranton, Pennsylvania. Some social media users questioned whether this was the same "Scranton" from the U.S. sitcom "The Office" and whether Scranton was indeed a real American city. Meanwhile, Biden's political rival, U.S. President Donald Trump, accused Biden of exaggerating his connections to the small Pennsylvania city. This topic arose once again during the final presidential debate of 2020. Twice during the debate, Biden mentioned his small-town roots while discussing middle-class families. Here are transcripts from these two moments: "Where I come from, in Scranton and Claymont, the people don't live off the stock market. This isn't about me. There's a reason why he's bringing up all this malarkey. There's a reason for it. He doesn't want to talk about the substantive issues. It's not about his family and my family. It's about your family, and your family's hurting badly. If you're making less than, if you're a middle-class

True

Voting in the 2020 U.S. Election may be over, but the misinformation keeps on ticking. Never stop fact-checking. Follow our post-election coverage here.This topic came up once again during the final presidential debate of 2020. Twice during the debate, Biden mentioned his small-town roots while talking about middle-class families. Here are transcripts from these two moments:In the past, Trump has pushed an exaggerated version of this claim, saying that Biden "wasn't born here" in Scranton.For fans of "The Office," this is the same Scranton that serves as the home of the fictional paper company Dunder Mifflin. The New York Times reported:While the Bidens moved out of Scranton when he was 10 years old, the family maintained some connections to his hometown. In 1987, Jean Finnegan Biden, the former vice president's mother, told the Scrantonian Tribune, "Scranton's our hometown... we have fond memories of it." In 2008, Delaware's The News Journal published an article about Biden's hometown friends and his authentic connection to the city: Mon, Sep 1, 2008 Page 10 The News Journal (Wilmington, Delaware) Newspapers.comIn an interview with GQ, Biden talked about his childhood in Scranton and noted that his family spent most holidays and summers visiting friends in Scranton until he was about 16 years old. Biden also said that a few of his friends from Scranton were in his wedding:

FMD_train_1272

101 utilities cut rates, credit GOP tax cuts.

06/11/2018

For months, President Donald Trump has been touting the benefits of the tax law he signed in December. But in early June, he began expanding his argument beyond lower tax bills to include lower energy bills. On June 7, Trump tweeted, "$3 billion payoff: 101 utilities cut rates, credit GOP tax cuts." The tweet linked to a Washington Examiner article that, in turn, cited research by Americans for Tax Reform, a group supportive of the tax cut. "$3 billion payoff: 101 utilities cut rates, credit GOP tax cuts" https://t.co/x1a1OJuRgd. This isn't the first time the White House has relied on Americans for Tax Reform for evidence of real-world impacts from the passage of the tax bill. Previously, we looked at Trump's statement that since we passed tax cuts, over 3 million workers have received tax cut bonuses, many of them thousands and thousands of dollars. That talking point, gleaned from the group's research, rated Mostly True. The energy rate-cut list, which is a sub-list of the broader one we checked previously, attracted the White House's attention not long after it hit its 100th item. For the utilities on the group's list that provided an estimate of savings per customer, most said ratepayers would save about $1 to $4 on their bill per month. Americans for Tax Reform cited a large number of company news releases and news articles, so we don't dispute the number (which had already grown to 102 a day later). That said, we will provide some additional information that helps put the list in fuller context. It shouldn't be surprising to see a lot of investor-owned utilities lowering rates after the corporate tax reduction. It also shouldn't be surprising that the companies specifically cited the tax changes as the reason for the rate cut. In most cases, experts said, utilities would have been required to do so by their regulators. The tax law impacts privately owned utilities—often called investor-owned utilities, or IOUs for short—but not public utilities. Investor-owned utilities pay corporate taxes, so the tax law's reduction of the top corporate rate from 35 percent to 21 percent should save this type of utility a substantial amount of money. By contrast, publicly held utilities do not pay corporate taxes, so they are unaffected by this provision of the tax bill. Public utilities include rural electric cooperatives, municipally owned utilities, and federal or state power authorities. Among electricity utilities, about two-thirds of Americans are served by investor-owned utilities, while about a third receive their power from public utilities. For water utilities, a few of which appear on the group's list, public utilities are dominant. So while 101 utilities cutting their rates may seem like a large number, your ability to benefit from a rate cut depends on which utilities happen to serve your area. It's also worth pointing out that many of these rate cuts were preordained by existing energy regulations. Utilities are natural monopolies, and because of that, they've been regulated for well over 100 years, said Manny Teodoro, a political scientist at Texas A&M University who has studied energy issues. It's a recognition that a pure monopoly will result in a lack of competition and abusive pricing. For that reason, under longstanding regulations, utilities need to go back to energy regulatory bodies whenever they seek to modify their rates in order to provide reasons for the change. If a utility happens to benefit from a tax change, there's a good chance it will be required under existing regulations to lower its rates to account for that. Rates are set by public utility commissions through rate-making processes that clearly identify the reasons for the rate change, whether up or down, said Billy Pizer, a Duke University public policy professor who studies energy. This doesn't undercut the larger point of the tally, but it does suggest that the rate cuts required two elements to materialize: the tax cut, which Trump touted, and the longstanding regulations that require companies to share the tax gains with ratepayers rather than just with shareholders. And the latter is an aspect Trump didn't address. Trump tweeted, "101 utilities cut rates, credit GOP tax cuts." The list comes from an organization that strongly supported the tax bill. The tally of rate cuts is well-documented, and the group acknowledges that it is not comprehensive. That said, it's worth noting that public utility customers will not see the same types of rate cuts cited in the list, which represents about one-third of Americans. Trump's tweet seeks full credit for the tax law while glossing over the role of energy regulations that mandate utility savings be passed along to customers. We rate the statement Mostly True.

True

On June 7, Trumptweeted, $3 billion payoff: 101 utilities cut rates, credit GOP tax cuts. The tweet linked to aWashington Examiner articlethat in turn citedresearch by Americans for Tax Reform, a group supportive of the tax cut.$3 billion payoff: 101 utilities cut rates, credit GOP tax cutshttps://t.co/x1a1OJuRgdThis isnt the first time the White House has relied on Americans for Tax Reform for evidence of real-world impacts from passage of the tax bill. Previously, we looked at Trumps statement that since we passed tax cuts, over 3 million workers have gotten tax cut bonuses many of them thousands and thousands of dollars. That talking point,gleaned from the groups research, ratedMostly True.By contrast, publicly held utilities do not pay corporate taxes, so they are unaffected by this provision of the tax bill. Public utilitiesincluderural electric cooperatives, municipally owned utilities, and federal or state power authorities.

FMD_train_505

Ohios electricity rates are 10 percent below the national average.

07/27/2010

Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland seems determined to be regarded as your energy governor. In his race for re-election this November, the governor touts his efforts toward energy reform at almost every opportunity.He was at it again during a campaign address on July 6 when he said, The energy reform bill I proposed gave Ohio one of the nations most aggressive renewable energy policies and has pushed our utilities to innovate.And while other states that failed to act saw electricity rates jump 70 percent, Strickland said, Ohios electricity rates are 10 percent below the national average.Stricklands spokeswoman, Allison Kolodziej, acknowledges that Ohios electricity rates were already well below the national average before Strickland took office in January 2007. But she said the governors push for Senate Bill 221 which became law in 2008 and placed tighter reins on utility companies seeking to set market-based pricing prevented Ohios rates from skyrocketing as rates did in other states where wholesale market pricing was unchecked.The question: Are Ohios rates today a full 10 percent below the national average as the governor claimed? The governors campaign staff said it relied on information from the U.S. Department of Energys Energy Information Administration, or EIA, for its figures.According to EIAs most recent average retail price report, released June 16 and updated through March, Ohios average electricity price for all sectors this year was 8.72 cents per kilowatt hour. The national average was 9.5 cents. That means Ohios rate thus for 2010 for all sectors is about 8 percent below the national average not 10 percent.In 2009, however the last full year of available figures Ohios average was 8.63 cents per kilowatt hour and the national average 9.75 cents, meaning a year ago the state was 11 percent below the national average. That means Stricklands statement is not accurate today but was a year ago.Kolodziej said the campaign is relying on 2009 figures because the full 2010 year figures are not yet complete.The premise of Stricklands statement is that Ohio is still trending below the national average when it comes to electricity rates, and thus is better off than many other states in terms of utility costs. The context of his point was accurate.But while the full 2010 figures are not yet available, there were more up to date figures the governor could have relied on during his speech that, while not as flattering as 2009, could have still effectively made his point just more accurately.We rate this statement as Mostly True. Comment on this item.

True

Comment on this item.

FMD_train_1363

Did US 'Lead the World' in Reducing CO2 Emissions in 2019?

02/19/2020

In February 2020, we received multiple inquiries from readers about the veracity of articles which claimed that the United States had "led the entire world" in reducing carbon dioxide emissions that, along with other greenhouse gases like methane, contribute significantly to global warming. contribute On Feb. 13, the right-leaning website The Daily Wire published an article with the headline "United States Led Entire World in Reducing CO2 Emissions in 2019." That piece reported as follows: article "The United States led the entire world in reducing CO2 emissions last year while also experiencing solid economic growth, according to a newly released report. 'The United States saw the largest decline in energy-related CO2 emissions in 2019 on a country basis a fall of 140 Mt, or 2.9%, to 4.8 Gt,' The International Energy Agency (IEA) reported on Tuesday. 'US emissions are now down almost 1 Gt from their peak in the year 2000, the largest absolute decline by any country over that period.' On the same day, the right-leaning website Breitbart published a similar article with the headline "Report: U.S. the Global Leader for Reducing CO2 Emissions in 2019," writing: article "The United States led the world in tackling CO2 emissions last year while combining that singular success with solid economic growth, a new report reveals. It has also been confirmed while the U.S. was hitting its climate goals, at the same time '80 percent of the increase in CO2 emissions came from Asia and that China and India both contributed significantly' to global increases." On Feb. 11, the right-leaning Washington Examiner wrote that "U.S. emissions fell 2.9%, or by 140 million tons, continuing the trend of the United States leading the world in total emissions decline since 2000." That prompted Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, to tweet: wrote tweet "FACT you will NEVER see on the 6 oclock news: U.S. emissions FELL 2.9%, or by 140 million tons, continuing the trend of the United States LEADING THE WORLD IN TOTAL EMISSIONS DECLINE since 2000." Based on the data contained in the International Energy Agency's (IEA) February 2020 report, it would be accurate to say that in 2019 the U.S. had the largest year-on-year reduction in carbon dioxide emissions of any country, in absolute terms. However, claiming as The Daily Wire and Breitbart did that the U.S. had "led the world" or was "the global leader" in reducing emissions that year, risked giving readers the mistaken impression that the U.S. had performed better than any country when it came to reducing CO2 emissions. This was not the case, because the U.S. reduced its CO2 emissions by just 2.9%, while other countries and regions fared better. Germany, for example, achieved a year-on-year reduction of 8% in its CO2 emissions. The source of the aforementioned claims was the IEA Feb. 11 data release entitled "Global CO2 Emissions in 2019." The IEA told Snopes that a more detailed, country-by-country breakdown of emissions data was not yet available, but would be published in March. However, some country- and region-specific details were already clear. According to the report, the overall global trend was as follows: report "Global energy-related CO2 emissions flattened in 2019 at around 33 gigatonnes (Gt), following two years of increases. This resulted mainly from a sharp decline in CO2 emissions from the power sector in advanced economies, thanks to the expanding role of renewable sources (mainly wind and solar PV), fuel switching from coal to natural gas, and higher nuclear power output." Although advanced economies (a category that includes the U.S., the European Union, Australia, Japan, Canada, and others) experienced positive economic growth in 2019, energy-related CO2 emissions also fell, on average, in those countries and regions. The U.S. produced around 4.8 Gt (gigatons/billions of tons) of CO2 in 2019. That was 140 Mt (megatons/millions of tons) fewer than it produced in 2018 the biggest single absolute reduction in energy-related CO2 emissions by any country. The U.S. produced around 2.9% less CO2 in 2019 than it did in 2018. The IEA report added that: "US emissions are now down almost 1 Gt from their peak in the year 2000, the largest absolute decline by any country over that period. A 15% reduction in the use of coal for power generation underpinned the decline in overall US emissions in 2019. Coal-fired power plants faced even stronger competition from natural gas-fired generation, with benchmark gas prices an average of 45% lower than 2018 levels. As a result, gas increased its share in electricity generation to a record high of 37%. Overall electricity demand declined because demand for air-conditioning and heating was lower as a result of milder summer and winter weather." The large absolute reduction in CO2 emissions in the United States in 2019 is in part a function of the sheer volume of CO2 produced there (which is in part determined by the large size of the U.S. economy). By contrast, its rate of emissions reduction was not as significant as that achieved in other countries and regions. For example, the IEA report explained that Germany achieved a year-on-year reduction in CO2 emissions of 8%, while Japan's emissions fell by 4.3% significantly greater rates of decline than the 2.9% achieved in the U.S. Despite having an overall CO2 output that is almost 40% smaller than that of the United States (2.9 Gt vs 4.8 Gt), the European Union still managed to achieve a greater absolute reduction in emissions than the U.S. in 2019 (160 Mt vs 140 Mt). That was because emissions fell at a significantly greater rate in the EU than in the U.S. (5% versus 2.9%). It's true that, according to the IEA's February 2020 report, the U.S. achieved a greater absolute reduction in CO2 emissions than any other country, in 2019. However, claims that the U.S. therefore "led the entire world" or was a "global leader" in CO2 emissions were belied by the fact that other countries (including Germany, Japan, and likely others) achieved a superior rate of reduction in CO2 emissions. Although not a country, the European Union achieved both a larger absolute reduction and a greater rate of reduction in CO2 emissions than the US did. As such, we're issuing a rating of "Mixture." The National Aeronautics and Space Administration. "The Causes of Climate Change." Accessed 19 February 2020. Saavedra, Ryan. "United States Led Entire World in Reducing CO2 Emissions in 2019." The Daily Wire. 13 February 2020. Kent, Simon. "Report: U.S. the Global Leader for Reducing CO2 Emissions in 2019." Breitbart. 13 February 2020. Siegel, Josh. "Demise of Coal in Rich Countries Brings Global Carbon Emissions to a Stall." Washington Examiner. 11 February 2020. The International Energy Agency. "Data Release -- Global CO2 Emissions in 2019." 11 February 2020.

NEI

In February 2020, we received multiple inquiries from readers about the veracity of articles which claimed that the United States had "led the entire world" in reducing carbon dioxide emissions that, along with other greenhouse gases like methane, contribute significantly to global warming. On Feb. 13, the right-leaning website The Daily Wire published an article with the headline "United States Led Entire World in Reducing CO2 Emissions in 2019." That piece reported as follows:On the same day, the right-leaning website Breitbart published a similar article with the headline "Report: U.S. the Global Leader for Reducing CO2 Emissions in 2019," writing:On Feb. 11, the right-leaning Washington Examiner wrote that "U.S. emissions fell 2.9%, or by 140 million tons, continuing the trend of the United States leading the world in total emissions decline since 2000." That prompted Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, to tweet:According to the report, the overall global trend was as follows:

FMD_train_1727

Tioga Hills Elementary School Controversy

04/06/2015

Claim: A hearing-impaired student at Tioga Hills Elementary School was physically disciplined by a teacher and sustained a dislocated shoulder as a result. Example: [Collected via Facebook, April 2015] PLEASE SHARE! I would like to ask my friends to please share and support us at this time. I am not going to stand silent anymore. On Tuesday, March 17th, my son, Tommy suffered an attack on him by his math teacher, Mrs. Joan Barr Pokorak at Tioga Hills Elementary School in the Vestal School District. As many of you know, my 10 year old, fourth grade son, Tommy has been through many ear surgeries over the past years, resulting in a significant hearing loss in his left ear. He has a 504 Plan in place at school due to his disability. The plan specifies that he have preferential seating in the front of the room with his right ear, his "good" ear towards the teacher. This plan has been in place over 2 years. It came to our attention that during this math teacher's class, Tommy is seated near the back of the classroom with his impaired ear in the direction of the math teacher. During CSE meetings the hearing specialist from the school noted that Tom cannot hear in this position. Tommy and students in the classroom testify that on Tuesday, March 17th Mrs. Pokorak was working on a math problem at the front of the room and hesitating with an answer. Tommy blurted out, "the answer is.." giving the answer out of turn. From what students have testified, Mrs. Pokorak screamed, "GET OUT!!!!" Tommy said he was startled and wasn't sure if she was talking to him. She came directly behind him, dragged and lifted him up from his chair, pulled him by his right arm to the door and pushed him out into the hallway with both hands while screaming, "GET OUT!!!" She then slammed the door, causing the teacher from the next door classroom to come out into the hallway to see what was going on. Parents reported to me, that students still in the classroom sat there stunned. My son was hurting, shocked, and terrified what just happened to him. When Tommy came home that day, I checked with parents of students in the class to see what they would say happened. They all told the same scenario that Tom relayed of the events. Tommy complained of shoulder pain and his shoulder was making very loud popping sounds. Concerned that the teacher had injured his shoulder, I took him to Lourdes Hospital Emergency Room. X-rays and the Dr. confirmed that due to the attack on Tommy from this teacher, he suffered a third degree separation (Closed dislocation) of his Acromioclavicular Joint with significant scapular winging. At that time the hospital social worker said as a mandated reporter she must call Child Protective Services for an investigation of the case. Our family was devastated. Expecting to hear from Vestal School District regarding their concern for Tom's health and well being we waited and waited thinking we would be contacted by someone from the district. Up to this point, no explanation or even acknowledgement of the incident has been made on the part of the school. The State Police investigator has informed us that the school district has blocked him from contacting individuals, students, and has retained legal counsel for Mrs. Pokarak. Again, to this day she refuses to speak to the investigator regarding her brutal attack on my son. Now, the Tioga County District Attorney, Eric Gartenman, is refusing to speak with our attorney regarding this incident. We are left confused and without resolution or answers as to why. When speaking with the investigating officer, he stated that Mr. Gartenman felt that Mrs. Pokarak was justified in injuring my son due to his "talking in class." The investigator stated that Tommy wasn't out of control, disrespectful to the teacher or others..he was "talking." When we explained that he MUST be seated toward the front of the room with his good ear facing the teacher (according to his 504 plan) Tommy said he truly didn't hear the teacher from where he was placed in the classroom if she had asked him to be quiet. Why couldn't she ask him to leave the class, why the brutal attack that resulted in a dislocation? What kind of force and anger causes this action and injury? Why is this okay? And WHY are there so many questions left unanswered?! My son is now experiencing both physical and emotional trauma due to this assault. He is afraid to be in school, afraid of another attack. If not on my son..who will be next? Our elected officials are doing NOTHING!! So, when you think your kids are safe at school, think again. It is with a heavy heart that I post this and ask for support, because I am a teacher and can't even imagine EVER harming one of my students. Please, please help us get the word out regarding this cover up by Vestal School District and Eric Gartenman and ask for justice on behalf of my son. Keep all of our children safe. Please "Share" in hopes we migh get some help and resolution and prevent this from happening to someone else's child. Thank you so much- Sharon and Frank Russo. [Click here to expand text]. [Click here to expand text] Origins: Sharon Vail Russo of Binghamton, New York, posted the above-reproduced item to her Facebook page on 3 April 2015, detailing an alleged assault on her 10-year-old son Tommy by his math teacher on 17 March 2015 at the Tioga Hills Elementary School in in Apalachin, New York. According to Ms. Russo's account, her fourth-grade son has a significant hearing loss in one ear and is therefore typically seated in classrooms towards the front of the room with his "good" ear positioned towards the teacher in order to help compensate for his hearing loss. For some reason Tommy was seated in a disadvantageous position in his math class, and when he supposedly blurted out something like "c'mon, the answer is ..." in reference to a math problem the teacher was attempting to work out on in front of the room, the teacher yelled at him to "GET OUT" of the classroom. When Tommy failed to respond to this command (because his hearing issue made him unsure whether it was addressed to him), the teacher physically dragged him out of his seat, pushed and pulled him out the classroom door and into the hallway, and slammed the door behind him, screaming at him and dislocating his shoulder in the process. posted The New York State Police Child Abuse hotline was contacted a day after the alleged incident, and in April 2015 state police reported they had completed an investigation into the allegations and that a decision on whether to pursue criminal charges (two possible misdemeanor charges) rested in the hands of the Tioga County District Attorney. On 6 April 2015 Ms. Russo posted again about the incident to her Facebook page, indicating that the district attorney's office had opened a case about the matter: posted I spoke with my attorney, Mr. Ronald Benjamin. He told me that he has been in contact with Mr. Gartenman (1st Assistant DA for Tioga Co.) and the case has been opened. He expressed that as soon as the big trial Tioga Co. is dealing with now is over, they will be dealing with the CPS investigation from the NY State Police regarding Mrs. P.Mr. Benjamin also said he would speak to media regarding the case and they should contact him should they wish. As for the teacher, Mrs. P- She is still at Tioga Hills Elementary as of today. However, on 7 April 2015 Vestal Central School District Superintendent Mark LaRoach sent a letter to parents of students at Tioga Hills Elementary stating that the District Attorney's office had determined the accusations were unfounded and the teacher had been exonerated. letter Nonetheless, the Russos' attorney said they had filed an action against the school district that would "mature into a lawsuit in the next couple of months." Last updated: 9 April 2015

NEI

[Click here to expand text].Origins: Sharon Vail Russo of Binghamton, New York, posted the above-reproduced item to her Facebook page on 3 April 2015, detailing an alleged assault on her 10-year-old son Tommy by his math teacher on 17 March 2015 at the Tioga Hills Elementary School in in Apalachin, New York. According to Ms. Russo's account, her fourth-grade son has a significant hearing loss in one ear and is therefore typically seated in classrooms towards the front of the room with his "good" ear positioned towards the teacher in order to help compensate for his hearing loss. For some reason Tommy was seated in a disadvantageous position in his math class, and when he supposedly blurted out something like "c'mon, the answer is ..." in reference to a math problem the teacher was attempting to work out on in front of the room, the teacher yelled at him to "GET OUT" of the classroom. When Tommy failed to respond to this command (because his hearing issue made him unsure whether it was addressed to him), the teacher physically dragged him out of his seat, pushed and pulled him out the classroom door and into the hallway, and slammed the door behind him, screaming at him and dislocating his shoulder in the process.The New York State Police Child Abuse hotline was contacted a day after the alleged incident, and in April 2015 state police reported they had completed an investigation into the allegations and that a decision on whether to pursue criminal charges (two possible misdemeanor charges) rested in the hands of the Tioga County District Attorney. On 6 April 2015 Ms. Russo posted again about the incident to her Facebook page, indicating that the district attorney's office had opened a case about the matter:However, on 7 April 2015 Vestal Central School District Superintendent Mark LaRoach sent a letter to parents of students at Tioga Hills Elementary stating that the District Attorney's office had determined the accusations were unfounded and the teacher had been exonerated.

FMD_train_1140

In Wisconsin, unions can essentially give unlimited contributions to political parties, but business can't give any.

11/21/2014

Wisconsin Assembly Speaker Robin Vos sounded euphoric on Milwaukee radio on Nov. 5, 2014, the morning after the mid-term elections. How are you? he was asked by conservative talk show host Charlie Sykes. Charlie, I literally could not be better, Vos replied. Not only had Republican Gov. Scott Walker won re-election, but gains in the Assembly meant Republicans would enjoy their largest majority in that chambersince 1957. In theinterview, Vos laid out a number of his priorities for the next legislative session, which starts in January 2015. One proposal would allow business contributions to the political parties. Right now, if you are the Democratic Party, you can take unlimited union money, in many ways, but there's a prohibition on business being able to give to a political party, Vos claimed. Id like to get rid of that and create a level playing field. Vos presumably was singling out the Democratic Party because it typically gets more support from unions than the GOP does. Well check both parts of his claim -- that in Wisconsin, unions can essentially make unlimited contributions to political parties, while businesses cant make any. Unions State law allows unions to contribute directly to political parties (and to candidates, for that matter). But since at least 2008, no union has used its treasury funds to directly make a contribution to a political party, according to the state Government Accountability Board, which oversees state elections. There is a strong disincentive to contribute that way. If they did, unions would have to register with the state as a political committee and would have to disclose all their sources of revenue and all their disbursements. Instead, what unions typically do is create political action committees, which in turn make contributions to political parties (and candidates). A union can give a PAC the equivalent of $20 per union member per year without having to disclose the names of the union members. Or, the union can give unlimited amounts to PACs, as long as the union members names are disclosed. PACs, though, are limited to contributing $6,000 per year to a political party. So, unions are allowed to contribute directly to political parties -- but, in practice, they dont. They are allowed to give unlimited amounts of money to a political action committee, but a PAC is limited to how much it can give to a party. Business The second part of Vos claim is that there's a prohibition on business being able to give to a political party. In Wisconsin, campaign contributionsmust originate from individuals. That means business owners -- those who own sole proprietorships or partnerships -- can make contributions to political parties (as well as to candidates and political action committees). That is, as long as the source is personal funds and not funds from the business -- and as long as they follow the limit for a particular race. ButWisconsin prohibitscorporations, including limited liability companies, from making contributions to parties, candidates or PACs. Like unions, corporations can form political action committees to solicit campaign contributions from individuals. But as weve noted, unlike unions, corporations cant make contributions to PACs. Vos told us hed like to see state law changed so that it treats corporations like unions -- in other words, allowing corporations to make the same kind of political contributions as unions do. Our rating Vos said that in Wisconsin, unions can essentially give unlimited contributions to political parties, but business can't give any. The law allows unions to make unlimited contributions to the parties, but in practice, they make no such direct contributions at all. Rather, they give to political action committees, which in turn are limited in what they can give to parties. Business owners using their personal funds can contribute to political parties, within limits, but corporations can't make any such contributions. We rate the claim Mostly True. To comment on this item, go to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinelwebsite.

True

Not only had Republican Gov. Scott Walker won re-election, but gains in the Assembly meant Republicans would enjoy their largest majority in that chambersince 1957.In theinterview, Vos laid out a number of his priorities for the next legislative session, which starts in January 2015. One proposal would allow business contributions to the political parties.In Wisconsin, campaign contributionsmust originate from individuals.ButWisconsin prohibitscorporations, including limited liability companies, from making contributions to parties, candidates or PACs.To comment on this item, go to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinelwebsite.

FMD_train_17

Lowe's Email Scam Promises Portable Air Conditioners

07/21/2022

In July 2022, during a heat wave across the U.S. and other countries, we reviewed an email that claimed Lowe's Home Improvement was giving away free air conditioners in a sweepstakes. In reality, there was no giveaway, and the email was a scam. Scammers were pretending to be Lowe's in an apparent phishing attempt to get people's personal information, such as credit and debit card numbers. the U.S. other countries scam phishing The scam email read, "CONGRATULATIONS! You are the lucky online winner of a brand new [Lowe's] Sweepstakes BTU Portable Air Conditioner entry!" Lowe's We advise readers to never click links or call phone numbers that appear in these kinds of scam emails. The links will lead to phishing attempts, and the phone calls will connect you with scammers who likely will try to lure sensitive data from you. advise readers scam Scam emails often contain obvious grammatical errors. Also, the "from" email address in scam emails can look unofficial, another sign of something suspicious going on. For example, instead of an official email address ending with "@lowes.com," the sender may have something like, "[email protected]." This would not be a legitimate email address for Lowe's. The U.S. Better Business Bureau (BBB) has published a number of articles about the dangers of phishing. In one of its advisories, the agency detailed how these kinds of scams work: one of its advisories Phishing scams tend to follow a pattern. The victim receives an email, phone call or text message (called smishing or SMS phishing). The message urges the target to click a link, share information, call a phone number, or download an attachment which likely contains malware. In the case of an email or text, the link frequently leads to a form, which prompts the target to enter personal information. Think twice before downloading anything from the internet, especially if its an attachment from an anonymous sender. Scammers will hide malware in an attachment and once downloaded, it can wreak havoc on your personal device or steal your personal information. If you're online at home, the scammer may also steal the IP address and then proceed to connect to any other device connected to your home wifi. The BBB also has tips on how to avoid falling victim to these kinds of scams: If something sounds suspicious, call the company directly or checking the company website directly. Dont click on links in an unexpected email type the URL for the company into the browser or do a web search to find the right website. Dont click, download, or open anything that comes from an anonymous sender. This is likely an attempt to gain access to your personal information or install malware on your computer. Question generic emails. Scammers cast a wide net by including little or no specific information in their fake emails. Always be wary of unsolicited messages that don't contain your name, last digits of your account number or other personalizing information. BBB Tip: Phishing Scams Can Come in Text Messages, Prize Offers. 1 Mar. 2022, https://www.bbb.org/article/news-releases/16758-bbb-tip-phishing-scams. Kirka, Danica, and Jill Lawless. UK Breaks Its Record for Highest Temperature As Heat Builds. Snopes.com via The Associated Press, 19 July 2022, https://www.snopes.com/ap/2022/07/19/uk-breaks-its-record-for-highest-temperature-as-heat-builds/. McLaughlin, Tim, and Brendan OBrien. Record-Breaking U.S. Heat Wave Bakes Americans. Reuters, 20 July 2022, https://www.reuters.com/world/us/coast-coast-us-heat-wave-threatens-tighten-its-grip-2022-07-20/.

False

In July 2022, during a heat wave across the U.S. and other countries, we reviewed an email that claimed Lowe's Home Improvement was giving away free air conditioners in a sweepstakes. In reality, there was no giveaway, and the email was a scam. Scammers were pretending to be Lowe's in an apparent phishing attempt to get people's personal information, such as credit and debit card numbers.The scam email read, "CONGRATULATIONS! You are the lucky online winner of a brand new [Lowe's] Sweepstakes BTU Portable Air Conditioner entry!"We advise readers to never click links or call phone numbers that appear in these kinds of scam emails. The links will lead to phishing attempts, and the phone calls will connect you with scammers who likely will try to lure sensitive data from you.The U.S. Better Business Bureau (BBB) has published a number of articles about the dangers of phishing. In one of its advisories, the agency detailed how these kinds of scams work:

FMD_train_1837

What is the reason for NFL players standing on the sidelines during the National Anthem?

10/24/2016

An image widely circulated on Facebook in response to the National Football League's anthem controversy claimed that NFL players did not stand on the sidelines during the playing of the U.S. national anthem before games prior to 2009. Instead, they stayed in locker rooms during the anthem and did not begin standing along the sidelines for renditions of "The Star-Spangled Banner" until after the Defense Department began paying the NFL to hold patriotic displays in 2009. The issue has been in the public spotlight ever since San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick began protesting police brutality by kneeling during the national anthem during exhibition games played prior to the start of the 2016 NFL season. Several other players, including some in other sports, have since participated in similar silent demonstrations during the 2016 and 2017 seasons. Tom E. Curran of Comcast Sportsnet New England reported in a story published on August 29, 2016, that teams standing together on the field during the national anthem was a relatively recent development in NFL history. "NFL spokesman Brian McCarthy confirmed that this practice began in 2009, adding, 'As you know, the NFL has a long tradition of patriotism. Players are encouraged but not required to stand for the anthem.'" What actually changed in 2009, according to NFL spokesman Brian McCarthy, was that players had previously remained in their locker rooms during the national anthem for primetime games due to network timing issues. After 2009, players appeared on the sidelines for the anthem during primetime games, just as they had been doing all along for Sunday afternoon games. The distinction often went unnoticed by viewers, as network telecasts frequently did not air the pre-game anthem ceremonies. ESPN commentator Stephen A. Smith referenced Curran's report during a segment on September 14, 2016, adding a "paid patriotism" element to the mix. The players were moved to the field during the national anthem because it was seen as a marketing strategy to make the athletes look more patriotic. The United States Department of Defense paid the National Football League $5.4 million between 2011 and 2014, and the National Guard paid $6.7 million between 2013 and 2015 to stage on-field patriotic ceremonies as part of military recruitment budget-line items. The practice of "paid patriotism" came to light on April 30, 2015, when Sen. Jeff Flake (R-AZ) released a statement chiding the New Jersey Army National Guard for paying between $97,000 and $115,000 to the New York Jets for a series of promotions involving military personnel. That November, Flake and fellow Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain issued a report stating that the Defense Department had been paying for patriotic displays in football and other sports between 2011 and 2014. Contrary to the public statements made by the DOD and the NFL, the majority of the contracts—72 of the 122 contracts analyzed—clearly show that the DOD paid for patriotic tributes at professional football, baseball, basketball, hockey, and soccer games. These paid tributes included on-field color guards, enlistment and reenlistment ceremonies, performances of the national anthem, full-field flag details, ceremonial first pitches, and puck drops. The National Guard paid teams for the opportunity to sponsor military appreciation nights and to recognize its birthday. It paid the Buffalo Bills to sponsor its Salute to the Service game. The DOD even paid teams for the opportunity to perform surprise welcome home promotions for troops returning from deployments and to recognize wounded warriors. While well-intentioned, it raises questions about how many of these displays included a disclaimer that these events were, in fact, sponsored by the DOD at taxpayer expense. Even with that disclosure, it is hard to understand how a team accepting taxpayer funds to sponsor a military appreciation game, or to recognize wounded warriors or returning troops, can be construed as anything other than paid patriotism. However, this report did not cover the year 2009, so it is unclear whether NFL teams' appearances on the field for the national anthem truly began in conjunction with the "paid patriotism" policy. In a September 2017 piece about the anthem controversy, CNN noted that the connection between "paid patriotism" and players being mandated to be present for the anthem is tenuous. The report does mention several instances where teams were paid for anthem performances, but that was about the specific artist or presentation. There is nothing in the report to suggest teams were paid or coerced into pulling players onto the field as part of "paid patriotism" initiatives. In fact, Pentagon spokesman Army Major Dave Eastburn recently clarified the Defense Department's current relationship with professional sports. "DoD does not require or request that athletes be on the field during the playing of the national anthem when military members are part of the patriotic opener," he said in a statement to CNN. The league announced in May 2016 that they would refund $723,724 to taxpayers, which they said "may have been mistakenly applied to appreciation activities rather than recruitment efforts" during the years in question. This story was updated to note that the 2009 changes in NFL anthem policy were specific to primetime games.

NEI

Tom E. Curran of Comcast Sportsnet New England reported in a story published on 29 August 2016 that teams standing together on the field during the playing of the national anthem was a relatively recent development in NFL history: "NFL spokesman Brian McCarthy confirmed this the practice began in 2009, adding, 'As you know, the NFL has a long tradition of patriotism. Players are encouraged but not required to stand for the anthem.'"ESPN commentator Stephen A. Smith referenced Currant's report during a segment on 14 September 2016, adding a "paid patriotism" element to the mix:The practice of "paid patriotism" came to light on 30 April 2015, when Sen. Jeff Flake (R-AZ) released a statement chiding the New Jersey Army National Guard for paying between $97,000 and $115,000 to the New York Jets for a series of promotions involving military personnel. That November, Flake and fellow Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain issued a report stating that the Defense Department had been paying for patriotic displays in football and other sports between 2011 and 2014:The league announced in May 2016 that they would refund $723,724 to taxpayers which they said "may have been mistakenly applied to appreciation activities rather than recruitment efforts" during the years in question.

FMD_train_1692

Says Madison Mayor Paul Soglin's stated intent when proposing that city contractors disclose private political donations was to discourage contributions to organizations with which he disagrees.

06/12/2013

Madison Mayor Paul Soglin wants to require city contractors to publicly disclose donations theyve made to super PACS or advocacy groups operating in Wisconsin. That has drawn objections from a conservative public interest law firm, theWisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty. It contends the liberal mayors proposed ordinance is unconstitutional and violates a bedrock principle of our democracy that government cannot play favorites among citizens, including public contractors, based on their political beliefs. So why does Soglin want to mandate the public disclosures by firms doing business with the city? Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty offered this answer in a June 4, 2012post on its website: Theproposed ordinance, according to Mayor Soglin, is intended to discourage contributions to organizations with which he disagrees. Is that what Soglin has said is a goal of the legislation? Asked to back up the groups claim, Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty president and general counsel Rick Esenberg pointed to a May 8, 2013story in Madisons Capital Timesthat quoted Soglin extensively about his motives. The article stated that actions by Republican Gov. Scott Walker and the GOP-controlled Legislature that ran contrary to the wishes of Madison and Soglin were on the mayors mind when he drafted the ordinance. Legislative action since Gov. Scott Walkers election including Act 10 in 2011 curtailing the collective bargaining power of most public workers, and more recently, legislation setting levy limits for municipalities and restricting cities powers in tenant-landlord law got Soglin wondering if companies supporting Republican causes would rather lobby against the city or do business with it, the Cap Times story said. It added: Hes betting that exposing such activities might prompt some companies to curtail them. Those passages suggest pretty strongly that Soglin believes that some contractors faced with being identified as pro-Republican or pro-conservative will reconsider their political activity under his proposal to require them to publicly report their now-private donations to advocacy groups. Deeper into the Capital Times interview, Soglin made another reference to the right side of the political spectrum. He mentioned the Koch Brothers, the billionaire industrialists who founded the conservative group Americans for Prosperity, a tea-party organization that supported Walker in his 2012 recall win. Its unclear how much the group raises and spends because as a tax-exempt organization the group, like many others, does not have to disclose its donors. Soglins additional comments from the article: I think it would be a good idea to know if the bidders are contributing to political efforts which go into organizations that may be lobbying for certain kinds of outcomes or working against the interests of the city. It is simply the idea that sunshine is good. If a company bidding on a city contract also is lobbying for state or federal regulations that make their product required in their industry, the public ought to know about it. At the same time if theyre supplying the city while they're behaving like theKoch brothers, it would be good for the public to know it. Its a bit ironic when someone wants a contract with government, yet supports organizations that hate government and try to make it inefficient. So that is what is in the article. To be sure, the language of the proposed ordinance itself doesnt say Soglins intent is to squelch donations. It says information on donations is essential to the operation of a democracy, informing voters and governments about the activities of those attempting to influence the operations of government. Indeed, the proposal would require disclosure of donations to groups of any political stripe -- it does not single out conservatives or Republicans. Rather, the ordinance specifies that firms and minority owners disclose donations made to tax-exempt 501(c)(4) advocacy or super PAC organizations operating in Wisconsin the prior two years. Contractors would face a one-year ban from receiving city contracts if they fail to disclose any donations to advocacy groups within 30 days of getting a contract. When we reached Soglin, he acknowledged the ordinance might cause some firms hoping to continue as city contractors to stop making donations to groups that oppose the views of he and other city leaders. I will not say that this will leave things exactly the way things are, he said. But Soglin added this: He said the contractors were free to exercise their First Amendment rights and that he hopes they continue to make such donations, saying, I want to know where they stand. He said his goal was to unmask donations, for example, by firms whose ownersmake private donations to advocacy groups working to unseat sitting aldermen. Or to identify firm officials who give to groups supporting private-school vouchers and other programs and decisions he and city officials have opposed. I think the public has a right to know, said Soglin. What would happen if left-leaning city officials discover that contractors are fighting the views of city officials in private? Soglin said no city officials will take into account political donations when officials are deciding on awarding a contract. That language is also included in the ordinance. But Scott Resnick, the Madison Common Councils president pro tem, told us in an interview that aldermen would, in fact, use the information on donations made to groups supporting Republicans in state government when evaluating whether firms should be rewarded future city contracts. So we want to know if you were putting money towards that before we sign another contract with you, he said. This would be one more data set that will be used to make decisions on awarding contracts. In the view of Wisconsin Institute for Law & Libertys Esenberg, the ordinances statement that political activity would not be held against firms at contract time shows the provision has no legitimate government purpose. Curiosity is not a valid governmental purpose, nor is the exposure of private contributions to the public for use by you or others in the political arena, Esenbergwrote to Soglinon June 3, 2013. Soglin, Esenberg said, leaves the listener no other choice but to think that he favors an outcome in which contractors curtail their political activity. He wants to out these people as conservatives or libertarians, and they wont want to be outed that way in Madison, Esenberg said. Our rating The Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty contended that, according to Soglin himself, the proposed ordinance is intended to discourage contributions to organizations with which he disagrees. The group cites a newspaper interview that paraphrased Soglin saying that could happen in some cases as a result of his legislation. Soglin told us the same thing, but said his goal was limited to transparency. His statements make pretty clear he looks forward to forcing contractors to choose between trimming their political activity or disclosing it and facing the consequences. And he predicts some will stop making donations. We rate the statement True.

True

That has drawn objections from a conservative public interest law firm, theWisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty. It contends the liberal mayors proposed ordinance is unconstitutional and violates a bedrock principle of our democracy that government cannot play favorites among citizens, including public contractors, based on their political beliefs.Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty offered this answer in a June 4, 2012post on its website: Theproposed ordinance, according to Mayor Soglin, is intended to discourage contributions to organizations with which he disagrees.Asked to back up the groups claim, Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty president and general counsel Rick Esenberg pointed to a May 8, 2013story in Madisons Capital Timesthat quoted Soglin extensively about his motives.If a company bidding on a city contract also is lobbying for state or federal regulations that make their product required in their industry, the public ought to know about it. At the same time if theyre supplying the city while they're behaving like theKoch brothers, it would be good for the public to know it.Curiosity is not a valid governmental purpose, nor is the exposure of private contributions to the public for use by you or others in the political arena, Esenbergwrote to Soglinon June 3, 2013.

FMD_train_1436

Mr. T Death Hoax

05/23/2016

In May 2016, a message reporting that actor Mr. T (the stage name of Laurence Tureaud), best known for his portrayal of B.A. Baracus on the 1980s television series The A-Team, had passed away was widely circulated on Facebook: Wow.. I was shocked...R. I. P. Mr. T You were an inspiration to everyone. Show respect and share to let people know. Like if you liked Mr. T ?? However, no news outlets have reported on the action star's alleged passing, and reports of his death are belied by the fact that Mr. T is still active on his social media accounts and recently made an appearance at a Fairfield Hotel event. accounts event Fake Facebook obituaries for non-dead celebrities are an example of "like farming," a popular social media scheme aimed at getting more likes, shares, and comments: like farming Facebook's algorithms in particular emphasize popular content, and therefore gathering "likes" and "shares" receives a high premium. Sometimes, it's just an annoyance maybe that kid really does want a hundred thousand "likes" so that a Victoria's Secret model will go to a school dance with him, so he's inundating people with appeals (although that's doubtful at best) but more often, the intent is scammy. Like-farmers will gather clicks, which denote popularity, then scrub the original content and replace it with something else (usually a scammy ad of some sort) to bypass Facebook constraints. Facebook has moved to quash this behavior by adjusting their algorithms, but of course, some scammers' efforts always get by the online gatekeepers. efforts Although Mr. T did not pass away in May 2016, one factor that may have contributed to the spread of this death hoax is that the actor celebrated his64th birthday on 21 May 2016. birthday

False

However, no news outlets have reported on the action star's alleged passing, and reports of his death are belied by the fact that Mr. T is still active on his social media accounts and recently made an appearance at a Fairfield Hotel event.Fake Facebook obituaries for non-dead celebrities are an example of "like farming," a popular social media scheme aimed at getting more likes, shares, and comments:Facebook's algorithms in particular emphasize popular content, and therefore gathering "likes" and "shares" receives a high premium. Sometimes, it's just an annoyance maybe that kid really does want a hundred thousand "likes" so that a Victoria's Secret model will go to a school dance with him, so he's inundating people with appeals (although that's doubtful at best) but more often, the intent is scammy. Like-farmers will gather clicks, which denote popularity, then scrub the original content and replace it with something else (usually a scammy ad of some sort) to bypass Facebook constraints. Facebook has moved to quash this behavior by adjusting their algorithms, but of course, some scammers' efforts always get by the online gatekeepers.Although Mr. T did not pass away in May 2016, one factor that may have contributed to the spread of this death hoax is that the actor celebrated his64th birthday on 21 May 2016.

FMD_train_597

Is it possible for birth certificates in the United States to reveal undisclosed financial accounts linked to a 'Strawman'?

01/16/2017

The idea that United States citizens can gain access to secret funds because of a government-created "strawman" is a persistent myth that was debunked long ago as a get-rich-quick scheme promulgated by shysters with links to far-right groups. When your birth certificate was monetized and converted into a UNITED STATES Government Bond shortly after your birth by your mother, your net worth became unlimited, amounting to billions of dollars, without your, your mother's, or your father's knowledge. When the UNITED STATES declared bankruptcy in 1933 under the bankruptcy (Straw man) law known as HJR 192, it pledged all Americans as collateral (debt slaves) against the national debt to the international bankers, gave all the land to the international bankers (Federal Reserve Corporation), and confiscated and outlawed all the gold except for one ounce for each person, thus eliminating the lawful means (gold and silver coins) by which you could legally pay your debt. The UNITED STATES also assumed legal responsibility for providing a new way for you to pay. In 1933, the UNITED STATES Government declared that it would pay all of your debts with the money it receives from your labor, birth certificate, and Social Security registered number through what is known as your Reserve Account, worth billions. The UNITED STATES Corporation Government did this by providing what is known as the Exemption Account. The bankers loan credit and not money because there has not been any lawful money since June 5, 1933. The Exemption Account is your exemption from having to pay for anything. In practical terms, this meant giving each American something to pay with, and that something is your credit. This secret has been hidden for over 79 years. Your value to society was then and is still calculated using actuarial tables. At birth, average value bonds were created from your birth certificate. I understand that this is currently between one and two million dollars at your birth when your mother unknowingly gave her baby, you, away to the UNITED STATES Government. These birth certificate bonds were collateralized by your birth certificate and your mother's maiden name under an Act of Congress in 1921. Then your birth certificate bond became a negotiable instrument just like any security instrument under UCC Article 3, the code of commercial law under which world trade falls. The bonds are hypothecated and traded on the stock market until their value is unlimited for all intents and purposes. People all over the world buy and sell your bond every day on the stock markets as investments. All that credit created is technically and rightfully yours. In point of fact, you should be able to go into any store in America and buy anything and everything in sight, telling the clerk to charge it to your Exemption Account, which is identified by a nine-digit number that you will recognize as your Social Security number, without the dashes. It is your EIN, which stands for Exemption Identification Number from the UNITED STATES CORPORATION of America. The "strawman," the theory states, is an entity created by an alleged 1933 "House Joint Resolution" marking U.S. residents as collateral for the country's loans. Though it is unclear how prevalent it is today, the FBI has classified the idea of birth certificate "redemption" as a common form of bond fraud. Proponents of this scheme claim that the U.S. government or the Treasury Department controls bank accounts, often referred to as U.S. Treasury Direct Accounts, for all U.S. citizens that can be accessed by submitting paperwork to state and federal authorities. Trainers and websites often charge large fees for kits that teach individuals how to perpetrate this scheme. They frequently imply that others have had great success in discharging debt and purchasing merchandise such as cars and homes. Failures to implement the scheme successfully are attributed to individuals not following instructions in a specific order or not filing paperwork at the correct times. This scheme predominantly uses fraudulent financial documents that appear to be legitimate. These documents are frequently referred to as bills of exchange, promissory bonds, indemnity bonds, offset bonds, sight drafts, or comptrollers' warrants. In addition, other official documents are used outside of their intended purpose, like IRS forms 1099, 1099-OID, and 8300. This scheme frequently intermingles legal and pseudo-legal terminology in order to appear lawful. Notaries may be used in an attempt to make the fraud appear legitimate. Often, victims of the scheme are instructed to address their paperwork to the Secretary of the Treasury. Filing these types of "frivolous tax submissions" can incur a $5,000 fine, though authorities give offenders 30 days to retract the documents. The Treasury Department's office of the Inspector General published an example of a "sight draft" while warning that they were being used "in an attempt to pay for everything from cars to child support." The Treasury also provided guidance in April 2009 to financial institutions advising them how to report loan modification scams, which included a description of a hidden "account" being used as a bogus payment. A homeowner maintains that he or she does not need to pay a mortgage because the loan contract is invalid, or the customer attempts to pay with a bogus sight draft, Federal Reserve Bank/Treasury letter, or check that accesses a Treasury Direct Account. Such homeowners may be committing fraud or may have been duped by individuals who claim government-related contracts are illegitimate. Other homeowners may have unsuspectingly paid for illegitimate or bogus pay-off documents. A spokesperson for the Treasury told us on January 17, 2017, that these types of scams have not been a "recent issue of concern" for the department's investigators. However, they are still reported to its financial crimes enforcement division. The Southern Poverty Law Center stated in a 2002 report that the redemption "movement" can be traced back to a South Dakota man, Roger Elvick, who has ties to the Aryan Nations and other white supremacist organizations. Elvick first started spreading his crackpot vision in the 1980s when he was the national spokesperson for the Committee of the States, a white supremacist group Elvick started with William Potter Gale, who had previously founded the Posse Comitatus, a violent anti-Semitic organization. By 1990, redemption groups advised by Elvick were active in 30 states and several provinces of Canada and had tried to pass more than $15 million in bad checks. Elvick was eventually convicted of personally passing more than $1 million in sight drafts and, in a separate case, of filing fraudulent IRS forms. He spent most of the 1990s in federal prison. Elvick was indicted again in Ohio in 2003 and charged with corruption, extortion, and forgery, but his courtroom behavior derailed his trial. During preliminary hearings, Elvick frustrated court officials by denying his identity, claiming the court had no jurisdiction over him or his straw man, and constantly interrupting with unfathomable questions about procedure. A judge ruled Elvick mentally unfit to stand trial and committed him to a correctional psychiatric facility, where he was diagnosed with an "unclassified mental disorder" and underwent nine months of treatment before facing trial. Elvick then surprised prosecutors by changing his plea to guilty. The inspector general's office for the Department of Housing and Urban Development noted the use of "UCC" (Uniform Commercial Code) in a 2015 bulletin concerning right-wing sovereign citizen groups, pointing out that members commonly use the term in fraudulent documents.

False

The "strawman," the theory states, is an entity created by an alleged 1933 "House Joint Resolution" marking U.S. residents as collateral for the country's loans. Though it is unclear how prevalent it is today, the FBI has classified the idea of birth certificate "redemption" as a common form of bond fraud:Filing these types of "frivolous tax submissions" can incur a $5,000 fine, though authorities give offenders 30 days to retract the documents. The Treasury Department's office of the Inspector General published an example of a "sight draft" while warning that they were being used "in an attempt to pay for everything from cars to child support":The Treasury also provided us with an April 2009 guidance they sent to financial institutions advising them how to report loan modification scams, which included a description of a hidden "account" being used as a bogus payment:A spokesperson for the Treasury told us on 17 January 2017 that these types of scams have not been a "recent issue of concern" for the department's investigators. However, they are still reported to its financial crimes enforcement division.The Southern Poverty Law Center stated in a 2002 report that the redemption "movement" can be traced back to a South Dakota man, Roger Elvick, who has ties to the Aryan Nations and other white supremacist organizations:The inspector general's office for the Department of Housing and Urban Development, noted the use of "UCC" (Uniform Commercial Code) in a 2015 bulletin concerning right-wing sovereign citizen groups, pointing out members commonly use the term in fraudulent documents:

FMD_train_681

Yes, Kandiss Taylor's Campaign Slogan is 'JESUS, GUNS, AND BABIES'

02/17/2022

Curious about how Snopes' writers verify information and craft their stories for public consumption? We've collected some posts that help explain how we do what we do. Happy reading, and let us know what else you might be interested in knowing. Political hopeful Kandiss Taylor, who is vying to be elected Georgia governor, launched her campaign tour on February 17, 2022, and quickly became a trending Twitter topic after the GOP candidate was pictured alongside the words "Jesus, guns, babies." The campaign slogan appears to have been first made prominent by political analyst Arieh Kovler, who said on Twitter that the phrase was a hell of a campaign slogan. A look at Taylor's official website proved that her campaign slogan indeed read "Jesus, guns, and babies," with the added verbiage "morality over money!" A scroll through the South Georgia native's website also showed that she has served as an educator in the public school system for 19 years as a third-grade teacher, school counselor, testing coordinator, student-services coordinator, and homeless liaison. "The welfare, education, and safety of our children are of utmost importance to me. I want to see the focus of our government move to issues that matter and impact our daily lives. It's time to move away from the manipulation of special interest groups. Money and power have no place in influencing our public servants," wrote Taylor. According to her website, those issues include a pro-life platform centered around gun rights, election reform, immigration, the economy, and education. Her website further states that she is passionate about the working class, mental health, less government overreach, education, small business growth, gun rights, farmers, the economy, the right to life, and election integrity. Put simply, "Jesus, Guns, and Babies!" When asked what made her decide to run, she responded, "I can't complain about what is going on if I'm not willing to do something about it. The Governor's budget is 60% education, and who better to clean things up than a public school educator who knows where and what to cut!" Taylor took to social media on February 17 to announce her three-day campaign launch, "The Paint Georgia Red Bus Tour," which features her "Jesus, guns, babies" slogan painted in bold letters outside of her campaign vehicle. As of this writing, tour dates past February 19 were not made public. Snopes contacted Taylor for further elaboration on her campaign platform. We will update the article accordingly if we hear back.

True

Curious about how Snopes' writers verify information and craft their stories for public consumption? We've collected some posts that help explain how we do what we do. Happy reading and let us know what else you might be interested in knowing.Political hopeful Kandiss Taylor, who is vying to be elected Georgia governor, launched her campaign tour on Feb. 17, 2022, and quickly shot up as a trending twitter topic after the GOP candidate was pictured alongside the words, Jesus, guns, babies. The campaign slogan appears to have been first made prominent by political analyst Arieh Kovler, who said on Twitter that the phrase was a hell of a campaign slogan. A look on Taylors official website proved that her campaign slogan indeed read, Jesus, guns, and babies with the added verbiage, morality over money! Screengrab/kandisstaylor.comTaylor took to social media on Feb. 17 to announce her three-day campaign launch, The Paint Georgia Red Bus Tour, which features her Jesus, guns, babies slogan painted in bold letters outside of her campaign vehicle. As of this writing, tour dates past Feb. 19 were not made public.

FMD_train_1319

Did Lionel Messi Officially Sign for Paris Saint-Germain?

08/10/2021

In August 2021, rumors swirled around the future of Lionel Messi, one of the greatest soccer players of all time, who broke down in tears at a press conference to announce he would be leaving FC Barcelona of Spain, for whom he had played for two decades, leading the club to extraordinary success and establishing himself as a global superstar of the sport, rivaled only by Portugal's Cristiano Ronaldo. broke down in tears According to statements issued by both the club and Messi himself, both sides had agreed a new contract for the Argentine attacking midfielder, now aged 34, the terms of which would have seen his previous salary reported to have be $667,000 per week cut in half. statements reported However, strict Financial Fair Play (FFP) rules put in place by Spain soccer authorities, combined with Barcelona's dire financial straits the club has debts of more than 1 billion ($1.2 billion) ultimately made the new contract impossible. debts of more than 1 billion Messi's previous contract expired earlier in the summer of 2021, meaning he was now a free agent, and could be signed by any other club without the need for a transfer fee to be paid. However, Messi's profile in the sport, and his likely wage demands, meant only a very small number of clubs were in a realistic position to sign him. Over the weekend Aug. 6 to Aug. 8 of 2021, rumors emerged online that French giants Paris Saint-Germain (PSG) were aggressively pursuing the signing of Messi, who scored a staggering 672 goals in 778 first-team appearances at Barcelona, and won a record six Ballons d'Or an annual award generally considered to recognize the world's best player each year between 2009 and 2019. scored PSG was taken over in 2012 by the Qatari government-run Qatar Investment Authority, providing an extraordinary injection of cash and sponsorship deals that have helped drastically improve the club's fortunes in the intervening decade. taken over in 2012 The club's controversial Qatari backers also funded a series of marquee signings, including the two most expensive transfers in soccer history: that of Brazilian star Neymar from Barcelona, in August 2017 for 222 million ($264 million or $293 million in 2021 terms); and that of French star Kylian Mbappe from AS Monaco, in February 2018 for 180 million ($223 million or $247 million in 2021 terms). controversial Qatari backers 222 million 180 million On Aug. 10, PSG further fueled speculation that its signing of Messi was imminent scheduling a press conference for the next morning, and posting short videos featuring the Argentinian flag and snippets of an Argentinian soccer jersey. press conference short videos When Messi himself was greeted by PSG fans at Paris-Le Bourget airport, on the outskirts of the French capital, and at the Royal Monceau hotel, the rumors were all but officially confirmed. greeted by PSG fans Royal Monceau However, the club removed any remaining doubts when, on the evening of Aug. 10, they officially confirmed Messi's move to the club on a two-year contract, with the option of a third year. In a news release posted to the club's official website, PSG wrote: news release [PSG] is very happy to announce the signing of Leo Messi on a two-year contract, with the option of a further year. The six-time Ballon d'Or winner is considered a legend of the sport, and a true source of inspiration for all generations, on and off the field. The signing of Leo reinforces the ambitions of PSG and offers our loyal supporters an exceptional team, which promises to bring incredible footballing moments in the years to come. Messi himself further confirmed the bombshell move, providing the following statement as part of PSG's news release: I can't wait to start a new chapter of my career in Paris. The club and its vision match perfectly my own ambitions. I know just how talented the players and staff are here. By their sides, I'm determined to create something great for this club and for the fans. I cannot wait to step on to the grass at [PSG home ground] Parc des Princes.

True

In August 2021, rumors swirled around the future of Lionel Messi, one of the greatest soccer players of all time, who broke down in tears at a press conference to announce he would be leaving FC Barcelona of Spain, for whom he had played for two decades, leading the club to extraordinary success and establishing himself as a global superstar of the sport, rivaled only by Portugal's Cristiano Ronaldo. According to statements issued by both the club and Messi himself, both sides had agreed a new contract for the Argentine attacking midfielder, now aged 34, the terms of which would have seen his previous salary reported to have be $667,000 per week cut in half. However, strict Financial Fair Play (FFP) rules put in place by Spain soccer authorities, combined with Barcelona's dire financial straits the club has debts of more than 1 billion ($1.2 billion) ultimately made the new contract impossible.Over the weekend Aug. 6 to Aug. 8 of 2021, rumors emerged online that French giants Paris Saint-Germain (PSG) were aggressively pursuing the signing of Messi, who scored a staggering 672 goals in 778 first-team appearances at Barcelona, and won a record six Ballons d'Or an annual award generally considered to recognize the world's best player each year between 2009 and 2019. PSG was taken over in 2012 by the Qatari government-run Qatar Investment Authority, providing an extraordinary injection of cash and sponsorship deals that have helped drastically improve the club's fortunes in the intervening decade.The club's controversial Qatari backers also funded a series of marquee signings, including the two most expensive transfers in soccer history: that of Brazilian star Neymar from Barcelona, in August 2017 for 222 million ($264 million or $293 million in 2021 terms); and that of French star Kylian Mbappe from AS Monaco, in February 2018 for 180 million ($223 million or $247 million in 2021 terms).On Aug. 10, PSG further fueled speculation that its signing of Messi was imminent scheduling a press conference for the next morning, and posting short videos featuring the Argentinian flag and snippets of an Argentinian soccer jersey. When Messi himself was greeted by PSG fans at Paris-Le Bourget airport, on the outskirts of the French capital, and at the Royal Monceau hotel, the rumors were all but officially confirmed. In a news release posted to the club's official website, PSG wrote:

FMD_train_494

Ive even cut my own salary -- twice.

08/11/2010

Elected officials' pay can be a sensitive topic for taxpayers, especially in today's economic climate. So it's no surprise that Ohio Treasurer Kevin Boyce, who is running in November to keep his job, is bragging about cutting his salary. Boyce discussed his six-figure earnings in a YouTube video released by his office. Presented as a preview of the office's forthcoming annual financial report, the production feels more like a tribute to Boyce's performance as treasurer, aimed directly at voters. "I've even cut my salary -- twice," said Boyce, a Democrat and former Columbus city councilman. Boyce was appointed Treasurer in late 2008 after Richard Cordray left a vacancy when he took the state attorney general's job following Marc Dann's resignation. Annual salaries for the state's elected officials are set in state law, which lawmakers can amend to increase or decrease pay. The treasurer's salary has been set at $109,986 since 2008. In June 2009, Boyce sent a memo to the state Department of Administrative Services stating that he was taking a pay cut that would reduce his gross salary that year to $107,874. The pay cut, effective July 1, 2009, was equivalent to taking five unpaid furlough days, a cost-saving measure that has been imposed on many state employees. In the same memo, Boyce authorized an extension of the reduction for all of 2010. This year's pay cut is equivalent to 10 unpaid furlough days, according to the administrative services department. Boyce's gross salary this year will be $105,757. Boyce lumped both cuts -- each about 2 percent -- in the same memo, but he effectively trimmed his salary twice. Had he not extended the cut into 2010, his pay would have jumped back up to $109,986, a spokeswoman for the administrative services department said.

True

Comment on this item.

FMD_train_751

Is This Nike 'Make America Great Again' Hat Real?

09/07/2018

In early September 2018, an image purportedly showing the Nike "swoosh" symbol on the tag of a "Make America Great Again" hat started spreading online. The image was posted amid a controversy over former NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick's involvement in a new advertising campaign for Nike, a sports apparel company. Kaepernick made headlines in 2016 by kneeling during pregame renditions of the national anthem to protest racial inequality and police brutality. The "take a knee" protests, which caught on with other NFL players and spread to athletes in other sports, were viewed by some (including President Trump) as unpatriotic and disrespectful to veterans. So when Kaepernick appeared in Nike's 30th anniversary "Just Do It" ad campaign, some disgruntled consumers took to social media to share photographs and videos of themselves destroying various pieces of Nike apparel to demonstrate their displeasure. It appears that this image of a Nike-branded "Make America Great Again" cap was posted in an attempt to "troll" pro-Trump conservatives who were upset over Kaepernick's endorsement deal ("Make America Great Again," or "MAGA," is a well-known Trump slogan). When the image was shared by Twitter user @Nicoxw1, for example, it included a message facetiously noting that "133,291,000 Americans will have a stroke today." The image is a hoax, merely a manipulated version of an older viral image showing a "Made in China" tag on a "Make America Great Again" hat. It should be noted that while some third-party companies do produce "Make America Great Again" hats in China, the website DonaldJTrump.com, from which customers can purchase official MAGA merchandise, states that all their products are proudly made in the U.S.A.

False

The image was posted in the midst of a controversy over former NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick's involvement in a new advertising campaign for Nike, a sports apparel company. Kaepernick made headlines in 2016 by kneeling during pregame renditions of the national anthem to protest racial inequality and police brutality.The "take a knee" protests, which caught on with other NFL players and spread to athletes in other sports, were viewed by some (including President Trump) as unpatriotic and disrespectful to veterans. So when Kaepernick showed up in Nike's 0th anniversary "Just Do It" ad campaign, some disgruntled consumers took to social media to share photographs and videos of themselves destroying various pieces of Nike apparel to demonstrate their displeasure.It appears that this image of a Nike-branded "Make America Great Again" cap was posted in an attempt to "troll" pro-Trump conservatives who were upset over Kaepernick's endorsement deal ("Make America Great Again," or "MAGA," is a well-known Trump slogan). When the image was shared by Twitter user @Nicoxw1, for example, it included a message facetiously noting that "133,291,000 Americans will have a stroke today."It should be noted that while some third-party companies do produce "Make America Great Again" hats in China, the website DonaldJTrump.com, from which customers can purchase official MAGA merchandise, states that all their products are proudly made in U.S.A.

FMD_train_1800

Notable concepts worth discarding.

07/27/2015

FACT CHECK: Was Nick Hanauer's 2012 TED Talk about income inequality banned because it was "too politically controversial" to release? Claim: A 2012 TED Talk video featuring wealthy entrepreneur Nick Hanauer speaking on the subject of income inequality was banned because it was deemed "too politically controversial." Example: [Collected via e-mail, July 2015] There are several articles that claim "TED Banned This Billionaire For Exposing Capitalism's Biggest Lie" or similar wording. This refers to the speech of Nick Hanauer, a Seattle venture capitalist. The sensational language of this claim makes me suspicious, as does the unlikelihood of the assertion. Is it true? What is the source of the rumor? Origins: On 1 March 2012, Seattle-based venture capitalist and entrepreneur Nick Hanauer participated in the global conference series of "TED Talks." The video of his six-minute talk, widely circulated since its release, captured him addressing a range of issues pertaining to income inequality and capitalism from the perspective of a very wealthy individual. Not long after Hanauer's March 2012 talk was filmed, rumors began circulating that TED had deliberately suppressed the clip due to its potentially offensive nature (to rich people). On 16 May 2012, National Journal published an article contending that TED's organizers had quashed the groundbreaking talk because its content was simply too controversial to release, an odd assertion considering the 2011 emergence of a well-known protest movement known as Occupy Wall Street. TED organizers invited multimillionaire Seattle venture capitalist Nick Hanauer, the first non-family investor in Amazon.com, to give a speech on March 1 at their TED University conference. Inequality was the topic, specifically Hanauer's contention that the middle class, and not wealthy innovators like himself, are America's true "job creators." "We've had it backward for the last 30 years," he said. "Rich businesspeople like me don't create jobs. Rather, they are a consequence of an ecosystemic feedback loop animated by middle-class consumers, and when they thrive, businesses grow and hire, and owners profit. That's why taxing the rich to pay for investments that benefit all is a great deal for both the middle class and the rich." You can't find that speech online. TED officials initially told Hanauer they were eager to distribute it. "I want to put this talk out into the world!" one of them wrote to him in an e-mail in late April. But early this month, they changed course, telling Hanauer that his remarks were too "political" and too controversial for posting. In the years since 2012, Hanauer's TED clip has paradoxically been viewed millions of times while remaining the focus of articles describing it as "banned," "too controversial," or the speech TED "doesn't want you to see." While it's difficult to determine the accuracy of statements about its online availability in March 2012, the clip clearly became widely available and was frequently viewed on sharing sites such as YouTube shortly thereafter, and it has remained popular ever since. But in 2015, many social media users continued to assert Hanauer's talk was banned: Banned TED Talk: Nick Hanauer Rich People Don't Create Jobs (VIDEO) #news https://t.co/wmlAmaIZ48 #news https://t.co/wmlAmaIZ48 Hannah Kennison (@HannahKennison1) July 6, 2015 July 6, 2015 Nick Hanauer on His Banned TED Talk & Why the Middle Class are the Job Creators https://t.co/KKQOqIK5PQ https://t.co/KKQOqIK5PQ Jonathan Goodman (@GoodmanJonathan) July 20, 2015 July 20, 2015 if you are interested in #economics, then it is worth listening Banned TED Talk: Nick Hanauer 'Rich people don't... https://t.co/00E6rlPF1g #economics https://t.co/00E6rlPF1g Mudassar Bashir (@mb62020) June 15, 2015 June 15, 2015 Nick Hanauer too politically controversial: rich people don't create jobs, consumers do - via Reese Jones https://t.co/9xzs0vn1kz https://t.co/9xzs0vn1kz VritTV (@Verite_TV) June 11, 2015 June 11, 2015 In late May 2012, a contributor to TED's forums specifically asked why Hanauer's talk had been "banned," prompting a lengthy discussion during which individuals affiliated with TED linked to a statement issued by TED curator Chris Anderson explaining why Hanauer's talk had not been promoted. The service by which Anderson published the explanation (Posterous) shuttered in April 2013, taking Anderson's remarks with it. However, a cached version revealed the date (17 May 2012), title ("TED and inequality: The real story"), and content of Anderson's rebuttal. Anderson opened by stating that "TED was subject to a story so misleading it would be funny... except it successfully launched an aggressive online campaign against us." He described an ensuing "firestorm of outrage" on sites including Reddit and Huffington Post, wherein TED was "accused of being cowards ... in the pay of our corporate partners ... [and] the despicable puppets of the Republican party." Anderson's account of the decision not to release Hanauer's talk differed dramatically from the circulating rumors: Here's what actually happened. At TED this year, an attendee pitched a 3-minute audience talk on inequality. The talk tapped into a really important and timely issue. But it framed the issue in a way that was explicitly partisan. (The talk explicitly attacked what he called an article of faith for Republicans. He criticized Democrats too, but only for not also attacking this idea more often.) And it included a number of arguments that were unconvincing, even to those of us who supported his overall stance, such as the apparent ruling out of entrepreneurial initiative as a root cause of job creation. The audience at TED who heard it live (and who are often accused of being overly enthusiastic about left-leaning ideas) gave it, on average, mediocre ratings—some enthusiastic, others critical. At TED, we post one talk a day on our home page. We're drawing from a pool of 250+ that we record at our own conferences each year and up to 10,000 recorded at the various TEDx events around the world, not to mention our other conference partners. Our policy is to post only talks that are truly special. And we try to steer clear of talks that are bound to descend into the same dismal partisan head-butting people can find every day elsewhere in the media. We discussed internally and ultimately told the speaker we did not plan to post. He did not react well. He had hired a PR firm to promote the talk to MoveOn and others, and the PR firm warned us that unless we posted, he would go to the press and accuse us of censoring him. We again declined, and this time I wrote to him and tried gently to explain in detail why I thought his talk was flawed. So he forwarded portions of the private emails to a reporter, and the National Journal duly bit on the story. And it was picked up by various other outlets. As Anderson noted, income inequality was the subject of at least one TED Talk video in 2011. Much of the rumor regarding Nick Hanauer's purportedly banned TED Talk segment hinged upon the differing assertions made by TED and Nick Hanauer at the time of the controversy in 2012. However, Anderson's claims (that TED curators are tasked with promoting only the most impactful clips) weren't implausible or suggestive of a cover-up. It would be difficult to determine whether Hanauer or anyone working on his behalf threatened a public relations offensive, but TED maintained that quality and not content was behind the decision not to feature the video (which clearly was not "banned" from public view but was simply not promoted by TED). Since the time of the initial debate over whether or why the TED talk was "banned," the clip has been distributed both by TED and other outlets and widely viewed by a large online audience. In August 2014, Hanauer returned for a TED Talk titled "Beware, fellow plutocrats, the pitchforks are coming." While it's true that TED opted not to promote Hanauer's initial appearance (during which he discussed income inequality), his segment was not banned, and the organization cited his lack of substantive content alongside his primary reliance on partisan ideas as the reason it was not curated alongside other featured TED Talks. At no point during the immediate controversy did TED appear to deny the existence of the video, remove it from the Internet, interfere with its distribution, or otherwise thwart the ideas advocated by Hanauer from spreading. The group simply chose initially not to promote the clip (as they do for a large number of TED Talks) in favor of other content selected by their curators. Last updated: 27 July 2015 Originally published: 27 July 2015

True

Not long after Hanauer's March 2012 talk was filmed, rumors began circulating claiming that TED had deliberately suppressed the clip due to its potentially offensive (to rich people) nature. On 16 May 2012, National Journal published an article contending that TED's organizers had quashed the groundbreaking talk because its content was simply too controversial to release, an odd assertion considering the 2011 emergence of a well-known (and widely reported upon) protest movement known as Occupy Wall Street):Banned TED Talk: Nick Hanauer Rich People Dont Create Jobs (VIDEO) #news https://t.co/wmlAmaIZ48 Hannah Kennison (@HannahKennison1) July 6, 2015Nick Hanauer on His Banned TED Talk & Why the Middle Class are the Job Creators https://t.co/KKQOqIK5PQ Jonathan Goodman (@GoodmanJonathan) July 20, 2015if you are interested in #economics, then it is worth listeningBanned TED Talk: Nick Hanauer 'Rich people don't... https://t.co/00E6rlPF1g Mudassar Bashir (@mb62020) June 15, 2015Nick Hanauer too politically controversial: rich people dont create jobs, consumers do - via Reese Jones https://t.co/9xzs0vn1kz VritTV (@Verite_TV) June 11, 2015In late May 2012 a contributor to TED's forums specifically asked why Hanauer's talk had been "banned," prompting a lengthy discussion during the course of which individuals affiliated with TED linked to a statement issued by TED curator Chris Anderson on why Hanauer's talk had not been promoted. The service by which Anderson published the explanation (Posterous) shuttered in April 2013, taking Anderson's remarks with it. However, a cached version revealed the date (17 May 2012), title ("TED and inequality: The real story"), and content of Anderson's rebuttal.As Anderson noted, income inequality was the subject of at least one [uncensored] TED Talk video in 2011.Since the time of the initial debate over whether or why the TED talk was "banned," the clip has been distributed both by TED and other outlets and widely viewed by a large online audience. In August 2014, Hanauer returned for a TED Talk titled "Beware, fellow plutocrats, the pitchforks are coming."