Datasets:

kkawamu1

/

fmd_train_val

like 0

FMD_train_1923

IRS Refund Notification

03/17/2006

Phishing bait: Notice from the IRS indicating the recipient is eligible for a tax refund. Examples: [Collected on the Internet, 2006] IRS Notification - Please Read This. After the last annual calculations of your fiscal activity, we have determined that you are eligible to receive a tax refund of $163.80. Please submit the tax refund request and allow us 6-9 days to process it. A refund can be delayed for a variety of reasons, such as submitting invalid records or applying after the deadline. To access the form for your tax refund, please click here. Regards, Internal Revenue Service. Copyright 2006, Internal Revenue Service U.S.A. All rights reserved. Origins: Notices purporting to come from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) make effective phishing bait for several reasons. Notices from federal government institutions, especially an agency with the ominous reputation of the IRS, grab people's attention. Unlike other phishing schemes that emulate mailings from various private financial institutions (e.g., Bank of America) and are therefore easily recognized as phony by many recipients (because they do not do business with those companies), a forged IRS notice has the potential to ensnare a much larger pool of victims, as most adult U.S. residents have dealings with that agency. Many people find the federal income tax filing process complicated and confusing, so the idea that they might have unclaimed tax refunds waiting for them seems plausible. A March 2006 mass phishing email took advantage of these points, spamming millions of Internet users with phony notices that included the IRS logo, advising recipients they were eligible to receive tax refunds (of $63.80 or $163.80), and inviting them to click on a link that took them to an IRS website form through which they could claim those refunds. Of course, the links included in the messages did not actually send users to the genuine IRS website; they redirected claimants to imposter IRS sites (hosted on servers in various countries) and instructed them to enter all sorts of sensitive personal information (credit card number, expiration date, CVV code, and ATM PIN) into an online form so that the supposed refunds could be posted directly to their debit/credit card or bank accounts. Any information entered into such forms can be harvested by scammers and used for identity theft and other financial crimes. The IRS never offers refunds through email or sends out unsolicited emails to taxpayers. When the IRS needs to contact a taxpayer, they send notice via U.S. Mail, and every such notice includes a telephone number that the recipient can call for confirmation. Should you need to visit the IRS website for any reason, go there directly (by entering the www.irs.gov URL into your web browser) rather than following links in email messages. Last updated: 17 March 2006 Sources: Miller, Anita. "Internet Scammers Using IRS Logo for Bait." San Marcos Daily Record. 17 March 2006. Speier, Drew. "E-Mail Scam Uses Fake IRS Web Site." WFIE-TV. 2 March 2006. KPHO-TV. "Consumers Warned of IRS 'Phishing' Scam." 2 March 2006. KXAN-TV. "New E-Mail Scam Promises Money From the IRS." 17 March 2006. WFSB-TV. "Latest Scam Targets Tax Returns." 2 March 2006. WHEC-TV. "IRS Warning Taxpayers About Fake E-Mail Scam." 2 March 2006. WLNS-TV. "Beware of Tax Scam." 7 March 2006.

False

To access the form for your tax refund, please click hereOrigins: Notices purporting to come from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) make good phishing bait for a number of reasons:

FMD_train_1198

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

01/16/2020

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

NEI

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

FMD_train_1153

Return to Offender

01/08/2015

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

NEI

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

FMD_train_207

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

03/05/2021

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

True

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

FMD_train_30

Is Morgan Freeman a Beekeeper?

04/02/2021

In late March and early April 2021, Snopes readers inquired about memes circulating on Facebook claiming that legendary actor Morgan Freeman had converted his 124-acre ranch in Mississippi into a bee sanctuary. The text of the meme read, "Concerned about the loss of bees, Morgan Freeman converted his 124-acre Mississippi ranch into a bee refuge. He hired gardeners, filled acres with clover, planted hundreds of flowering trees, purchased 26 hives, and has turned himself into a beekeeper." Posts and articles on various websites stating the "Shawshank Redemption" star is a beekeeper with a bee sanctuary at his Mississippi residence have been circulating for years. They are sourced from an interview given by Freeman to late-night comedy host Jimmy Fallon in 2014. During the interview, Freeman acknowledged that he lived in Mississippi and stated he was new to beekeeping, having just purchased his bees from Arkadelphia, Arkansas, two weeks prior: interview The website Mother Nature News in 2014 quoted Freeman talking about his beekeeping project, reporting that he made the following remarks during a media tour promoting the film "Lucy": quoted There's a concerted effort to bring bees back onto the planet ... We do not realize that they are the foundation, I think, of the growth of the planet, the vegetation... I have so many flowering things and I have a gardener too. Because she takes care of the bees too, all she does is figure out, 'OK, what would they like to have?', so we've got acres and acres of clover, we're planting stuff like lavender, I've got like, maybe 140 magnolia trees, big blossoms. In these comments attributed to him, Freeman mentioned environmental concerns associated with the survival of bees and making efforts to ensure his bees thrive. But he didn't actually state in those remarks that he converted his ranch into a "bee sanctuary" for the purpose of helping the environment. Over the years, news articles have cropped up sourcing Freeman's 2014 comments and reporting that he had converted his ranch in Mississippi to a bee sanctuary. In 2019, a large number of articles were aggregated from a Forbes story with the headline, "Morgan Freeman Converted His 124-Acre Ranch Into A Giant Honeybee Sanctuary To Save The Bees." But the Forbes story also cites Freeman's 2014 interview on Fallon. news articles cropped up Forbes story We were unable to find recent comments by Freeman confirming whether he currently keeps bees at his Mississippi residence, as of this writing. We reached out to Freeman's agency CAA and asked whether Freeman is still beekeeping and whether his effort would be described as a bee sanctuary meant to help the environment, but didn't get a response in time for publication. We will update this story if we hear back.

NEI

Posts and articles on various websites stating the "Shawshank Redemption" star is a beekeeper with a bee sanctuary at his Mississippi residence have been circulating for years. They are sourced from an interview given by Freeman to late-night comedy host Jimmy Fallon in 2014. During the interview, Freeman acknowledged that he lived in Mississippi and stated he was new to beekeeping, having just purchased his bees from Arkadelphia, Arkansas, two weeks prior:The website Mother Nature News in 2014 quoted Freeman talking about his beekeeping project, reporting that he made the following remarks during a media tour promoting the film "Lucy":Over the years, news articles have cropped up sourcing Freeman's 2014 comments and reporting that he had converted his ranch in Mississippi to a bee sanctuary. In 2019, a large number of articles were aggregated from a Forbes story with the headline, "Morgan Freeman Converted His 124-Acre Ranch Into A Giant Honeybee Sanctuary To Save The Bees." But the Forbes story also cites Freeman's 2014 interview on Fallon.

FMD_train_626

Under economic sanctions, now Iran is suffering 30 percent inflation, 20 percent unemployment.

09/27/2013

An Iranian president says hesready to resolvethe nations nuclear standoff with the West what gives? Former U.S. Labor Secretary Robert Reich gives at least partial credit to economic pain orchestrated by the United States and international allies. While the United States must still be very cautious, he saidon ABCsThis Week, one of the big lessons here is that economic sanctions do seem to work. Right now Iran is suffering 30 percent inflation, 20 percent unemployment, he told a roundtable including CNNs Newt Gingrich, ABCs Jonathan Karl and PBS Gwen Ifill. I mean this nation is hurting and our economic sanctions, because we've been patient with them, because we have actually rounded up almost every other nation to support us, have had a huge impact. Is Iran suffering such high inflation and unemployment under economic sanctions? Tumbling oil exports Now, economic sanctions are nothing new for Iran, which hasfaced U.S. sanctionssince its 1979 Islamic revolution. But the pressure has been rising. Other nations have joined in sanctions since 2006 in response to Irans efforts to develop a nuclear weapon,according to a report by Kenneth Katzman of the Congressional Research Service, which provides nonpartisan analysis to Congress. Oil exports, which fund nearly half of Irans government spending, have fallen by about half since 2011, from about 2.5 million barrels a day to about 1.25 million. The drop has been driven, Katzman says, by a European Union embargo and U.S. pressure on Iranian oil customers. Iran also lost access to the international banking system. The combination has caused a sharp drop in the value of Irans currency, the rial, Katzman says. Meanwhile, sanctions helped trigger a recession thats driving up unemployment. Has that meant 30 percent inflation, 20 percent unemployment, as Reich told ABC viewers? Theres not a simple answer. Inflation estimates range from30 percent to 70 percent. Official unemployment statistics, meanwhile, are out of date, and outside experts question their accuracy, anyway. The International Monetary Fund, World Bank and Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development dont have up-to-date figures for Iranian unemployment. Still, Reichs in range. Gary Hufbauer, a former U.S. Treasury official and senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics who has studied sanctions for 30 years, said Reichs numbers seem reasonable. Heres how the Congressional Research Service put it in June: Inflation: 30 percent plus, according to Iran Central Bank in May 2013, but believed to be over 50 percent by outside experts. Unemployment rate: Official rate is 15.3 percent as of the end of 2011, but outside experts believe the rate is higher. Reich pointed us to news articles from theAssociated Pressand energy news siteOilPrice.com which offer some support for his numbers while highlighting the uncertainty. The Associated Press reported in June inflation over 30 percent, though it cited a 14 percent unemployment rate. OilPrices.com noted Sept. 19 that analysts outside the country found that unemployment rate impossible to believe, and quoted an estimate from Mehrdad Emadi, an Iranian-born economic adviser to the European Union, of more than 20 percent. (The OilPrices.com report echoes a Reuters report from thesame day.) So reasonable seems like a fair assessment for Reichs numbers. We should also note theres not universal agreement on the size of sanctions role in all that financial pain, which experts also attribute to Iransfiscal management. Reich, a professor of public policy at the University of California at Berkeley with a background in economics, told PolitiFact it just makes sense unemployment and inflation would follow a slash in oil exports. The typical consequence for a nation dependent on exports when those exports are cut is high inflation and high unemployment, he said. Michael Malloy, a professor at the University of the Pacifics McGeorge School of Law who specializes in banking regulation and economic sanctions, told PolitiFact it's likely to be a much more complicated picture. Our ruling Reich told ABC viewers that under economic sanctions, now Iran is suffering 30 percent inflation and 20 percent unemployment. Irans own statistics arent widely trusted and international organizations dont have recent unemployment figures. But those numbers fall within a broad range of expert estimates cited by news reports and the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service. Its worth noting that Irans economic struggle has been exacerbated by its own economic policies and other factors, not just sanctions. Still, theres good evidence theyve had a huge impact, as Reich said. We rate his claim Mostly True.

True

An Iranian president says hesready to resolvethe nations nuclear standoff with the West what gives?While the United States must still be very cautious, he saidon ABCsThis Week, one of the big lessons here is that economic sanctions do seem to work.Now, economic sanctions are nothing new for Iran, which hasfaced U.S. sanctionssince its 1979 Islamic revolution. But the pressure has been rising.Other nations have joined in sanctions since 2006 in response to Irans efforts to develop a nuclear weapon,according to a report by Kenneth Katzman of the Congressional Research Service, which provides nonpartisan analysis to Congress.Inflation estimates range from30 percent to 70 percent. Official unemployment statistics, meanwhile, are out of date, and outside experts question their accuracy, anyway.Reich pointed us to news articles from theAssociated Pressand energy news siteOilPrice.com which offer some support for his numbers while highlighting the uncertainty.The Associated Press reported in June inflation over 30 percent, though it cited a 14 percent unemployment rate. OilPrices.com noted Sept. 19 that analysts outside the country found that unemployment rate impossible to believe, and quoted an estimate from Mehrdad Emadi, an Iranian-born economic adviser to the European Union, of more than 20 percent. (The OilPrices.com report echoes a Reuters report from thesame day.)We should also note theres not universal agreement on the size of sanctions role in all that financial pain, which experts also attribute to Iransfiscal management.

FMD_train_173

Does Germany Require You To Be Fully Vaccinated Before Receiving Assisted Suicide?

08/25/2023

On August 22, 2023, a photo of a November 2021 headline from the National Review went viral on X, the social media platform formerly known as Twitter. The headline asserted that "In Germany, you must be fully vaxxed before your death by assisted suicide." The headline was never accurate, and the underlying story, at the time the tweet went viral in August 2023, was outdated. In late November 2021, at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, a German euthanasia association, Verein Sterbehilfe, issued a news release mandating compliance with so-called 2G regulations. As described by the BBC, "2G stands for genesen (recovered in the past six months) or geimpft (vaccinated)." Many predominantly right-wing publications highlighted this press release as an example of COVID-19 regulations gone too far. The Spectator, for example, wrote on November 28, 2021, that irony has been declared many times during this pandemic, but now, from COVID-riddled Germany comes the final proof: you can't kill yourself now unless you've been vaccinated. As European countries battle to limit the spread of the virus, Verein Sterbehilfe has issued a new directive, declaring it will now only help those who have been vaccinated or recovered from the disease. Several important pieces of context are missing from both the headline claim that Germany mandated this compliance and the notion that this organization mandated these health regulations for the safety of the person ending their life. Neither implication is true. Verein Sterbehilfe is not a German governmental agency; it is, instead, a not-for-profit membership-based club that offers assistance and planning for people and their loved ones looking to exercise their right to self-determination in their death: that is, to end their life instead of progressing through a painful or incurable illness. It was on behalf of this latter population that the COVID policies were mandated, per Sterbehilfe's news release: euthanasia and the preparatory examination of the personal responsibility of our members willing to die require human closeness. However, human closeness is a prerequisite and breeding ground for the transmission of the coronavirus. As of today, the 2G rule applies in our club, supplemented by situation-related measures, such as quick tests before encounters in closed rooms. Snopes reached out to Verein Sterbehilfe to ask if any COVID-19 restrictions remained in place at the organization at the time of this reporting, but we did not receive a response. Because Germany made no such regulation regarding assisted suicide, because Verein Sterbehilfe is a nongovernmental organization, and because the story at issue was multiple years out of date, the assertion was false.

False

On Aug 22, 2023, a photo of a November 2021 headline from the National Review went viral on X, the social media platform formerly known as Twitter. The headline asserted that "In Germany, you must be fully vaxxed before your death by assisted suicide."In late November 2021, at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, a German euthanasia association, Verein Sterbehillfe, issued a news release mandating compliance with so-called 2G regulations. As described by the BBC, "2G stands for genesen (recovered in the past six months) or geimpft (vaccinated)." Many predominantly right-wing publications highlighted this press release as an example of Covid-19 regulations gone too far. The Spectator, for example, wrote on Nov. 28, 2021, that:Verein Sterbehilfe is not a German governmental agency it is, instead, a not-for-profit membership-based club that offers assistance and planning for people and their loved ones looking to exercise their right to self-determination in their death: i.e., to end their life instead of progressing through a painful or incurable illness.It was on behalf of the later population that the COVID policies were mandated, per Sterbehilfe's news release:

FMD_train_1625

Is the Trump campaign automatically selecting a "Recurring Donation" option that will expire in December?

11/06/2020

Voting in the 2020 U.S. Election may be over, but misinformation continues to circulate. Never stop fact-checking. Follow our post-election coverage here. On Oct. 31, 2020, The New York Times reported that the Trump Campaign's fundraising landing page was "now automatically checking a box to create recurring weekly donations from supporters until mid-December." This is true, although the "automatically checked box" development is fairly old news. The Trump Campaign's primary fundraising platform, WinRed, changed the landing page to automatically check the monthly recurring donation option in March 2020. The shift to soliciting weekly donations occurred in mid-September 2020, with that option also appearing as pre-checked. The more recent development is the change in when those weekly contributions would stop. Earlier solicitations committed people to donations that would stop automatically on Election Day, Nov. 3, 2020. In late October, the text was changed to read "make this a recurring donation until 12/14." It is worth mentioning that well before any returns came in on Nov. 3, the campaign encouraged donations as a way to "keep fighting after election day" because "there will be voter fraud like you've never seen." Speaking to the Times, Trump campaign spokesperson Tim Murtaugh stated that no one would receive a recurring charge without their knowledge and that donors could opt out at any time. He argued that funds were needed because "this race will be very close, and it is possible that multiple states will require recounts and potential additional spending from our campaign." From a factual standpoint, there is no guarantee that the money goes to fight election-related lawsuits. Some of the money goes to resolving Trump Campaign debt, while much of the rest goes to the Republican National Committee's general operating account. Because the Trump Campaign is indeed accepting recurring donations until Dec. 12, and because that option is auto-checked on the campaign's primary fundraising platform, we rank this claim.

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.On Oct. 31 2020, The New York Times reported that the Trump Campaign's fundraising landing page was "now automatically checking a box to create recurring weekly donations from supporters until mid-December." This is true, though the "automatically checked box" development is fairly old news. The Trump Campaign's primary fundraising platform WinRed changed the landing page to automatically check the monthly recurring donation option in March 2020. The shift to soliciting for weekly donations occurred in mid-September 2020, with that option also appearing as pre-checked.The more recent development is the change in when those weekly contributions would stop. Earlier solicitations committed people to donations that would stop automatically recurring on Election Day, Nov. 3 2020. In late October, the text was changed to read "make this a recurring donation until 12/14." It bears mentioning that well before any returns came in on Nov. 3, the campaign encouraged donations as a way to "keep fighting after election day" because "there will be voter fraud like you've never seen."Speaking to the Times, Trump campaign spokesperson Tim Murtaugh said that no one would receive a recurring charge without their knowledge and donors could opt out at any time. He argued that funds were needed because "this race will be very close, and it is possible that multiple states will require recounts and potential additional spending from our campaign.From a factual standpoint, there is no guarantee that the money goes to fight election-related lawsuits. Some of the money goes to resolving Trump Campaign debt, much of the rest goes to the Republican National Committees' general operating account. Because the Trump Campaign is indeed accepting recurring donations until Dec. 12, and because that option is auto-checked on the campaign's primary fundraising platform, we rank this claim

FMD_train_1249

Wedding Dress Guy

05/10/2004

Claim: A man listed a wedding gown on eBay via a hilarious offer of sale that included photos of him posing in the dress. Example: [Collected on the Internet, 2004] For Sale: One Slightly Used Size 12 Wedding Gown. Only worn twice: Once at the wedding and once for these pictures. Make: Victoria Style: 611 Size: 12 Divorce forces sale I found my ex-wife's wedding dress in the attic when I moved. She took the $4000 engagement ring but left the dress. I was actually going to have a dress burning party when the divorce became final, but my sister talked me out of it. She said, "Thats such a gorgeous dress. Some lucky girl would be glad to have it. You should sell it on EBay. At least get something back for it." So, this is what Im doing. Im selling it hoping to get enough money for maybe a couple of Mariners tickets and some beer. This dress cost me $1200 that my drunken sot of an ex-father-in-law swore up and down he would pay for but didnt so I got stuck with the bill. Luckily I only got stuck with his daughter for 5 years. Thank the Lord we didn't have kids. If they would have turned out like her or her family I would have slit my wrists. Anyway, its a really nice dress as you can see in the pictures. Personally, I think it looks like a $1200 shower curtain, but what do I know about this. We tried taking pictures of this lovely white garment but it didnt look right on the hanger as you can see, so my sister says, "You need a model." Well, quite frankly my sister isnt exactly small, (like a size 12 is?) so she wouldnt pose for the picture. Seeing as I have sworn off women for the time being and I aint friends with any, it left me holding the bag. I took the liberty of blacking out my face - not to protect the ex-wife but to protect me from my bar buddies and co-workers finding out about it. I would never live it down. Actually I didnt think my head would fit in the neck hole, but then I figured she got her Texas cheerleader hair through there I could get my head in it. Though, after looking at the pictures, I thought it made me look fat. How do you women wear this crap? I only had to walk 3 feet and I tripped twice. Dont worry ladies - I am wearing clothes on underneath it. I gotta say it did make me feel very pretty. So if it can make me feel pretty, it can make you feel pretty, especially on the most important day of your life, right? Anyway, I was told to say it has a train and a veil and all kinds of shiny beady things. I think it's funny that one picture makes it look like the chest plate off an Imperial Storm Trooper. Did I mention that all I want is a ball game and beer? Cheap at twice the price. Ladies, you wont regret this. You may regret the dude you marry but not the dress. Just a little side note - As I was putting this ad in EBay, it asked me for a color. Is a wedding dress any other freaking color than white or ivory??!! If it is it wouldn't be a wedding dress, now would it?? I suppose black would work... On Apr-26-04 at 10:38:31 PDT, seller added the following information: Well, the auction is a little over half over and I am just amazed. This thing has taken more hits than that pothead that lives in the next building. Man, oh man, if hits were bucks Id be getting a suite at Safeco. I also have received TONS of email. I dont have the time to reply to all of them but I just want to let everyone know that I appreciate the well wishes. Of the email I received: Five or so were invitations to ball games in other states. Two of those were for little league games. Do they have those cushy executive boxes with the free chicken wings at those? One email was from Scotland. Its a good thing he wrote it because I wouldnt be able to understand a word he said. Never did get through Braveheart. Most were thanking me for the laugh. Youre entirely welcome. Five years of misery was well worth the hearty guffaw that was my pleasure to give you. Oh, yeah. I also got three marriage proposals. Yes, you read it right - three marriage proposals. I feel like one of those mass murderers on death row. I never understood how the hell they got more chicks than I did. Now I know. They sold crap on eBay. On Apr-26-04 at 23:45:56 PDT, seller added the following information: Holy Moly! The hit counter is starting to look like the odometer in my truck! Not the new shiny black full-size 4-wheel-drive American pick-up that I had to part with, but the somewhat older, multicolored, lumpy, tiny, 2-wheel-drive foreign pick-up that belches smoke. A little something about that vehicle, though: its absolutely amazing! When I get inside it to go to the store, I am all depressed. But when I arrive at the store, Im so freaking loopy from inhaling the fumes, I forget why I went there in the first place. Im saving buckets of money. Of course, I will probably have to spend it all on the tuberculosis I will acquire, but hey, you cant have everything. I felt compelled to update this ad once more due to all of your emails. The first thing I have to say is thank you all for your support in my time of need. It was a truly harrowing experience. Some of you men know exactly what I mean. Seeing as this has turned into my little public forum, I just want to address a few of the emails that kind of left me scratching my head. I now have five marriage proposals. You would think my speaking of the ones I already got yesterday would have put a damper on it, but you women sure are persistent. One woman actually said she doesnt want to marry me, but wouldnt mind being my ex-wife. Hmmm. Let me think about that. Nope. No thanks, already got one. (Pssst. Didnt I mention I had one? Who wants an ex-wife that cant read? Now, I know what you guys are thinking - "If she cant read, then the divorce would be smooth sailing." Well, that would be all well and good but I didnt say her ATTORNEY couldnt read. You following me on this?) Other emails are serious buyers asking about the dress. "How long is the train?" and "Does the gown come with the headdress and veil?" Yes, headdress and veil are included, but the do-rag stays with me. And if the train was long enough for my exs caboose, its long enough for yours. You will have to supply your own baggage, though. I gave mine to Goodwill. There was this one woman who wrote, "You should have covered your tattoos. People will be able to recognize you, like on Americas Most Wanted." HELLO!!! Im a guy selling a dress. Im not wanted for war crimes. Some of your emails made me laugh. Like the bitter woman that wished she had her exs testicles to sell on eBay. Im not too sure theres a market for that, though. Then there was the guy that gave his wifes wedding dress to the Salvation Army by mistake, thinking it was a Christmas tree. Guess he didnt have any Christmas balls that year. This has also been a learning experience for me. I got a lot of messages correcting me about the color of wedding dresses. For Russian Orthodox, they are blue. For Chinese they are red. Mexico has multi-colored ones. All I know is, for my next wedding I will be wearing a hairy, flesh-toned ensemble because I will be buck naked with a toe tag lying on a slab in the morgue because I would have killed myself. A lot of folks were asking me if I wear womens dresses a lot. I can honestly say that this is the first time I have ever donned female attire. Its also the first time Ive been inside something feminine that didnt nag me to take out the garbage. It seems a few people have taken offense to my inferring a size 12 is big. One male even pointed out that Marilyn Monroe was a size 14. Now, I would agree with you that size 12/14 is small if I lived elsewhere. But I live right here in the good old 48 Contiguous, where binging and purging is a way of life. American women do not want to be double digits in size. Just ask any woman what size they want to be. Invariably they will say five or seven. Wealthy will be the person that opens a store for Lane Bryant-sized women but sews size 7 tags on all the clothes. On the flip side of that, I have taken offense to some of the people that told me Im ugly and a loser. All I have to say is youd be ugly too if you had a huge white blotch on your face. And as far as being a loser, I think you have it all wrong. I am such the winner. It isnt every day an average guy can make 50,000 people laugh. Thanks to each and every one of you from the heart of my bottom. Origins: The online auction powerhouse eBay has been the setting of many strange come-ons, some seriously meant and some far less so. In addition to a throng of earnest sellers and determined bargain hunters that frequent this popular online bazaar, it is also populated by its share of crazies intent upon sneaking their hoax listings into the marketplace. Consequently, one can't always tell fish from fowl at first glance. Over the years, our readers have queried us about various eBay auctions because they harbored suspicions about particular listings, either due to the nature of the goods being tendered or because something about the pitch struck them as not quite right (e.g.; an offer of a tea kettle, which displayed additional wares of the seller). Yet few of the auctions so doubted have been asked about as often as the April 2004 proffering of a size 12 Victoria wedding gown, an item that isn't in and of itself all that unusual. But it wasn't the dress that set people to wondering; it was the seller's comments, which appeared to afford a hilarious look into one man's private hell. The seller wasn't so much advertising a dress as he was proclaiming from a public soapbox how awful his wife had been. The auction listing was just as much about getting even as it was about unloading an item he had no particular use for. tea kettle Or was it? Had a gal with "Texas cheerleader hair" really so turned a man against marriage that he swore that "for my next wedding I will be wearing a hairy, flesh-toned ensemble because I will be buck naked with a toe tag lying on a slab in the morgue because I would have killed myself"? Herein rested the listing's appeal: The story was entertaining, but was it real? The solicitation was on the up and up, at least in regard to the nature of the merchandise being vended there was such a dress, and the offer of sale was genuine. However, some (if not all) of the gown's backstory was the stuff of fairy tales. The original eBay listing posted by 42-year-old Larry Star wasn't provoking much interest among those shopping for a wedding dress, so he rewrote it to make it amusing resulting in the posting that has served to make him famous. The tale of marital woe posted by this Brooklyn native both contained invented details and omitted key bits of information. Though he has a sister, she didn't talk him out of the dress burning party he had his heart set upon by suggesting he list the gown on eBay and so get something out of it. He also had an ex-wife prior to the one whose dress he supposedly was selling. (Star and his first missus were married in 1994, separated in 1996, and were divorced in 1998.) And contrary to his statement, "Thank the Lord we didn't have kids. If they would have turned out like her or her family I would have slit my wrists," he and his second wife did indeed have a son together during their short-lived marriage. The unhappy couple wed in 2000, separated in 2001 after a domestic kafuffle (which reportedly resulted in Star's being charged with domestic violence assault in the fourth degree and interfering with the reporting of domestic violence), and divorced in 2003. Though "five years of misery" might well have been worth the hearty guffaw he says was his pleasure to give the online community, those years weren't spent "stuck" with the "drunken sot's" daughter; his time cohabitating with Wife #2 amounted to just a bit more than a year. It's not known if the gown in question even belonged to his ex-wife, as she hasn't surfaced to speak publicly about the matter. Also, according to the Houston Chronicle, when asked if the dress had really been hers, Mr. Star sidestepped the question, instead replying, "I got the wedding dress, I wanted to get rid of it. I was going to burn it and had the idea of selling it on eBay. I needed to sell it on eBay with all the other dresses on there, and I needed to make it stand out." And stand out it did. The auction of the fabled wedding gown ended 28 April 2004 with a buyer using the online handle of "absolutsth" placing the winning bid of $3,850. Yet all is not coming up roses for the intrepid seller who one would assume to be realizing a profit of $2,650 on the gown he says cost originally $1,200, as the sale has fallen through. According to Star, the buyer has backed out, claiming "I left my computer on and somebody made the bid for me." The folks at eBay have told Star he can either accept the second-highest bid or re-list the dress and hold the sale again. As of 7 May 2004, he had not decided whether he would accept the next highest legitimate bid (if there even was a legitimate bid). By the time the auction ended, Star's listing on eBay had been viewed more than 5.8 million times. Some of those visitors, possibly caught up in the frenzy of it all, placed bids they did not intend to honor. (Officials at eBay had to weed out many phonies at one point the bidding reached $99 million.) How many of the remaining bids were legitimate is not known. And, even if all those bids were meant seriously at the time they were placed, some of those prospective buyers may now be having second thoughts, particularly those who offered more than $1,000 for a used, stained dress that was only worth $1,200 when it first came off the hanger. The ultimate fate of the frock may take it in a far different direction than down the aisle on the back of a budget-conscious bride. Its listing (which has now been viewed 11 million times) has brought recognition to its owner and has possibly opened the way to a new career for this software test designer and part-time musician. Thanks to the dress, Larry Star has twice been a guest on both MSNBC's Countdown and NBC's Today Show, each time wearing the unsold gown. Also thanks to the dress, he has made his debut as a stand-up comedian at the Punchline Comedy Club in Atlanta. He has said he would like to pursue a comedy writing career, and all this attention might well work to get that going. Though there are many stand-up comedians on the circuit, we know of none that perform their schtick outfitted in wedding regalia. Could this gown do for Star what a sledgehammer and a watermelon did for Gallagher? Barbara "smash hit" Mikkelson Additional Information: Weddingdressguy.com (Larry Star) Last updated: 3 July 2007 Sources: Brodeur, Nicole. "Fact Is, There's Some Fiction to Man's Pitch to Sell His Ex-wife's Wedding Dress on eBay." The Seattle Times. 29 April 2004 (p. B1). Curry, Ann, Matt Lauer and Katie, Couric. "Today." NBC. 30 April 2004. Eldredge, Richard. "Wedding Dress Guy Jilted by eBay Bidder." The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. 7 May 2004 (p. E2). Kelso, John. "Best of eBay: A Wedding Dress Tale." Cox News Service. 2 May 2004. Olbermann, Keith. "Countdown." MSNBC. 30 April 2004. Olbermann, Keith. "Countdown." MSNBC. 28 April 2004. Parks, Louis. "On eBay, Wedding Dress for Success." The Houston Chronicle. 30 April 2004 (Houston; p. 1). Weiss, Tara. "A Star is Born, Selling Wedding Dress on eBay." Hartford Courant. 30 April 2004 (p. D2). Associated Press. "Man Who Sold Ex's Wedding Dress on eBay Earns Instant Fame." 30 April 2004. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. "15 Minutes Still Ticking for Wedding Dress Guy." 4 May 2004 (p. E2).

True

Over the years, our readers have queried us about various eBay auctions because they harbored suspicions about particular listings, either due to the nature of the goods being tendered or because something about the pitch struck them as not quite right (e.g.; an offer of a tea kettle, which displayed additional wares of the seller). Yet few of the auctions so doubted have been asked about as often as the April 2004 proffering of a size 12 Victoria wedding gown, an item that isn't in and of itself all that unusual. But it wasn't the dress that set people to wondering; it was the seller's comments, which appeared to afford a hilarious look into one man's private hell. The seller wasn't so much advertising a dress as he was proclaiming from a public soapbox how awful his wife had been. The auction listing was just as much about getting even as it was about unloading an item he had no particular use for.Additional Information: Weddingdressguy.com (Larry Star)

FMD_train_1187

If youre a low-wage worker and youre single and dont have children, were literally taxing you into poverty.

11/11/2021

After months and months of the ongoing debate over the various plans and proposals being considered in Washington D.C., its rare to see a new argument emerge. But in an Oct. 30, 2021 appearance on MSNBC, U.S. Rep. Gwen Moore, D-Milwaukee, offered this case for supporting President Joe Bidens Build Back Better plan. The framework is much more than a social safety net program, Moore said onVelshi, an MSNBC programhosted by author and finance correspondent Ali Velshi. I think these programs contribute as much to our growing economy as anything. What good is growth if were taxing our workers into poverty? Moore went on to say: If youre a low-wage worker and youre single and dont have children, were literally taxing you into poverty. Is Moore right? When asked to provide backup for the statement, Moores office directed PolitiFact Wisconsin to a July 2020 report from the liberalCenter on Budget and Policy Priorities. Thereport focused on a provision in the planthat would temporarily extend the Earned Income Tax Credit to about 17 million low-wage workers. The report said, in part: The federal tax code currently taxes about 5.8 million low-wage workers aged 19-65 into or deeper into poverty, because the payroll and (in some cases) federal income taxes they pay exceed any EITC they receive. Thats generally on point, but does not cover the single and no children aspect of Moores claim. So, we reached out to other experts on the topic. Lets start with the terms involved and some basic data. The Bureau of Labor Statistics, part of the U.S. Department of Labor, does not use the phrase low-wage worker. However, the agency does publish an annual report and data on workers with hourly earnings at or below theprevailing Federal minimum wage. According to the February 2021BLS Report: In 2020, 73.3 million workers age 16 and older were paid on an hourly basis, or about 55.5 percent of all workers. About 1.1 million of those, or 1.5 percent, were paid at or below the federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour. Whats more, according to the report, among workers paid an hourly wage, those who were single were more likely than married workers to earn the federal minimum wage or less. And about 60 percent of those in the hourly-wage category worked in the hospitality industry, meaning bars, restaurants and food services. Low wages are common in these fields, in part because workers typically supplement their pay with tips. When asked about Moores claim,Christopher Wimer, senior research scientist at Columbia Universitys Center on Poverty & Social Policy, told us he would need more precise definitions for low-wage, worker and even single without children. Since Moores statement did not address those details, Wimer, who conducts research on the measurement of poverty and disadvantage as well as historical trends in poverty, constructed his own measurement. He chose 2017 to 2019, because 2020 was an unusual year with COVID-19 job losses, stimulus payments and more. He defined low-wage as being in the bottom quartile -- that is the bottom 25% -- of annual income from wage and salary income (among those with at least some wage and salary income, so a worker). Then he selected adults who lived with no other family members (including any children, so single with no children). The bottomline: For those folks, their poverty rates are indeed higher after you use after-tax income. That is, about 49 percent fall under the poverty rate after taxes, but if you take out federal, state and payroll taxes, the figure would be more like 41 percent. Elaine Maag, a principal research associate in the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center at the Urban Institute, said Moore's comment is not only plausible, but in limited contexts -- true. Maag pointed out that in 2020, the official poverty threshold for a single person under age 65 with no children in the home was $13,465. (For a married couple younger than 65 with no children, the threshold was $17,331.) If I select a household with income just above that threshold, you can see that after tax, their income will be below $13,465, Maag said. Moore said If youre a low-wage worker and youre single and dont have children, were literally taxing you into poverty. Moore, in her statement, did not define the terms she was using, but experts we talked to were able to create plausible scenarios and found that -- in at least limited scenarios -- she is on target. For a statement that is accurate but needs clarification or additional information, our rating is Mostly True.

True

The framework is much more than a social safety net program, Moore said onVelshi, an MSNBC programhosted by author and finance correspondent Ali Velshi. I think these programs contribute as much to our growing economy as anything. What good is growth if were taxing our workers into poverty?When asked to provide backup for the statement, Moores office directed PolitiFact Wisconsin to a July 2020 report from the liberalCenter on Budget and Policy Priorities.Thereport focused on a provision in the planthat would temporarily extend the Earned Income Tax Credit to about 17 million low-wage workers. The report said, in part:The Bureau of Labor Statistics, part of the U.S. Department of Labor, does not use the phrase low-wage worker. However, the agency does publish an annual report and data on workers with hourly earnings at or below theprevailing Federal minimum wage.According to the February 2021BLS Report:When asked about Moores claim,Christopher Wimer, senior research scientist at Columbia Universitys Center on Poverty & Social Policy, told us he would need more precise definitions for low-wage, worker and even single without children.Elaine Maag, a principal research associate in the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center at the Urban Institute, said Moore's comment is not only plausible, but in limited contexts -- true.

FMD_train_327

Did Bill Belichick Shake His Head at Mac Jones' Overthrow?

04/01/2021

In late March 2021, a video was shared that showed Bill Belichick shaking his head moments after NFL prospect Mac Jones overthrew a football. The New England Patriots coach was present to attend the University of Alabama football team's pro day. In the video, he was standing next to San Francisco 49ers head coach Kyle Shanahan. The video appeared in articles that were shown to Google Discover users. For example, one story stated, "Bill Belichick isn't impressed with Mac Jones' throw at Alabama pro day." Another read, "Cameras catch Bill Belichick's reaction to Mac Jones' overthrow at Alabama Pro Day." Several articles seemed to suggest they could read minds. We found no indication that Belichick was shaking his head or showing disapproval at a single overthrow by Jones. In the video, it appeared that Shanahan and Belichick were having a conversation. The likely explanation for Belichick's head shake was that he was reacting to something Shanahan said. Four NFL coaches were present to watch Jones and other Alabama football prospects: Sean Payton of the New Orleans Saints, Matt Nagy of the Chicago Bears, Shanahan, and Belichick. The Associated Press also reported that Belichick was among a group of five general managers in attendance. In January 2021, Jones led the Alabama football team to the College Football Playoff national championship. He was also a Heisman Trophy finalist, placing third in the vote count. The team's head coach is Nick Saban. The same Twitter account that hosted the video of Belichick shaking his head also tweeted another video showing Jones throwing a deep ball with precision. ESPN also shared additional videos of the Alabama pro day that showcased Jones executing a number of solid plays. The Associated Press published a brief comment from Jones, who appeared to feel confident in his performance in front of Belichick and the other NFL coaches and general managers. "At Alabama, they told me to sit in the pocket and rip it, so that's what I did," Jones said. "That's what you're supposed to do when you're at Alabama. But when the NFL comes, I'll do whatever they tell me to do. I showed today that I can do everything that they want me to do." Without further evidence that Belichick was showing disapproval at a single throw by a Heisman Trophy finalist who led his team to a national title, we have rated this claim as "Unproven."

NEI

In late March 2021, a video was shared that showed Bill Belichick shaking his head moments after NFL prospect Mac Jones overthrew a football. The New England Patriots coach was on hand to attend the University of Alabama football team's pro days. In the video, he was standing next to San Francisco 49ers head coach Kyle Shanahan: Several articles appeared to perhaps read minds.Four NFL coaches were on hand to watch Jones and other Alabama football prospects. Sean Payton of the New Orleans Saints, Matt Nagy of the Chicago Bears, Shanahan, and Belichick were all in attendance. The Associated Press also reported that Belichick was among a group of five general managers on hand.In January 2021, Jones led the Alabama football team to the College Football Playoff national championship. He was also a Heisman Trophy finalist, placing third in the vote count. The team's head coach is Nick Saban.The same Twitter account that hosted the video of Belichick shaking his head also tweeted this video. It showed Jones throwing a deep ball with precision:ESPN also shared more videos of the Alabama pro days that showed Jones executing a number of solid plays.The Associated Press published a brief comment from Jones. He appeared to feel confident in his showing in front of Belichick and the other NFL coaches and general managers:Without further evidence that Belichick was showing disapproval at a single throw of the football by a Heisman Trophy finalist who led his team to a national title, we have rated this claim as "Unproven."

FMD_train_590

Scam involving counterfeit $80 coupons at Wegmans

02/01/2016

In late January 2016, Facebook users began sharing a post that promised a $200 coupon for the Wegmans supermarket chain to users who completed a short series of steps. In July 2019, social media users encountered a similar offer for an $80 coupon. The embedded links in those posts pointed to a URL not associated with Wegmans. Users who attempted to complete the steps and claim the coupon were directed to a page that resembled content hosted on Facebook, but its URL didn't match the social network's. The landing page was familiar to all who had encountered similar scams in the past. Wegmans' official Facebook page warned customers about the coupon scam, and a Better Business Bureau article provided shoppers with tips on avoiding survey and coupon scams operating in that fashion. The article advised, "Don't believe what you see. It's easy to steal the colors, logos, and header of an established organization." Scammers can also make links look like they lead to legitimate websites and emails appear to come from a different sender. Legitimate businesses do not ask for credit card numbers or banking information on customer surveys. If they do ask for personal information, like an address or email, be sure there's a link to their privacy policy. When in doubt, do a quick web search. If the survey is a scam, you may find alerts or complaints from other consumers. The organization's real website may have further information. Watch out for a reward that's too good to be true. If the survey is real, you may be entered in a drawing to win a gift card or receive a small discount off your next purchase. Few businesses can afford to give away $50 gift cards for completing a few questions.

False

A Better Business Bureauarticle provided shoppers tips about avoiding survey and coupon scams operating in that fashion:

FMD_train_1554

Has the state of Massachusetts stopped sending out notices for renewing driver's licenses by mail?

11/04/2008

Massachusetts is no longer mailing notifications for driver's license renewals. Effective immediately, the Registry of Motor Vehicles will no longer be mailing out license renewal applications or reminders to renew your driver's license. It is now the driver's responsibility to know when their license is expiring and to renew it on their own. This may come as a surprise to many, as there has been no public information sent out about these changes. Fortunately, we received the information in one of our trade publications. This policy could change in the future, but for now, it's a significant cost-saving measure, and they plan to continue with it. Below is a blurb from the publication. Mailings Eliminated The RMV will no longer mail out the following materials to customers: - License renewal notices - Mass ID renewal notices - License reinstatement letters: Letter sent to a licensed customer when his/her license is reinstated, provided that the license is still active; Letter sent to an unlicensed customer when his/her right to operate is reinstated - Registration reinstatement letters: Letter sent to a person or corporation whose suspended registration has been reinstated; Letter sent to a person or corporation whose revoked registration has been reinstated - Vehicle Inspection reminder letters for vehicles that are overdue for inspection - Inspector license renewal notices - 7D license renewal notices - Driver's Education Certificates - Junior Operator Brochures for parents (still available in branches) - Change of address labels (customers can create their own) I am just passing this along; my suggestion is to pull out your license and somehow set a reminder for yourself to ensure you renew it. This is just a heads up so that no one gets pulled over and has their car impounded because they didn't realize they hadn't renewed their license. Origins: We're used to seeing certain types of notices arrive in our mailboxes regularly. Aside from monthly credit card statements and utility bills, every year or two, the mail brings us income tax forms, voter materials for upcoming elections, automobile registration renewals, etc. One common type of mailing will no longer arrive in the mailboxes of Massachusetts residents: renewal notifications for about-to-expire driver's licenses. As of November 3, 2008, the Massachusetts Registry of Motor Vehicles (RMV) will no longer be sending out notices to residents reminding them to renew their driver's licenses. Statewide cuts and spending controls announced by Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick in October 2008 slashed $2 million from the RMV's budget, leading to the elimination of mailing license renewal reminders and other courtesy notices in an effort to save money (in this case, an estimated $800,000). Governor Deval Patrick stated that he would eliminate 1,000 jobs from state government and slash the budget by more than $1 billion, reacting to the national economic crisis with sweeping cuts that his administration called the worst single round of midyear budget rollbacks in state history. The reductions will affect almost all sectors of state government, significantly impacting state university campuses and community colleges, the state's health insurance programs, and dozens of social service programs, from assistance for at-risk teens to services for the mentally ill and the elderly. The cuts range from nearly $300 million on healthcare spending to the elimination of letters to residents simply reminding them to renew their driver's licenses. As noted in a "Message from Registrar Kaprielian on RMV Budget Cuts" displayed on the Massachusetts RMV website: "Like many businesses across the Commonwealth, the RMV is working to squeeze every penny of savings from our budget in the wake of a drastic downturn in the state's economy. To weather this financial storm, the RMV is adopting operational changes that we believe will minimize the impact on customer service in our branches." For now, at least, it's incumbent upon residents of that commonwealth to be aware when their licenses are due to expire and to initiate the renewal process on their own in a timely fashion. Last updated: November 4, 2008 Sources: Viser, Matt. "Patrick to Cut 1,000 Jobs from State Payroll." The Boston Globe. October 16, 2008.

True

As noted in a "Message from Registrar Kaprielian on RMV Budget Cuts" displayed on the Massachusetts RMV web site:

FMD_train_346

Facebook scam involving fraudulent ALDI coupons

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 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_1676

Was Steve Scalise present at a gathering organized by white supremacists?

12/28/2014

On 28 December 2014, the website CenLamar published an article titled "House Majority Whip Steve Scalise Was Reportedly an Honored Guest at 2002 International White Supremacist Convention." According to the site, current House Majority Whip Steve Scalise, then a Louisiana state representative, was a guest speaker at an event hosted by the European-American Unity and Rights Organization (EURO), a group headed by former Klan leader and neo-Nazi David Duke, at the Landmark Best Western Hotel in Metairie, Louisiana, in May 2002. (EURO was a renamed version of Duke's NOFEAR group that advocated fighting for "white civil rights" for "Europeans and Americans wherever they may live.") The dozen years that elapsed between the EURO event in 2002 and the article's publication in 2014 made it markedly difficult to investigate the article's claims. At the time of the convention, much internet-based political discussion occurred solely on message boards, many of which have long since been retired due to inactivity, abandoned, or become otherwise inaccessible for a variety of reasons. Following the article's publication, the claim was circulated and reposted on a number of left-leaning websites. This repetition created the impression that multiple sources were documenting the claim, but the information all pointed back to the same single source: Stormfront.org, a white supremacist message board with a lengthy and notorious history on the web. A 2002 post claiming Scalise attended the EURO conference held in Metairie that year became suddenly notable in late 2014. In that post, the writer stated that EURO's recent national convention held in the greater New Orleans area was a convergence of ideas represented by Americans from diverse geographical regions like California, Texas, New Jersey, and the Carolinas. This indicates that the concerns held are pervasive in every sovereign state and republic alike, within an increasingly diminishing view of where America stands on individual liberty for whites. In addition to plans to implement tactical strategies that were discussed, the meeting was productive locally as State Representative Steve Scalise discussed ways to oversee the gross mismanagement of tax revenue or "

NEI

On 28 December 2014, the web site CenLamar published an article titled "House Majority Whip Steve Scalise Was Reportedly an Honored Guest at 2002 International White Supremacist Convention." According to the site, current House Majority Whip Steve Scalise, then a Louisiana state representative, was a guest speaker at an event hosted by the European-American Unity and Rights Organization (EURO), a group headed by former Klan leader and neo-Nazi David Duke, at the Landmark Best Western Hotel in Metairie, Louisiana, in May 2002. (EURO was a renamed version of Duke's NOFEAR group that advocated fighting for "white civil rights" for "Europeans and Americans wherever they may live.")A 2002 post claiming Scalise attended the EURO conference held in Metairie that year became suddenly notable in late 2014. In that post, the writer stated:Aside from the single mention by a single user on one internet forum back in 2002, no other record of such an appearance by Scalise emerged. A newsletter of indeterminate origin appearing to be the work of David Duke, EURO's founder, listed the May 2002 event's speakers but did not mention Scalise:Scalise himself also seemingly confirmed that he addressed a EURO group (again without actually stating that he did) in an interview with the New Orleans Time-Picayune, asserting that he didn't remember speaking at the event:Kenny Knight, a longtime associate of David Duke who said he booked space for the 2002 EURO conference, asserted that Scalise didn't actually speak at the EURO conference itself, but rather to a contingent of people (including some EURO attendees) who had gathered earlier in the day prior to the EURO conference kick-off:However, the Times-Picayune then poked holes in a number of Knight's statements, namely his claims that he was not himself a member of EURO, did not line up speakers for the 2002 EURO conference, and was not himself present at the conference:EURO head David Duke himself stated in a Washington Post interview that Scalise had indeed been invited to address the EURO gathering and had accepted that invitation and was present at the conference (although Duke was not himself present at the event and therefore didn't personally witness whatever Scalise may have done there):

FMD_train_1040

Did Audrey Hepburn Author These 'Beauty Tips'?

05/16/2001

Internet users often refer to the following quote: "For attractive lips, speak words of kindness. For lovely eyes, seek out the good in people. For a slim figure, share your food with the hungry. For beautiful hair, let a child run his or her fingers through it once a day. For poise, walk with the knowledge that you never walk alone. People, even more than things, have to be restored, renewed, revived, reclaimed, and redeemed; never throw out anyone. Remember, if you ever need a helping hand, you'll find one at the end of each of your arms. As you grow older, you will discover that you have two hands: one for helping yourself, the other for helping others. The beauty of a woman is not in the clothes she wears, the figure she carries, or the way she combs her hair. The beauty of a woman must be seen in her eyes, because that is the doorway to her heart, the place where love resides. The beauty of a woman is not in a facial mode, but the true beauty in a woman is reflected in her soul. It is the caring that she lovingly gives and the passion that she shows. The beauty of a woman grows with the passing years. Image via Pinterest. Proving that even the famous go in for glurge, Hepburn, who died in 1993, was not the original author of the quoted list of beauty tips. However, she considered the quote one of her favorites and quoted it in public a number of times. Its true author was humorist Sam Levenson (who said, "Insanity is hereditary: You can get it from your children"). However, despite the confusion over who wrote the piece, it's clear Hepburn never had a hand in any of it beyond repeating a favorite essay in public, always carefully crediting its author. That some have now come to think of this as "her" list is a regrettable misattribution. Biographies of Hepburn maintain that, as a 13-year-old, she did indeed serve as a courier and occasional secret messenger for the Resistance in World War II (like many other children in Holland), carrying messages and illegal leaflets stuffed into her socks and shoes. In addition to her fabled acting career, which included the 1953 Best Actress Oscar for "Roman Holiday," Hepburn was a long-time activist for charitable causes and, in 1988, was named the official spokesperson for the United Nations International Children's Emergency Fund (UNICEF). When asked in January 1992 if she had any personal beauty secrets besides Levenson's philosophical tips, she said, "If I had them, I'd make a fortune. But I know what helps: health, lots of sleep, lots of fresh air, and a lot of help from Estee Lauder." Donnally, Trish. "This Beauty Shares Her Tips." The San Francisco Chronicle. 27 January 1992 (p. D5). This article was updated to meet Snopes' current standards for article formatting and include recent examples of the claim.

False

Image via Pinterest.Proving that even the famous go in for glurge, Hepburn, who died in 1993, was not the original author of the quoted list of beauty tips. However, she considered the quote one of her favorites and quoted it in public a number of times. Its true author was humorist Sam Levenson (who said, "Insanity is hereditary: You can get it from your children").Biographies of Hepburn maintain that, as a 13-year-old, she did indeed serve as a courier and occasional secret messenger for the Resistance in World Word II (like many other children in Holland), carrying messages and illegal leaflets stuffed into her socks and shoes.In addition to her fabled acting career, which included the 1953 Best Actress Oscar for "Roman Holiday," Hepburn was a long-time activist for charitable causes and, in 1988, was named the official spokesperson for the United Nations International Children's Emergency Fund (UNICEF).

FMD_train_331

Does Photo Show Trump Arriving in New York for His Arraignment?

04/04/2023

On April 3, 2023, former U.S. President Donald Trump traveled from his Mar-a-Lago estate to New York City to face historic criminal charges related to alleged hush-money payments to a woman with whom he allegedly had a sexual encounter. face historic criminal charges alleged hush-money payments With his booking andarraignment set for the following afternoon at the Manhattan criminal courthouse, a Twitter user posted the below-displayed photo of the former president supposedly making his New York arrival.The photo showed Trump flanked by people in suits, presumably Secret Service agents, leading a massive crowd of people down a city street lined with American flags. following afternoon "President Trump returns to New York," tweeted @Brick_Suit, with the photo. tweeted The photo was fake; it was not a genuinedocumentationof Trump arriving to New York for his booking and arraignment. The Twitter user acknowledged that fact,writing in a reply tweet, "I didn't find this [photo]. I generated it via prompts." writing in a reply tweet The photo was generated by artificial intelligence (AI), with several telltale signs of computer-generated manipulation. For examples, an area near Trump's lower lip showed another trace of lip; the faces of the presumed Secret Service agents and many crowd members were disfigured; some heads looked more like skulls, and the flags' coloring wasn't consistent. Additionally, the man immediately behind Trump not only had signs of digital doctoring in his face but also his right hand. This was not the first digitally created photo supposedly documenting the aftermath of theManhattan District Attorney Office's move toindict Trump on March 30, 2023. Fakephotos of U.S. President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris celebrating the indictment, Trump clashing with law enforcement officers who were supposedly makinghis arrest, and the former president posing forhisjail mugshotalsospread on social media. indict Trump photos clashing his arrest jail mugshot Given that the photo of Trump leading a crowd was AI-generated it did not authentically show him arriving in New York on April 3, 2023 we rate this claim Getty Image's database of photojournalism included several authentic images of Trump's arrival to New York on April 3, including the one displayed below. database Trump arrived in New York City on April 3, 2023 for his arraignment. (Gotham/GettyImages) "Trump Is Heading to Court. Here's What to Expect." AP NEWS, 4 Apr. 2023, https://apnews.com/article/trump-new-york-arrest-indictment-hush-money-97caa163d876d8c9ac2aad7ca6fd1f3d. "Trump Returns to New York to Face Historic Criminal Charges." AP NEWS, 3 Apr. 2023, https://apnews.com/article/trump-indictment-new-york-florida-hush-money-election-764309dce49f81a50bf9f610ffd5ceb6.

False

On April 3, 2023, former U.S. President Donald Trump traveled from his Mar-a-Lago estate to New York City to face historic criminal charges related to alleged hush-money payments to a woman with whom he allegedly had a sexual encounter.With his booking andarraignment set for the following afternoon at the Manhattan criminal courthouse, a Twitter user posted the below-displayed photo of the former president supposedly making his New York arrival.The photo showed Trump flanked by people in suits, presumably Secret Service agents, leading a massive crowd of people down a city street lined with American flags."President Trump returns to New York," tweeted @Brick_Suit, with the photo.The photo was fake; it was not a genuinedocumentationof Trump arriving to New York for his booking and arraignment. The Twitter user acknowledged that fact,writing in a reply tweet, "I didn't find this [photo]. I generated it via prompts."This was not the first digitally created photo supposedly documenting the aftermath of theManhattan District Attorney Office's move toindict Trump on March 30, 2023. Fakephotos of U.S. President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris celebrating the indictment, Trump clashing with law enforcement officers who were supposedly makinghis arrest, and the former president posing forhisjail mugshotalsospread on social media.Getty Image's database of photojournalism included several authentic images of Trump's arrival to New York on April 3, including the one displayed below.

FMD_train_26

Is a woman the primary earner for managing a fraudulent foster care scheme within the family?

12/20/2010

The item reproduced below originated as an e-mail sent to radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh in July 2010 by Dr. Sebastian J. Ciancio, a urologist practicing in Danville, Illinois. In that e-mail, the doctor encouraged the radio host to "share this story with your listeners so that they know how the ruling class spends their tax dollars." In this example collected from the Snopes inbox in August 2010: I was speaking to an emergency room physician this morning. He told me that a woman in her 20's came to the ER with her 8th pregnancy. She stated "my momma told me that I am the breadwinner for the family." He asked her to explain. She said that she can make babies and babies get money for the family. The scam goes like this: The grandma calls the Department of Children and Family Services and states that the unemployed daughter is not capable of caring for these children. DCFS agrees and states that the child or children will need to go to foster care. The grandma then volunteers to be the foster parent, and thus receives a check for $1500 per child per month in Illinois. Total yearly income: $144,000 tax-free, not to mention free healthcare (Medicaid) plus a monthly "Link" card entitling her to free groceries, etc, and a voucher for 250 free cell phone minutes per month. This does not even include WIC and other welfare programs. Indeed, grandma was correct in that her fertile daughter is the "breadwinner" in the family. Variations: In December 2010 the following photograph was added to circulating versions of this item, even though the pictured family has no connection to the story and no mention of race appeared in the original text: In 2014, the setting was moved from Illinois to Florida. The gist of this "story" is the claim that an Illinois woman who was pregnant with her eighth child (while still in her 20's) admitted to an emergency room physician that she was deliberately having children and giving them up to foster care in order to earn money for her family, with her grandmother volunteering to raise the children and collecting $1,500 per month from the state for each child, for an annual tax-free income of $144,000 (plus additional benefits). Is the story true? It's a second-hand account, and Dr. Ciancio declined to identify the physician who supposedly told it to him, which makes verification of that aspect of the tale difficult. Nonetheless, whatever a pregnant patient may have told an unnamed emergency room physician, the scenario described simply isn't possible. According to payment rates published by the State of Illinois' Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS), monthly payments for licensed relative home care range from $384 to $471 per child, depending upon the age of the child: payment rates The maximum monthly payment (for a child age 12 and over) is $471 per month, not $1,500 per month, so the largest amount of money a foster parent caring for eight children would receive in a month (assuming all of those children were at least 12 years old) would be $3,768, for an annual total of $45,216 a far cry from the $144,000 yearly income claimed above. (And even the $45,216 figure is a generous projection, given that it's an obvious impossibility for a woman who is pregnant with her eighth child to already have eight children all over the age of twelve.) Pickel, Mary Lou. "Tea Party at the Capitol." The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. 28 February 2009.

False

According to payment rates published by the State of Illinois' Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS), monthly payments for licensed relative home care range from $384 to $471 per child, depending upon the age of the child:

FMD_train_1257

Is this photograph depicting legislators engaging in a game of Solitaire?

11/01/2009

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

True

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

FMD_train_1836

Taxes and fees amount to about 20 percent of a typical $300 round-trip domestic ticket. Thats higher than taxes on products like alcohol, tobacco and firearms.

03/17/2013

On a scale of politically controversial topics, airline tickets might rank near the bottom, perhaps somewhere just above Roberts Rules of Order and a quorum call.And yet plane tickets have been part of some curious claims taken on by PolitiFact: Every time you buy an airline ticket, the federal government runs a background check on you -- PolitiFact Texas:Mostly False You can use food stamps for a plane ticket to go to Hawaii -- PolitiFact National:Pants on Fire Now coming down the runway is a claim byGary Kelly, chief executive officer of Dallas-based Southwest Airlines. Southwest carries themost domestic passengersin the U.S. and themost passengersat Milwaukees Mitchell International Airport.Kelly made his statement in a column he wrote for the February 2013 issues of the in-flight magazines of Southwest and of AirTran Airways, which Southwestacquiredin 2011.Taxes and fees amount to about 20 percent of a typical $300 round-trip domestic ticket, he stated. Thats higher than taxes on products like alcohol, tobacco and firearms.With spring break around the corner, and alcohol, tobacco and firearms always in season, lets see if Kellys claim takes flight.Cost of an airline ticketKellys opinion column focused on federal taxes on airline tickets and other products. His source for the taxes on an airline ticket isAirlines for America, the trade group that advocates for the airline industry. It spent $6.37 million in federal lobbying in 2012,accordingto the nonpartisan OpenSecrets.org.In December 2012, Airlines for Americaannounced detailsof a campaign it would undertake in 2013 to persuade lawmakers to reduce federal taxes on airlines and take other steps to help the industry.Just how high are those taxes?Southwest Airlines spokesman Brad Hawkins usedfiguresprovided by Airlines for America to give a breakdown of the four major federal taxes and fees on a ticket with a base price of $300. His example includes one connecting flight each way -- in other words, a ticket that includes two flights on the departure segment of the trip and two flights on the return. Based on Hawkins calculations, the $66.10 equals 22 percent of the cost of the $300 ticket, exceeding the 20 percent that Kelly claimed.As for the size of the taxes and fees, we found a Federal Aviation Administrationdocumentconfirming the excise tax and segment fee amounts; theyhelp fundthe FAA, which coordinates air traffic control and other aspects of the aviation system. (Anexcise taxis somewhat like a sales tax, in that it is paid on a purchase, but its often included in the purchase price. )Another FAAdocumentconfirms the passenger facility charge, which is collected by public agencies that run commercial airports and is used for FAA-approved projects at the airports. And a Transportation Security Administrationdocumentconfirms the Sept. 11 fee, which helps fund the TSA.We ran Kellys statement and his itinerary by Joakim Karlsson, a researcher with theAirline Ticket Tax Projectat the Massachusetts Institute of Technology; the project studies ticket taxes and user fees added directly to airline tickets. He called Kellys statement mathematically correct, but fundamentally misleading.Karlsson noted that fares are usually quoted with taxes and fees included. So, a $300 ticket would include a base fare of about $239.Karlsson calculated that would trigger $61 in taxes and fees, which would still amount to 20 percent of the ticket cost, the same amount Kelly claimed.But more importantly, Karlsson said, the sample ticket that Kelly uses is not typical: So, a $418 non-stop ticket would include $54 in taxes and fees, or just under 15 percent of the total. (The taxes and fees in Kellys $300 ticket example, if the trip were non-stop, also would equal just under 15 percent. )That means the first part of Kellys claim is accurate, but leaves out important details.Taxes and fees on other productsAs for the second part of Kellys statement, the Southwest Airlines spokesman cited a 2011opinion columninThe Wall Street Journalby the chief executive officer of Airlines for America, the airlines trade group. The column argued that the taxes paid by airlines are at the same excessive levels as sin taxes imposed on alcohol, tobacco and gambling.But the column provided no figures to show how the various tax rates compare.We found the followingfiguresfrom the federal Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, a division of the Department of Treasury. They represent only the federal taxes on these products. Some brands of beer cost more than others, some wine costs more in one part of the country than another, buying in bulk costs less, etc.But, to consider some examples, if a: None of this takes into account state and local taxes on the various products, but Kellys claim focuses on federal taxes.So, the tax rate on an airline ticket -- whether its 20 percent, as in the example Kelly cited, or the more typical 15 percent as cited by the MIT program -- is generally higher than the federal tax rates on the other products Kelly cited.One might argue that taxes and fees on airline tickets, which help fund aviation operations, are fundamentally different from sin taxes on things like cigarettes, which are meant to hold down consumption. But thats not an argument central to this claim.Our ratingKelly said: Taxes and fees amount to about 20 percent of a typical $300 round-trip domestic ticket. Thats higher than taxes on products like alcohol, tobacco and firearms.The first part of the claim is technically accurate, but misleading, given that the tax rate on a typical flight -- which costs more than $300 and doesnt include connecting flights -- is 15 percent. The second part of the claim, although it doesnt take into account price variations on various products, appears generally accurate.On balance, since the thrust of the claim was which had more taxes and which had less, we rate the statement Mostly True.

True

Every time you buy an airline ticket, the federal government runs a background check on you -- PolitiFact Texas:Mostly FalseYou can use food stamps for a plane ticket to go to Hawaii -- PolitiFact National:Pants on FireNow coming down the runway is a claim byGary Kelly, chief executive officer of Dallas-based Southwest Airlines. Southwest carries themost domestic passengersin the U.S. and themost passengersat Milwaukees Mitchell International Airport.Kelly made his statement in a column he wrote for the February 2013 issues of the in-flight magazines of Southwest and of AirTran Airways, which Southwestacquiredin 2011.Taxes and fees amount to about 20 percent of a typical $300 round-trip domestic ticket, he stated. Thats higher than taxes on products like alcohol, tobacco and firearms.With spring break around the corner, and alcohol, tobacco and firearms always in season, lets see if Kellys claim takes flight.Cost of an airline ticketKellys opinion column focused on federal taxes on airline tickets and other products. His source for the taxes on an airline ticket isAirlines for America, the trade group that advocates for the airline industry. It spent $6.37 million in federal lobbying in 2012,accordingto the nonpartisan OpenSecrets.org.In December 2012, Airlines for Americaannounced detailsof a campaign it would undertake in 2013 to persuade lawmakers to reduce federal taxes on airlines and take other steps to help the industry.Just how high are those taxes?Southwest Airlines spokesman Brad Hawkins usedfiguresprovided by Airlines for America to give a breakdown of the four major federal taxes and fees on a ticket with a base price of $300. His example includes one connecting flight each way -- in other words, a ticket that includes two flights on the departure segment of the trip and two flights on the return.Based on Hawkins calculations, the $66.10 equals 22 percent of the cost of the $300 ticket, exceeding the 20 percent that Kelly claimed.As for the size of the taxes and fees, we found a Federal Aviation Administrationdocumentconfirming the excise tax and segment fee amounts; theyhelp fundthe FAA, which coordinates air traffic control and other aspects of the aviation system. (Anexcise taxis somewhat like a sales tax, in that it is paid on a purchase, but its often included in the purchase price.)Another FAAdocumentconfirms the passenger facility charge, which is collected by public agencies that run commercial airports and is used for FAA-approved projects at the airports. And a Transportation Security Administrationdocumentconfirms the Sept. 11 fee, which helps fund the TSA.We ran Kellys statement and his itinerary by Joakim Karlsson, a researcher with theAirline Ticket Tax Projectat the Massachusetts Institute of Technology; the project studies ticket taxes and user fees added directly to airline tickets. He called Kellys statement mathematically correct, but fundamentally misleading.Karlsson noted that fares are usually quoted with taxes and fees included. So, a $300 ticket would include a base fare of about $239.Karlsson calculated that would trigger $61 in taxes and fees, which would still amount to 20 percent of the ticket cost, the same amount Kelly claimed.But more importantly, Karlsson said, the sample ticket that Kelly uses is not typical:So, a $418 non-stop ticket would include $54 in taxes and fees, or just under 15 percent of the total. (The taxes and fees in Kellys $300 ticket example, if the trip were non-stop, also would equal just under 15 percent.)That means the first part of Kellys claim is accurate, but leaves out important details.Taxes and fees on other productsAs for the second part of Kellys statement, the Southwest Airlines spokesman cited a 2011opinion columninThe Wall Street Journalby the chief executive officer of Airlines for America, the airlines trade group. The column argued that the taxes paid by airlines are at the same excessive levels as sin taxes imposed on alcohol, tobacco and gambling.But the column provided no figures to show how the various tax rates compare.We found the followingfiguresfrom the federal Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, a division of the Department of Treasury. They represent only the federal taxes on these products.

FMD_train_1907

Could Kids with COVID-19 Symptoms Be Quarantined Without Parental Consent?

08/17/2020

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 August 2020, as states and school districts in the United States grappled with whether and how to reopen schools for the fall semester, multiple readers asked Snopes to examine the accuracy of a social media post, shared widely by users in the United States, that claimed children who showed symptoms of COVID-19 could lawfully be quarantined outside their family home without the consent of their parents or guardians. shared widely The post, which typically began "For all the caring parents out there" and often warned "THEY WILL BE REMOVING YOUR KIDS & YOU CANT [sic] DO OR SAY ANYTHING ABOUT IT!" consisted of an imagined conversation between a school teacher and a parent, as follows: Teacher: Sorry we have had to take your child to a testing centre [sic] as they were showing symptoms of corona (that means they could have a cold, temperature, a cough)Parent: Right so where is my child?HT [Head teacher]: I'm sorry I can't disclose that informationP [Parent]: Is my child ok?HT: I can assure you your child is in safe hands, in the mean time you need to self-isolate with your family for 14 daysP: No I'm coming to get my child nowHT: I'm sorry but if you arrive at the school we will have no choice but to call the police and have you removed from the premises.P: is this a joke? that is my childHT: I'm sorry but under the new covid act we have the power to remove your child without your consent if we feel the have symptoms.P: So when will I see my child nextHT: We will have a child service officer contact you. Now imagine this was a call from your Childs Headteacher I suggest every parent on my facebook gets off there [sic] ass and do some real research on the legislation of the covid act 2020 regarding the laws for children in school!!!! Versions of the post were originally shared by users in the United Kingdom earlier in August. Clues that the post originated outside the United States could be found in the use of the term "head teacher" (the British equivalent of an American school principal) and in the British spelling of "testing centre." The post also referred to a piece of legislation called the "COVID Act," claiming that the law authorized school authorities to "remove" children without parental consent if they presented symptoms of COVID-19. shared A "Coronavirus Act" was passed by the U.K. Parliament in 2020, but it did not give school officials the powers claimed in the viral Facebook post. Versions of the post were subsequently shared by users in Canada, and its claims about the "COVID act" were also false in that context. did not false The U.S. Congress passed no law in 2020 called the "Coronavirus Act" or the "COVID Act" or "COVID-19 Act," so that particular aspect of the post was also false in the U.S. context on the federal level. We also checked the actions of state legislatures around the country. Based on our examination of the National Conference of State Legislatures database of COVID-19-related legislation, no state had enacted any law that conferred on educational authorities the power to quarantine children with symptoms outside their family home without their parents' or guardians' consent. database As a result, the "COVID Act" Facebook post shared widely by users in the United States in August 2020 was not only based on an earlier set of claims that originated in an entirely different jurisdiction (the U.K.), but it also did not inadvertently refer to a different recently enacted law that authorized school officials to quarantine pupils. The post's claims were false. A law that empowers educational authorities to quarantine children outside their home without their parents' consent does not exist and is also highly unlikely to be passed in the United States. Several decades of federal court precedents have established that parents and children have a constitutionally protected right not to be separated. In 1999, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit wrote that: federal court precedents wrote "Parents and children have a well-elaborated constitutional right to live together without governmental interference [...]. That right is an essential liberty interest protected by the Fourteenth Amendment's guarantee that parents and children will not be separated by the state without due process of law except in an emergency." Like all rights, the right of parents and children to live together is not absolute, and can be curtailed, suspended, or outweighed by competing rights or by a broader public interest. For example, while the law recognizes an individual's fundamental right to move about as they please, there are circumstances in which state and local officials have the authority to temporarily restrict that right. That includes a quarantine or self-isolation order in which an individual who is known or suspected to have contracted a dangerous and contagious illness like COVID-19 is legally forced to stay home because of the risk posed to the broader community. State and local authorities can restrict fundamental freedoms in this way on the basis of something called the "state police powers doctrine," which we have discussed at greater length elsewhere. elsewhere Similarly, the right of a parent to live with and raise a child is not absolute. A child also has a fundamental right to be free from physical, sexual, and emotional harm, as well as a right to a basic level of nutrition, shelter, and safety. Where those rights come into conflict, such as in cases where a parent neglects or abuses a child, or is proven incapable of providing care, state authorities can and do intervene to protect the rights of the child, and states can, and sometimes do, involuntarily terminate the parental rights of adults. involuntarily terminate However, because parental rights are regarded as fundamental, any law or official action that abridges those rights can be subjected by the courts to what is known as "strict scrutiny." Roughly speaking, this means that an especially high standard of justification is required any time the state seeks to curtail a fundamental right, and the state has the burden of proving that its actions or policies are not unconstitutional. strict scrutiny Carlton Larson, Martin Luther King, Jr. professor of law at the University of California-Davis, told Snopes the type of law described in the Facebook post shown above would be very unlikely to survive that kind of judicial scrutiny: professor Such laws would restrict the fundamental right of parents to raise their children [...]. To infringe such a right, the government would have to satisfy strict scrutiny, meaning the law must be narrowly tailored to achieve a compelling state interest. Typically, this means if there are less restrictive alternatives available, the government must first use those. Fighting Covid would clearly be a compelling state interest, but this doesn't seem narrowly tailored. Quarantining at home with parents seems just as safe as quarantining in some government-run facility. So I suspect a court would quickly declare any such law unconstitutional. Similarly, Barbara Bennett Woodhouse, a law professor and director of the Child Rights Project at Emory University, told Snopes that: director The U.S. Constitution protects parents from having children removed from parental custody without a showing that the parent is either unfit or poses an imminent danger to the child. The scenario you describe [the conversation presented in the viral Facebook post] is not consistent with any laws, either state or federal, of which I am aware. In the case of a parent suspected of extreme child abuse or endangerment, the authorities might prevent that parent from taking the child home from school, until an investigation and court hearing could establish the facts. In a medical emergency, if a child's quarantine or hospitalization were deemed necessary, the parent would be involved in any decisions and would have decision-making authority over where and how the child was to be quarantined. Rahman, Grace. "Can Children Be Detained Without Their Parents' Consent If the Authorities Think They Have Coronavirus?" Full Fact. 13 August 2020. Goldhamer, Marisha. "Canadian Children With COVID-19 Symptoms Can Quarantine With a Parent or Guardian." Agence France-Presse. 14 August 2020. U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. "Kirkpatrick vs. County of Washoe et al. -- Opinion." 9 December 2016. U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. "Wallis vs. Spencer -- Opinion." 14 September 1999. U.S. Supreme Court. "Santosky vs. Kramer -- Opinion." 24 March 1982. Mac Guill, Dan. "Could People Be Fined for Refusing COVID-19 Vaccine in US?" Snopes.com. 11 August 2020. U.S. Children's Bureau. "Grounds for Involuntary Termination of Parental Rights." December 2016.

False

Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And, please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease. In August 2020, as states and school districts in the United States grappled with whether and how to reopen schools for the fall semester, multiple readers asked Snopes to examine the accuracy of a social media post, shared widely by users in the United States, that claimed children who showed symptoms of COVID-19 could lawfully be quarantined outside their family home without the consent of their parents or guardians. Versions of the post were originally shared by users in the United Kingdom earlier in August. Clues that the post originated outside the United States could be found in the use of the term "head teacher" (the British equivalent of an American school principal) and in the British spelling of "testing centre." The post also referred to a piece of legislation called the "COVID Act," claiming that the law authorized school authorities to "remove" children without parental consent if they presented symptoms of COVID-19. A "Coronavirus Act" was passed by the U.K. Parliament in 2020, but it did not give school officials the powers claimed in the viral Facebook post. Versions of the post were subsequently shared by users in Canada, and its claims about the "COVID act" were also false in that context.The U.S. Congress passed no law in 2020 called the "Coronavirus Act" or the "COVID Act" or "COVID-19 Act," so that particular aspect of the post was also false in the U.S. context on the federal level. We also checked the actions of state legislatures around the country. Based on our examination of the National Conference of State Legislatures database of COVID-19-related legislation, no state had enacted any law that conferred on educational authorities the power to quarantine children with symptoms outside their family home without their parents' or guardians' consent. A law that empowers educational authorities to quarantine children outside their home without their parents' consent does not exist and is also highly unlikely to be passed in the United States. Several decades of federal court precedents have established that parents and children have a constitutionally protected right not to be separated. In 1999, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit wrote that:For example, while the law recognizes an individual's fundamental right to move about as they please, there are circumstances in which state and local officials have the authority to temporarily restrict that right. That includes a quarantine or self-isolation order in which an individual who is known or suspected to have contracted a dangerous and contagious illness like COVID-19 is legally forced to stay home because of the risk posed to the broader community. State and local authorities can restrict fundamental freedoms in this way on the basis of something called the "state police powers doctrine," which we have discussed at greater length elsewhere.Similarly, the right of a parent to live with and raise a child is not absolute. A child also has a fundamental right to be free from physical, sexual, and emotional harm, as well as a right to a basic level of nutrition, shelter, and safety. Where those rights come into conflict, such as in cases where a parent neglects or abuses a child, or is proven incapable of providing care, state authorities can and do intervene to protect the rights of the child, and states can, and sometimes do, involuntarily terminate the parental rights of adults.However, because parental rights are regarded as fundamental, any law or official action that abridges those rights can be subjected by the courts to what is known as "strict scrutiny." Roughly speaking, this means that an especially high standard of justification is required any time the state seeks to curtail a fundamental right, and the state has the burden of proving that its actions or policies are not unconstitutional.Carlton Larson, Martin Luther King, Jr. professor of law at the University of California-Davis, told Snopes the type of law described in the Facebook post shown above would be very unlikely to survive that kind of judicial scrutiny:Similarly, Barbara Bennett Woodhouse, a law professor and director of the Child Rights Project at Emory University, told Snopes that:

FMD_train_1148

Did Israel Destroy the Palestine National Library, the Azhar Library, and the 'National Cultural Center'?

05/13/2019

In May 2019, a set of images supposedly showing the Palestine "National Cultural Center" before and after it was destroyed by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) went viral on social media, along with the claim that the IDF had also destroyed the National Palestine Library and the Azhar Library. Many social media users presented these images as if they were recent, even comparing them to the fire that had broken out at Notre Dame Cathedral a few weeks prior. The photographs used in this meme were real, but they were not taken recently, and the accompanying information was inaccurate or misleading. These photographs show the Said al-Mishal Centre (not the "National Cultural Center") in Gaza, which was destroyed during an airstrike on August 9, 2018, at the end of a "round of escalation" between the militant group Hamas and the IDF. Here's how the Meir Amit Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center summed up the events that eventually led to the Centre's destruction: On August 8 and 9, 2018, there was a fifth round of escalation between Hamas and the IDF. Hamas and other terrorist organizations fired about 180 rockets and mortar shells at Israeli territory. The IDF responded with extensive attacks on Hamas infrastructure and assets. During and between the rounds of escalation (from the end of May to August 9, 2018), more than 610 rockets and mortar shells were fired from the Gaza Strip at Israeli territory. At the same time, contacts were held to reach an agreement between the sides, mediated by Egypt and the UN envoy to the Middle East, but so far without result. The Israeli military maintained that the Said al-Mishal Centre was targeted because it was being "used by the Hamas terror organizations' interior security forces for military purposes." However, Sameer al-Mishal, the director general of the Centre, disputed this assertion, and the Palestinian Performing Arts Network released a statement claiming that the IDF was attacking the culture of Palestine: "The centre was a symbol of Palestinian cultural heritage and was purposefully targeted by the Israeli occupation because art and culture reinforce and strengthen Palestinian national and cultural identity." While we were able to find a number of reports concerning the destruction of the Said al-Mishal Centre in August 2018, as well as several images showing the aftermath of that attack (including the image featured on the right-hand side of this meme), our search for news reports about the destruction of the Palestine National Library was less successful. The claim that Israel destroyed the "Palestine National Library" likely refers to a July 2018 bombing at a Hamas training facility in Gaza. YnetNews reported that the five-story, unfinished building, which sat on a network of tunnels, had originally been planned as a national library. The Hamas training facility in Gaza that the IAF attacked on Saturday was meant to be the "Palestinian national library," the IDF said. The facility, located next to the Sheikh Zayed mosque, is an unfinished and abandoned five-story building in the al-Shati refugee camp, which was meant to be used for public or government services for the Palestinians, or at the very least for housing. Instead, the IDF said it has been used for years as an urban warfare training facility for Hamas, and in recent months, Hamas has also been using it to drill survival in the tunnels. A tunnel was dug under the building, which connects to Hamas's massive underground tunnel network in the strip. While this building may have been intended at one time to house a "Palestinian National Library," the edifice apparently never operated in this function. Again, it's unclear exactly what facility this meme is referring to as the "Azhar" library. Our best guess is that it is referencing the Al-Azhar University - Gaza (AUG) Library of the Faculty of Agriculture. While that library is still standing as of this writing, one of its branches was severely damaged by "Israeli aggression on the Gaza Strip in 2009." It contains a huge collection of materials in Agricultural and Animal Sciences essential for students in the Faculty of Agriculture. Al-Azhar University - Gaza (AUG) has the only faculty specialized in Agriculture in the Gaza Strip. However, the library was severely damaged during the Israeli aggression on the Gaza Strip in 2009. The total destruction of the library forced the university administration to combine what was left of it with the central library in a hall named the Faculty of Agriculture hall. We were unable to find many additional details about this attack. A contemporary article from the New Humanitarian didn't mention the library specifically, but it did report that Al-Azhar University - Gaza was damaged during an attack in 2009, and that thousands of students were unable to return to school due to "issues related to war." Al-Azhar, Gaza's second-largest university, generally seen as pro-Fatah (the political faction associated with Mahmoud Abbas in the West Bank), was hit on the same day. Three thousand of the 20,000 registered students could not return this semester due to issues related to the war, said public relations officer at Al-Azhar University Sameh Hassanin, who also said there had been a 20 percent increase in the number of students unable to afford fees since the offensive ended. There is also a library at Al-Azhar University in Cairo, Egypt, but we found no reports concerning the destruction of that library.

False

Many social media users presented these images as if they were recent, even comparing them to the fire that had broken out at Notre Dame Cathedral a few weeks prior:These photographs show the Said al-Mishal Centre (not the "National Cultural Center") in Gaza that was destroyed during an air strike on 9 August 2018 at the end of a "round of escalation" between the militant group Hamas and the IDF. Here's how the Meir Amit Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center summed up the events that eventually led to the Centre's destruction:The Israeli military maintained that the Said al-Mishal Centre was targeted because it was being "used by the Hamas terror organisations interior security forces for military purposes." But Sameer al-Mishal, director general of the Centre, disputed this assertion, and the Palestinian Performing Arts Network released a statement claiming that the IDF was attacking the culture of Palestine: The centre was a symbol of Palestinian cultural heritage and was purposefully targeted by the Israeli occupation because art and culture reinforce and strengthen Palestinian national and cultural identity."While we were able to find a number of reports concerning the destruction of the Said al-Mishal Centre in August 2018, as well as several images showing the aftermath of that attack (including the image featured on the right-hand side of this meme), our search for news reports about the destruction of the Palestine National Library were less successful.The claim that Israel destroyed the "Palestine National Library" likely refers to a July 2018 bombing at a Hamas training facility in Gaza. YnetNews reported that the five-story, unfinished building, which sat on a network of tunnels, had originally been planned as a national library:Library of Faculty of Agriculture:We were unable to find many additional details about this attack. A contemporary article from the New Humanitarian didn't mention the library specifically, but it did report that Al-Azhar University - Gaza was damaged during an attack in 2009, and that thousands of students were unable to return to school due to "issues related to war":There is also a library at Al-Azhar University in Cairo, Egypt, but we found no reports concerning the destruction of that library.

FMD_train_1326

Was Fox News talking about the controversial topic of the 'War on Christmas' while other networks were reporting on Michael Cohen's guilty pleas?

08/22/2018

On August 21, 2018, President Donald Trump's former lawyer, Michael Cohen, pleaded guilty to eight criminal charges, including multiple counts of tax evasion and violations of federal campaign finance laws. Cohen also appeared to implicate his former client in possible criminal wrongdoing, alleging that Trump, while a candidate, directed Cohen to pay hush money to two women who claimed to have had affairs with the future president. Those bombshell revelations came on the same afternoon that a jury in Virginia convicted President Trump's former 2016 presidential campaign chairman, Paul Manafort, on eight counts of banking fraud and filing false tax returns, while failing to agree on a verdict for ten other charges. Both the Manafort and Cohen cases arose from investigative work undertaken as part of Special Counsel Robert Mueller's probe into potential Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election and the possibility of Russian collusion with the Trump campaign. Understandably, much of the news media in the United States gave these major developments extensive coverage that day, in print, online, and on the major television news networks. Some observers accused the conservative-leaning Fox News of downplaying the Cohen and Manafort stories or of deliberately focusing on other issues of lesser importance. Elements of this criticism were accurate and proportionate in pointing out the striking differences between how most TV news networks reported on the developments and how Fox News covered them. However, one viral Twitter post appeared to contain a screenshot of Fox News contributor Tomi Lahren discussing the 'War on Christmas,' while other networks covered Cohen's guilty pleas. The chyron in the image read, "TOMI: OBAMA CREATED FESTIVUS TO DESTROY CHRISTMAS." CNN: Michael Cohen to plead guilty. ABC: Michael Cohen to plead guilty. NBC: Michael Cohen to plead guilty. FOX News: pic.twitter.com/JR4uAnyCQn pic.twitter.com/JR4uAnyCQn Diane N. Sevenay (@Diane_7A) August 21, 2018. That tweet was then reposted on Facebook by the left-wing page "The Other 98%": The image is fake and is an old meme that first appeared in December 2017. Congrats, @BarackObama, on apparently creating Seinfeld pic.twitter.com/5g2t7eYDHj @BarackObama pic.twitter.com/5g2t7eYDHj jordan (@JordanUhl) December 24, 2017. Lahren herself publicly dismissed the meme: "Does it not bother you to circulate a photoshopped piece of FAKE NEWS? Classy." https://t.co/hvwdgwPkd2 https://t.co/hvwdgwPkd2 Tomi Lahren (@TomiLahren) December 24, 2017. The meme does indeed consist of a screenshot of a real Fox News appearance that Lahren made in August 2017, but with the original chyron digitally edited and replaced with something different and non-relevant: .@TomiLahren: "How about when the mainstream media stops covering Russia day in and day out, maybe we can drop the Hillary email scandal." pic.twitter.com/OwfYWfuhDD @TomiLahren pic.twitter.com/OwfYWfuhDD Fox News (@FoxNews) August 31, 2017. It's not clear whether those who posted the edited image in the context of Cohen and Manafort's legal troubles in August 2018 intended to engage in satire or to trick other internet users into believing Lahren really discussed Festivus on that day. Diane Sevenay, whose viral tweet was reposted by "The Other 98%," is a comedy writer. As reported by Mashable, a satirical Fox/Cohen news coverage meme emerged on August 21, with Twitter users taking turns to parody Fox News' content on the day of Cohen's guilty pleas: Mashable CNN - Cohen plea deal MSNBC - Cohen plea deal Fox News - Are cats becoming too tall? Fred Delicious (@Fred_Delicious) August 21, 2018. CNN: Manafort guilty on 8 counts NYT: Manafort guilty of fraud AP: Cohen pleads guilty Fox News: Were the lobsters on the Titanic happy that it sank? #1 Rachel (@rachel) August 21, 2018. Another widely shared screenshot purported to show Fox News reframing the conviction of Manafort by only mentioning, in a mobile news alert, the fact that a mistrial was declared on ten of the charges against him, while other news organizations reported his being found guilty on eight charges. The image, posted to Facebook by the "Angry Americans" page, is authentic but very misleading. Another screenshot shows that Fox News first sent out an alert that read, "Jury finds Manafort guilty on eight counts in fraud trial," before following up with a second one about the mistrial on the ten other charges: Same topic. Different perspectives. ?? #Manafort pic.twitter.com/r2ZUgFSxDS Push the Push (@pushthepush) August 21, 2018. Neumeister, Larry and Tom Hays. "Cohen Pleads Guilty, Implicates Trump in Hush-Money Scheme." Associated Press. August 22, 2018. Barakat, Matthew et al. "Ex-Trump Campaign Chairman Paul Manafort Guilty of 8 Charges." Associated Press. August 22, 2018. Stanley-Becker, Isaac. "In Trump's Right-Wing Media Universe, It Was a Day Like Any Other." The Washington Post. August 22, 2018. Sung, Morgan. "What Was Fox News Covering While Manafort and Cohen Were in Court? This Hilarious Meme Has Some Answers." Mashable. August 21, 2018.

False

On 21 August 2018, President Donald Trump's former lawyer Michael Cohen pleaded guilty to eight criminal charges, including multiple counts of tax evasion and violations of federal campaign finance laws. Cohen also appeared to implicate his former client in possible criminal wrongdoing, alleging that Trump, while a candidate, directed Cohen to pay hush money to two women who claimed to have had affairs with the future president.Those bombshell revelations came on the same afternoon that a jury in Virginia convicted President Trump's former 2016 presidential campaign chairman Paul Manafort on eight counts of banking fraud and filing false tax returns, while failing to agree on a verdict for ten other charges.Some observers accused the conservative-leaning Fox News of downplaying the Cohen and Manafort stories, or of deliberately focusing on other issues of lesser import. Elements of this criticism were accurate and proportionate in pointing out the striking differences between how most TV news networks reported on the developments and how Fox News covered them.However, one viral Twitter post appeared to contain a screen shot of Fox News contributor Tomi Lahren discussing the 'War on Christmas,' while other networks covered Cohen's guilty pleas. The chyron in the image read "TOMI: OBAMA CREATED FESTIVUS TO DESTROY CHRISTMAS."CNN: Michael Cohen to plead guilty.ABC: Michael Cohen to plead guilty.NBC: Michael Cohen to plead guilty.FOX News: pic.twitter.com/JR4uAnyCQn Diane N. Sevenay (@Diane_7A) August 21, 2018The image is fake, and is an old meme which first appeared in December 2017.Congrats, @BarackObama, on apparently creating Seinfeld pic.twitter.com/5g2t7eYDHj jordan (@JordanUhl) December 24, 2017Does it not bother you to circulate a photoshopped piece of FAKE NEWS? Classy. https://t.co/hvwdgwPkd2 Tomi Lahren (@TomiLahren) December 24, 2017.@TomiLahren: "How about when the mainstream media stops covering Russia day in and day out, maybe we can drop the Hillary email scandal." pic.twitter.com/OwfYWfuhDD Fox News (@FoxNews) August 31, 2017It's not clear whether those who posted the edited image in the context of Cohen and Manafort's legal travails in August 2018 intended to engage in satire, or to trick other internet users into believing Lahren really discussed Festivus on that day. Diane Sevenay, whose viral tweet was re-posted by "The Other 98%", is a comedy writer.As reported by Mashable, a satirical Fox/Cohen news coverage meme emerged on 21 August, with Twitter users taking turns to parody Fox News' content on the day of Cohen's guilty pleas: Fred Delicious (@Fred_Delicious) August 21, 2018 #1 Rachel (@rachel) August 21, 2018The image, posted to Facebook by the "Angry Americans" page, is authentic but very misleading. Another screenshot shows that Fox News first sent out an alert which read "Jury finds Manafort guilty on eight counts in fraud trial" before following up with a second one about the mistrial on the ten other charges:Same topic. Different perspectives. ?? #Manafort pic.twitter.com/r2ZUgFSxDS Push the Push (@pushthepush) August 21, 2018

FMD_train_578

A Presidential Hug

06/10/2004

On 4 May 2004, a campaign swing through the Midwest saw President Bush visiting Lebanon, Ohio, where as he worked the crowd outside the Golden Lamb (the state's oldest inn) he was photographed giving a comforting hug to 15-year-old Ashley Faulkner, whose mother was killed in the September 11 terrorist attacks on the U.S. The moment was captured with a digital camera by Ashley's father, Lynn Faulkner. (Ashley's mother, Wendy Ruth Faulkner, a vice president of a risk management and insurance brokerage company, was working in the South Tower of the World Trade Center on September 11 and did not survive the collapse of the building.) Wendy Ruth Faulkner Bush Photo with Teen Shows Conviction and Compassion It started out as a fluke. Lynn Faulkner had been offered an extra ticket to a Bush campaign event by his neighbor Linda Prince. Mr. Faulkner decided to offer it to his 15-year old daughter Ashley who he expected would decline, as she would have to miss some school to attend. But his daughter surprised him. Ashley reminded her dad how four years ago they attended a similar event when then Texas Governor George W. Bush visited the same spot on the campaign trail. Ashley remembered attending that event with both her father and her mother Wendy Faulkner. It was raining that day and they all stood in the rain awaiting Governor Bush "eating Triscuit crackers" enjoying the time together and hoping to get a glimpse of the would-be president. Ashley recalled holding her mothers hand as they waited. So she decided to go again this year, but this time her mother could not attend. Wendy Faulkner was murdered on 9/11/01 in the south tower of the World Trade Center. She was there on the 104th floor for a one-day meeting. Ashley decided to miss school in honor and remembrance of her mother and attend the event. [Rest of article here.] here An editorial about the story behind the photograph can be found at the Washington Dispatch web site, which also includes a page of reader-submitted commentary about the story. Washington Dispatch commentary Goetz, Kristina. "Bush Pauses to Comfort Teen." The Cincinnati Enquirer. 6 May 2004. Hallett, Joe. "No Apology from Bush Just Yet." The Columbus Dispatch. 5 May 2004 (p. A1). Hallett, Joe. "Despite the Post-9/11 Tribulations, the President Remains a Leader." The Columbus Dispatch. 9 May 2004 (p. B5). Rairden, C.K. "Bush Photo with Teen Shows Conviction and Compassion." The Washington Dispatch. 10 May 2004. Zimkus, Charlie. "Our Artist Records Warm Welcome for President Bush." The Columbus Dispatch. 6 May 2004 (p. B8).

True

On 4 May 2004, a campaign swing through the Midwest saw President Bush visiting Lebanon, Ohio, where as he worked the crowd outside the Golden Lamb (the state's oldest inn) he was photographed giving a comforting hug to 15-year-old Ashley Faulkner, whose mother was killed in the September 11 terrorist attacks on the U.S. The moment was captured with a digital camera by Ashley's father, Lynn Faulkner. (Ashley's mother, Wendy Ruth Faulkner, a vice president of a risk management and insurance brokerage company, was working in the South Tower of the World Trade Center on September 11 and did not survive the collapse of the building.)[Rest of article here.]An editorial about the story behind the photograph can be found at the Washington Dispatch web site, which also includes a page of reader-submitted commentary about the story.

FMD_train_448

Sen. Rubios (tax plan) would cut taxes for households making around $3 million a year by almost $240,000, which is way more than three times the earnings of a typical family.

07/16/2015

Hillary Clinton outlined her economic vision in detailfor the first time during her presidential campaign, calling for a growth and fairness economy in a speech at the New School in Manhattan on July 13, 2015. She also lambasted a select groupRepublican presidential candidates for their purportedly out-of-touch approach toward the working class.Among the targets were Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush and U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida. Clinton singled out Rubiosproposed tax plan: Another priority must be reforming our tax code. Now, we hear Republican candidates talk a lot about tax reform. But take a good look at their plans. Sen. Rubio's would cut taxes for households making around $3 million a year by almost $240,000, which is way more than three times the earnings of a typical family. We decided to fact-check the somewhat intricate claim. Rubios plan Clintons campaign directed us to ablog postfrom the Tax Policy Center,an independent think tank that analyzes tax policy. The article concerns Rubios plan in general, but the pertinent part reads, Those in the top 0.1 percent, who make $3.3 million and up, would be in line for an average tax cut of $240,000 a boost in after-tax income of 3.8 percent. Is $240,000 more than three times the earning power of a typical family? Her campaign pointed usto U.S. Census Bureau data that showed median household incomeas $53,046 for the period 2009 to 2013. So those numbers back up Clintons statement. But there is one minor complication: The article from the Tax Policy Center is based on an analysis of Utah Sen. Mike Lees 2013 plan,notRubios plan (actually a joint venture with Lee) that was released in 2015 and is similar to the original Lee plan. Generally speaking, the Rubio-Lee plan groups people into two income tax brackets, 15 percent or 35 percent, the higher of which would kick in at an individual income of $75,000. Thats a decrease from the seven brackets currently in place. Another centerpiece of the plan is a $2,500 tax credit given to parents for each child under sixteen. Thats the broad outline, but the plan still lacks some details. There are critical unresolved issues that make it difficult for us to do an analysis of Rubios current plan, said Howard Gleckman, resident fellow at the Tax Policy Center and author of the blog post. For example, Gleckman points out that the Rubio-Lee plannever specifiesexactly what would happen to apersonal tax credit of $2,000, a subsidy that would be available to anybody who claimed it on their tax returns. If it were included as a refundable tax credit (meaning people could get a check back), it would have a significant impact on low-income families. As of now, their incomes would actually decrease under the Lee plan, according to the Tax Policy Centers analysis. Qualitatively, the rough sense is a very generous tax cut for high-income people, said Gleckman, adding, What were not sure about is low-income people. So low-income people might get some kind of tax break under Rubios plan, or they might not. The other thing to know about Clintons statement is that the wealthy get a tax break under Rubios plan because he wants tax reductions, and the wealthy pay the most taxes. The reason why the top is getting whats seemingly a big tax cut is that theyre already taxed at a much higher rate, said Kyle Pomerleau, an economist at the Tax Foundation, a business-backed group. Under the Rubio plan, the top tax rate would drop from 39.6 percent to 35 percent. Pomerleau added that its crucial to remember that the plan proposes tax cuts across all income brackets, not just the top ones, and often at higher percentages for those with lower incomes. Pomerleau, however, did say that he found Clintons claim plausible. Our ruling Clinton said that Rubios tax plan would cut taxes for households making around $3 million a year by almost $240,000, which is way more than three times the earnings of a typical family. It is possible to take issue with the statement in some ways. The source of her claim uses an earlier version of Rubios plan in its analysis, and she said $3 million when she should have said $3.3 million. But the thrust of her statement is sound. An analysis of a plan extremely similar to the one put forth by Rubio would cut taxes for those making $3.3 million and more by nearly $240,000, which is more than three times the U.S. median household income of $53,046. We rate her statement MostlyTrue.

True

Clintons campaign directed us to ablog postfrom the Tax Policy Center,an independent think tank that analyzes tax policy. The article concerns Rubios plan in general, but the pertinent part reads, Those in the top 0.1 percent, who make $3.3 million and up, would be in line for an average tax cut of $240,000 a boost in after-tax income of 3.8 percent.For example, Gleckman points out that the Rubio-Lee plannever specifiesexactly what would happen to apersonal tax credit of $2,000, a subsidy that would be available to anybody who claimed it on their tax returns. If it were included as a refundable tax credit (meaning people could get a check back), it would have a significant impact on low-income families. As of now, their incomes would actually decrease under the Lee plan, according to the Tax Policy Centers analysis.

FMD_train_1593

Does the Biden plan require banks to report all transactions exceeding $600 to the IRS?

09/16/2021

Announced in April 2021, U.S. President Joe Biden's American Families Plan is an ambitious proposal that aims to expand Americans' access to childcare and education and increase the number of women in the workforce. The plan intends to fund all of this through higher taxes on income earners and increased reporting requirements for banks that could potentially yield more tax revenue. These reporting requirements have drawn the ire of several banks that took issue with this less widely known section of the plan. A Facebook post by FNB Community Bank claimed: "The Biden administration has proposed requiring all community banks and other financial institutions to report to the IRS on all deposits and withdrawals through business and personal accounts worth more than $600, regardless of tax liability. This indiscriminate, comprehensive bank account reporting to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) could soon be enacted in Congress and will create an unacceptable invasion of privacy for our customers." Another screenshot shared by our readers expressed similar concerns: "The Independent Community Bankers of America (ICBA) even began a campaign, calling on communities to send a letter to Biden to prevent this so-called intrusive proposal: 'Tell Congress: Don't Let IRS Invade My Privacy.' The Biden administration is proposing requiring financial institutions to report to the IRS all transactions of all business and personal accounts worth more than $600. This is an unprecedented invasion of privacy. In order to oppose this intrusive proposal, please send this letter to your representative and senators immediately." We looked up the proposal itself, and it does require more robust reporting of transactions across business and personal accounts. The proposal, which aims to go into effect after December 31, 2022, states: "This proposal would create a comprehensive financial account information reporting regime. Financial institutions would report data on financial accounts in an information return. The annual return will report gross inflows and outflows with a breakdown for physical cash, transactions with a foreign account, and transfers to and from another account with the same owner." This requirement would apply to all business and personal accounts from financial institutions, including bank, loan, and investment accounts, with the exception of accounts below a low de minimis gross flow threshold of $600 or fair market value of $600. We begin by explaining some of the more technical terms in this proposal. A "de minimis threshold" is broadly defined as the amount of a transaction that has such a small value that accounting for it would be unreasonable. We spoke to Visiting Assistant Professor of Tax Law at New York University, Nyamagaga Gondwe, who explained, "It is the amount below which the IRS would argue isn't worth investigating. It's the difference between your company giving you a $5 card to Subway versus traveling on a private jet on your company's dime. The latter is worth reporting." In this case, "gross flow" refers to the aggregate inflows and outflows of cash from bank accounts. In sum, the current proposal stipulates that an aggregate amount of less than $600 worth of cash flowing into and out of accounts is not worth reporting. The "fair market value" refers to the amount people are willing to pay for an asset in the open market. In this case, Gondwe argued, the use of the term could possibly refer to the changing market value of transactions exceeding $600 that may occur in foreign currency transactions. The ICBA claims that the proposal will make banks report "all transactions" above the limit, but this is misleading. While it is true that the IRS will have more information on cash flows above $600, that doesn't mean they will have all the information pertaining to all transactions. The Center for American Progress (CAP) points out that banks will only be providing aggregate numbers to the IRS after each year—gross inflow and gross outflow—and not individualized transaction information. This reporting requirement would also extend to peer-to-peer payment services like Venmo but wouldn't require people to report any additional information to the government. According to The Wall Street Journal, financial institutions must already report interest, dividends, and investment incomes to the IRS, and the IRS can obtain other information through audits. According to Marie Sapirie of Tax Notes, a publication focused on tax news, a parenthetical to the proposal indicates that there is some flexibility in raising the minimum account balance/inflow/outflow above $600. The Tax Notes report also states that the Treasury Department estimated this form of reporting would raise $463 billion over the 10-year budget window, making it the third-largest revenue raiser proposed in the budget. The aim is to target businesses outside of large corporations that carry out gross underreporting of their income, amounting to $166 billion per year. According to the proposal: "Requiring comprehensive information reporting on the inflows and outflows of financial accounts will increase the visibility of gross receipts and deductible expenses to the IRS. Increased visibility of business income will enhance the effectiveness of IRS enforcement measures and encourage voluntary compliance." Banks claim this would be an invasion of consumer privacy, with the ICBA saying it would allow the government to monitor account information. However, CAP analysts Seth Hanlon and Galen Hendricks argue, "Only the prior year's total inflow and total outflow would be reported on annual forms. No one would say that the IRS monitors you on your job because it receives a W-2 from your employer with your total wages every January." Another challenge not mentioned in the ICBA's consumer alert is the higher costs this reporting proposal may impose on banks. In May 2021, a coalition of banking associations wrote a letter to the U.S. Senate Committee on Finance, arguing that they already provide a lot of data to the IRS and that this would impose additional costs on their systems. The costs and other burdens imposed to collect and report account flow information would surpass the potential benefits from such a reporting scheme. New reporting would appear to require material development costs and process additions for financial institutions, as well as significant reconciliation and compliance burdens on impacted taxpayers. For example, reporting total gross receipts and disbursements would require a new reporting paradigm for depository institutions, necessitating system changes to collect the information. On the flipside, Sapirie wrote for Tax Notes, the benefits of such a reporting proposal may be difficult to realize: "Increasing the amount of information flowing into the IRS would not in itself lead to increased enforcement, and it might come with added challenges." Former IRS Commissioner Charles O. Rossotti acknowledged that the IRS today cannot use all the information it already receives, and significant areas of noncompliance are barely addressed, so more reporting alone will not solve the problem. It would almost certainly have a deterrent effect for taxpayers contemplating evasion, but the extent of that effect is unclear, and it might be insufficient to justify the costs to financial institutions and the federal government of implementing such a large new reporting regime. But CAP's analysis argues that this will help prevent tax evasion while also providing more funding to enhance data security for consumers: "Additional funding would go to enhancing data security. Even at present, the IRS's data security is already much better than that of the financial industry, with only very rare and limited breaches compared to the exponentially larger data breaches from financial institutions. Second, the reporting of information flows only from financial institutions to the IRS and not in the other direction, as some earlier proposals had called for." The Biden administration's bank reporting proposal is a critical element of the Build Back Better agenda. It gives the IRS some visibility into opaque forms of income that disproportionately accrue to high-income individuals. Despite fearmongering from bank lobbies, the proposal protects taxpayers' privacy while simply requiring banks to provide basic, aggregated information about flows. That enables the IRS to select audits in a more efficient and equitable way so that the vast majority of taxpayers will be less likely to be audited. By deterring and helping catch tax cheats, the proposal raises substantial revenue for the Build Back Better agenda, which provides critical investments to increase economic opportunities for American families and communities. On October 12, 2021, Speaker Nancy Pelosi defended the proposal in response to a question from a reporter, who said, "[Banks] are concerned about the tracking of transactions that are greater than $600; Americans are starting to get worried about this. Do you think [this] is going to stay in the Reconciliation Bill?" "With all due respect, the plural of anecdote is not data," Pelosi said. "Yes, there are concerns that some people have. But if people are breaking the law and not paying their taxes, one way to track them is through the banking measure. I think $600—that's a negotiation that will go on as to what the amount is. But yes." Whatever the impact of this proposal is, it does require additional reporting of certain bank transactions, just not in the way the banks are portraying it.

NEI

Announced in April 2021, U.S. President Joe Bidens American Families Plan is an ambitious proposal that aims to expand Americans' access to childcare and education and increase the number of women in the workforce. The plan is to fund all of this through more taxes on higher-income earners and increased reporting requirements of banks that could potentially yield more tax revenue. These reporting requirements have caught the ire of a number of banks that took issue with this less widely known section of the plan.A Facebook post by FNB Community Bank claimed: The Biden administration has proposed requiring all community banks and other financial institutions to report to the IRS on all deposits and withdrawals through business and personal accounts worth more than $600 regardless of tax liability. This indiscriminate, comprehensive bank account reporting to the [Internal Revenue Service (IRS)] can soon be enacted in Congress and will create an unacceptable invasion of privacy for our customers.The Independent Community Bankers of America (ICBA) even began a campaign, calling on communities to send a letter to Biden to prevent this so-called intrusive proposal":We looked up the proposal itself, and it does require more robust reporting of transactions across business and personal accounts. The proposal, which aims to go into effect after Dec. 31, 2022, states:We begin by explaining some of the more technical terms in this proposal. A "de minimis threshold" is broadly defined as the amount of a transaction that has such a small value that accounting for it would be unreasonable. We spoke to Visiting Assistant Professor of Tax Law at New York University, Nyamagaga Gondwe, who explained, "It is the amount below which the [IRS] would argue isn't worth investigating. It's the difference between your company giving you a $5 card to Subway, versus traveling on a private jet on your company's dime. [The latter] is worth reporting." In this case, "gross flow" refers to the aggregate inflows and outflows of cash from bank accounts. In sum, the current proposal stipulates that an aggregate amount of less than $600 worth of cash flowing into and out of accounts is not worth reporting. The "fair market value" refers to the amount people are willing to pay for an asset in the open market. In this case, Gondwe argued, the use of the term could possibly refer to the changing market value of transactions more than $600 that may occur in foreign currency transactions. The ICBA claims that the proposal will make banks report "all transactions" above the limit, but this is misleading. While it is true that the IRS will have more information on cashflows above $600, that doesnt mean they will have all the information pertaining to all transactions. The Center for American Progress (CAP) points out that banks will only be providing aggregate numbers to the IRS after each year gross inflow and gross outflow and not individualized transaction information. This reporting requirement would also extend to peer-to-peer payment services like Venmo, but wouldnt require people to report any additional information to the government. According to The Wall Street Journal, financial institutions must already report interest, dividends, and investment incomes to the IRS, and the IRS can get other information through audits.According to Marie Sapirie of Tax Notes, a publication focused on tax news, a parenthetical to the proposal indicates that there is some flexibility on raising the minimum account balance/inflow/outflow above $600.The Tax Notes report also states that the treasury department estimated this form of reporting would raise $463 billion over the 10-year budget window, making it the third largest revenue raiser proposed in the budget. The aim is to target businesses outside of large corporations that carry out gross underreporting of their income in the amount of $166 billion per year. According to the proposal: Requiring comprehensive information reporting on the inflows and outflows of financial accounts will increase the visibility of gross receipts and deductible expenses to the IRS. Increased visibility of business income will enhance the effectiveness of IRS enforcement measures and encourage voluntary compliance.Banks claim this would be an invasion of consumer privacy, with the ICBA saying it would allow the government to monitor account information. However, CAP analysts Seth Hanlon and Galen Hendricks argue, Only the prior years total inflow and total outflow would be reported on annual forms. No one would say that the IRS monitors you on your job because it receives a W-2 from your employer with your total wages every January.Another challenge not mentioned in the ICBAs consumer alert is the higher costs this reporting proposal may place on banks. In May 2021, a coalition of banking associations wrote a letter to the U.S. Senate Committee on Finance, arguing that they already give a lot of data to the IRS, and that this would impose additional costs on their systems:On the flipside, Sapirie wrote for Tax Notes, the benefits of such a reporting proposal may be difficult to come by:But CAPs analysis argues that this will help prevent tax evasion, while also providing more funding to enhance data security for consumers:On Oct. 12, 2021, Speaker Nancy Pelosi defended the proposal in response to a question from a reporter, who said, "[Banks] are concerned about the tracking of transactions that are greater than $600, Americans are starting to get worried about this. Do you think [this] is going to stay in the Reconciliation Bill?"

FMD_train_388

According to Ted Cruz's tax proposal, businesses are required to pay a 16 percent tax on their earnings, as well as on the wages they distribute to their employees.

01/26/2016

Ted Cruzs tax plan, envisioningtax returns that fit on postcards, would whack businesses twice over, Marco Rubio says. We wondered about that. In the Jan. 14, 2016, Fox Business Network Republican presidential debate in North Charleston, S.C., Sen. Rubio of Florida said that under the plan advocated by Sen. Cruz of Texas, businesses basically will have to pay a tax, both on the money they make, but they also have to pay taxes on the money that they pay their employees. A moment later, Rubio said Cruzs plan does not eliminate the corporate (income) tax or the payroll tax. Businesses will now have to pay 16 percent on the money they make. They will also have to pay 16 percent on the money they pay their employees. Cruz disputed that characterization, saying in part that a critical piece that Marco seems to be missing is that this 16 percent business flat tax enables us to eliminate the corporate income tax. It goes away. Cruzs plan replaces the corporate income tax, the payroll tax and others with a flat tax. Does it also make businesses pay 16 percent on profits and payroll, as Rubio said? Cruzs plan outlined After emailing Rubios campaign about how he reached his 16 percent conclusions, we turned to Cruzs tax plan asoutlined by his campaign. Under the Simple Flat Tax, Cruz says on a campaign webpage, the current seven rates of personal income tax will collapse into a single low rate of 10 percent. For a family of four, the first $36,000 will be tax-free. The Child Tax Credit will remain in place, Cruz proposes, and the plan revamps the earned-income tax credit while preserving deductions for charitable contributions and mortgage interest payments. Heres the flat-tax postcard as envisioned by Cruz: SOURCE:Web page,The Simple Tax Plan,Ted Cruz presidential campaign (viewed Jan. 20, 2016) Next up: the 16 percent element. On Cruzs website, we spotted no direct indication the 16 percent would apply to payroll spending. For businesses, Cruz says there, the corporate income tax will be eliminated. It will be replaced by a simple Business Flat Tax at a single 16 percent rate. The current payroll tax system will be abolished, while maintaining full funding for Social Security and Medicare. Cruz further says the business flat tax will be based on revenues minus expenses such as equipment, computers, and other business investments. In general, Cruz says, his proposed tax overhaul will deliver a tremendous economic boost, according to the well-respected Tax Foundation, a Washington, D.C., nonprofit thatdescribes itselfas a leading independent tax policy research organization. Independent breakdowns We fetched the foundationsOctober 2015 analysisof Cruzs plan which, the foundation said, would replace the corporate income tax and all payroll taxes with a 16 percent Business Transfer Tax, or subtraction method value-added tax. In addition, his plan would repeal a number of complex features of the current tax code. Farther along, the analysis spelled out a payroll aspect. Specifically, the foundation said, Cruzs plan: Enacts a broad-based, 16 percent Business Transfer Tax or value-added tax. This tax is levied on all business profits, less capital investment. This would include the payroll of business, government, and nonprofit institutions, as well as net imports. The tax would exempt from taxation the purchase of health insurance. A business transfer tax is also often known as a subtraction-method value-added tax. While its base is identical in economic terms to that of the credit-invoice VAT seen in many OECD countries, it is calculated from corporate accounts, not on individual transactions. The foundation also said: Under current law, some taxes on labor are explicitly levied on nominal wages, reducing take-home pay, while others are implicitly passed on to workers through lower nominal wages. The business transfer tax would also fall substantially on payrolls, but it would do so entirely through implicit reductions in nominal wages rather than explicit reductions in take-home pay. Thats a bit gobbledy-gooky for us. A foundation official, Kyle Pomerleau, told us by phone and email that what Rubio said largely holds up, though it would be wrong to conclude businesses under Cruzs plan would pay 16 percent on the same money twice. That is, Pomerleau elaborated, Cruzs plan eliminates the existing payroll tax, which is 15.3 percent of wages (half of that paid by employers, the other half by employees), but the plan counts payroll expenditures as part of net business profits, which are taxed at 16 percent. Even though his plan gets rid of the payroll tax, Pomerleau emailed, his new Business Flat Tax will end up taxing that payroll by disallowing its deduction at the business level. Another authority, Joe Rosenberg of theUrban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, told us by phone that Rubio was accurate about Cruzs plan presuming he meant what most people define as profit by his phrase what you make. Rosenberg walked us through how he sees Cruzs plan working: Say a business buys something for 50 cents at wholesale and has to pay its employees 50 cents, accumulating $1 in costs. Then the business sells the something for $1.10, drawing a 10-cent profit. Under the Cruz plan, Rosenberg said, the business pays the flat tax solely on the 60-cent difference between the $1.10 in sales and the 50 cents spent on the wholesale purchase. And, Rosenberg noted, theres another way to pin what Cruzs plan subjects to the 16 percent tax -- by isolating what the business makes, the 10 cents, and then adding the 50 cents in employee payroll. Its very fair to interpret what Sen. Rubio said as correct, Rosenberg said, though its also worth mention (again) that Cruzs plan eliminates existing payroll and income taxes. Broadly, Rosenberg didnt agree that Cruzs plan whipsaws businesses, saying: Its a change in the way theyre taxed. Its not taxing something twice. We didnt hear back from Rubios camp about his claim nor did Cruz aides engage. Footnote: A Jan. 14, 2016,foundation postby economist Alan Cole says Cruz and Rubio arent proposing entirely distinct tax approaches. In fact, Cole wrote, if you put together two taxes from Rubios plan (and fiddle with the rates), you can actually synthetically construct the business flat tax from Cruzs plan! Our ruling Rubio said that under Cruzs tax plan, businesses will now have to pay 16 percent on the money they make. They will also have to pay 16 percent on the money they pay their employees. Under Cruzs plan, that rate applies both to net income and payroll expenditures though the way this description was phrased by Rubio merits clarification. That is, the 16 percent would not be applied to what a business makes and separately applied again to money paid to employees. Also unsaid: The proposed tax would replace taxes including payroll and income taxes. We rate this claim Mostly True. MOSTLY TRUE The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information. Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check.

True

Ted Cruzs tax plan, envisioningtax returns that fit on postcards, would whack businesses twice over, Marco Rubio says.After emailing Rubios campaign about how he reached his 16 percent conclusions, we turned to Cruzs tax plan asoutlined by his campaign. Under the Simple Flat Tax, Cruz says on a campaign webpage, the current seven rates of personal income tax will collapse into a single low rate of 10 percent. For a family of four, the first $36,000 will be tax-free. The Child Tax Credit will remain in place, Cruz proposes, and the plan revamps the earned-income tax credit while preserving deductions for charitable contributions and mortgage interest payments.SOURCE:Web page,The Simple Tax Plan,Ted Cruz presidential campaign (viewed Jan. 20, 2016)In general, Cruz says, his proposed tax overhaul will deliver a tremendous economic boost, according to the well-respected Tax Foundation, a Washington, D.C., nonprofit thatdescribes itselfas a leading independent tax policy research organization.We fetched the foundationsOctober 2015 analysisof Cruzs plan which, the foundation said, would replace the corporate income tax and all payroll taxes with a 16 percent Business Transfer Tax, or subtraction method value-added tax. In addition, his plan would repeal a number of complex features of the current tax code.Another authority, Joe Rosenberg of theUrban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, told us by phone that Rubio was accurate about Cruzs plan presuming he meant what most people define as profit by his phrase what you make.Footnote: A Jan. 14, 2016,foundation postby economist Alan Cole says Cruz and Rubio arent proposing entirely distinct tax approaches. In fact, Cole wrote, if you put together two taxes from Rubios plan (and fiddle with the rates), you can actually synthetically construct the business flat tax from Cruzs plan!Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check.

FMD_train_759

Did Every Single School Marching Band in DC Just Boycott Trump's Inauguration?

12/15/2016

On 14 December 2016, misleading reports appeared that not one high schoolmarching band in Washington, D.C. would participate in Donald Trump's inauguration: Donald Trump is so unpopular that not even high school marching bands want the opportunity to perform at his inauguration. Although this is typically an honor for any band asked to participate, there is nothing typical or honorable about Trump being named president-elect. The Facebook group "American News X" distorted the truth even further when they published a meme stating that "not one high school marching band" was willing to perform at the inauguration: American News X High school marching bands, both inside and outside of Washington D.C., have not "boycotted" Donald Trump's inauguration. The rumor isa sensationalized and exaggerated version of a genuine news reportpublished by NBC Washington'sAndrea Swalec, whichstated that interest in playing the 2016inauguration appearedlower than normal, and that bands in the D.C. area did not apply to participate: report At least one D.C. public school marching band has participated in the past five inaugural parades, but none applied for consideration this year. Ballou High Schools Majestic Marching Knights performed Destinys Childs Lose My Breath at George W. Bushs second inaugural parade in 2005, and stepped along Pennsylvania Avenue as they played James Browns I Got You (I Feel Good) at Barack Obamas second inaugural parade eight years later. But the beloved band decided to take a break in January and not apply to play in the inaugural parade after several other recent performances, the principal said. Dunbar High Schools band marched in Obamas first inauguration in 2009 but the school will sit this one out because they are rebuilding the band, the principal said. Eastern High School also chose not to participate, the principal said, without elaborating. A D.C. Public Schools spokeswoman said she was not aware of any band in the district that had applied to participate in President-elect Donald Trumps inaugural parade Jan. 20. However, that is not the same as an organized boycott. While it is true that high school bands in the D.C. area did not apply to play Trump's inauguration, theschools cited a variety of reasons to miss the event (a boycott not being one of them). Furthermore, the area's involvement in the last five inaugurations may speak to the lack of interest this year: But politics may not explain the low interest in the inaugural parade; an unwritten rule of the band world may play into why some bands didnt apply. University of Maryland band director Eli Osterloh said that after performing in an inaugural parade, some bands opt to wait about 10 years before applying again, as a courtesy to other applicants. None of this means that the event will be missing a marching band. Drum Corps International events director Sue Kuehnhold said that bands from the president's hometown could be selected to play at the 20 January 2017 inauguration. Swalec, Andrea. "DC-Area Marching Bands Opt to Sit Out Trump's Inaugural Parade." NBC Washington. 14 December 2016.

False

The Facebook group "American News X" distorted the truth even further when they published a meme stating that "not one high school marching band" was willing to perform at the inauguration:High school marching bands, both inside and outside of Washington D.C., have not "boycotted" Donald Trump's inauguration. The rumor isa sensationalized and exaggerated version of a genuine news reportpublished by NBC Washington'sAndrea Swalec, whichstated that interest in playing the 2016inauguration appearedlower than normal, and that bands in the D.C. area did not apply to participate:

FMD_train_90

Certainly! 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 life. 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 stated: "She is passionate about the working class, mental health, less government overreach, education, small business growth, gun rights, our farmers, the economy, 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_1278

"Was 11.6 million jobs added to the U.S. economy by Trump during the pandemic?"

10/12/2020

Voting in the 2020 U.S. Election may be over, but misinformation continues to circulate. Never stop fact-checking. Follow our post-election coverage here. Facing Democratic rival U.S. Sen. Kamala Harris in a debate in October 2020, Vice President Mike Pence attempted to credit his boss, President Donald Trump, for developing policies that helped rebound the economy after unprecedented losses due to the COVID-19 pandemic. In particular, Pence stated that the U.S. workforce added millions of jobs since the early days of the outbreak because of Trump's fiscal and regulatory policies. He said, "We're going through a pandemic that lost 22 million jobs at the height; we've already added back 11.6 million jobs because we had a president who cut taxes, rolled back regulation, unleashed American energy, and fought for free and fair trade. [...] We literally have spared no expense to help the American people and the American worker through this." In other words, he claimed the Trump administration spearheaded a variety of initiatives that added 11.6 million jobs in the summer and fall of 2020, regaining nearly half of the roughly 22 million jobs lost at the start of the pandemic. The comment echoed multiple statements by Trump in which he, too, attempted to praise the administration's successful balance of public health and economic interests. "Our strategy to kill the China virus has focused on protecting those at greatest risk while allowing younger and healthy Americans to safely return to work and school," he said in August. "We added 1.8 million new jobs in July, exceeding predictions for the third month in a row, and adding a total of over 9.3 million jobs since May." To determine the legitimacy of such assertions, we referred to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) "seasonally adjusted nonfarm payroll," which is the standard measurement for determining how U.S. wage and salary jobs change over time. The payroll data are compiled monthly via a survey of about 145,000 businesses and government agencies across the country, excluding people who are self-employed or work for farms or private households. When a news story stated that, for instance, the economy added "661,000 new workers," that number typically referred to the month-to-month change in nonfarm payrolls—661,000 more jobs were added in September compared to August 2020. We obtained monthly nonfarm payroll data, which showed: According to our analysis of the month-by-month statistics, the economy tallied almost 1.4 million fewer jobs in March compared to February. Then, the recession deepened, and April recorded 20.8 million fewer jobs than the month prior—the steepest decline since the Great Depression. While Pence did not provide an explanation for his labor statistics at the debate, we assumed he was referencing the sum of job losses in March and April, showing employers cut about 22 million jobs during those two months, per the BLS data. After that, the country started a slow, steady recovery. The data show the following increases in job totals, all approximations, on a month-by-month basis: (We should note here that the monthly employment figures for August and September 2020 were both preliminary and subject to revision as of this writing.) Looking at the data, yes, about 11.4 million jobs were added to the U.S. economy between May and September, and the Trump administration's comments about the economy showing significant job growth since the early weeks of the pandemic were true at face value. However, that upward trend had little to do with the White House and everything to do with how businesses on a grand scale adapted to new rules on social distancing to curb the spread of the deadly virus. In March, for instance, California issued the first statewide "stay-at-home order," and New York City closed all non-essential businesses—both decisions that contributed to April's historic job loss. Then, over the weeks, employers developed plans for operating under public health officials' recommendations to curb the spread of COVID-19 and, as a result, were able to bring back workers who had been furloughed or reopen after a temporary shutdown. Those trends significantly impacted job growth in the U.S., not Trump. Additionally, a Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) loan—which was developed by Congress, not the White House, via the March Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act—helped some small businesses bring back lost positions or keep workers who would otherwise have been laid off. That stimulus package's direct payments to Americans who earned $75,000 annually or less (or families that made up to $150,000 annually) may have also driven spending in the summer months and, consequently, kept some employers afloat after the initial shock to their profits earlier in the year. All of that said, no evidence showed that the Trump administration enacted policies—whether related to taxes or trade—that "added back" the jobs; rather, economic trends shifted from the early days of the outbreak during mass furloughs and business closures. Here's the bottom line: Presidential administrations often exaggerate their influence on the economy—especially when employment is showing somewhat positive signs—regardless of whether they're leading the country during a crisis like the COVID-19 outbreak or in comparatively normal times. As Neil Irwin wrote for The New York Times in January 2017, just days before Trump's inauguration: "The reality is that presidents have far less control over the economy than you might imagine. Presidential economic records are highly dependent on the dumb luck of where the nation is in the economic cycle. And the White House has no control over the demographic and technological forces that influence the economy." Additionally, the White House had little influence on how businesses quickly adapted to recommendations by public health officials to safely operate during the pandemic. For those reasons, we rate this claim a "Mixture" of truth and falsehoods. It was true that the country added back about half of the jobs lost during the early months of the pandemic, though it was a false misinterpretation of economic conditions to tie that job growth to Trump policies or to claim that he "cut taxes, rolled back regulation, unleashed American energy, and fought for free and fair trade," as Pence alleged, and that those moves directly added jobs. Here's video footage of Pence making the claim on the vice presidential debate stage, courtesy of C-SPAN: https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4913299/user-clip-vp-pence-jobs-claim. Factba.se. "Press Conference: Donald Trump Holds A Coronavirus Pandemic Briefing In Bedminster - August 7, 2020." Accessed 9 October 2020. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. "BLS Data Viewer." 9 October 2020. Reuters staff. "Timeline: How the Global Coronavirus Pandemic Unfolded." Accessed 12 October 2020.

NEI

Voting in the 2020 U.S. Election may be over, but the misinformation keeps on ticking. Never stop fact-checking. Follow our post-election coverage here.Facing Democratic rival U.S. Sen. Kamala Harris for a debate in October 2020, Vice President Mike Pence attempted to give credit to his boss, President Donald Trump, for developing policies that rebounded the economy after unprecedented losses due to the COVID-19 pandemic."Our strategy to kill the China virus has focused on protecting those at greatest risk while allowing younger and healthy Americans to safety return to work and safely return to school," he said in August. "We added 1.8 million new jobs in July, exceeding predictions for the third month in a row, and adding a total of over 9.3 million jobs since May."To determine the legitimacy of such assertions, we referred to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) "seasonally adjusted nonfarm payroll," which is the standard measurement for determining how U.S. wage and salary jobs change over time. The payroll data are compiled monthly via a survey of about 145,000 businesses and government agencies across the country, excluding people who are self-employed, or work for farms or private households.When a news story stated that, for instance, the economy added "661,000 new workers," that number was typically a reference to the month-to-month change in nonfarm payrolls 661,000 more jobs were added in September compared to August 2020.According to our analysis of the month-by-month statistics, the economy tallied almost 1.4 million less jobs in March compared to February. Then, the recession deepened, and April recorded 20.8 million less jobs than the month prior the steepest decline since the Great Depression.However, that upward trend had little to do with the White House and everything to do with how businesses on a grand scale adapted to new rules on social distancing to curb the spread of the deadly virus. In March, for instance, California issued the first statewide "stay at home order" and New York City closed all non-essential businesses both decisions that contributed to April's historic job loss.Additionally, a Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) loan which was developed by Congress, not the White House, via the March Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act helped some small businesses bring back lost positions or keep workers who would otherwise have been laid off. That stimulus packages direct payments to Americans who earned 75,000 annually or less (or families that made up to $150,000 annually) may have also driven spending in the summer months and, consequently, kept some employers afloat after initial shock to their profits earlier in the year.Here's the bottom line: Presidential administrations often exaggerate their influence on the economy especially when employment is showing somewhat positive signs no matter if they're leading the country during a crisis like the COVID-19 outbreak or comparatively normal times. As Neil Irwin wrote for The New York Times in January 2017, just days before Trumps inauguration:

FMD_train_931

Bernie Sanders Marched with MLK at Selma?

01/21/2016

On January 20, 2016, the website Democratic Underground posted a photograph purportedly showing Bernie Sanders participating in a 1965 civil rights march from Selma to Montgomery, Alabama, with Martin Luther King Jr. The website identified the man standing "behind Coretta King, just right of Old Glory in the glasses, white 't' shirt, open collar, and dark jacket" as the future United States senator and 2016 Democratic presidential candidate. The man in the photograph does bear a resemblance to a young Bernie Sanders, but that similarity alone is not sufficient to confirm that Sanders took part in the 1965 Selma to Montgomery march. The image was taken on March 26, 1965, and a caption provided by licenser Corbis Images identifies Martin Luther King Jr. along with several other prominent political leaders but makes no mention of Bernie Sanders. The caption states: "Dr. Martin Luther King (C) leads thousands of civil rights demonstrators out on the last leg of their Selma to Montgomery 50-mile hike. Others identifiable in the front row include John Davis (2nd from L) of SNCC, King's aide Reverend Ralph Abernathy (3rd from L), Dr. Ralph Bunche (5th from L), Mrs. King (next to her husband), and Reverend Hosea Williams (carrying a little girl, R)." This photograph has been widely available for decades, but it wasn't until January 2016 that Bernie Sanders' name became associated with a face in the crowd. Although Sanders has stated that he participated in the landmark "March on Washington" civil rights event of August 1963 (where Martin Luther King Jr. delivered his iconic "I Have a Dream" speech), there is no record of Sanders claiming that he was also present at any other civil rights march involving Martin Luther King Jr. On the national holiday named for the civil rights leader, Senator Bernie Sanders called Reverend Martin Luther King Jr. "one of the great leaders in American history." Sanders, then a college student, was in the crowd on The Mall in Washington when King delivered his "I Have a Dream" speech from the steps of the Lincoln Memorial. "We must never forget his heroic efforts to end segregation and racial injustice. It is also important, however, to remember that he fought for a society in which all people had good jobs at good wages and that quality education and health care were available to all. At a time when we have an almost record number of Americans living in poverty, obscene levels of income and wealth inequality, and millions working longer hours for lower pay, we still have much to learn from Dr. King's extraordinary life." As Mother Jones noted, Sanders' active participation in the Civil Rights movement was "brief and localized" and effectively ended in 1963. Sanders' involvement was limited to one arrest for protesting and a poor GPA from neglecting his studies. However, Sanders was, in his own right, an active participant in the movement during his three years at the University of Chicago. Although Sanders did attend the 1963 March on Washington, most of his work was in and around Hyde Park, where he became involved with the campus chapter of CORE (Congress of Racial Equality) shortly after transferring from Brooklyn College in 1961. During Sanders' first year in Chicago, a group of apartment-hunting white and black students discovered that off-campus buildings owned by the university were refusing to rent to black students, in violation of the school's policies. CORE organized a 15-day sit-in at the administration building, which Sanders helped lead. The protest ended when George Beadle, the university's president, agreed to form a commission to study the school's housing policies. That spring, with Sanders as its chairman, the university chapter of CORE merged with the university chapter of SNCC (Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee). Sanders announced plans to take the fight to the city of Chicago, and in the fall of 1962, he followed through, organizing picketers at a Howard Johnson in Cicero. Sanders told the Chicago Maroon, the student newspaper, that he wanted to keep the pressure on the restaurant chain after the arrest of 12 CORE demonstrators in North Carolina for trying to eat at a Howard Johnson there. Sanders left his leadership role at the organization not long afterward; his grades suffered so much from his activism that a dean asked him to take some time off from school. However, he continued his activism with CORE and SNCC. In August 1963, shortly after returning to Chicago from the March on Washington, Sanders was charged with resisting arrest after protesting segregation at a school on the city's South Side. He was later fined $25, according to the Chicago Tribune. Some have suggested that the identity of the face circled in the photograph is likely that of Paul Reese, who resembled a young Bernie Sanders, participated in civil rights events of the time, and was present at the march pictured here. In short, that picture is not of Bernie Sanders, who did not march in Selma. His campaign has confirmed this.

False

On 20 January 2016, the web site Democratic Underground posted a photograph purportedly showing Bernie Sanders participating in a 1965 civil rights march from Selma to Montgomery (Alabama) with Martin Luther King, Jr. The web site identified the man standing "behind Coretta King, just right of Old Glory in the glasses, white 't' shirt, open collar and dark jacket" as the future United States senator and 2016 Democratic presidential candidate:The above-displayed image was taken on 26 March 1965, and a caption to the photograph provided by licenser Corbis Images identifies Martin Luther King, Jr. along with several other prominent political leaders but makes no mention of Bernie Sanders:This photograph has been widely available for decades, but it wasn't until January 2016 that Bernie Sanders' name became associated with a face in the crowd. Although Sanders has stated that he did participate in the landmark "March on Washington" civil rights event of August 1963 (where Martin Luther King, Jr. delivered his iconic "I Have a Dream" speech), we haven't found any record of Sanders' claiming that he was also present at any other civil rights march involving Martin Luther King, Jr:As Mother Jones noted, Sander's active participation in the Civil Rights movement was "brief and localized" and effectively ended in 1963:Some have pegged the identity of the face circled above as likely being that of Paul Reese, who looked somewhat like a young Bernie Sanders, participated in civil rights events of the time, and was present at the march pictured here:One more time: that picture is not of Bernie Sanders, who did not march in Selma. His campaign has *confirmed* this. https://t.co/EseJmycaVX Joy Reid (@JoyAnnReid) February 12, 2016

FMD_train_1580

Elena Kagan Tied to Obama's Birth Certificate

08/05/2010

Claim: President Obama nominated Elena Kagan for the U.S. Supreme Court as a reward for her help in getting nine challenges to his eligibility dismissed. Example: [Collected via e-mail, August 2010] Well, someone figured out why Obama nominated Elana Kagan for theSupreme Court. Pull up the Supreme Courts website, go to the docketand search for Obama. She was the Solicitor General for all the suitsagainst him filed with the Supreme Court to show proof of natural borncitizenship. He owes her big time. All of the requests were denied of course.They were never heard. It just keeps getting deeper and deeper, doesn't it? The American people mean nothing any longer. It's all about paybacktime for those that compromised themselves to elect someone thatreally has no true right to even be there. We should be getting sosick of all of this nonsense. The USA has finally become the laughingstock of the world. GOD help and deliver us. Variations: An e-mailed screed claiming that thisarticle is wrong is itself wrong. screed Origins: Rumors that Elena Kagan was nominated for a position on the U.S. Supreme Court by President Barack Obama as a tit-for-tat payment of Kagan's assistance in using her position as U.S. Solicitor General to fend off lawsuits challenging Obama's eligibility for the presidency began circulating in August 2010, prompted by a 4 August 2010 online article published byWorldNetDaily (WND). That article claimed that Kagan "has actually been playing a role forsome time in the dispute over whether Obama is legally qualified to be in the White House" and that a "simple search of the high court's own website reveals Kagan's name coming up at least nine times on dockets involving Obama eligibility issues," then went on to suggest that all nine of the referenced docket items article were dismissed due to Kagan's influence, an action for which President Obama "owes her big time" and has rewarded her with a quid pro quo Supreme Courtnomination. One small problem for the advocates of this political conspiracy theory: None of the nine docket items cited by WND was about "whether Obama is legally qualified to be in the White House." The WND article simply cites the results of a non-specific search on all Supreme Court docket items containing the names "Obama" and "Kagan" and misleadingly claims them all as "involving Obama eligibility issues," without regard for the real underlying issues of those cases.* search * Each of the docket items included the name of the lower court from which it was appealed, as well as a case number. Using those pieces of information as reference points for looking up the subject of each of the cited docket items (as WND utterly failed to do) revealed that NONE of the nine entries cited by WND had anything at all to do with cases challenging Barack Obama's eligibility to hold the office of President of the United States; in fact, most of them actually stemmed from cases which were originally filed against the federal government long before the presidential candidacy of Barack Obama (but which since "rolled over" to the current administration). The nine entries cited by WND comprised cases filed by: Gary William Holt, a federal prisoner in Tennessee who was convicted of firearms-related offenses and whose case is a prisoner civil rights issue filed during the Bush administration. Gary William Holt Jerome Julius Brown, whose case not only long antedates the Obama administration, but is also largely incomprehensible and has nothing do to with eligibility issues. The case was originally dismissed by a lower court that could not discern either "which claims are made against which defendants on what basis" nor what "relief [the] plaintiff demands," and a description of the case provides some idea of why the lower court found it unworthy of consideration: Jerome Julius Brown description This matter is before the Court on the Complaint filed by Plaintiff Jerome Julius Brown ("Brown"), who refers to himself as "U.S. Bounty # 1014, U.S.A., Mr. Jerome Julius Brown Sr. et al." On June 7, 2010, Brown filed a one-page Complaint accompanied by 167 pages of attachments. The one-page Complaint is incomprehensible. It consists of several disjointed sentence fragments that do not make sense. It refers to a "petition for writ and attachments," an appeal from a magistrate judge, the United States Marshals Service, "assessment & taxation no real property data land condemnation business check card" and demands $70,000.00. The attachments include copies of his Maryland Driver's License, a business check card apparently issued to him by Chevy Chase Bank, and a Federal Express account card. Other attachments demonstrate that he has filed other lawsuits against Chevy Chase Bank, and that he has filed other lawsuits against other various persons and entities. Also included among the attachments are copies of various checks drawn on what appears to be a business account for "Zip One Mail Contractor Courier" and "Jerome Julius Brown," an "ID Theft Affidavit" that refers to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, a credit report for Brown that includes handwritten notes regarding purported fraud and identity theft, and what appears to be a copy of a home equity loan application. Louis Lutz, a truck driver who was employed as a U.S. Army civilian contractor in Iraq between 2004 to 2006 (long before the advent of the Obama administration) and whose case has to do with the combatant status of civilian contractors and employees working in Iraq and Afghanistan, not presidential eligibility issues. Louis Lutz Two filings involving Abdul Hamid Abdul Salam Al-Ghizzawi, a Libyan citizen seeking release from his incarceration at Guantanamo Bay Naval Station. (Al-Ghizzawi was finally released in March 2010, after seven years of imprisonment.) Abdul Hamid Abdul Salam Al-Ghizzawi released Three filings involving Jamal Kiyemba, a Ugandan who was incarcerated at Guantanamo Bay Naval Station for four years beginning in 2002. (Although Kiyemba was released from Guantanamo in 2006, due to "some procedural detail of the American legal system, Jamal Kiyembas name remains in the headlines of the highly public legal battle that began as Kiyemba v. Bush and which sits now on the desks of the nine justices of the Supreme Court of the United States under its new name: Kiyemba v. Obama." The case is a separation-of-powers issue that has nothing to do with presidential eligibility.) Jamal Kiyemba The Real Truth About Obama, Inc., a case which, although the plaintiff's name might suggest a presidential eligibility issue, is actually a challenge to three Federal Election Commission regulations which the plaintiff organization alleges are "unconstitutionally overbroad" and thereby infringed their right "to disseminate information about presidential candidate Senator Obama's position on abortion." The Real Truth About Obama, Inc. After we published our article on this topic, WND hurriedly scrubbed the original article from their site without explanation, then misleadingly replaced it three days later with a thoroughly rewritten article on a different topic which was prefaced by an Editor's Note acknowledging their error: replaced Editor's Note: An earlier version of this story incorrectly described a series of cases for which Elena Kagan represented the government as eligibility cases. Those cases, in fact, were a series of unrelated disputes pending before the Supreme Court and the references have been removed from this report. Many people unfamiliar with the function of the Solictor General's office have claimed that even if the referenced docket items are not cases involving eligibility issues, they somehow demonstrate a questionable or inappropriate connection between Barack Obama and Elena Kagan, as if the latter personally represented the former in court and was rewarded for her efforts with a Supreme Court nomination. This claim is also false One of the duties of the Solicitor General is, in layman's terms, to act as advocate for the United States before the Supreme Courtin any lawsuits filed against the federal government over abridgements of constitutional rights; thus the current Solicitor General's name will appear on virtually every Supreme Court docket item entered during his or her tenure. (Indeed, a simple search of docket items for the name "Elena Kagan" turns up over 500 matching entries.) Because such lawsuits often name the President of the United States as a respondent, it is also not uncommon for the current president's name to appear on such docket items (even if he was not yet in office at the time the underlying cases were originally filed in lower courts). In all such cases, however, the Solicitor General functions as a representative of the interests of the federal government, not as personal counsel for the President. (Several dozen Supreme Court docket items still identify Barack Obama's predecessor, George W. Bush, as a respondent, and in every one of those cases the Solicitor General is likewise listed as an attorney for the respondent.) search George W. Bush *NOTE: Immediately after we published this piece, WND scrubbed all references to the original article from their web site without explanation. Three days later, WND misleadingly replaced the original with a thoroughly rewritten article on a completely different topic. Last updated: 3 August 2015

NEI

Variations: An e-mailed screed claiming that thisarticle is wrong is itself wrong.Origins: Rumors that Elena Kagan was nominated for a position on the U.S. Supreme Court by President Barack Obama as a tit-for-tat payment of Kagan's assistance in using her position as U.S. Solicitor General to fend off lawsuits challenging Obama's eligibility for the presidency began circulating in August 2010, prompted by a 4 August 2010 online article published byWorldNetDaily (WND). That article claimed that Kagan "has actually been playing a role forsome time in the dispute over whether Obama is legally qualified to be in the White House" and that a "simple search of the high court's own website reveals Kagan's name coming up at least nine times on dockets involving Obama eligibility issues," then went on to suggest that all nine of the referenced docket items One small problem for the advocates of this political conspiracy theory: None of the nine docket items cited by WND was about "whether Obama is legally qualified to be in the White House." The WND article simply cites the results of a non-specific search on all Supreme Court docket items containing the names "Obama" and "Kagan" and misleadingly claims them all as "involving Obama eligibility issues," without regard for the real underlying issues of those cases.* Gary William Holt, a federal prisoner in Tennessee who was convicted of firearms-related offenses and whose case is a prisoner civil rights issue filed during the Bush administration. Jerome Julius Brown, whose case not only long antedates the Obama administration, but is also largely incomprehensible and has nothing do to with eligibility issues. The case was originally dismissed by a lower court that could not discern either "which claims are made against which defendants on what basis" nor what "relief [the] plaintiff demands," and a description of the case provides some idea of why the lower court found it unworthy of consideration: Louis Lutz, a truck driver who was employed as a U.S. Army civilian contractor in Iraq between 2004 to 2006 (long before the advent of the Obama administration) and whose case has to do with the combatant status of civilian contractors and employees working in Iraq and Afghanistan, not presidential eligibility issues.Two filings involving Abdul Hamid Abdul Salam Al-Ghizzawi, a Libyan citizen seeking release from his incarceration at Guantanamo Bay Naval Station. (Al-Ghizzawi was finally released in March 2010, after seven years of imprisonment.) Three filings involving Jamal Kiyemba, a Ugandan who was incarcerated at Guantanamo Bay Naval Station for four years beginning in 2002. (Although Kiyemba was released from Guantanamo in 2006, due to "some procedural detail of the American legal system, Jamal Kiyembas name remains in the headlines of the highly public legal battle that began as Kiyemba v. Bush and which sits now on the desks of the nine justices of the Supreme Court of the United States under its new name: Kiyemba v. Obama." The case is a separation-of-powers issue that has nothing to do with presidential eligibility.)The Real Truth About Obama, Inc., a case which, although the plaintiff's name might suggest a presidential eligibility issue, is actually a challenge to three Federal Election Commission regulations which the plaintiff organization alleges are "unconstitutionally overbroad" and thereby infringed their right "to disseminate information about presidential candidate Senator Obama's position on abortion."After we published our article on this topic, WND hurriedly scrubbed the original article from their site without explanation, then misleadingly replaced it three days later with a thoroughly rewritten article on a different topic which was prefaced by an Editor's Note acknowledging their error:One of the duties of the Solicitor General is, in layman's terms, to act as advocate for the United States before the Supreme Courtin any lawsuits filed against the federal government over abridgements of constitutional rights; thus the current Solicitor General's name will appear on virtually every Supreme Court docket item entered during his or her tenure. (Indeed, a simple search of docket items for the name "Elena Kagan" turns up over 500 matching entries.) Because such lawsuits often name the President of the United States as a respondent, it is also not uncommon for the current president's name to appear on such docket items (even if he was not yet in office at the time the underlying cases were originally filed in lower courts). In all such cases, however, the Solicitor General functions as a representative of the interests of the federal government, not as personal counsel for the President. (Several dozen Supreme Court docket items still identify Barack Obama's predecessor, George W. Bush, as a respondent, and in every one of those cases the Solicitor General is likewise listed as an attorney for the respondent.)*NOTE: Immediately after we published this piece, WND scrubbed all references to the original article from their web site without explanation. Three days later, WND misleadingly replaced the original with a thoroughly rewritten article on a completely different topic.

FMD_train_1189

Russian Star Has Testicles Stolen

02/26/2015

Claim: A Russian man was drugged and his testicles stolen by an attractive stranger. PROBABLY Example: [Collected via e-mail, February 2015] There appears to be a new version of the kidney robbery articlegoing around. kidney robbery Now the Daily Mail in the UK has just published an article about a famousRussian actor (but not showing his face, but showing his name) beingdrugged and having his testicles stolen: Origins: On 26 February 2015, the British newspaper the Daily Mail published an article titled "Married TV actor wakes up to find his testicles have been STOLEN after he is drugged in Russian bar by attractive blonde working for organ traffickers." As the example quoted above observed, the article bore many hallmarks of long-circulating urban legends involving organ theft (often as the result article urban legends of an illicit or otherwise immoral sexual encounter). According to the article, 30-year-old married Russian celebrity Dmitry Nikolaev met a blonde stranger in a bar in Moscow. After he (presumably) pursued an extramarital encounter with the woman, he awoke to unexplained and severe pain in the area of his groin and was later informed by doctors that his testicles had been removed (without his knowledge or consent). Moreover, the site claimed, the surgical procedure was performed by a skilled individual and likely resulted from a larger organized crime outfit trafficking in human organs. Neither the Daily Mail nor the Russian news source to which it referred provided any date, specific location, or other verifiable details of the alleged crime. The narrative stated that the man was transported to a hospital and only learned after an examination that his testicles had been removed, which does not sound particularly likely given even a layperson's ability to detect whether or not he currently possesses testes. It's possible that the news source intended to imply the man's testicles were replaced with prosthetics, but the nature of his injury was not detailed: referred They kissed and had some more beer and after that the actor remembers nothing,' said a police source. He woke up next day at a bus stop, feeling acute pain, and with blood on his trousers. Rushed to hospital, he was told that his testicles had been removed and that 'it was done like proper surgery by someone with a medical education'. The operation was conducted in a 'skillful way', said police, who believe his beer was spiked by an unknown drug. As discussed elsewhere on this site, the usefulness of such a donation (willing or not) is debatable. It's highly unlikely a crime such as the one described truly constitutes a profit center for gangs in any country, as testicles are neither a commonly purchased medical commodity nor a commonly transplanted organ, and organs of any description are delicate and difficult to transport. donation Finally, the manner in which the site partially obscured the purported victim's identity was atypical and suspicious. While the man's face was pixelated, his full name, age, and general location were utilized by the Russian news outlet from which the Daily Mail sourced the story. The translated article from which the claims arose concluded with a claim that the man's wife remained ignorant of his experience, which is rather implausible given that his full name and other identifying details were released by the media: Interestingly, the wife of the injured man is still convinced that her husband was in the hospital because of surgery on the genitals caused by a serious illness. Last updated: 26 February 2015

False

There appears to be a new version of the kidney robbery articlegoing around. Origins: On 26 February 2015, the British newspaper the Daily Mail published an article titled "Married TV actor wakes up to find his testicles have been STOLEN after he is drugged in Russian bar by attractive blonde working for organ traffickers." As the example quoted above observed, the article bore many hallmarks of long-circulating urban legends involving organ theft (often as the result Neither the Daily Mail nor the Russian news source to which it referred provided any date, specific location, or other verifiable details of the alleged crime. The narrative stated that the man was transported to a hospital and only learned after an examination that his testicles had been removed, which does not sound particularly likely given even a layperson's ability to detect whether or not he currently possesses testes. It's possible that the news source intended to imply the man's testicles were replaced with prosthetics, but the nature of his injury was not detailed:As discussed elsewhere on this site, the usefulness of such a donation (willing or not) is debatable. It's highly unlikely a crime such as the one described truly constitutes a profit center for gangs in any country, as testicles are neither a commonly purchased medical commodity nor a commonly transplanted organ, and organs of any description are delicate and difficult to transport.

FMD_train_277

Did a Reddit User Find Treasure in His Grandparents' Barn?

12/17/2021

In late 2021, online advertisements appeared on websites, claiming: "He Found Treasure Inside His Grandparents' Barn." Our research led us to a Reddit user named EvilEnglish, who posted in 2013 that he really did find what could be described as a "treasure" left behind in his grandparents' safe in Tennessee. However, the truth of the story had been twisted over the years by the ads and slideshow articles. First, the two pictures in the ad had nothing to do with the Reddit user, his grandparents, or the location of the "treasure" in the safe. The photograph of the supposed Reddit user is of Chris Seiter, a writer for exgirlfriendrecovery.com, and the picture of the old house also appeared to be unrelated. We found multiple photographs in the 60-page slideshow article that resulted from clicking the ad, which had nothing to do with what actually happened, despite being credited to him. Furthermore, the discovery was made in EvilEnglish's grandparents' farmhouse, not a "barn." Despite being credited to the Reddit user, these two pictures seemed to have no connection to the real story about the treasure found in EvilEnglish's grandparents' home or safe. In the original story posted in 2013, EvilEnglish, who did not provide his real name, mentioned that his father died in 2009, which led to his inheriting his grandparents' farmhouse in middle Tennessee, a property they had owned from the late 1970s until 1997. As he wrote on Reddit, it was under a damp and loose carpet in the closet under the staircase that he found and eventually opened a "secret safe": "My dad passed away a few years ago, and he inherited an old farmhouse in middle Tennessee from my grandparents. The house was a home for my grandparents for about 20 years. They bought this house in the late '70s/early '80s to escape the oppressive summer heat of the South. My grandfather was an avid sportsman and enjoyed collecting various firearms. My grandmother was a collector of coins and other antiques and curiosities. My grandfather was diagnosed with lung cancer in 1998, but I think the last time they traveled to the Tennessee house was around 1997. After my grandfather passed away, neither my grandmother nor father returned to the house. My father passed in 2009, and we've been working to close out his estate and traveled to the farmhouse to prepare it for sale. There was a lot of work to do here, as it is an old house. I was working in a closet below the staircase and saw that the rug was pretty disgusting. I started pulling up the rug and noticed a block of concrete. This was very out of place since all of the downstairs flooring is hardwood. I pushed the carpet back further and saw a round cap with a circular indentation on it. I pulled off the cap and... a secret safe! I gave the handle a tug, but it wouldn't budge. If you twist the handle, it will still spin. I called several locksmiths in TN, but it is impossible to get someone to come out on a Sunday up there. I should also mention that early last year, my brother-in-law and I were moving some of the furniture. He went to move one of the coffee tables, and when he picked it up, the tabletop came off the base. Underneath the tabletop of the coffee table was a hidden, standalone safe. It was pretty heavy, but we were able to load it into the truck. He took it to work and was able to cut it open. Inside were several pistols (.22s, a .357, and a few others), as well as about 300 single one-dollar bills. We found out that they were "Barr Notes" and supposedly rare because that particular Secretary of the Treasury died just 29 days into office. Most of the locksmiths in the area seem to only want to come out during the week. I'm trying to arrange for an off day this upcoming Friday to return to Tennessee! On April 30, 2013, EvilEnglish posted to Reddit that the safe had been unlocked, revealing "treasure" from his grandparents' past. Inside, he found "dozens of rare coins, pocket watches and wristwatches, jewelry, and stacks of soggy money," according to KSL.com. The money may have been wet after a pipe leak that occurred in the years before the safe was found. The original Imgur album of photos, as well as multiple YouTube videos, are no longer available. Readers looking for pictures of the grandparents' "secret safe" can find them within the same news article from KSL.com or from a HuffPost article from May 1, 2013. In the album, the pictures showed the "Major Safe. Co." logo on the floor being examined by the professional who found a way to open it. All of the "treasure" found in the safe was displayed on the kitchen counter. In an old Reddit comment, EvilEnglish wrote: "Funny that as a boy, in that very house, my grandma read me 'Treasure Island,' and I always dreamed of finding something like this!" Snopes debunks a wide range of content, and online advertisements are no exception. Misleading ads often lead to obscure websites that host lengthy slideshow articles with numerous pages. This practice is known as advertising "arbitrage." The advertiser's goal is to make more money from the ads displayed on the slideshow's pages than it costs to show the initial ad that attracted viewers.

True

In late 2021, online advertisements were displayed on websites, claiming: "He Found Treasure Inside His Grandparents' Barn." Our research led us to a Reddit user named EvilEnglish who posted in 2013 that he really did find what could be described as a "treasure" that was left behind in his grandparents' safe in Tennessee.First, the two pictures in the ad had nothing to do with the Reddit user, his grandparents, or where the "treasure" was found in the safe. The photograph of the supposed Redditer is of Chris Seiter, a writer for exgirlfriendrecovery.com, and the picture of the old house appeared to also be unrelated.We found multiple photographs in the 60-page slideshow article that resulted from clicking the ad that also had nothing to do with what actually happened, despite the fact that they were credited to him. Further, the discovery was made in EvilEnglish' grandparents' farmhouse, not a "barn." Despite being credited to the Reddit user, these two pictures appeared to have nothing to do with the real story about the treasure found in the EvilEnglish's grandparents' home or safe.In the original story that was posted in 2013, EvilEnglish, who did not provide his real name, said that his father died in 2009. That led to his inheriting his grandparents' farmhouse in middle Tennessee, a property they had owned between around the late 1970s and 1997.On April 30, 2013, EvilEnglish posted to Reddit that the safe had been unlocked, revealing "treasure" from his grandparents' past.Inside, he found "dozens of rare coins, pocket watches and wristwatches, jewelry, and stacks of soggy money," according to KSL.com.The original Imgur album of photos, as well as multiple YouTube videos, are no longer available. Readers looking for pictures of the grandparents' "secret safe" can find them within the same news article from KSL.com, or from this HuffPost article from May 1, 2013.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_1510

We cut our deficits by more than half.

09/05/2014

In 2012, PolitiFact twiceratedTrueclaims that President Barack Obama failed to keep a promise to cut federal deficits in half by the end of his first term. At that point, the budget gap topped a trillion bucks and Republican congressmencalled out Obamabecause the deficit had been reduced by just 15 percent. But there was the president atLaborfest 2014in Milwaukee proclaiming we cut our deficits by more than half. In his Sept. 1, 2014speech, the president ticked off for union supporters a list of major policy decisions he contends helped boost the economy and improve the governments bottom line. We cant cover all of those here, but the deficit claim grabbed our attention. Has it really been cut in half? The White House Office of Management and Budget pointed us to achart prepared by that officein 2013 as proof of Obama's claim. It compares the yearly deficits under Obama, expressed -- as they often are -- as a share of the nations entire economy, which is measured by the Gross Domestic Product. At the start of Obamas term, the chart showed, the figure was 9.2 percent. The latest figure was 4.1 percent. That appears to back Obama's statement. But let's examine this in detail. To do that, we reviewed figures published by the Congressional Budget Office as well as theWhite Houses Office of Management and Budget. We also consulted with independent fiscal experts. The baseline year for comparison is fiscal year 2009, which ended Sept. 30 of that year. This was the last budget from President George W. Bush, as Obama took office in January of that year. The most recent complete fiscal year is 2013. Those are the same years Obama's chart showed. Our analysis showed the drop easily topped 50 percent, and was actually somewhat higher than Obama's chart would indicate. As a share of the economy, we found -- and our experts confirmed -- the drop was from 9.8 percent in 2009 to 4.1 percent in 2013. Obamas chart actually reflects a lower deficit figure for 2009, and therefore a lower share of GDP, 9.2%. Thats because instead of using the actual 2009 deficit of $1.4 trillion, Obama lowers it by the $200 billion in increased deficit spending that he -- not Bush -- pushed through in the stimulus plan to address the crisis that became the Great Recession. That resulting figure is what Obama calls the deficit he inherited from Bush. But no matter which figure is used, the deficit as a share of the economy still fell by more than half. Show me the money There's another way to look at this. That is, in raw dollars -- the way attendees at the union event probably would. Indeed, deficits are often expressed that way as well. The White House and CBO figures each show that in 2009 the deficit reached $1.4 trillion. As a share of GDP, it easily topped any year since World War II, said Steve Ellis, vice president of the nonpartisan Taxpayers for Common Sense. By the end of fiscal year 2013, the deficit figure had fallen to $679.5 billion in dollars unadjusted for inflation. Thats a 52 percent drop. Heres the year-by-year trend in 2009 dollars: Fiscal year Deficit Deficit as share of GDP 2009 1,412,688,000,000 9.8 percent 2010 1,294,373,000,000 8.8 percent 2011 1,299,593,000,000 8.4 percent 2012 1,086,963,000,000 6.8 percent 2013 679,502,000,000 4.1 percent There is one wrinkle. When you use Obama's methodology to compare the deficit Obama inherited -- the 2009 result minus the stimulus package to that in 2013 -- the drop in the deficit is slightly under half, at 48%. Ellis and Marc Goldwein, senior policy director at the nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, both included an additional year, the 2014 fiscal year, which is just a month from completion. The Aug. 27, 2014CBO estimate for this years budget,fiscal year 2014, is a continued shrinking of the deficit to $506 billion, or 2.9 percent of GDP. Those figures would put Obama's claim over the top no matter the number-crunching method. Looking ahead Ellis cautioned that talking about deficit amounts in raw dollars doesnt really give a good sense of the scale: A $400 billion deficit in a $10 trillion economy is a lot bigger than a $400 billion deficit in $17 trillion economy. And he and Goldwein emphasized that while the deficit has been halved, its been halved from a skyscraping peak. In the decade before deficits exploded in 2008 and 2009, they averaged just over 1 percent of GDP, including three years of surpluses, we calculated. As of 2013, that figure was at 4.1 percent. The growth in the deficit from 2007 to 2009 was due mainly to factors related to the Great Recession, said Goldwein. Tax collections fell as people lost jobs and corporate profits dropped; spending on food stamps and other aid programs rose with increased need; stimulus and tax break legislation passed, as did bailouts of financial firms. The economic recovery, wind-down of stimulus, reversal of TARP/Fannie transactions, and lower interest rates are really what has caused our deficit to fall so much, Goldwein told us. He mentioned cuts in discretionary spending as well. Looking ahead, the CBO warns that later in the next decade deficits as a share of the economy will grow and federal debt will climb without changes in current policies. But Obama, its fair to say, was speaking of the change during his presidency. And his claim dovetails with one PolitiFact National checked in July 2013, ratingTrueObamas claim that the deficit is falling at the fastest rate in 60 years. Our rating At a union rally on Labor Day, Obama declared We cut our deficits by more than half. The numbers back up Obamas claim: Thanks to income tax revenues rising and spending on emergency assistance dropping, Americas deficit has fallen by more than 50 percent from its highest point since World War II to a level $733 billion lower. We rate the claim True.

True

In 2012, PolitiFact twiceratedTrueclaims that President Barack Obama failed to keep a promise to cut federal deficits in half by the end of his first term.At that point, the budget gap topped a trillion bucks and Republican congressmencalled out Obamabecause the deficit had been reduced by just 15 percent.But there was the president atLaborfest 2014in Milwaukee proclaiming we cut our deficits by more than half.In his Sept. 1, 2014speech, the president ticked off for union supporters a list of major policy decisions he contends helped boost the economy and improve the governments bottom line.The White House Office of Management and Budget pointed us to achart prepared by that officein 2013 as proof of Obama's claim.To do that, we reviewed figures published by the Congressional Budget Office as well as theWhite Houses Office of Management and Budget. We also consulted with independent fiscal experts.The Aug. 27, 2014CBO estimate for this years budget,fiscal year 2014, is a continued shrinking of the deficit to $506 billion, or 2.9 percent of GDP.And his claim dovetails with one PolitiFact National checked in July 2013, ratingTrueObamas claim that the deficit is falling at the fastest rate in 60 years.

FMD_train_1094

The median male worker in this country has not seen a raise, inflation adjusted, for 30 years, basically.

01/15/2014

For all the advances since the era of teased-out rocker hair, one thing hasnt changed for Americas average working man: the amount of bacon he brings home. So says Rana Foroohar, a CNN global economic analyst andTimemagazine assistant managing editor (who, by the way,snagged thefirst interviewwith new Federal Reserve chair Janet Yellen). Appearing on CNNsThe Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer,Foroohar brought up the point during a general discussion about the countrys economic woes. You know, I have to jump in on this because we are living in a time when the corporate share of the overall economic pie is as high as it has been in decades, Foroohar said. Meanwhile, the median male worker in this country has not seen a raise, inflation-adjusted, for 30 years, basically. Foroohars eye-popping statistic about median male worker income is certainly interesting. We wanted to know if it is correct. Comparing 1982-2012 TheU.S. Census Bureauproved a go-to source. The bureaus Septemberreporton income, poverty and health insurance coverage in 2012 contains text and tables outlining historical changes (or lack thereof) in earnings for both men and women. Foroohar referenced median earnings, which experts say is a better measure than the average because the income difference between the countrys rich and working-class earners is stark. In 2012, the latest year for which data is available, the median full-time, year-round male worker earned $49,398. In 1982, exactly 30 years earlier, earnings in 2012 dollars were $48,152. So from 1982 to 2012, there was actually an inflation-adjusted raise of $1,246.But thats more because Foroohar is looking at two years in isolation. Tracking the income of median male workers over time shows that incomes climbed steeply from 1960 to 1970. But the figure has ebbed and flowed and remained mostly stagnant since 1970, dipping as low as $46,841 in 1996 and reaching a high of $51,670 in 1973. (You canview the tableon page 50 of the report.) Point being:You could just as easily widen or shrink Foroohars 30-year window by a few years and find a number that supports her point. Median earnings of the 2012 male worker are down compared to his counterpart 25 years ago (who earned $50,166 in 1987), 35 years ago ($50,480 in 1977) or 40 years ago ($50,074 in 1970). Even though Foroohars window shows a 2.6 percent pay increase between 1982 and 2012, its really pretty close to flat, said Gary Burtless, a senior fellow in economic studies at the Brookings Institution. It means that male median earnings increases just 0.085 percent per year (that is, 85 one-thousandths of a percentage point per year), he said. Some say men are even worse off Foroohars larger point, while technically correct and oft-repeated, misses the larger economic picture and is actually too generous, argues Michael Greenstone, an economics professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Greenstone co-authored a2012New York Timespostwith Brookings fellow Adam Looney that presented another way to examine median male wages. Instead of counting only the earnings of men with jobs, as the Census Bureau does, Greenstone factored in all working-age men. Factoring in men without jobs brings down the median income. The fraction of men in the workforce has declined sharply over the last several decades, he wrote, from 94 percent of prime-age men working in 1970 to 81 percent in 2010. It happened as incarceration rates and enrollment in the Social Security disability insurance program increased and labor force participation waned, as well as the wild success of women entering the labor market, he said. His 2012 study found real earnings of median males actually dropped by 19 percent since 1970, he found. This means that the median man in 2010 earned as much as the median man did in 1964 nearly a half century ago. The reasons for the trend are complex, Greenstone told us. Yes, there have been sweeping changes in technology, machinery and trade over the last 30 or 40 years that have had some effect. More striking, he said, is that educational attainment among men, which used to climb with each generation, has dropped off. The decline in working is concentrated among the men who have lower levels of education, Greenstone said. Its not concentrated among the college-grad guy who is married to a super successful woman. Michael Saltsman of the conservative Employment Policies Institute also argued the idea of stagnant wages is more controversial than it seems -- to a different end. He cited a 2012study in the National Tax Journalthat analyzed middle-class income from the past three cycles. Instead of using pre-tax income data, the researchers expanded the income definition to include taxes, income transfers and fringe benefits. Middle-class Americans are found to have made substantial gains, and these increases are even larger when including non-cash income, such as the ex-ante value of health insurance, the report says. Meanwhile, the earnings of female workers isnt cited as often as a metric of the economy because their participation in the workforce jumped sharply over the last 50 years. In any case, the 2012 full-time, year-round median female worker earned $37,791, according to census figures. In 1982, when about half as many women were working, median earnings were $29,731. Our ruling Foroohar said, the median male worker in this country has not seen a raise, inflation-adjusted, for 30 years, basically. Federal data for 1982-2012 shows a slight increase, though the numbers show the real value of median male earnings have been in the range of $46,840-$51,670 for about 40 years. We found another point of view that says the real median income has declined significantly once men without jobs are factored in. We also found a broader definition of income that changes the dynamic. Still, Foroohar clearly has a point. We rate her claim Mostly True.

True

So says Rana Foroohar, a CNN global economic analyst andTimemagazine assistant managing editor (who, by the way,snagged thefirst interviewwith new Federal Reserve chair Janet Yellen). Appearing on CNNsThe Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer,Foroohar brought up the point during a general discussion about the countrys economic woes.TheU.S. Census Bureauproved a go-to source. The bureaus Septemberreporton income, poverty and health insurance coverage in 2012 contains text and tables outlining historical changes (or lack thereof) in earnings for both men and women.Tracking the income of median male workers over time shows that incomes climbed steeply from 1960 to 1970. But the figure has ebbed and flowed and remained mostly stagnant since 1970, dipping as low as $46,841 in 1996 and reaching a high of $51,670 in 1973. (You canview the tableon page 50 of the report.)Greenstone co-authored a2012New York Timespostwith Brookings fellow Adam Looney that presented another way to examine median male wages. Instead of counting only the earnings of men with jobs, as the Census Bureau does, Greenstone factored in all working-age men. Factoring in men without jobs brings down the median income.Michael Saltsman of the conservative Employment Policies Institute also argued the idea of stagnant wages is more controversial than it seems -- to a different end. He cited a 2012study in the National Tax Journalthat analyzed middle-class income from the past three cycles. Instead of using pre-tax income data, the researchers expanded the income definition to include taxes, income transfers and fringe benefits.

FMD_train_793

Are Sink-Toilet Combinations Common in Japan?

06/10/2021

A fixation on toilets took over the internet in mid-June 2021 when a social media user posted a photo to Reddit that claimed to depict a Japanese toilet with a hand sink attached to the top of it. According to the post, water from the sink is used to wash a persons hands before it is reused in the toilet bowl for future business. toilets Reddit Screengrab/Reddit Reddit An internet search for the toilet-topping sinks revealed that there are several options available for less than $100. Product descriptions claim that the sink can be installed on a toilet in less than five minutes simply take the already existing reservoir lid off of the toilet and replace it with the sink addition. A valve connects the faucet to the toilet and, according to customer reviews, water used to wash hands is then automatically drained into the toilet bowl and reused during flushing. customer reviews Similar products have been on the market in recent years and have been advertised as not only something to save water but a method that encourages men to wash hands. In 2013, NPRs "All Tech Considered" featured the toilet-sink and toilet-urinal addition, noting that the combination has been around in Japan since at least 1956. According to an excerpt from Leonard Korens book, 283 Useful Ideas From Japan, the Japanese inspired combo is both practical and budget-friendly: encourages men to wash hands All Tech Considered 283 Useful Ideas From Japan "This system costs less than conventional toilets and comes in eight- and-16-liter sizes and a rainbow of colors. Also available for bathrooms are artificial flushing-sound generations that people can use to cover up the sound of what they're doing without wasting water." The toilet review site, Toilet Found! noted that the toilet-sink systems became popular in Japan after World War II when the real estate came with a hefty price tag. The design was meant for small bathrooms and living quarters, where creativity and innovation were key to comfortability. In addition to space constraints, the system also conserves and reuses water and does not require a heater to warm the water, potentially lowering utility bill expenses as well. Toilet Found! The design is such that water from the supply line channels through the faucet for you to wash your hands. And then drained out through the sink drain and into the tank. The water will keep flowing to fill up the tank, until it gets shut off by the float, wrote the review site. This way water is not wasted. Compare to the usual when you have to wash your hands on a separate sink with clean water. And it adds up to more water used for each visit to the toilet.

True

A fixation on toilets took over the internet in mid-June 2021 when a social media user posted a photo to Reddit that claimed to depict a Japanese toilet with a hand sink attached to the top of it. According to the post, water from the sink is used to wash a persons hands before it is reused in the toilet bowl for future business. Screengrab/RedditAn internet search for the toilet-topping sinks revealed that there are several options available for less than $100. Product descriptions claim that the sink can be installed on a toilet in less than five minutes simply take the already existing reservoir lid off of the toilet and replace it with the sink addition. A valve connects the faucet to the toilet and, according to customer reviews, water used to wash hands is then automatically drained into the toilet bowl and reused during flushing.Similar products have been on the market in recent years and have been advertised as not only something to save water but a method that encourages men to wash hands. In 2013, NPRs "All Tech Considered" featured the toilet-sink and toilet-urinal addition, noting that the combination has been around in Japan since at least 1956. According to an excerpt from Leonard Korens book, 283 Useful Ideas From Japan, the Japanese inspired combo is both practical and budget-friendly:The toilet review site, Toilet Found! noted that the toilet-sink systems became popular in Japan after World War II when the real estate came with a hefty price tag. The design was meant for small bathrooms and living quarters, where creativity and innovation were key to comfortability. In addition to space constraints, the system also conserves and reuses water and does not require a heater to warm the water, potentially lowering utility bill expenses as well.

FMD_train_128

Could this image be depicting the Bitterroot Forest Fire?

08/31/2003

A Once-in-a-Lifetime Photo of a Forest Fire in Bitterroot Forest, Montana This awesome picture was taken in the Bitterroot National Forest in Montana on August 6, 2000, by a fire behavior analyst from Fairbanks, Alaska, named John McColgan, using a digital camera. Since he was working when he took the picture, he cannot sell or profit from it, so he should at least be recognized as the photographer of this once-in-a-lifetime shot. The year 2000 brought one of the worst fire seasons in half a century to the United States. By August, more than 4 million acres (an area greater in size than the states of Connecticut and Rhode Island combined) had been burned by wildfires, and dozens of blazes raged out of control in eleven western states, with nearly half of the conflagrations occurring in Idaho and Montana. On August 6, 2000, as several fires converged in the Bitterroot National Forest near the town of Sula in western Montana, John McColgan, a fire behavior analyst employed by the USDA Forest Service, snapped the spectacular photograph shown above with a digital camera and described the experience to a writer for the western Montana newspaper The Missoulian: "That's a once-in-a-lifetime look there. I just happened to be in the right place at the right time. I've been doing this for 20 years, and it ranks in the top three days of fire behavior I've seen." The day was August 6, the Sunday when several forest fires converged near Sula into a firestorm that overran 100,000 acres and destroyed 10 homes. Temperatures in the flame front were estimated at more than 800 degrees. Nevertheless, McColgan said, the wildlife appeared to be taking the crisis in stride, gathering near the East Fork of the Bitterroot River where it crosses under U.S. Highway 93. "They know where to go, where their safe zones are," McColgan said. "A lot of wildlife did get driven down there to the river. There were some bighorn sheep there. A small deer was standing right underneath me, under the bridge." McColgan snapped the photo with a Kodak DC280 digital camera. Since he was working as a Forest Service firefighter, the shot is public property and cannot be sold or used for commercial purposes. After McColgan downloaded his amazing image to an office computer, a friend found it, e-mailed a copy to another friend, and by mid-September 2000, the picture was blazing its way across the Internet. Because many forwarded copies of the image lacked any attribution or explanation, e-mail recipients began to circulate rumors about its origins and authenticity; some claimed that the photo was snapped by a tourist, that it was taken during the extensive Yellowstone National Park fire of 1988, or that it was yet another digital fake. As John McColgan said afterward, "I couldn't have profited from [the photograph], so I guess I'm glad so many people are enjoying it." We're happy to help him at least receive proper credit for his work. This picture has also been circulated with text identifying it as a photograph of August 2003 forest fires in British Columbia, of October 2007 California wildfires, of the June 2012 Waldo Canyon Fire in Colorado Springs, Colorado, and of the November 2016 forest fires in Gatlinburg, Tennessee. Chaney, Rob. "Mystery Solved: Forest Service Firefighter Captured Tragedy with Digital Camera." The Missoulian. 15 September 2000. CNN.com. "Montana Homes Threatened by Wildfires." 7 August 2000.

True

On 6 August 2000, as several fires converged in the Bitterroot National Forest near the town of Sula in western Montana, John McColgan, a fire behavior analyst in the employ of the USDA Forest Service, snapped the spectacular photograph shown above with a digital camera and described the experience to a writer for the western Montana newspaper The Missoulian:After McColgan downloaded his amazing image to an office computer, a friend found it, e-mailed a copy to another friend, and by mid-September 2000 the picture was blazing its way across the Internet. Because many forwarded copies of the image lacked any attribution or explanation, e-mail recipients began to circulate rumors about its origins and authenticity some claimed that the photo was snapped by a tourist, that it was taken during the extensive Yellowstone National Park fire of 1988, or that it was yet another digital fake.

FMD_train_957

More astronauts have been to the moon than farmers who paid the inheritance tax in 2013.

04/23/2015

Liberal comedian Bill Maher made an out-of-this-world comparison to poke a hole in the Republican argument that the estate tax threatens the livelihoods of family farmers. Of 5,000 Americans who paid the estate tax in 2013, 20 farmers paid it, Maher said on his April 17, 2015, show. Twenty-four Americans have been to the moon. More astronauts have been to the moon than farmers who paid the inheritance tax in 2013. There obviously is no relation between the number of farmers paying the estate tax and the number of Americans who went to the moon, but as a point of trivia, Mahers claim is an intriguing one. A reader asked us to do the magic that you do, which is determining whether Mahers point is accurate. One small step for fact-checkers ... Caveat No 1: Maher is using the number of astronauts who have been to the vicinity of the moon, not just the number of moonwalkers. Twelve Americans have walked the moons surface over six Apollo missions, starting with Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin planting an American flag in 1969. (If youre not sure about whether the lunar landing really happened, you wont like this fact-check, but you may enjoy these bona fidemoon misconceptions.) Add another 12 American astronauts who orbited the moon but did not walk on it, and you get 24. NASA chief historian William Barry said the 24 Americans is a solid figure in that it doesnt double count Americans who made more than one lunar trip. There were several astronauts who flew to the Moon and orbited it on one mission and then were lucky enough to go back and land on it on a later mission, Barry said. Jim Lovell, for instance, made two trips to the moon in Apollo 8 and Apollo 13, but he never walked on it. (In this Smithsonian picture, Lovell and his crew emerge from the U.S.S. Iwo Jima after landing the spacecraftApollo 13in the South Pacific.) One giant leap for the truth What Maher calls the inheritance tax and what Republicans call the death tax is more accurately described as the estate tax. Some wealthy families face this tax when they pass on assets (cash, land, homes, stocks, etc.) to heirs after death. Most estates do not owe estate taxes. It affects about 5,500 Americans whose estates exceed the exemption limit of$5.43 million per person. If the estate is worth more than that, an heir could pay a tax rate up to 40 percent on the value of the estate above that limit. Even though it doesnt affect all that many people, it brings in big bucks for the government. Repealing it would cost about $270 billion over the next decade, according to the congressional Joint Committee on Taxation. In the week ahead of Mahers April 17 show, House Republicans approveda planto eliminate the estate tax, saying it can prove devastating to families forcing them to sell land, lay off workers, and even shut down entirely. So did this tax really affect just 20 farmers in 2013, as Maher said? The number comes from an estimate by the Tax Policy Center, a joint venture of the Urban Institute and Brookings Institution. Tax Policy Center economists wanted to get an idea of how the tax would affect estates, including those with farm and business assets, in 2013. All of their numbers are estimates based on the centersestate tax model. They defined family farms and businesses as estates having farm or business assets less than $5 million and half of the estate. These farms and businesses had taxable returns and total assets between $5 million and up $10 million. Its a definition that hones in on small farms and business the most relevant in responding to the myth that many small farms and small businesses must be liquidated to pay estate tax, said Brandon DeBot, a research assistant at the federal fiscal policy division of the liberal Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. Using the Tax Policy Centers model, an estimated 20 small farms and small businesses would have had to pay the estate tax in 2013, amounting to a total of $6.9 million of tax with an average tax rate of 4.9 percent. So thats not just small farms, its small farmsandsmall businesses, which might not be a farm. Caveat No. 2: The number of farms and businesses is probably not exactly 20, as it is an estimate rounded to the nearest multiple of 10. That means the number is anywhere from 16-24. Caveat No. 3: Maher talked about family farmers, addressing the Republican argument about the plight of farmers who could lose their livelihood because of the estate tax. But family farms can be big farms, and thats where things get more complicated. Maher set up his comparison by discussing the plight of family farmers, but then later dropped the word family. That one word is important. The Tax Policy Center broadened the scope to include all farm and business estates, regardless of size, with at least half of their value from farm business activity. By that method, 120 farm and business estates would have had to pay the estate tax in 2013, said Roberton Williams, a Tax Policy Center fellow who worked on the model. Alan D. Viard, a resident scholar at the conservative American Enterprise Institute who studies federal tax and budget policy, says the the estate tax has a lot of flaws, but the effect on farmers is just not the right grounds to criticize this tax. Mahers point was strong, he said. In 2001, House Republicans voted to repeal the death tax.New York TimesreporterDavid Cay Johnston scoured1999 IRS filings, phoned the American Farm Bureau Federation, and interviewed farmers in effort to find examples of working farmers who lost their farms because of estate taxes. He found none, writing that the reality of who is bitten by the estate tax is different from the mythology, as the overwhelming majority of beneficiaries are the heirs of people who made their fortunes through their businesses and investments in securities and real estate. And in 2001, the estate tax wasmore robust than it is now, with a lower exemption level of $675,000 and a higher top tax rate of 55 percent. It is a small number, bottom line, Williams said. Theyre going to be the exception rather than the rule. Our ruling Maher compared 24 American astronauts who have been to the moon to 20 farmers whom he said were the only ones to pay the estate tax. His count for astronauts who have been to the moon is reasonable, counting both American moonwalkers and those who have flown in its orbit during various Apollo missions. The larger point about only 20 farmers paying the estate tax is a little more complicated. A 2013nonpartisan study found 20 small farmsandsmall businesses faced the estate tax in 2013. Maher referred to family farms in setting up his claim. Saying small farms would have been better. And he dropped family in later references. Experts said Maher generally could have been more careful in his wording, but that his bit of trivia largely checks out, as does his point that the estate tax affectsvery few small farmers. We rate his claim Mostly True. https://www.sharethefacts.co/share/2edf78cd-008c-408e-ae35-939322661e70

True

Twelve Americans have walked the moons surface over six Apollo missions, starting with Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin planting an American flag in 1969. (If youre not sure about whether the lunar landing really happened, you wont like this fact-check, but you may enjoy these bona fidemoon misconceptions.)Jim Lovell, for instance, made two trips to the moon in Apollo 8 and Apollo 13, but he never walked on it. (In this Smithsonian picture, Lovell and his crew emerge from the U.S.S. Iwo Jima after landing the spacecraftApollo 13in the South Pacific.)Most estates do not owe estate taxes. It affects about 5,500 Americans whose estates exceed the exemption limit of$5.43 million per person. If the estate is worth more than that, an heir could pay a tax rate up to 40 percent on the value of the estate above that limit.In the week ahead of Mahers April 17 show, House Republicans approveda planto eliminate the estate tax, saying it can prove devastating to families forcing them to sell land, lay off workers, and even shut down entirely.Tax Policy Center economists wanted to get an idea of how the tax would affect estates, including those with farm and business assets, in 2013. All of their numbers are estimates based on the centersestate tax model.In 2001, House Republicans voted to repeal the death tax.New York TimesreporterDavid Cay Johnston scoured1999 IRS filings, phoned the American Farm Bureau Federation, and interviewed farmers in effort to find examples of working farmers who lost their farms because of estate taxes. He found none, writing that the reality of who is bitten by the estate tax is different from the mythology, as the overwhelming majority of beneficiaries are the heirs of people who made their fortunes through their businesses and investments in securities and real estate.And in 2001, the estate tax wasmore robust than it is now, with a lower exemption level of $675,000 and a higher top tax rate of 55 percent.Experts said Maher generally could have been more careful in his wording, but that his bit of trivia largely checks out, as does his point that the estate tax affectsvery few small farmers. We rate his claim Mostly True.https://www.sharethefacts.co/share/2edf78cd-008c-408e-ae35-939322661e70

FMD_train_121

Was Joel Osteen nominated by Paul Ryan for the role of House Chaplain?

05/01/2018

Shortly after outgoing House Speaker Paul Ryan fired House Chaplain Patrick Conroy in a closed-door meeting at the end of April 2018, a rumor that the House Speaker had nominated televangelist Joel Osteen as his replacement started to spread online: fired spread Paul Ryan did not nominate Joel Osteen to be the new House Chaplain. This rumor originated with a satirical post on the message board Democratic Underground: post In a surprise move during the weekend, Speaker Ryan proposed that Prosperity Gospel champion, Joel Osteen, become the new chaplain for the U.S. House of Representatives. In a brief comment, the Speaker said, "America needs to become more prosperous. It needs a new approach to individual wealth. Pastor Osteen carries that message and shows us the way. Working Americans should be grateful to pay more taxes to the Federal Government. As Jesus, himself, said, 'It will be returned an hundred-fold.' Joel, my good friend, suggests that the road to a more prosperious America will come through even higher taxes on low-income citizens, who will benefit in the end, of course. I agree with the good Pastor, and will be introducing new legislation to that effect soon." The author of this post, a user identified as "MineralMan," wrote in the comments that the "evil grin" emoticon included at the bottom of the post indicated that the text was satirical. Forum users also compared the text to articles on the Borowitz Report, a well-known satirical blog published in the New Yorker: Borowitz Report Zanona, Melanie. "Ryan Explains Decision to Dismiss House Chaplain." The Hill. 27 April 2018.

False

Shortly after outgoing House Speaker Paul Ryan fired House Chaplain Patrick Conroy in a closed-door meeting at the end of April 2018, a rumor that the House Speaker had nominated televangelist Joel Osteen as his replacement started to spread online:Paul Ryan did not nominate Joel Osteen to be the new House Chaplain. This rumor originated with a satirical post on the message board Democratic Underground:The author of this post, a user identified as "MineralMan," wrote in the comments that the "evil grin" emoticon included at the bottom of the post indicated that the text was satirical. Forum users also compared the text to articles on the Borowitz Report, a well-known satirical blog published in the New Yorker:

FMD_train_1509

Did AT&T Have a Contract to Audit Dominion Voting Systems?

12/27/2020

On Christmas morning of 2020, a recreational vehicle exploded on the streets of Nashville near a building owned by AT&T that lies one block from the companys office tower. Shortly afterwards, social media users began circulating variants of a conspiracy theory holding that AT&T had been engaged to undertake a "forensic audit of Dominion voting machines," the latter of which were frequent targets of false election fraud claims made by President Donald Trump and his supports after Trump lost his re-election bid in November 2020: exploded election fraud The implication of the conspiracy theory was that the explosion had been intended to destroy the machines before they were audited in order to cover up evidence of massive voting fraud. However, both AT&T and Dominion have disclaimed the notion that the former company was engaged in audit of the latter, or that any Dominion-related systems were being moved to Nashville in preparation for a "forensic audit" (by anyone). No available external evidence suggests AT&T was involved in any such audit, either. As of now, the person of interest identified by the FBI in connection with the explosion, Anthony Quinn Warner, is believed to have been "paranoid about 5G technology" (another frequent subject of conspiracy theories) rather than possessing any election-related motive. Anthony Quinn Warner 5G technology conspiracy theories

False

On Christmas morning of 2020, a recreational vehicle exploded on the streets of Nashville near a building owned by AT&T that lies one block from the companys office tower. Shortly afterwards, social media users began circulating variants of a conspiracy theory holding that AT&T had been engaged to undertake a "forensic audit of Dominion voting machines," the latter of which were frequent targets of false election fraud claims made by President Donald Trump and his supports after Trump lost his re-election bid in November 2020:As of now, the person of interest identified by the FBI in connection with the explosion, Anthony Quinn Warner, is believed to have been "paranoid about 5G technology" (another frequent subject of conspiracy theories) rather than possessing any election-related motive.

FMD_train_1710

Ronald Reagan defeated Jimmy Carter by a significant margin, even though he was behind by 6% in the 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, which 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_1294

Whataburger Closing Its Doors?

06/28/2017

A prank Facebook post that appeared to link to an article reporting that the restaurant chain Whataburger was closing its doors surfaced in June 2017. However, clicking on the link takes you to a fake news story about the restaurant chain's faux announcement on the prank website Channel22news.com. The Texas-based food chain is shutting its doors effective April 26 due to numerous reports of food poisoning, with high concentrations of salmonella found in meat served in the DFW area during the month of April. Anyone who has eaten at Whataburger should be tested for salmonella poisoning, as symptoms can appear as many as three weeks later. Doctors urge all individuals who have eaten at these restaurants, especially in the Dallas-Fort Worth area, to seek medical attention immediately if they have dined there more than once in the past few weeks. The more frequently you have eaten there, the higher the likelihood of an infection occurring. Lawsuits have already been filed, and Whataburger has decided to shut its doors due to the litigation and payouts it expects to incur. Filing for bankruptcy in a downtown Austin courthouse, Whataburger spokesman Jeff Smith stated, "We have taken the advice of our counsel and filed Chapter 7; we have shut our doors." It is unclear what the future holds for the Texas-based chain. One thing is for certain: Allyson Heffernan is sure to be disappointed! Channel22News is clearly labeled with various disclaimers and carries a "you got owned" meme in its header: "We do NOT support FAKE NEWS!!! This is a prank website that is intended for fun. Bullying, violent threats, or posts that violate public order are NOT permitted on this website." Channel22News, as well as other sites of its ilk, allows users to generate their own fake news stories. These stories are then packaged into social media posts that resemble genuine news items. Because many people share links on social media without actually reading the stories, these "pranks" frequently reach large audiences. In response to the prank, Whataburger created a Facebook post of their own: "An article is being circulated stating that Whataburger will be closing all stores. This article is a hoax, and we aren't going anywhere." Dewey, Caitlin. "6 in 10 of You Will Share This Link Without Reading it, a New, Depressing Study Says." Washington Post. 16 June 2016.

False

However, clicking on the link takes you to a fake news story about the restaurant chain's faux announcement on the prank web site Channel22news.com:Channel22News, as well as other sites of its ilk, allow users to generate their own fake news stories. These stories are then packaged into social media posts that resemble genuine news items. Because many people share links on social media without actually reading the stories, these "pranks" frequently reach large audiences. In response to the prank, Whataburger created a Facebook post of their own:

FMD_train_1685

47 percent of Americanscant pay for an unexpected $400 expense through savings or credit cards, without selling something or borrowing money.

06/09/2015

The economic struggles of ordinary Americans are getting a good airing this presidential season and a statistical finding from the Federal Reserve provides ammunition for a candidate in either party who wants to make the case that too many people have been left behind. Washington PostreporterHunter Schwarzplugged some Fed data into a little segment called By the numbers, in the newspapers June 8, 2015, edition: 47: The percentage of Americans who cant pay for an unexpected $400 expense through savings or credit cards, without selling something or borrowing money, according to the Federal Reserve. The dollar figure caught our eye. It seemed surprisingly low. Other researchers have tried to gauge the financial vulnerability of American households to an economic setback, but typically, the amounts they test are much higher, in the thousands of dollars. We thought wed take a closer look. The Survey of Household Economics and Decisionmaking A few years ago, the Federal Reserve Board began asking Americans how well theyre doing financially. In May, the Fedreleased the 2014 results. The questions ranged from retirement planning, to how people managed any student debt they might have, to whether they think their overall situation is headed up or down. To measure participants sense of financial vulnerability, the survey asked them to imagine they had an emergency expense that cost $400, and it asked them how they would cover it. The better-off group said they would use cash-on-hand or a credit card that they would pay off in a month. Others said they would use a credit card but take time to pay it off, or they might borrow from a family member or a pay-day loan company, or they might sell something. And some said there was no way they could cover an unexpected $400 expense. Across the more than 5,800 people who completed the online survey, 53 percent said they would be able to pay essentially immediately. That left 47 percent who said they could not. Specifically, respondents indicate that they simply could not cover the expense (14 percent); would sell something (10 percent); or would rely on one or more means of borrowing to pay for at least part of the expense, including paying with a credit card that they pay off over time (18 percent), borrowing from friends or family (13 percent), or using a payday loan (2 percent), the report said. Interestingly, making over $100,000 a year was no guarantee of security. About a quarter of the more affluent group said that at the very least, they would pay off the $400 over time. As this chart from the report shows, ethnicity and income strongly affected the ability to absorb a $400 outlay. Other studies George Washington University business professor Annamaria Lusardi and two colleagues (Daniel J. Schneider at Princeton University and Peter Tufano at Oxford University) conducteda similar surveyin the depths of the recession in 2009. Their study asked people how they would handle a sudden $2,000 bill that they had to pay in 30 days. About half the respondents said they would probably or certainly be unable to cope with such an emergency out of their own funds. Lusardi said she considers the results comparable. The Federal Reserve had a lower amount, but it had to be paid right away, she told PunditFact. We gave people more time, so I think the percentages are consistent. In fact, even with five years separating the surveys, it is the similarity in the responses that caught her eye. Lusardi said it is a sign of the recessions deep damage to the typical Americans balance sheet. Until recently, the labor market and wages have been stagnant, Lusardi said. In the recession, many families used up their reserves of liquidity. It takes a long time to reestablish a good financial situation. There are other indications that most Americans live with a limited financial cushion. When the government shutdown for two weeks in 2013, aUniversity of Michigan research teamtracked a hefty drop in household spending among government workers. Even though their paychecks were interrupted only a short time, households cut their outlays in half, and many delayed paying their mortgages and credit card bills. Some racked up high cost credit card debt that took them up to nine months to pay back. Lusardis 2009 research included a number of other western nations. For the record, the United States ranked sixth out of eight in residents saying they would certainly or probably be able to manage a sudden $2,000 bill. Rank/Country Percent able to cope Rank/Country Percent able to cope 1. Italy 80.1 5. Portugal 54.1 2. Netherlands 73.2 6. United States 50 3. Canada 71.7 7. Germany 49.4 4. France 62.8 8. United Kingdom 47.8 Our ruling Schwarz said 47 percent of Americans cant pay for an unexpected $400 expense through savings or credit cards, without selling something or borrowing money. The only caveat here, and its a very minor one, is that figure represents the number of people who say they cant make that payment, based on a Federal Reserve Board survey. The Federal Reserve Board results are in line with a similar study and related research. We rate the claim True.

True

Washington PostreporterHunter Schwarzplugged some Fed data into a little segment called By the numbers, in the newspapers June 8, 2015, edition:A few years ago, the Federal Reserve Board began asking Americans how well theyre doing financially. In May, the Fedreleased the 2014 results. The questions ranged from retirement planning, to how people managed any student debt they might have, to whether they think their overall situation is headed up or down.George Washington University business professor Annamaria Lusardi and two colleagues (Daniel J. Schneider at Princeton University and Peter Tufano at Oxford University) conducteda similar surveyin the depths of the recession in 2009. Their study asked people how they would handle a sudden $2,000 bill that they had to pay in 30 days.There are other indications that most Americans live with a limited financial cushion. When the government shutdown for two weeks in 2013, aUniversity of Michigan research teamtracked a hefty drop in household spending among government workers. Even though their paychecks were interrupted only a short time, households cut their outlays in half, and many delayed paying their mortgages and credit card bills. Some racked up high cost credit card debt that took them up to nine months to pay back.

FMD_train_1737

Do These Photographs Show a Homeless Veteran Dying Under a Bush?

09/26/2018

A pair of photographs reportedly showing a severely dehydrated homeless veteran named Kent near death on the streets of Los Angeles started making their way around social media in September 2018: These images were apparently so shocking to some viewers that they suggested the photographs perhaps showed an artwork or a Halloween decoration as opposed to a real human being. Unfortunately, these pictures are genuine. The photographs were first posted online by Facebook user Nick Spano on 22 September 2018. The original Facebook post contained a lengthy bit of text which was largely concerned with Spano's view on how the homeless (especially homeless veterans) are treated in the United States, along with a few details about the pictured individual, who was said to be a 68-year-old man named Kent. The man told Spano that he was a veteran and that he was "looking for a place to die" when Spano brought him some water before paramedics arrived to take him to the hospital: posted This is America: Kent, a 68 year old veteran dying under a bush outside million dollar properties in LA. The softball size tumor on the side of his face is now a gaping hole. Dried blood covers his hands and face. Flies swarm around his head, not bothering to wait for him to die before laying their eggs in the open wound that is crawling with hundreds of maggots. He tries to speak, but I can no longer understand him. This is fucking America! Im just looking for a place to die, he said. Those were his first words to me when I first discovered Kent about a month a go in shallow bed under the bushes outside my place. Like many people, my initial gut reaction was, not in my backyard! But I know better. Im aware that homelessness is a symptom of our broken and wasteful system, and the basic lack of decency, and compassion towards one another. We treat people like trash. We want to discard the parts of society we dont want, but like plastic, its never going to go away. All we do is make the problem worse, rather than realizing that our own habits are the problem. The way we treat people is the problem. We speak to one another through our own filters, and judgements before we even get to know them. So, instead I brought Kent water, and sat down to talk with him for awhile. He pulled his hoodie aside and showed me the tumor on the side of his face. I did it to myself, he said. Years of smoking was the likely cause. He went to the VA for medical care, but he said that he felt like they were just waiting for him to die so he left. I asked if I could get him some help, but he didnt want it. Im just looking for a place to die, he said. We are all full of shit, guys. Lets be honest with ourselves. Between the look-at-me-now Instagram selfies, the woke AF Facebook posts, and the heated political rants over which party is more American, we have lost our souls. Weve sold out. Weve forgotten that real wealth comes from investing in one another. This isnt the Me Too era, its just the Me era. We are the wealthiest, and most wasteful consumer culture in the history of humankind, and we buy everything they sell us, even their excuses. We cant fix every problem! Its too big! Its too expensive! Get a job! I had to work for it, why shouldnt they?! Bullshit!!! Each bomb we dropped on Syria costs us $100 million, and weve dropped dozens. The Iraq War cost American taxpayers over $2.5 trillion dollars and counting, and it was a lie! We have our own national emergency right here in the City of Dreams, but we dont have enough money to fix it. Could you imagine what would happen if we took funding for just one of those bombs, and dropped it into social services for American communities; into shelters for the homeless; medical care for our vets; clean water for Flint?!?! Dont say we cant fix the problem, because thats bullshit. We can!!! We are just so god damn brainwashed and complacent that we dont think we actually have any power to change it. But change starts when we stop ignoring the problem, and realize that we are the ones to fix it. Even the smallest act makes a big difference. There is no one else to call! Tag! Youre fucking it! The irony of the fact that I took a photo of Kent as he lie dying outside my house while waiting for paramedics to arrive, and posted it here for all to see, isnt lost on me. This might appear hypocritical to some, but that wont change my commitment to people like Kent in my community. I will continue to treat these people with dignity and respect, and be of service anyway I can, and if in the process, this post gets at least one of you, the next time you see someone camped out on the street, to stop and talk to them; to put your hand on their shoulder; to call them brother or sister; and to restore even the slightest sense of dignity in them through a simple act of compassion, then its worth it. Not everyone can help in the same way, and sometimes people dont want help, but we all can be human to one another. As they lifted Kent onto the stretcher, he raised his hand, and gave me a peace sign. I dont know his status at this time, but I will post an update as soon as I can. People over Profits -- Compassion over Comfort Spano updated his post a few days later but he didn't have much additional information to report: Unfortunately, there isn't much to share at this time. I finally found the hospital where Kent was taken and being treated, but due to patient privacy laws (HIPPA), and the fact that I don't know Kent's full name, they wont not give me any information at this time. I dont know if he has passed, or if he is still in their care. I have made a request to a supervisor to share my information with Kent so that he can grant me access. I've also made it clear that there are many people who want to show their support, so I'm hoping they help us make that happen. Without Kent's last name, it's difficult to verify some of the details in this Facebook post, but it doesn't bear any of the hallmarks that have revealed similar posts to be hoaxes. For instance, we could not find any record of these photographs appearing online prior to Spano's post, which supports that Spano truly was the person who took them. This post also doesn't include a call to action urging users to share it (which is a common tactic for disingenuous clickbait). We contacted Spano for more information about Kent, and he provided us with security camera footage to verify that his photographs were authentic and noted that Kent had told him during previous interactions he was a veteran. Spano never got Kent's last name, however, and Kent didn't have any ID on him when he was taken away by paramedics. While we can't officially verify whether or not Kent was a veteran, his story is, unfortunately, rather plausible. According to the National Coalition for Homeless Veterans, approximately 40,000 veterans in the United States are homeless on any given night. National Coalition for Homeless Veterans National Coalition for Homeless Veterans. &nbsp "FAQ About Homeless Veterans." Retrieved 25 September 2018.

True

The photographs were first posted online by Facebook user Nick Spano on 22 September 2018. The original Facebook post contained a lengthy bit of text which was largely concerned with Spano's view on how the homeless (especially homeless veterans) are treated in the United States, along with a few details about the pictured individual, who was said to be a 68-year-old man named Kent. The man told Spano that he was a veteran and that he was "looking for a place to die" when Spano brought him some water before paramedics arrived to take him to the hospital:While we can't officially verify whether or not Kent was a veteran, his story is, unfortunately, rather plausible. According to the National Coalition for Homeless Veterans, approximately 40,000 veterans in the United States are homeless on any given night.

FMD_train_1555

Did Senator Tom Cotton advocate for drug testing individuals receiving Social Security benefits?

01/24/2018

Amid tense talks between Congressional Republicans and Democrats over the 2018 federal budget, the attention of many observers turned to each side's record on government spending, benefits and entitlements, and fiscal priorities. In that vein, a widely shared Facebook meme targeted Republican Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas, accusing him of supporting a modified version of a long-standing liberal bugbear: drug testing for welfare recipients. On January 21, 2018, Facebook user Ken Stanley wrote, "Tom Cotton calls for every person who receives Social Security to be drug tested; those who test positive will lose benefits." This claim is false. We searched Cotton's speeches, op-eds, and press releases, as well as the Congressional Record and news archives, and found no evidence of the Senator ever having advocated such a policy. In an email, a spokesperson for Cotton told us the meme was "completely false": Senator Cotton does not support (nor has he ever supported) drug testing for Social Security recipients. Indeed, even those who call for drug testing for welfare recipients do not typically propose the same policy for Social Security. This is because Social Security is more widely regarded as an earned benefit (workers contribute to it through payroll taxes), while programs such as housing assistance or the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (formerly known as food stamps) are regarded as welfare. Senator Cotton does, however, have a record of making statements and advocating policies around welfare assistance that have raised eyebrows. In 2015, Salon and Raw Story headlines accused Cotton of "blaming" drug addiction on Social Security benefits and claiming that receiving Social Security disability benefits causes individuals to "spiral" into drug addiction. The articles, as well as Cotton's actual comments, were more nuanced. In a speech at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, Cotton advocated for reform of the Social Security disability system and drew a link between population decline and social ills (including drug addiction) in certain counties and regions, and rates of Social Security disability insurance uptake: "It's hard to say what came first or caused the other: population decline or increased disability usage. Or maybe economic stagnation caused both. Regardless, there seems to be, at least at the county and regional level, something like a disability tipping point. When a county hits a certain level of disability usage, disability becomes a norm. It becomes an acceptable way of life and an alternative source of income to a good-paying, full-time job. After a certain point, when disability keeps climbing and becomes endemic, employers will struggle to find employees or begin or continue to move out of the area. Population continues to fall, and a downward spiral kicks in, driving once-thriving communities into further decline. Not only that, but once this kind of spiral begins, communities could begin to suffer other social plagues as well, such as heroin or meth addiction and associated crime." In 2014, while running for the Senate, a Huffington Post writer accused Cotton of "calling food stamp recipients addicts." Again, his comments were much more nuanced than that description. According to a Huffington Post transcript of a virtual town hall hosted by Cotton in July 2014, the then-Congressman defended voting down a Democratic bill relating to agricultural payments and federal food aid on the basis that it did not sufficiently reform the food stamps program, including by requiring drug testing for applicants: "I don't think that we should be using farmers as a way to pack more welfare spending into Barack Obama's government," Cotton said. "Nor should we have a food stamp program that isn't reformed, that doesn't have job training and work requirements, that doesn't have drug testing requirements, so we can get people who are addicted the help they need. Or make sure that long-term addicts or recidivists are not abusing taxpayer dollars." In March 2017, Cotton joined with Republican Senate colleagues in voting to nullify an Obama-era Department of Labor rule that limited the circumstances under which states could conduct drug testing for individuals applying for unemployment insurance. President Donald Trump later formally reversed the guideline, effectively giving states greater powers in conducting drug screening for jobless benefits. So Senator Cotton has certainly supported drug testing for welfare programs but never for Social Security.

False

On 21 January 2018, Facebook user Ken Stanley wrote: In 2015, Salon and Raw Story headlines accused Cotton of "blaming" drug addiction on Social Security benefits, and claiming that receiving Social Security disability benefits causes individuals to "spiral" into drug addiction. The articles, as well as Cotton's actually comments were more nuanced. In 2014, while running for the Senate, a Huffington Post writer accused Cotton of "calling food stamp recipients addicts." Again, his comments were much more nuanced than that description. According to a Huffington Post transcript of a virtual town hall hosted by Cotton in July 2014, the then-Congressman defended voting down a Democratic bill relating to agricultural payments and federal food aid, on the basis that it did not sufficiently reform the food stamps program, including by requiring drug testing for applicants:In March 2017, Cotton joined with Republican Senate colleagues in voting to nullify an Obama-era Department of Labor rule which limited the circumstances under which states could conduct drug-testing for individuals applying for unemployment insurance. President Donald Trump later formally reversed the guideline, effectively giving states greater powers in conducting drug screening for jobless benefits. So Senator Cotton has certainly supported drug testing for welfare programs but never for Social Security.

FMD_train_891

Is Olive Garden set to close down?

12/11/2020

In December 2020, an online advertisement displayed a picture of an Olive Garden Italian Restaurant sign along with text that read: "Closing Time: Here's All The Restaurant Chains Closing in 2020." This advertisement was misleading. Olive Garden is not closing all of its restaurants. Readers who clicked the advertisement were led to a 50-page story on the website Money Pop. 50-page story While the advertisement promised a list of restaurant chains that would be closing in 2020, the headline on the actual story was different: "These Popular Restaurant Chains Are Losing Money Fast." headline The story mentioned Olive Garden, but it only mentioned that two locations had closed in Springfield, Massachusetts, and Birmingham, Alabama, in March and April, respectively. Springfield, Massachusetts Birmingham, Alabama Olive Garden did not go out of business in 2020, but that's not to say it hadn't faced financial hardship during the COVID-19 pandemic. The coronavirus had led to the closure of dine-in services at thousands of different restaurants across the United States. This meant less revenue, which resulted in lost jobs. In many cases, restaurants closed. lost jobs restaurants closed On June 22, 2020, Nation's Restaurant News reported that National Restaurant Association President and CEO Tom Ben said the restaurant industry had faced "catastrophic losses." reported Darden Restaurants owns the Olive Garden brand, as well as LongHorn Steakhouse, Cheddar's Scratch Kitchen, Yard House, The Capital Grille, Seasons 52, Bahama Breeze, and Eddie V's. On Dec. 9, 2020, InvestorPlace.com reported that Darden had managed to survive the pandemic thus far, but it also asked: "What's next for Darden Restaurants?" reported The bull case is built on a bear case regarding other restaurants. Without government help, small operators are closing by the score. This means chains like Darden may be all thats left when people again feel safe to eat out. Darden has managed to make money at Olive Garden while closing half its tables. It reinstated the dividend and paid back its $270 million emergency loan. Once the pandemic is over, Cramer predicts, fast-casual chains like Olive Garden will be the height of fine dining. the height of fine dining. Darden is expected to report earnings Dec. 18, for the quarter ending in November. The estimate is for 72 cents per share of net income on $1.7 billion of sales. That would beat last years profit on 17% less revenue. on $1.7 billion of sales on 17% less revenue The Money Pop story also mentioned The Cheesecake Factory on its list. We previously covered that rumor as well. previously covered 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

This advertisement was misleading. Olive Garden is not closing all of its restaurants. Readers who clicked the advertisement were led to a 50-page story on the website Money Pop.While the advertisement promised a list of restaurant chains that would be closing in 2020, the headline on the actual story was different: "These Popular Restaurant Chains Are Losing Money Fast."The story mentioned Olive Garden, but it only mentioned that two locations had closed in Springfield, Massachusetts, and Birmingham, Alabama, in March and April, respectively.Olive Garden did not go out of business in 2020, but that's not to say it hadn't faced financial hardship during the COVID-19 pandemic. The coronavirus had led to the closure of dine-in services at thousands of different restaurants across the United States. This meant less revenue, which resulted in lost jobs. In many cases, restaurants closed.On June 22, 2020, Nation's Restaurant News reported that National Restaurant Association President and CEO Tom Ben said the restaurant industry had faced "catastrophic losses."On Dec. 9, 2020, InvestorPlace.com reported that Darden had managed to survive the pandemic thus far, but it also asked: "What's next for Darden Restaurants?"Darden has managed to make money at Olive Garden while closing half its tables. It reinstated the dividend and paid back its $270 million emergency loan. Once the pandemic is over, Cramer predicts, fast-casual chains like Olive Garden will be the height of fine dining.Darden is expected to report earnings Dec. 18, for the quarter ending in November. The estimate is for 72 cents per share of net income on $1.7 billion of sales. That would beat last years profit on 17% less revenue.The Money Pop story also mentioned The Cheesecake Factory on its list. We previously covered that rumor as well.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_556

Man who sells wedding dresses

05/10/2004

Claim: A man listed a wedding gown on eBay via a hilarious offer of sale that included photos of him posing in the dress. . Example: [Collected on the Internet, 2004] For Sale: One Slightly Used Size 12 Wedding Gown. Only worn twice: Once at the wedding and once for these pictures. Make: Victoria Style: 611 Size: 12 Divorce forces sale I found my ex-wife's wedding dress in the attic when I moved. She took the $4000 engagement ring but left the dress. I was actually going to have a dress burning party when the divorce became final, but my sister talked me out of it. She said, "Thats such a gorgeous dress. Some lucky girl would be glad to have it. You should sell it on EBay. At least get something back for it." So, this is what Im doing. Im selling it hoping to get enough money for maybe a couple of Mariners tickets and some beer. This dress cost me $1200 that my drunken sot of an ex-father-in-law swore up and down he would pay for but didnt so I got stuck with the bill. Luckily I only got stuck with his daughter for 5 years. Thank the Lord we didn't have kids. If they would have turned out like her or her family I would have slit my wrists. Anyway, its a really nice dress as you can see in the pictures. Personally, I think it looks like a $1200 shower curtain, but what do I know about this. We tried taking pictures of this lovely white garment but it didnt look right on the hanger as you can see, so my sister says, "You need a model." Well, quite frankly my sister isnt exactly small, (like a size 12 is?) so she wouldnt pose for the picture. Seeing as I have sworn off women for the time being and I aint friends with any, it left me holding the bag. I took the liberty of blacking out my face - not to protect the ex-wife but to protect me from my bar buddies and co-workers finding out about it. I would never live it down. Actually I didnt think my head would fit in the neck hole, but then I figured she got her Texas cheerleader hair through there I could get my head in it. Though, after looking at the pictures, I thought it made me look fat. How do you women wear this crap? I only had to walk 3 feet and I tripped twice. Dont worry ladies - I am wearing clothes on underneath it. I gotta say it did make me feel very pretty. So if it can make me feel pretty, it can make you feel pretty, especially on the most important day of your life, right? Anyway, I was told to say it has a train and a veil and all kinds of shiny beady things. I think it's funny that one picture makes it look like the chest plate off an Imperial Storm Trooper. Did I mention that all I want is a ball game and beer? Cheap at twice the price. Ladies, you wont regret this. You may regret the dude you marry but not the dress. Just a little side note - As I was putting this ad in EBay, it asked me for a color. Is a wedding dress any other freaking color than white or ivory??!! If it is it wouldn't be a wedding dress, now would it?? I suppose black would work... On Apr-26-04 at 10:38:31 PDT, seller added the following information: Well, the auction is a little over half over and I am just amazed. This thing has taken more hits than that pothead that lives in the next building. Man, oh man, if hits were bucks Id be getting a suite at Safeco. I also have received TONS of email. I dont have the time to reply to all of them but I just want to let everyone know that I appreciate the well wishes. Of the email I received: Five or so were invitations to ball games in other states. Two of those were for little league games. Do they have those cushy executive boxes with the free chicken wings at those? One email was from Scotland. Its a good thing he wrote it because I wouldnt be able to understand a word he said. Never did get through Braveheart. Most were thanking me for the laugh. Youre entirely welcome. Five years of misery was well worth the hearty guffaw that was my pleasure to give you. Oh, yeah. I also got three marriage proposals. Yes, you read it right - three marriage proposals. I feel like one of those mass murderers on death row. I never understood how the hell they got more chicks than I did. Now I know. They sold crap on eBay. On Apr-26-04 at 23:45:56 PDT, seller added the following information: Holy Moly! The hit counter is starting to look like the odometer in my truck! Not the new shiny black full-size 4-wheel-drive American pick-up that I had to part with, but the somewhat older, multicolored, lumpy, tiny, 2-wheel-drive foreign pick-up that belches smoke. A little something about that vehicle, though: its absolutely amazing! When I get inside it to go to the store, I am all depressed. But when I arrive at the store, Im so freaking loopy from inhaling the fumes, I forget why I went there in the first place. Im saving buckets of money. Of course, I will probably have to spend it all on the tuberculosis I will acquire, but hey, you cant have everything. I felt compelled to update this ad once more due to all of your emails. The first thing I have to say is thank you all for your support in my time of need. It was a truly harrowing experience. Some of you men know exactly what I mean. Seeing as this has turned into my little public forum, I just want to address a few of the emails that kind of left me scratching my head. I now have five marriage proposals. You would think my speaking of the ones I already got yesterday would have put a damper on it, but you women sure are persistent. One woman actually said she doesnt want to marry me, but wouldnt mind being my ex-wife. Hmmm. Let me think about that. Nope. No thanks, already got one. (Pssst. Didnt I mention I had one? Who wants an ex-wife that cant read? Now, I know what you guys are thinking - "If she cant read, then the divorce would be smooth sailing." Well, that would be all well and good but I didnt say her ATTORNEY couldnt read. You following me on this?) Other emails are serious buyers asking about the dress. "How long is the train?" and "Does the gown come with the headdress and veil?" Yes, headdress and veil are included, but the do-rag stays with me. And if the train was long enough for my exs caboose, its long enough for yours. You will have to supply your own baggage, though. I gave mine to Goodwill. There was this one woman who wrote, "You should have covered your tattoos. People will be able to recognize you, like on Americas Most Wanted." HELLO!!! Im a guy selling a dress. Im not wanted for war crimes. Some of your emails made me laugh. Like the bitter woman that wished she had her exs testicles to sell on eBay. Im not too sure theres a market for that, though. Then there was the guy that gave his wifes wedding dress to the Salvation Army by mistake, thinking it was a Christmas tree. Guess he didnt have any Christmas balls that year. This has also been a learning experience for me. I got a lot of messages correcting me about the color of wedding dresses. For Russian Orthodox, they are blue. For Chinese they are red. Mexico has multi-colored ones. All I know is, for my next wedding I will be wearing a hairy, flesh-toned ensemble because I will be buck naked with a toe tag lying on a slab in the morgue because I would have killed myself. A lot of folks were asking me if I wear womens dresses a lot. I can honestly say that this is the first time I have ever donned female attire. Its also the first time Ive been inside something feminine that didnt nag me to take out the garbage. It seems a few people have taken offense to my inferring a size 12 is big. One male even pointed out that Marilyn Monroe was a size 14. Now, I would agree with you that size 12/14 is small if I lived elsewhere. But I live right here in the good old 48 Contiguous, where binging and purging is a way of life. American women do not want to be double digits in size. Just ask any woman what size they want to be. Invariably they will say five or seven. Wealthy will be the person that opens a store for Lane Bryant-sized women but sews size 7 tags on all the clothes. On the flip side of that, I have taken offense to some of the people that told me Im ugly and a loser. All I have to say is youd be ugly too if you had a huge white blotch on your face. And as far as being a loser, I think you have it all wrong. I am such the winner. It isnt every day an average guy can make 50,000 people laugh. Thanks to each and every one of you from the heart of my bottom. Origins: The online auction powerhouse eBay has been the setting of many strange come-ons, some seriously meant and some far less so. In addition to a throng of earnest sellers and determined bargain hunters that frequent this popular online bazaar, it is also populated by its share of crazies intent upon sneaking their hoax listings into the marketplace. Consequently, one can't always tell fish from fowl at first glance. Over the years, our readers have queried us about various eBay auctions because they harbored suspicions about particular listings, either due to the nature of the goods being tendered or because something about the pitch struck them as not quite right (e.g.; an offer of a tea kettle, which displayed additional wares of the seller). Yet few of the auctions so doubted have been asked about as often as the April 2004 proffering of a size 12 Victoria wedding gown, an item that isn't in and of itself all that unusual. But it wasn't the dress that set people to wondering; it was the seller's comments, which appeared to afford a hilarious look into one man's private hell. The seller wasn't so much advertising a dress as he was proclaiming from a public soapbox how awful his wife had been. The auction listing was just as much about getting even as it was about unloading an item he had no particular use for. tea kettle Or was it? Had a gal with "Texas cheerleader hair" really so turned a man against marriage that he swore that "for my next wedding I will be wearing a hairy, flesh-toned ensemble because I will be buck naked with a toe tag lying on a slab in the morgue because I would have killed myself"? Herein rested the listing's appeal: The story was entertaining, but was it real? The solicitation was on the up and up, at least in regard to the nature of the merchandise being vended there was such a dress, and the offer of sale was genuine. However, some (if not all) of the gown's backstory was the stuff of fairy tales. The original eBay listing posted by 42-year-old Larry Star wasn't provoking much interest among those shopping for a wedding dress, so he rewrote it to make it amusing resulting in the posting that has served to make him famous. The tale of marital woe posted by this Brooklyn native both contained invented details and omitted key bits of information. Though he has a sister, she didn't talk him out of the dress burning party he had his heart set upon by suggesting he list the gown on eBay and so get something out of it. He also had an ex-wife prior to the one whose dress he supposedly was selling. (Star and his first missus were married in 1994, separated in 1996, and were divorced in 1998.) And contrary to his statement, "Thank the Lord we didn't have kids. If they would have turned out like her or her family I would have slit my wrists," he and his second wife did indeed have a son together during their short-lived marriage. The unhappy couple wed in 2000, separated in 2001 after a domestic kafuffle (which reportedly resulted in Star's being charged with domestic violence assault in the fourth degree and interfering with the reporting of domestic violence), and divorced in 2003. Though "five years of misery" might well have been worth the hearty guffaw he says was his pleasure to give the online community, those years weren't spent "stuck" with the "drunken sot's" daughter; his time cohabitating with Wife #2 amounted to just a bit more than a year. It's not known if the gown in question even belonged to his ex-wife, as she hasn't surfaced to speak publicly about the matter. Also, according to the Houston Chronicle, when asked if the dress had really been hers, Mr. Star sidestepped the question, instead replying, "I got the wedding dress, I wanted to get rid of it. I was going to burn it and had the idea of selling it on eBay. I needed to sell it on eBay with all the other dresses on there, and I needed to make it stand out." And stand out it did. The auction of the fabled wedding gown ended 28 April 2004 with a buyer using the online handle of "absolutsth" placing the winning bid of $3,850. Yet all is not coming up roses for the intrepid seller who one would assume to be realizing a profit of $2,650 on the gown he says cost originally $1,200, as the sale has fallen through. According to Star, the buyer has backed out, claiming "I left my computer on and somebody made the bid for me." The folks at eBay have told Star he can either accept the second-highest bid or re-list the dress and hold the sale again. As of 7 May 2004, he had not decided whether he would accept the next highest legitimate bid (if there even was a legitimate bid). By the time the auction ended, Star's listing on eBay had been viewed more than 5.8 million times. Some of those visitors, possibly caught up in the frenzy of it all, placed bids they did not intend to honor. (Officials at eBay had to weed out many phonies at one point the bidding reached $99 million.) How many of the remaining bids were legitimate is not known. And, even if all those bids were meant seriously at the time they were placed, some of those prospective buyers may now be having second thoughts, particularly those who offered more than $1,000 for a used, stained dress that was only worth $1,200 when it first came off the hanger. The ultimate fate of the frock may take it in a far different direction than down the aisle on the back of a budget-conscious bride. Its listing (which has now been viewed 11 million times) has brought recognition to its owner and has possibly opened the way to a new career for this software test designer and part-time musician. Thanks to the dress, Larry Star has twice been a guest on both MSNBC's Countdown and NBC's Today Show, each time wearing the unsold gown. Also thanks to the dress, he has made his debut as a stand-up comedian at the Punchline Comedy Club in Atlanta. He has said he would like to pursue a comedy writing career, and all this attention might well work to get that going. Though there are many stand-up comedians on the circuit, we know of none that perform their schtick outfitted in wedding regalia. Could this gown do for Star what a sledgehammer and a watermelon did for Gallagher? Barbara "smash hit" Mikkelson Additional Information: Weddingdressguy.com (Larry Star) Last updated: 3 July 2007 Sources: Brodeur, Nicole. "Fact Is, There's Some Fiction to Man's Pitch to Sell His Ex-wife's Wedding Dress on eBay." The Seattle Times. 29 April 2004 (p. B1). Curry, Ann, Matt Lauer and Katie, Couric. "Today." NBC. 30 April 2004. Eldredge, Richard. "Wedding Dress Guy Jilted by eBay Bidder." The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. 7 May 2004 (p. E2). Kelso, John. "Best of eBay: A Wedding Dress Tale." Cox News Service. 2 May 2004. Olbermann, Keith. "Countdown." MSNBC. 30 April 2004. Olbermann, Keith. "Countdown." MSNBC. 28 April 2004. Parks, Louis. "On eBay, Wedding Dress for Success." The Houston Chronicle. 30 April 2004 (Houston; p. 1). Weiss, Tara. "A Star is Born, Selling Wedding Dress on eBay." Hartford Courant. 30 April 2004 (p. D2). Associated Press. "Man Who Sold Ex's Wedding Dress on eBay Earns Instant Fame." 30 April 2004. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. "15 Minutes Still Ticking for Wedding Dress Guy." 4 May 2004 (p. E2).

True

Over the years, our readers have queried us about various eBay auctions because they harbored suspicions about particular listings, either due to the nature of the goods being tendered or because something about the pitch struck them as not quite right (e.g.; an offer of a tea kettle, which displayed additional wares of the seller). Yet few of the auctions so doubted have been asked about as often as the April 2004 proffering of a size 12 Victoria wedding gown, an item that isn't in and of itself all that unusual. But it wasn't the dress that set people to wondering; it was the seller's comments, which appeared to afford a hilarious look into one man's private hell. The seller wasn't so much advertising a dress as he was proclaiming from a public soapbox how awful his wife had been. The auction listing was just as much about getting even as it was about unloading an item he had no particular use for.Additional Information: Weddingdressguy.com (Larry Star)

FMD_train_1328

Does the CDC Own an Ebola Patent?

10/10/2014

Claim: The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) owns a patent on Ebola. : : The CDC patented a strain of Ebola in 2010. : The CDC created Ebola and obtained a patent for it to restrict or profit from the development of a vaccine. Example: [Collected via email, October 2014]Is there any truth to the rumor that The United States Government is one of 6 owners of a patent on the Ebola virus? Does this mean they have the right to demand blood samples from any victims? Can they force those on government health care to take experimental Ebola vaccines that they develop? Is the CDC purposely allowing Ebola to enter the country in order to cause a "run" on a newly developed vaccine? Origins: The 2014 Ebola outbreak began in December 2013 and is the deadliest recorded since the discovery of ebolaviruses in 1976. The severity and scope of the 2014 Ebola outbreak has caused significant global concern over the threat posed by the disease, and a number of rumors have resulted. One pervasive strain of rumors centers around "ownership" of what many understand to be the Ebola virus: more specifically, ownership of a patent granted to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in 2010, Patent No. CA2741523A1. An abstract for that patent reads: CA2741523A1 The invention provides the isolated human Ebola (hEbola) viruses denoted as Bundibugyo (EboBun) deposited with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ("CDC"; Atlanta, Georgia, United States of America) on November 26, 2007 and accorded an accession number 200706291. As the Ebola outbreak intensified, concern over the spread of the disease steadily increased; and the seemingly-suspect CDC patent on Ebola began to circulate on social media. Many users interpreted use of words like "invention" to indicate the U.S. government or its agents had literally invented Ebola in the lab as a tool to control the population or push forward an agenda involving expensive vaccines and cures. However, the 2014 Ebola outbreak is due to a strain of the virus known as Ebola Zaire and not the EboBun strain for which the CDC patent was obtained, so any pharmaceutical dollars to be made would not be affected by a patent protecting a strain of the virus not central to the current outbreak. Speculation often centers upon the reasons any agency (government or privately held) would patent a virus such as Ebola if not to restrict the development of a cure or to capitalize on the profits from a potential cure. But at the time the Ebola patent was granted in 2010, the area of human gene patents was not as legally clear as it became following a Supreme Court decision a few years later. On 13 June 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on the case of Association For Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics in respect to whether isolated genetic material was patent eligible. Justice Clarence Thomas opined in the decision that "genes and the information they encode are not patent-eligible ... simply because they have been isolated from the surrounding genetic material," and he added: decision In this case, by contrast, Myriad did not create anything. To be sure, it found an important and useful gene, but separating that gene from its surrounding genetic material is not an act of invention. On 9 October 2014, professor of biological sciences at Purdue University and Ebola researcher David Sanders addressed rumors about the CDC's patent on Ebola. Sanders explained that overall the practice of patenting "life forms" is not uncommon for the CDC, noting that patents like the one the CDC holds on the EboBun strain of Ebola can circumvent for-profit patenting as well as facilitate broader research: The CDC does hold some patents on life forms, but it generally does this for the common good, so a commercial company can't come along and patent it. The CDC lets researchers work with the strain without fees. Until the Supreme Court's 2013 decision on isolated genetic material, the ambiguity involved made such patents a potential necessity. In light of it the CDC's intent in patenting Ebola appears to be far less nefarious. Last updated: 10 October 2014 Mears, Bill. "Court: Human Genes Cannot Be Patented" CNN. 13 June 2014.

NEI

One pervasive strain of rumors centers around "ownership" of what many understand to be the Ebola virus: more specifically, ownership of a patent granted to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in 2010, Patent No. CA2741523A1. An abstract for that patent reads:Speculation often centers upon the reasons any agency (government or privately held) would patent a virus such as Ebola if not to restrict the development of a cure or to capitalize on the profits from a potential cure. But at the time the Ebola patent was granted in 2010, the area of human gene patents was not as legally clear as it became following a Supreme Court decision a few years later. On 13 June 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on the case of Association For Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics in respect to whether isolated genetic material was patent eligible. Justice Clarence Thomas opined in the decision that "genes and the information they encode are not patent-eligible ... simply because they have been isolated from the surrounding genetic material," and he added:

FMD_train_1113

Fraudulent Scheme Involving Government Grants

12/10/2004

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

NEI

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

FMD_train_1240

Today the top 1 percent earn a higher share of our national income than any year since 1928.

01/30/2015

Barack Obama and U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, have recently expressed similar concerns about the future of working-class Americans, although they differ in their proposed solutions. In his January 2015 State of the Union address, the Democratic president stated his desire to work with Congress to offer free community college to students while creating additional education, child care, and retirement savings programs to support the middle class. He proposed that funding would come from a $320 billion tax increase on the nation's highest earners and financial institutions, including investment banks. After Obama's speech, Cruz told Fox News he was disappointed with Obama's goals to increase government spending and taxes, which he argued would harm hardworking Americans. Cruz claimed that the country's rich and powerful have become complacent during Obama's presidency. "Today, the top 1 percent earn a higher share of our national income than in any year since 1928," Cruz said. Was Cruz correct? He cites West Coast economist Emmanuel Saez, a University of California, Berkeley economics professor who studies wealth and income inequality. Cruz's spokesman, Phil Novack, indicated that Cruz does not agree with Obama, who stated in his speech that he wants to reduce the top 1 percent's after-tax income. Novack explained that Cruz believes the only way to jumpstart the economy is by championing pro-growth policies like energy development and a flatter, simpler tax structure. Cruz's comparison to 1928 comes from a report by the Pew Research Center, which cites research by Saez. Saez helps steer the World Top Incomes Database, sponsored by the Paris School of Economics, a research center and consortium of French universities offering graduate degrees and post-graduate fellowships in economics. The database, established in 2011, shows the distribution of top incomes for more than 20 countries using data from millions of tax returns collected over about 100 years. Saez stated that he and economists, including Thomas Piketty, built the database from sources such as public-use files of individual tax returns. The public-use micro-files are anonymized to preserve each taxpayer's confidentiality, Saez noted. To examine changes over time ourselves, we created a chart from the database. The resulting data, covering 1913, the earliest verifiable year, to 2012, shows that 1928 and 2012 were the top two years in which the top 1 percent of the richest Americans earned the greatest share of the nation's income, which the government categorizes into 15 categories, including wages, salaries, self-employment income, and income from dividends and interest. In 1928, the top 1 percent of earners, then comprising about 1.2 million residents, collectively held 19.6 percent of the nation's income. In 2008, the year Obama was elected president, the top 1 percent possessed nearly 18 percent. The 1 percent collectively saw their share of the nation's income increase by nearly 5 percent during the first three years of Obama's presidency. In his fourth year, 2012, the 1 percent (nearly 314 million residents) controlled 19.34 percent. According to the database, that was the greatest share these wealthiest Americans had held since 1928. (No. 3 goes to 1927, when the top 1 percent had 18.7 percent of U.S. income.) Top 15 years the richest American taxpayers had the greatest share of U.S. income from 1913 through 2012: Year | Top 1% income share 1928 | 19.6 2012 | 19.34 1927 | 18.68 1916 | 18.57 1929 | 18.42 2007 | 18.33 1914 | 18.16 2006 | 18.06 1926 | 18.01 1913 | 17.96 2008 | 17.89 2005 | 17.68 1936 | 17.64 1917 | 17.6 1925 | 17.6 Source: The World Top Incomes Database, 2011 (accessed Jan. 30, 2015) Saez informed us via email that Obama and Congress (which shifted to Republican control during his tenure) did little to address wealth inequality up until 2012, as the country recovered from the Great Recession, which officially lasted from December 2007 to June 2009. In a Sept. 3, 2013, report, Saez wrote that in 2012, average real incomes per family in the top 1 percent of earners nationally increased by 19.6 percent, while average incomes among the rest of the population grew by only 1 percent. The report suggested that the entire surge in top 1 percent incomes in 2012 could be attributed to income re-timing—when individuals delay making payments to report a higher income and take advantage of lower tax rates. Saez also indicated that he expects the top 1 percent's income share for 2014 to be slightly lower than in 2012 due to tax increases approved by Congress and Obama in 2013, which raised the nation's marginal income tax rate from 35 to 39.6 percent for married couples earning more than $450,000 annually, starting in 2013. This deal, which also reduced tax deductions for high-earning businesses and individuals, helped the government avoid the fiscal cliff, a term describing the impending impact of tax cuts initiated by President George W. Bush expiring at the end of 2012, coinciding with mandated spending reductions. Questions about income-inequality research have arisen regarding the World Top Incomes Database and Saez's work, which have become popular sources for politicians discussing income and wealth inequality. Some experts, however, have raised doubts about the Piketty-Saez inequality measurements. Gary Burtless, an economist with the Brookings Institution, noted that the Saez-Piketty data may understate income growth for the bottom 99 percent. He explained that Piketty and Saez limit their focus to pre-tax private income, including wages, self-employment earnings, dividends, interest, rental payments, and, in some cases, capital gains. As a result, Burtless argued, the database does not account for other income sources such as Social Security, unemployment benefits, food stamps, government reimbursement of medical bills, and untaxed fringe benefits like employer contributions to health and retirement plans. If these income items are included, Burtless stated, the bottom 99 percent of income recipients has experienced much faster income growth than what is shown by Piketty and Saez. He suggested that the best statistics on U.S. income inequality come from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO), which constructs three measures of income: gross market income, pre-tax income (gross market income plus cash and non-cash government transfers), and after-tax income (pre-tax income minus federal income, payroll, and excise taxes). CBO data indicates that from 2009 to 2010, the top 1 percent's share of income increased from 13.3 percent to 14.9 percent. (To clarify, Piketty and Saez report that their research shows the top 1 percent's share of income escalating from 16.68 percent to 17.45 percent.) Next, we spoke with Robert Litan, another economist with the Brookings Institution, about why income inequality escalated so quickly during Obama's first term. Litan noted that reasons for the rising share of the top 1 percent's income include increasing CEO pay relative to workers, the extraordinary success of tech entrepreneurs, facilitated by the Internet and globalization, and the achievements of financiers, particularly hedge fund managers. A June 12, 2014 article by the liberal Economic Policy Institute also highlights the disparity in earnings and compensation between CEOs and typical workers. Burtless and Litan further explained that Congress and Obama could not have significantly influenced the percentage increase of the top 1 percent's income based on Piketty-Saez measurements. They emphasized that Congress and the president have a more direct impact on after-tax income than on pre-tax income because their decisions directly affect the tax burdens and government transfer payments of families across different income levels. Our ruling: Cruz stated, "Today the top 1 percent earn a higher share of our national income than any year since 1928." Cruz accurately summarized calculations of income by respected researchers, although this statement does not acknowledge that there are some income streams not included in the cited calculations that would tend to benefit those of us in the bottom 99 percent, relatively speaking. Additionally, tax changes that took effect in 2013 may slightly reduce the proportion of the nation's income held by the top 1 percent. Mark this statement as Mostly True. MOSTLY TRUE: The statement is accurate but requires clarification or additional information.

True

In hisJanuary 2015 State of the Union address, the Democratic president said he wants towork with Congress to offer free community college to students while creating other education, child care and retirement savings programs to help the middle class. Funding, hes proposed, would come from a $320 billion tax increase on the nations highest earners and financial institutions including investment banks.By email, Cruz spokesman Phil Novack indicated Cruz does not agree with Obama, who said in his speech he wants to reduce the top 1 percents after-tax income. Novack said Cruz, rather than increase taxes on the wealthy, believes the only way to jumpstart the economyis by championing pro-growth policies like energy development and aflatter, simpler tax structure.And, Novack said, Cruz drew his comparison to 1928 froma reportby the Pew Research Center citing research byEmmanuel Saez, a University of California, Berkeley economics professor who studies wealth and income inequality.Saez helps steer theWorld Top Incomes Database, sponsored by the Paris School of Economics, a research center and conglomerate of French universities offering graduate degrees and post-graduate fellowships in economics.The database, in place since 2011, shows the distribution of top incomes for more than 20 countries using data from millions of tax returns collected over about 100 years. By email, Saez said he and economists includingThomas Pikettybuilt the database from sources including public-use files of individual tax returns. The public-use micro-files are blurred to preserve each payers confidentiality, Saez said.To check on changes over time for ourselves, we built a chart fromthe database.The resulting data, covering 1913, the earliest checkable year, to 2012, shows 1928 and 2012 to be the top two years where the top 1 percent of the richest Americans (the richest of the rich)earned the greatest share of the nations income, whichthe government breaks downinto 15 categories including wages, salaries and self-employment income plus income from dividends and interest.Source:The World Top Incomes Database, 2011 (accessed Jan. 30, 2015)In aSept. 3, 2013, report, Saez wrote that in 2012, average real incomes per familyin the top 1 percent of earners nationally increased by 19.6 percent, while average incomes among the rest of us grew1 percent. The report said the entire surge in top 1 percent incomes in 2012 could be a result of income re-timing -- when people hold off on making payments so they can report a higher income to take advantage of lower tax rates.By email, Saez said he expects the top 1 percents income share for 2014 to prove slightly lower than in 2012 as a result of tax increasesapproved by Congress and Obama in 2013raising the nations marginal income-tax rate from 35 to 39.6 percent for married couples earning more than $450,000 annually, starting in 2013. That deal, which also whittled tax deductions for high-earning businesses and individuals, helped the government avoidthe fiscal cliff, a term describing the looming impact of tax cuts initiated by President George W. Bush expiring at the end of 2012 at the same time congressionally mandated spending reductions were due to kick in.The World Top Incomes Database and Saezs work have become popular sources forpoliticiansto cite when discussing income and wealth inequality. Still, some experts have raised doubts about what goes into the Piketty-Saez inequality measurements.Burtless suggested the best statistics on U.S. income inequality come from the nonpartisanCongressional Budget Office. That's because CBO constructs 3 measures of income -- gross market income, pretax income (gross market income plus cash and no cash government transfers), and after-tax income (pre-tax income minus federal income, payroll, and excise taxes), Burtless said in his email. CBO data indicates that from 2009 to 2010, the top 1 percents share of income increased from 13.3 percent to 14.9 percent. (To refresh, Piketty and Saez say their research shows the top 1 percents share of income escalating from 16.68 percent to 17.45 percent.)Next, we talked to Robert Litan, another economist with the Brookings Institution, about why income inequality escalated so quickly in Obamas first term. By email, Litan said reasons for the rising share of the top 1 percents income include rising CEO pay relative to workers, extraordinary success of tech entrepreneurs in particular, made possible by Internet + globalization, and successful financiers, especially hedge fund managers. AJune 12, 2014 articleby the liberal Economic Policy Institute also highlights inequality in earnings and compensation between CEOs and typical workers.Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check.

FMD_train_1770

Did California Divert Dam Repair Funds to Programs for 'Illegals'?

02/16/2017

On 15 February 2017, the web site ConservativeDailyPost.com published an inaccurate story bearing the headline, "Post-Emergency Report Concludes: CA Governor Directed Critical Dam Funds To Programs For Illegals," and reportingthat a nonexistent post-emergency report found that California governor Jerry Brown spent $25 billion on programs for undocumented immigrants rather than investing in fixing the Oroville Dam, leading to current dangerous conditions in Northern California: Despite warnings about the flood danger posed by the Oroville Dam twelve years ago, flaky California Democratic Governor Jerry Brown ignored the warnings in favor of spending $25 billion per year on illegal immigrants. Now the chickens are coming home to roost as rainstorms later in the week could cause the neglected portion of the dam to dump large amounts of water on downtown Oroville. Brown stands revealed as spending money on unlawful immigrants rather than protecting the more than 20 million farmers and residential consumers the dam provides water to. While it is true that environmental groups have been warning state and federal authorities about structural deficiencies at Oroville Dam since well before Brown took office, the dam and programs for undocumented immigrants are funded from separate budget sources, thus spending on one does not impact the other.Ted Thomas, spokesman for the California Department of Water Resources, told us: Lake Oroville is part of the State Water Project, which is owned and operated by the California Department of Water Resources. All of the construction, operation, and maintenance costs of the State Water Project are paid by the 29 public water agencies (known as the SWP contractors) that take delivery of water from the project. ConservativeDailyPost.com linked to an article fromtheWashington Times,which quoted conservatives critical of the California governor for failing to address issues with the dam while spending on programs for undocumented people and a high-speed rail project. The article cites others who said President Trump should help repair the dam, instead of building a new wall at the U.S.-Mexico border: Critics of Californias willingness to spend billions of dollars on high-speed rail and services for illegal immigrants were quick to draw parallels to the states failure to invest in the Oroville Dam. The cost of fixing the spillway alone is now $200 million. Charlie Kirk, founder of conservative student group Turning Point USA, fired off a meme Monday saying, California Governor Jerry Brown spends $25 billion per year to support illegal immigrants/I wonder how much Governor Brown spent to maintain the Oroville Dam? Others defended Mr. Brown, pointing out that the emergency spillway had never been used until this year and that the catastrophic rainstorms came as a shock, especially after five years of drought. Still others turned the crisis into an opportunity to blast Mr. Trump, saying he should repair the Oroville Dam instead of building a wall on the southern border. While the article doesn't say where Kirk's meme sourced its "$25 billion" figure, a 2014 study by immigrant reduction proponentsFederation for American Immigration Reform claimed that undocumented immigrants cost the Golden State $25.3 billion annually. The claim is questionable, however, because the group lumps U.S. citizens born to undocumented immigrants in with non-citizen children when estimating the cost of education: study Nearly half of those expenditures ($12.3 billion) result from the costs of K-12 education for the children of illegal aliens both those illegally in the country and those born in the United States. Another major outlay ($2.1 billion) results from the need to provide supplemental English language instruction to Limited English Proficient students, many of whom are children of illegal aliens. Together, these educational costs are 57.1 percent of total expenditures. What is true is that environmental experts have been warning officials since at least 2003 about the now-compromised spillway that is threatening to collapse and flood communities below. As early as 2003, Friends of the River, the Sierra Club, and the South Yuba River Citizens League have been warning state and federal officials that the spillway was unsound. In a 2003 letter, the groups wrote: We are concerned that the physical structure of the ungated spillway may not comport well with the exist well with the existing reservoir regulation manual that calls for use of reservoir surcharge space by utilizing the Dam's ungated spillway when appropriate... At present, the ungated spillway at Oroville Dam consists of a spillway lip only and utilizes a hillside as the project spillway. Utilizing such a spillway has the potential to cause severe damage to the downstream hillside, project facilities, and downstream environments located in the path of the flood release... We do not believe that it is in the Departments best interest to pursue a relicensing strategy that might in practice reduce the effective flood control space at Oroville Dam. Rather, it would seem prudent to seek approval from FERC for modifications to the Dam such as the construction of a spillway below the ungated spillway lip that would allow Dam operators to operate the Dam consistent with the existing and desired flood operation rules without causing significant damages or disruption to project land and facilities. The Washington Post explains: In October 2005, as the Oroville Dam was going through a re-licensing process, the three groups filed a motion urging a federal regulatory agency to require state officials to armor the emergency spillway with concrete so that in the event of extreme rain and flooding, water would not freely cascade down and erode the hillside. The upgrade would have cost millions of dollars and no one wanted to foot the bill, said Ronald Stork, senior policy advocate for Friends of the River, one of the groups that filed the motion. When the dam is overfull, water goes over that weir and down the hillside, taking much of the hillside with it, Stork told The Washington Post. That causes huge amounts of havoc. Theres roads, theres transmission lines, power lines that are potentially in the way of that water going down that auxiliary spillway. Federal officials, however, determined that nothing was wrong and the emergency spillway, which can handle 350,000 cubic feet of water per second, would perform as designed and sediment resulting from erosion would be insignificant, according to a July 2006 memo from John Onderdonk, then a senior civil engineer for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Eleven years later, flooding due to mid-February 2017 storms forced nearly 200,000 residents living in the dam's shadow to evacuate their homes. As of 16 February 2017, crews are working to shore up the structure as more heavy rain is expected in the coming week. Stork told us: We were told not to worry our pretty little heads and they just ignored the issue of throwing the hillside into the channel below, sayingthat would never happen. Mother Nature just demonstrated they were incorrect. Capshaw, Ron."Post-Emergency Report Concludes: CA Governor Directed Critical Dam Funds To Programs For Illegals." The Conservative Daily Post.15 February 2017. Richardson, Valerie."California Spent on High-Speed Rail and Illegal Immigrants, but Ignored Oroville Dam." The Washington Times.13 February 2017. Martin, Jack."The Fiscal Burden of Illegal Immigration on California Taxpayers." Federation for American Immigration Reform.June 2014. Guerra, Kristine."The Government Was Warned That the Oroville Dam Emergency Spillway Was Unsafe. It Didnt Listen." The Washington Post.14 February 2017.

False

While the article doesn't say where Kirk's meme sourced its "$25 billion" figure, a 2014 study by immigrant reduction proponentsFederation for American Immigration Reform claimed that undocumented immigrants cost the Golden State $25.3 billion annually. The claim is questionable, however, because the group lumps U.S. citizens born to undocumented immigrants in with non-citizen children when estimating the cost of education:

FMD_train_688

Bacon Sandwich Reported as Offensive on Facebook

12/08/2016

On 23 November 2016, the Facebook page "I Am Proud To Be English" shared a photograph of a bacon sandwich alongside a meme implying that the image was banned because it was offensive to Muslims. The meme read: "I actually had this reported on my timeline as being offensive!! Is it? How many people dare to like and share it?" Tens of thousands answered the call, though many of the post's top comments expressed skepticism about the claim on several levels. At least one person noticed that the assertion that the bacon sandwich was reported as offensive did not align with the wide circulation of the photograph after it was posted. Doubters were correct in suspecting that the bacon sandwich picture was unlikely to be flagged by Facebook. The social network's Community Standards state that only the following content is subject to review and removal: Direct Threats, Self-Injury, Dangerous Organizations, Bullying and Harassment, Attacks on Public Figures, Criminal Activity, Sexual Violence and Exploitation, and Regulated Goods. We could find no appropriate category under which the image would be restricted via a report. In response to an earlier but similar rumor, a representative for Facebook told us that images which do not violate Facebook's Community Standards would not be removed from their platform. The "share this bacon sandwich" meme was one of several that suggested that Muslims are offended by the mere sight of pork or simply offended in ways that were rumored to affect citizens of the UK or United States. Similar claims often circulate about disabled veterans, poppies, and Nativity scenes, but all versions are very likely forms of likebait (or like-farming), aiming to appeal to the emotional responses of social media users in order to promote or popularize unrelated companies or Facebook interests in a bait and switch.

False

On 23 November 2016, the Facebook page "I Am Proud To Be English" shared a photograph of a bacon sandwich alongside a meme implying the image was banned because it was offensive to Muslims:Doubters were correct in suspecting the bacon sandwich picture was unlikely to be flagged by Facebook. The social network's Community Standards held that only the following content is subject to review and removal: Direct Threats, Self-Injury, Dangerous Organizations, Bullying and Harassment, Attacks on Public Figures, Criminal Activity, Sexual Violence and Exploitation, and Regulated Goods. We could find no appropriate category under which the image would be restricted via a report.The "share this bacon sandwich" meme was one of several that suggested that Muslims are offended by the mere sight of pork, or simply offended in manners that were rumored to affect citizens of the UK or United States. Similar claims often circulate about disabled veterans, poppies, and Nativity scenes, but all versions are very likely to forms of likebait (or like-farming), aiming to appeal to the emotional responses of social media users in order to promote or popularize unrelated companies or Facebook interests in a bait and switch.

FMD_train_402

Is Sheryl Underwood exiting 'The Talk' following her endorsement of weight loss gummies which has angered CBS?

11/21/2023

In November 2023, multiple Facebook ads were displayed to users that led to an article that bore the People magazine logo and claimed that Sheryl Underwood, the longtime co-host of "The Talk," would be leaving the TV talk show to work on expanding her own line of keto gummies for weight loss. However, this was not true. Underwood has nothing to do with any keto gummies for weight loss, nor did People magazine ever publish any such story. Underwood was simply the latest person in a long line of famous people who had had their image and likeness used without permission to sell keto gummies. Further, this false rumor that mentioned Underwood led to a dangerous scam that could potentially cost victims thousands of dollars per year. a long line of famous people One version of the Facebook ad claimed, "Producers are furious that she came forward." The headline in the ads read, "Sheryl Abandons 'The Talk' After Confessing Her Trick." Two of the false Facebook ads that promoted the scam. These ads led to a fake People magazine article on scam websites including emperorsland.pro, sizzlingpear.pro, mindfulmovement.pro and chillytreats.info. (We were unable to provide an archived link to the article since scammers design these websites so that the scam version of the page is cloaked from prying eyes that is, unless users specifically came from a Facebook ad.) This is not a true story, nor did People.com ever publish any such article. The fake People magazine article, which was nothing more than fiction and a scam, began as follows: Sheryl Underwood Confirms She Is Leaving 'The Talk' After Her Accidental 'Live' Confession On-Air... The host said that it was 'time for a break', but she may actually have bigger things in mind. (People) - Sheryl Underwood, the 60-year-old host on CBS's show 'The Talk', shocked everyone when she announced her departure from the show after 12 record-breaking years on-air. Sheryl, who has earned the reputation of being one of the most business savvy women in the industry, made sponsors (and CBS) FURIOUS. Why? Because Sheryl failed to disclose her new weight loss line to the network. Sheryl's new company is actually a HUGE competitor to CBS's current sponsor Weight Watchers because Sheryl's product is 90% cheaper and five times more effective than Weight Watchers's competing product. According to sources, CBS made Sheryl decide on which direction she was going to focus on in the future. Being so turned off by the reaction of the network and their power move she has decided to pursue her new weight loss line and dream. The scam article went on to falsely claim that other celebrities had joined with Underwood to promote the products, whether they be Belly Blast Keto Gummies, Total Fit Keto Gummies or other products. It is a fact that no celebrities have ever endorsed keto gummies that are purportedly intended for use in weight loss. Websites that promote sales of keto gummies for weight loss usually lack information about the true creators of the products and the source of where they were packaged. In the past, some consumers who fell victim to these scams told Snopes that the post office box numbers included in return addresses for the products don't exist. The rabbit hole for keto gummies goes even deeper, however. Two odd scenarios have been laid out by numerous victims of the scams, which usually involve monthly subscription fees often reported as being around $200 or more, or around $2,400 per year. Some consumers said that they never ordered the products but kept receiving shipments that they had no way of returning, due to fake return addresses. On the flip side, other customers said that they received charges for the products on their credit card statements despite never having ordered them, and then never received any products in the mail. Further, listings for keto gummies for weight loss on Amazon.com and Walmart.com often feature the words "Shark" and "Tank," although not consecutively as "Shark Tank." The two words are included in product listings on Amazon.com and Walmart.com so that any customers searching online for keto gummies with the words "Shark Tank" after those same customers saw false claims that said the TV show's investors endorsed the products would then fall victim to the scam and purchase the products based on the "Shark Tank" lie. Again, to be clear, no investors associated with "Shark Tank" ever endorsed gummies. false claims If any readers have been victimized by these scams, we recommend contacting your credit card company immediately, reporting fraud to the FTC and also searching the U.S. Better Business Bureau's (BBB) website to perform a search for the product name associated with the purchase on your account or the product that arrived at your doorstep, so that you can find the company or LLC connected with the scam. reporting fraud to the FTC website Liles, Jordan. Shark Tank Keto Gummies Weight Loss Reviews Are a Scam. Snopes, 14 Mar. 2023, https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/shark-tank-keto-gummies-weight-loss-reviews/.

False

However, this was not true. Underwood has nothing to do with any keto gummies for weight loss, nor did People magazine ever publish any such story. Underwood was simply the latest person in a long line of famous people who had had their image and likeness used without permission to sell keto gummies. Further, this false rumor that mentioned Underwood led to a dangerous scam that could potentially cost victims thousands of dollars per year.Further, listings for keto gummies for weight loss on Amazon.com and Walmart.com often feature the words "Shark" and "Tank," although not consecutively as "Shark Tank." The two words are included in product listings on Amazon.com and Walmart.com so that any customers searching online for keto gummies with the words "Shark Tank" after those same customers saw false claims that said the TV show's investors endorsed the products would then fall victim to the scam and purchase the products based on the "Shark Tank" lie. Again, to be clear, no investors associated with "Shark Tank" ever endorsed gummies.If any readers have been victimized by these scams, we recommend contacting your credit card company immediately, reporting fraud to the FTC and also searching the U.S. Better Business Bureau's (BBB) website to perform a search for the product name associated with the purchase on your account or the product that arrived at your doorstep, so that you can find the company or LLC connected with the scam.

FMD_train_1469

98 percent of American families make under $250,000 a year.

04/10/2012

How many Americans make less than $250,000 a year? According to tax statistics, it's a pretty overwhelming number. President Barack Obama has been making the most of that statistic as he promotes what he calls the Buffett Rule. "Florida, I've told you where I stand," Obama said at a campaign stop in Boca Raton on April 10, 2012. "So now it's time for members of Congress to tell you where they stand. In the next few weeks, we're going to vote on something we call the Buffett Rule." Obama's proposal is that people who have an income of $1 million or more per year should be required to pay a minimum tax rate of 30 percent. "And if we do that, then it makes it affordable for us to be able to say for those people who make under $250,000 a year, like 98 percent of American families do, then your taxes don't go up," Obama said. Under current law, many high earners pay significantly less than 30 percent if their income comes from investments instead of earnings. Critics of the Buffett Rule note that it won't bring in enough income to significantly dent the budget deficit. Obama spokesman Jay Carney said the president wanted the rule to support the principle of tax fairness but conceded that getting the rule passed would be an uphill battle in Congress. Here, we wanted to fact-check Obama's statement that 98 percent of American families make less than $250,000 a year. The White House's prepared materials on the Buffett Rule included statistics released annually by the Internal Revenue Service that supported the point. Using statistics from the IRS website, we found that 137,988,219 tax returns out of 140,494,127 — or 98.2 percent — reported adjusted gross income of less than $250,000 a year in 2009, the most recent data available. We rate the claim True.

True

How many Americans make less than $250,000 a year? According to tax statistics, its a pretty overwhelming number.President Barack Obama has been making the most of that statistic as he promotes what he calls the Buffett Rule.Florida, I've told you where I stand, Obama said at a campaign stop in Boca Raton on April 10, 2012. So now it's time for members of Congress to tell you where they stand. In the next few weeks we're going to vote on something we call the Buffet Rule.Obamas proposal is that people who have income of $1 million or more per year should be required to pay a minimum tax rate of 30 percent.And if we do that, then it makes it affordable for us to be able to say for those people who make under $250,000 a year, like 98 percent of American families do, then your taxes don't go up, Obama said.Under current law, many high earners pay significantly less than 30 percent if their income comesfrom investmentsinstead of earnings.Critics of the Buffett Rule note that it wont bring in enough income to significantly dent the budget deficit. Obama spokesman Jay Carney said the president wanted the rule to support the principle of tax fairness but conceded getting the rule passed would be an uphill battle in Congress.Here, we wanted to fact-check Obamas statement that 98 percent of American families make less than $250,000 a year.The White Houses prepared materials on the Buffett Rule included statistics released annually by the Internal Revenue Service that supported the point.Using statistics from the IRS website, we found that 137,988,219 tax returns out of 140,494,127 -- or 98.2 percent -- reported adjusted gross income of less than $250,000 a year in 2009, the most recent data available.We rate the claim True.

FMD_train_1166

Scam involving false promises of airline ticket giveaways

02/07/2016

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

False

Scammers and malware purveyors are always looking for ways to entice online users into following web links that will lead those victims into the traps set for them, and offers of free airline tickets are prime bait in that pursuit of prey. Airline tickets are something nearly everyone uses and have considerable value, but their non-material nature and the fact that they're not tremendously expensive (compared to, say, a new car) makes it seem plausible to the public that they're something a business might actually be giving away for free as part of an advertising promotion. Virtually every major U.S. air carrier including American Airlines, Delta Air Lines, Southwest Airlines, Emirates, United Airlines, US Airways, Continental Airlines, Alaska Airlines, WestJet Airlines, Allegiant Air, and Air Canada has been invoked in various online "free ticket" giveaway scams in recent years:Similar phony free ticket lures are used to spread malware. In those versions of the scam, those who attempt to reach the URL provided for the purpose of claiming the free tickets are instead victimized by a Facebook "lifejacking" attack, a malicious script that takes over a user's Facebook profile without their knowledge and propagates itself to their friends' accounts as well.

FMD_train_949

Did a Mother Deer Sacrifice Herself to Cheetahs to Save Her Fawns?

06/09/2018

Tales about animals exhibiting human (or human-like) behavior have long been the subject of myths and legends, and one form of this narrative especially resonates with modern readers: the notion that an animal, like most human mothers, would knowingly and willingly sacrifice her own life to protect her children. Many animals will, of course, engage in defensive posturing and even aggressively attack a much larger predator to defend their broods. However, we seem particularly drawn to accounts (such as this one) that suggest a mother animal goes beyond mere instinctive reaction and reasons out (and then engages in) a course of action she knows will spell her end but will preserve the lives of her offspring. One example of this type of narrative is the following account, which holds that a mother deer (actually an impala) deliberately allowed herself to be caught by cheetahs to give her two fawns a chance to escape a similar fate. The image seen here is one of a series of pictures (titled "The Stranglehold") taken by photographer Alison Buttigieg in Kenya in 2013, documenting the capture of an impala by a group of cheetahs. However, as Alison explained in her backstory to the set of photographs, what she captured on camera was not a mother impala sacrificing herself to protect her offspring. In fact, the real story was nearly the inverse of that concept—these photographs show a mother cheetah attempting to teach her cubs how to kill prey, then eventually dispatching a captured impala when her inexperienced cubs proved they weren't yet up to the task of strangling it themselves. I witnessed this cheetah kill in September 2013 in the Maasai Mara, Kenya. Narasha, the cheetah mom, was teaching her youngsters how to kill prey. However, they were a bit slow on the uptake and were playing with the hapless impala instead of killing it. Narasha, the cheetah mom, is the one grabbing the impala by the neck in all the photos. The youngsters practiced some skills like pouncing and tripping, which they got right, but they could not seem to figure out how to strangle the impala effectively. What is out of the ordinary in this sequence of photos is how calm the impala is throughout its ordeal. It is probably in shock and thus paralyzed with fear. It is disturbing how it seems to be posing in some photos, especially in the sixth one, as if determined to stay beautiful and proud until its very end. The defiance in its eyes is in stark contrast to its lack of interest in self-preservation. This allowed me to capture unique pictures of a kill that are seemingly choreographed in their grace. I wanted the viewer to sympathize with the impala while simultaneously witnessing the disturbing nature of this unusual kill. In the end, after what seemed like an interminable eternity (but was just a few minutes), the cheetah mom put the impala out of its misery, and the cats got to enjoy a nice meal. As Alison noted, it's unusual "how calm the impala is throughout its ordeal," as well as how the doomed animal exhibited a seeming "lack of interest in self-preservation," but those behaviors had nothing to do with an effort on the part of the impala to allow her fawns a chance to escape a similar fate. Other versions of this tale maintain that Ms. Buttigieg "fell into depression" after snapping the photograph, a claim she refuted in a statement to DNA (India) and in her own Facebook post: "It is not true that I suffered from depression; it was just lies so that some people get more likes on their page. People steal photos all the time to get attention, but this was very rude and hurtful." In fact, when asked if she knew her image, for which she won accolades and even awards, had gone viral, she replied, "Yes, I know. Hundreds of people are sending me messages about my fake depression and why I didn't save the deer. It's been horrible. I have no idea who started this; I wish I knew," said Buttigieg, a Maltese wildlife photographer residing in Finland.

False

Many animals will of course engage in defensive posturing and even aggressively attack a much larger predator in order to defend their broods. But we seem especially drawn to accounts (such as this one) that posit a mother animal's going beyond mere instinctive reaction and reasoning out (and then engaging upon) a course of action she knows will spell her end but will preserve the lives of her offspring.The image seen here is one of a series of pictures (titled "The Stranglehold") taken by photographer Alison Buttigieg in Kenya in 2013, documenting the capture of an impala by a group of cheetahs. But as Alison explained in her backstory to the set of photographs, what she captured on camera was not a mother impala's sacrificing herself to protect her offspring. In fact, the real story was nearly the inverse of that concept -- these photographs show a mother cheetah attempting to teach her cubs how to kill prey, then eventually dispatching a captured impala when her inexperienced cubs proved they weren't yet up to the task of strangling it themselves:Other versions of this tale maintain that Ms. Buttigieg "fell into depression" after snapping the photograph, a claim she refuted in a statement to DNA (India), as well as in her own Facebook post:

FMD_train_1728

When these [undocumented] students graduate from college, they're still illegal aliens. They cannot get a job.

05/13/2012

As a result of a decision last year by the Rhode Island Board of Governors for Higher Education, students who are in the state illegally who graduate from Rhode Island high schools are eligible for the in-state tuition rate if they decide to go to a state college or university. The ruling sparked a furor among advocates of strict enforcement of immigration laws.Two bills --one that would reverse the boards decisionandone that would make the policy state law-- were the subject of an April 24, 2012, hearing before the House Committee on Finance.William T. Terry Gorman, executive director ofRhode Islanders for Immigration Law Enforcement, argued for reversing the regents policy, saying the state would be subsidizing a college education for people who aren't employable because they are in the country illegally.Please keep in mind that these students, when they're attending high school, they're illegal aliens. When they graduate, they're illegal aliens. When they enter college, they're illegal aliens. Because of that status, they're not allowed to get a job to help pay their way through college. They're not allowed to get a driver's license to drive back and forth to college. And when we've provided them that four years of in-state tuition, they're not allowed to get a job, Gorman said. They can't get a job at Textron, they can't get a job at CVS, they can't get a job at Gilbane, they can't get a job at Dunkin Donuts, and they can't get a job at Burger King because of their status. And we provided them with four years of a college education.He again emphasized that point later in the hearing: When these students graduate from college, they're still illegal aliens. They cannot get a job. How does that help the economy?One could argue that it's good to have the state's smartest students -- whether legal or illegal -- move into the Rhode Island work force.But will those undocumented college grads really end up unemployed anyway?We were particularly curious because three of the 12 states that have passed laws to provide in-state tuition for undocumented high school graduates -- California, New Mexico and Texas -- are places where the illegal immigration issue is particularly prominent, thanks to their borders with Mexico.Are those states doing something different, allowing companies to tap the best-educated, motivated undocumented residents?The answer is no, saidLaura Vazquez, a legislative analyst for theNational Council of La Raza, a Washington, D.C.-based Latino civil rights and advocacy organization. She said the situation is the same throughout the United States. When they graduate, we don't get the benefit of having this educated group of people who are eager and ready to contribute fully.They do find work. Some of them are working under the table under poor conditions. Some work for family. A number of students go to law school or enroll in Ph.D. programs, she said. But companies can't hire them because the government requires that all workers be checked for employment eligibility.Graduates could seek employment overseas, but a lot of these kids feel American through and through and want to practice their skills here, Vazquez said. And if they were to leave the country to take an overseas job they won't be allowed back in for a long time. Immigration law says, in general, if you've been in the United States illegally for more than one year after reaching age 18, once you leave the country you are banned from reentering for 10 years.In a few cases, undocumented people who have been scheduled for deportation have gotten a waiver from the Department of Homeland Security, which allows them to seek a work permit. But the DHS is very stingy with it, she said.Other immigration experts told us the same thing: Gorman is essentially correct.It is true that undocumented college graduates are legally barred from working. The only exception is in rare cases they have been able to obtain contract work provided there is no employer/employee relationship, said Kent Wong, director of the Center for Labor Research and Education at the University of California, Los Angeles.Gorman sent us a link toa Huffington Post storyabout Iliana Guadalupe Perez, a mathematician and undocumented immigrant, who has writtena free online guidedetailing how undocumented college graduates can find work. Her advice was also to seek work as an independent contractor where proof of citizenship isn't required.When we asked Gorman what was going on in the border states, he suggested that graduates may be able to get jobs because enforcement was lax. He said a source in San Diego reported that immigration officials are not checking on hardly anything regarding illegal aliens here right now, least of all the status of recent college grads applying for jobs. She said the governor just authorized state scholarships for the illegal alien students.I also spoke with Jim Gilchrist from theMinuteman Projectand he echoed basically the same sentiments. He did say there has been more employer audits by ICE [U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement] but not of the type that would be looking for illegal alien college grads, Gorman said in an e-mail. (The Minuteman Project pushes for stronger enforcement of immigration laws. )I also spoke with the Policy Director of The Center for Immigration Studies and she said she has never heard of any enforcement efforts in Texas or California regarding illegal alien college grads, said Gorman. The center is a research group that opposes illegal immigration and wants less legal immigration into the United States.However, given the strictness of the law, a special effort to focus on college graduates may not be necessary.Michael Olivas, director of the Institute of Higher Education Law & Governance at the University of Houston, said the why-give-them-a-tuition-break-when-they-can't-get-a-job argument is a diversion from the real problem: children brought to the United States, sometimes at a very young age, are left in this netherworld where they can neither work nor be licensed once they become adults.And when their inability to find work is used to try to prevent them from being eligible for the same in-state educational opportunities as their peers, its the worst kind of misdirection. It's hiding the larger issue, said Olivas, a proponent of the federal DREAM Act, which would give such students a path to citizenship.Our rulingTerry Gorman, during testimony on the question of whether to let Rhode Island's undocumented high school graduates take advantage of in-state tuition rates, said, When these students graduate from college, they're still illegal aliens. They cannot get a job.The experts we spoke with said he's generally correct, although they can, in a few cases, be hired as independent contractors.Over all, we rate the claim asTrue. (Get updates fromPolitiFactRI on Twitter. To comment or offer your ruling, visit us on ourPolitiFact Rhode Island Facebookpage.)

True

As a result of a decision last year by the Rhode Island Board of Governors for Higher Education, students who are in the state illegally who graduate from Rhode Island high schools are eligible for the in-state tuition rate if they decide to go to a state college or university. The ruling sparked a furor among advocates of strict enforcement of immigration laws.Two bills --one that would reverse the boards decisionandone that would make the policy state law-- were the subject of an April 24, 2012, hearing before the House Committee on Finance.William T. Terry Gorman, executive director ofRhode Islanders for Immigration Law Enforcement, argued for reversing the regents policy, saying the state would be subsidizing a college education for people who aren't employable because they are in the country illegally.Please keep in mind that these students, when they're attending high school, they're illegal aliens. When they graduate, they're illegal aliens. When they enter college, they're illegal aliens. Because of that status, they're not allowed to get a job to help pay their way through college. They're not allowed to get a driver's license to drive back and forth to college. And when we've provided them that four years of in-state tuition, they're not allowed to get a job, Gorman said. They can't get a job at Textron, they can't get a job at CVS, they can't get a job at Gilbane, they can't get a job at Dunkin Donuts, and they can't get a job at Burger King because of their status. And we provided them with four years of a college education.He again emphasized that point later in the hearing: When these students graduate from college, they're still illegal aliens. They cannot get a job. How does that help the economy?One could argue that it's good to have the state's smartest students -- whether legal or illegal -- move into the Rhode Island work force.But will those undocumented college grads really end up unemployed anyway?We were particularly curious because three of the 12 states that have passed laws to provide in-state tuition for undocumented high school graduates -- California, New Mexico and Texas -- are places where the illegal immigration issue is particularly prominent, thanks to their borders with Mexico.Are those states doing something different, allowing companies to tap the best-educated, motivated undocumented residents?The answer is no, saidLaura Vazquez, a legislative analyst for theNational Council of La Raza, a Washington, D.C.-based Latino civil rights and advocacy organization. She said the situation is the same throughout the United States. When they graduate, we don't get the benefit of having this educated group of people who are eager and ready to contribute fully.They do find work. Some of them are working under the table under poor conditions. Some work for family. A number of students go to law school or enroll in Ph.D. programs, she said. But companies can't hire them because the government requires that all workers be checked for employment eligibility.Graduates could seek employment overseas, but a lot of these kids feel American through and through and want to practice their skills here, Vazquez said. And if they were to leave the country to take an overseas job they won't be allowed back in for a long time. Immigration law says, in general, if you've been in the United States illegally for more than one year after reaching age 18, once you leave the country you are banned from reentering for 10 years.In a few cases, undocumented people who have been scheduled for deportation have gotten a waiver from the Department of Homeland Security, which allows them to seek a work permit. But the DHS is very stingy with it, she said.Other immigration experts told us the same thing: Gorman is essentially correct.It is true that undocumented college graduates are legally barred from working. The only exception is in rare cases they have been able to obtain contract work provided there is no employer/employee relationship, said Kent Wong, director of the Center for Labor Research and Education at the University of California, Los Angeles.Gorman sent us a link toa Huffington Post storyabout Iliana Guadalupe Perez, a mathematician and undocumented immigrant, who has writtena free online guidedetailing how undocumented college graduates can find work. Her advice was also to seek work as an independent contractor where proof of citizenship isn't required.When we asked Gorman what was going on in the border states, he suggested that graduates may be able to get jobs because enforcement was lax. He said a source in San Diego reported that immigration officials are not checking on hardly anything regarding illegal aliens here right now, least of all the status of recent college grads applying for jobs. She said the governor just authorized state scholarships for the illegal alien students.I also spoke with Jim Gilchrist from theMinuteman Projectand he echoed basically the same sentiments. He did say there has been more employer audits by ICE [U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement] but not of the type that would be looking for illegal alien college grads, Gorman said in an e-mail. (The Minuteman Project pushes for stronger enforcement of immigration laws.)I also spoke with the Policy Director of The Center for Immigration Studies and she said she has never heard of any enforcement efforts in Texas or California regarding illegal alien college grads, said Gorman. The center is a research group that opposes illegal immigration and wants less legal immigration into the United States.However, given the strictness of the law, a special effort to focus on college graduates may not be necessary.Michael Olivas, director of the Institute of Higher Education Law & Governance at the University of Houston, said the why-give-them-a-tuition-break-when-they-can't-get-a-job argument is a diversion from the real problem: children brought to the United States, sometimes at a very young age, are left in this netherworld where they can neither work nor be licensed once they become adults.And when their inability to find work is used to try to prevent them from being eligible for the same in-state educational opportunities as their peers, its the worst kind of misdirection. It's hiding the larger issue, said Olivas, a proponent of the federal DREAM Act, which would give such students a path to citizenship.Our rulingTerry Gorman, during testimony on the question of whether to let Rhode Island's undocumented high school graduates take advantage of in-state tuition rates, said, When these students graduate from college, they're still illegal aliens. They cannot get a job.The experts we spoke with said he's generally correct, although they can, in a few cases, be hired as independent contractors.Over all, we rate the claim asTrue.(Get updates fromPolitiFactRI on Twitter. To comment or offer your ruling, visit us on ourPolitiFact Rhode Island Facebookpage.)

FMD_train_1794

About 2 percent of Americans get paid the minimum wage.

12/08/2013

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

True

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

FMD_train_175

I'm also the only lieutenant governor to not take a security detail.

05/26/2016

Lt. Gov. Carlos Lopez-Cantera operates without a security detail, a fact he frequently mentions as he campaigns to replace U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio. It serves as an example of his frugality, distinguishing him from the five Republicans vying for Rubio's seat, as well as from some predecessors who drew scrutiny over transportation spending. "I've actually cut the budget of the office by more than half and reduced the staff," he said in an interview with Fox 13's "Money, Power, Politics" show in Tampa, which aired on April 30. "I'm also the only lieutenant governor to have never taken a security detail." Lopez-Cantera shared this information during a speech earlier that month with the Hillsborough County GOP, explaining, "It's a waste of your money, and I'm protected by the Second Amendment." (He has a concealed weapons permit.) With Lopez-Cantera emphasizing this fact as an accomplishment, we wanted to know if he was truly the first lieutenant governor to decline taxpayer-funded protection. According to state law, the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles shall assign one patrol officer to the Office of the Governor; it does not mention the lieutenant governor. In practice, the right to a security detail for protection and transportation has been extended to recent lieutenant governors. However, after Gov. Rick Scott appointed him to the office in 2014, Lopez-Cantera verbally declined that protection. In March, the Legislature approved a budget that added language stating that the security patrol is at the discretion of the lieutenant governor. It seems that Lopez-Cantera had that discretion anyway, but the new language in law clarifies it. The Legislature also added language to grant the right to security for the attorney general, chief financial officer, and agriculture commissioner. This appears to stem from a credible threat against Attorney General Pam Bondi in 2015, which prompted law enforcement to provide around-the-clock security for her for six weeks at a cost of $216,000. Scott's press office re-emphasized that it was Lopez-Cantera's choice and not, as rumor had it, the decision of former Scott chief of staff Adam Hollingsworth to downplay the role in response to our inquiry. Still, there seemed to be a push to reduce expenses in that position after multiple news reports cited the amount of money spent on security and travel for Jeff Kottkamp under Gov. Charlie Crist and Jennifer Carroll, Scott's first lieutenant governor. The state spent $1.1 million over four years for security and transportation for Kottkamp. In Carroll's first year in office, the Florida Highway Patrol spent $288,000 on travel and security. However, after spending restrictions were put in place, that total dropped to $89,000 in 2012. Lopez-Cantera garners even less attention as lieutenant governor than Carroll, rarely appearing alongside Scott at public events and maintaining a sparse public calendar of events, as noted by the Miami Herald/Tampa Bay Times Tallahassee bureau in July 2015. Lopez-Cantera had six days of security at a cost of $27,000 in May 2014 following a threat against him, according to a Florida Department of Law Enforcement report. The lieutenant governor role was revived in 1968 after a century without one. We tried to contact Lopez-Cantera's predecessors (who are still alive today) for their insights. The Florida Highway Patrol stated that the following lieutenant governors had a security detail: Wayne Mixson (1979-87), Bobby Brantley (1987-1991), Buddy MacKay (1991-1998), Frank Brogan (1999-2003), Toni Jennings (2003-07), Kottkamp (2007-11), and Carroll (2011-13). We attempted to reach all of those former lieutenant governors and were able to interview all but Brogan, Jennings, and MacKay. Four confirmed they used the security detail. The only one who said he didn't use a security detail was Jim Williams, who served as lieutenant governor from 1975-79. "I didn't have security," Williams, 93, told PolitiFact Florida. Anita Oneida Darley, his aide at the time, also stated he didn't have a security detail. The Florida Highway Patrol could not confirm this. Mixson mentioned that he used a security detail when he traveled within Florida, but not when he was in the office or when he traveled to foreign countries. "The Florida Highway Patrol had traditionally supplied a security individual, and they did," Mixson said. Brantley noted that he had a state trooper who traveled with him sometimes, including on a trip to Canada. He said the trooper primarily served as a driver. "He had a desk inside my office," Brantley said. "If I didn't have a need for him, I'd have him go and do patrol duty. He would actually go on the street and stop speeders." Brantley recalled that Brogan was the first lieutenant governor he remembered having an actual plainclothes security detail. Kottkamp, now a lawyer in Tallahassee, stated that the security detail came with the job. "On the night Gov. Crist and I were elected, they showed up at the hotel," he said. "Someone was with me and the governor from that point on. It was a responsibility the FHP took very seriously." FHP leadership viewed it as a legal obligation to ensure continuity of government. Carroll mentioned that troopers would pick her up to provide security when she traveled to other parts of the state. Lopez-Cantera stated, "I'm also the only lieutenant governor to not take a security detail." He went without a security detail when he started in 2014, a break from most lieutenant governors in recent memory who have used state security. The only one we could find who said he did not have a security detail was Jim Williams, lieutenant governor from 1975-79. The state could not confirm one way or another. That was about 40 years ago, so to us, Lopez-Cantera's point still holds water. We rate this claim Mostly True.

True

Lt. Gov. Carlos Lopez-Cantera rolls without a security detail, a fact he likes to bring up as he campaigns to replace U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio. Its an example of penny-pinching that he uses to set himself apart from the field of five Republicans vying for Rubios seat, as well as some predecessors whodrewscrutinyover transportation spending.I've actually cut the budget of the office by more than half, reduced the staff, he said in aninterviewwith Fox 13sMoney, Power, Politicsshow in Tampa which ran on air April 30. I'm also the only lieutenant governor to not ever take a security detail.Lopez-Cantera had dropped this tidbit at a speech earlier that month with theHillsborough County GOP, explaining, Its a waste of your money, and Im protected by the Second Amendment. (He has a concealed weapons permit.)According tostate law, the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles shall assign one patrol officer to the Office of the Governor it does not mention the lieutenant governor. In practice, the right to a security detail for protection and transportation has been extended to recent lieutenant governors. But after Gov. Rick Scott plucked him for the office in 2014, Lopez-Cantera verbally declined that protection.In March, the Legislature approved a budget thatadded some languageto state that the security patrol is at the discretion of the Lieutenant Governor. It seems that Lopez-Cantera had that discretion anyway, but the new language in law makes that clear.The Legislature also added language to give the right to security for the attorney general, chief financial officer and agriculture commissioner. That appears to stem from a credible threat onAttorney General Pam Bondiin 2015, which prompted law enforcement to provide around-the-clock security for her for six weeks at a cost of $216,000.Scotts press office re-emphasized that it was Lopez-Canteras choice and not, asrumor had it, the decision of former Scott chief of staff Adam Hollingsworth to downplay the role in response to our inquiry.Still, there appeared to be a push to reduce expenses in that position after multiple news reports cited the amount of money spent on security and travel for Jeff Kottkamp under Gov. Charlie Crist and Jennifer Carroll, Scotts first lieutenant governor. The state spent$1.1 millionover four years for security and transportation for Kottkamp. In Carroll's first year in office, the Florida Highway Patrol spent $288,000 on travel and security. But after spending restrictions were put in place, that total dropped to$89,000in 2012.Lopez-Cantera garners even less attention as lieutenant governor than Carroll, hardly ever appearing alongside Scott at public events and keeping a sparse public calendar of events, theMiami Herald/Tampa Bay TimesTallahassee bureau noted inJuly 2015.Lopez-Cantera had six days of security at a cost of $27,000 in May 2014 following a threat against him, according to a Florida Department of Law Enforcementreport.https://www.sharethefacts.co/share/f3425ea7-664c-4d1c-9bc5-bb771765d290

FMD_train_484

National Prayer Breakfast Remarks: President Trump vs. President Obama

02/06/2017

An image macro purportedly showing two statements, one from former President Obama at the National Prayer Breakfast in 2016 and the other from President Trump at the same event the following year, was circulated on social media in February 2017: The quotes depicted in the image margo are largely accurate, although President Trump's remarks were edited together from a few different portions of his speech. President Obama's speech at the 2016 National Prayer Breakfast is archived at ObamaWhiteHouse.Archive.Gov. The relevant portion of his speech can be seen at around the 1:50 mark of the following video, and we've reproduced the relevant text portion below (the bolded text was omitted from above-displayed graphic): ObamaWhiteHouse.Archive.Gov And on this occasion, I always enjoy reflecting on a piece of scripture thats been meaningful to me or otherwise sustained me throughout the year. And lately, Ive been thinking and praying on a verse from Second Timothy: For God has not given us a spirit of fear, but of power and of love and of a sound mind. For God has not given us a spirit of fear, but of power and of love and of a sound mind. President Trump's 2017 National Prayer Breakfast speech was also archived by the White House. The above-displayed image macro condensed a larger portion of President Trump's speech into a brief paragraph. The entire speech can be seen in the following video, and we've reproduced the relevant text portion below (bolded text was omitted from above-displayed graphic): archived Thank you as well to Senate Chaplain Barry Black for his moving words. And I don't know, Chaplain, whether or not thats an appointed position. Is that an appointed position? I dont even know if youre a Democrat or if youre a Republican, but Im appointing you for another year the hell with it. (Laughter and applause.) And I think its not even my appointment, its the Senates appointment, but well talk to them. Your son is here. Your job is very, very secure, okay? (Laughter.) Thank you, Barry. Appreciate it very much. I also want to thank my great friends, though, Roma. Wheres Roma? Beautiful Roma Downey. The voice of an angel. Shes got the voice every time I hear it, that voice is so beautiful. Everything is so beautiful about Roma, including her husband because hes a special, special friend, Mark Burnett for the wonderful introduction. So true. So true. I said to the agent, Im sorry. The only thing more I actually got on the phone and fired him myself because he said, you dont want to do it, itll never work, itll never, ever work. You dont want to do it. I said, listen but I really fired him after it became the number-one show. It became so successful, and he wanted a commission, and he didnt want to do it. Thats what I really said. (Laughter.) But we had tremendous success on "The Apprentice." And when I ran for President, I had to leave the show. Thats when I knew for sure I was doing it. And they hired a big, big movie star Arnold Schwarzenegger to take my place. And we know how that turned out. (Laughter.) The ratings went right down the tubes. Its been a total disaster. And Mark will never, ever bet against Trump again. And I want to just pray for Arnold, if we can, for those ratings, okay? (Laughter.) The gist of this image macro was that President Obama's speech focused on scripture while President Trump's speech focused on TV ratings, but President Trump did talk about other subjects including the death of a U.S. Navy SEAL in Yemen and quote a piece of scripture (John 15:13) during his remarks: No one has inspired me more in my travels than the families of the United States military, men and women who have put their lives on the line every day for their country and their countrymen. I just came back yesterday from Dover Air Force Base to join the family of Chief William Ryan Owens, as Americas fallen hero was returned home. Very, very sad, but very, very beautiful. Very, very beautiful. His family was there. Incredible family, loved him so much. So devastated he was so devastated. But the ceremony was amazing. He died in defense of our nation. He gave his life in defense of our people. Our debt to him and our debt to his family is eternal and everlasting. Greater love hath no man than this: that a man lay down his life for his friends. We will never forget the men and women who wear the uniform, believe me. (Applause.) Thank you. From generation to generation, their vigilance has kept our liberty alive. Our freedom is won by their sacrifice, and our security has been earned with their sweat and blood and tears. God has blessed this land to give us such incredible heroes and patriots. They are very, very special, and we are going to take care of them. (Applause.) One could cherry-pick other portions of both speeches to create the impression that both Presidents Trump and Obama had focused equally on scripture during their remarks: Trump, Donald. "Remarks by President Trump at National Prayer Breakfast." The White House. 2 February 2017. Obama, Barack. "Remarks by the President at National Prayer Breakfast." The White House. 4 February 2016.

NEI

President Obama's speech at the 2016 National Prayer Breakfast is archived at ObamaWhiteHouse.Archive.Gov. The relevant portion of his speech can be seen at around the 1:50 mark of the following video, and we've reproduced the relevant text portion below (the bolded text was omitted from above-displayed graphic):President Trump's 2017 National Prayer Breakfast speech was also archived by the White House. The above-displayed image macro condensed a larger portion of President Trump's speech into a brief paragraph. The entire speech can be seen in the following video, and we've reproduced the relevant text portion below (bolded text was omitted from above-displayed graphic):

FMD_train_1247

Is an Incurable “Mexican Blood Flu” Creating a Health Crisis at the Southern Border?

05/17/2019

In mid-May 2019, viral claims began to emerge on Facebook warning about XDR-TB, or extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis, wreaking havoc at the Southern border. For example, a representative Facebook post asserted: "Let me describe how dire the current situation is because the government is staying tight-lipped. It's known as the Mexican Blood Flu or its scientific name XDR-T. And you wouldn't wish the symptoms (internal bleeding, coughing up blood, seizures, and even suffocation) on your worst enemy." For years, it was seen as a third-world problem, killing scores of people in the world's poorest countries, and a major outbreak within the U.S. was considered unthinkable. But here's the horrifying truth they don't want you to know: a U.S. outbreak has already begun, and officials have no idea how to contain it. The first case was discovered in McAllen, Texas, near the Mexican border. An illegal alien was detained by the U.S. Border Patrol, suffering from a scorching fever and coughing up blood. The Institute for Natural Healing is a subsidiary of a publishing company known as Agora, Inc., which has a lengthy history of using misleading tactics and politically charged language to get people to purchase supplements, eBooks, or stock tips. Snopes has previously debunked Agora content that suggested Hillary Clinton was hiding a cure for cancer, and an Agora advertisement for a $74 eBook explaining how to protect yourself from an alleged Klebsi plague set to ravage America. The founder of Agora once declared that "our customers don't pay us to be right." In point of fact, the scientific name of the disease in question is not XDR-T, but XDR-TB, a disease categorization that is a step more serious than multidrug-resistant TB (MDR-TB). According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), MDR-TB is resistant to at least isoniazid (INH) and rifampin (RIF), while XDR-TB is resistant to INH and RIF, any fluoroquinolone, and at least three of the injectable second-line anti-TB drugs. Agora often uses made-up names for commonly known conditions or cures to make it harder for potential buyers of supplements or eBooks to research them on their own. The term "Mexican Blood Flu" is another fabricated name, and it is also a poorly chosen one from a truth standpoint. The McAllen, Texas, incident referenced in the Institute for Natural Healing's advertisement took place in 2013 and concerned a Nepalese man who had traveled through South Asia, Brazil, and Mexico before crossing illegally into Texas, as reported by the Wall Street Journal. In medical isolation in South Texas, 100 miles or so from Mexico's border, is a man who embodies one of U.S. health officials' greatest worries: he is the first person to cross and be held in detention while infected with one of the most severe types of drug-resistant tuberculosis known today. The Nepalese man detained at the U.S. border carries a particularly deadly strain—XDR, "extensively drug-resistant" TB. His TB is resistant to at least eight of the 15 or so standard drugs, according to a U.S. government description of the case reviewed by the Journal. His XDR strain has been seen only once before in the U.S., in another patient of Nepalese origin, according to the government description. The assertion that a U.S. outbreak has already begun is similarly incorrect: following the McAllen incident, the United States reported zero XDR-TB cases in 2014 and 2015. In 2016, one case was reported in the entire United States. In 2017, the most recent year for which CDC data is available, two cases were reported. According to CDC data, the percentage of TB cases that are drug-resistant has remained stable for the last 20 years. The topic of multiple drug-resistant TB (not XDR-TB) at the Southern border was briefly revived in statements made by U.S. Rep. John Joyce, who in April 2019 participated in a fact-finding mission to the U.S.-Mexico border in Yuma, Arizona. During that trip, according to reporting by the Associated Press, Joyce said that there are 12 cases of multiple-drug-resistant strains of tuberculosis that had been identified in immigrants held in detention in Yuma, Arizona. Yuma, Arizona officials later stated that this information was incorrect, although the person who made the claim to the politician stood by it, according to the Arizona Republic. After a question from The Arizona Republic about a tuberculosis outbreak, Yuma County officials sought to set the record straight. "I can say, after confirming with the Yuma County Health District, there is no drug-resistant tuberculosis in Yuma County," said Kevin Tunell, a spokesman for the county. "Further, there are no cases of tuberculosis involving migrants in Yuma County at this time. All told, there is no basis for the claim that an XDR-TB outbreak is present at the Southern border." Belief in such a claim would require taking the word of a company that once sold a $74 eBook created to teach readers how to find an incredible cure for cancer hidden in the Book of Matthew, over the reports of health officials on the ground and health monitoring agencies such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

False

In mid-May 2019, viral claims began to emerge on Facebook warning about XDR-TB, or extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis, wreaking havoc at the Southern border. For example, a representative Facebook post asserted:As it turns out, these rumors are not driven by reality but by a company with a history of politically charged health misinformation selling a bogus natural health supplement. The claims made on Facebook mirror the claims made by an entity that calls itself the Institute for Natural Healing in a thinly sourced advertisement:The Institute for Natural Healing is a subsidiary of a publishing company known as Agora, Inc., which has a lengthy history of using misleading tactics and politically charged language to get people to purchase supplements, ebooks, or stock tips. Snopes has previously debunked Agora content that suggested Hillary Clinton was hiding a cure for cancer, and an Agora advertisement for a 74-dollar eBook explaining how to protect yourself from an alleged Klebsi plague set to ravage America. The founder of Agora once declared that our customers dont pay us to be right.In point of fact, the scientific name of the disease in question is not XDR-T, but XDR-TB, a disease categorization that is a step more serious than multidrug-resistant TB (MDR-TB). According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), MDR-TB is resistant to at least isoniazid (INH) and rifampin (RIF), while XDR-TB is resistant to INH and RIF, any fluoroquinolone, and at least three of the injectable second-line anti-TB drugs. Agora often uses made-up names for commonly known conditions or cures to make it harder for potential buyers of supplements or ebooks to research them on their own.Mexican blood flu is another made-up name, and its also a poorly chosen one from a truth standpoint. The McAllen, Texas, incident referenced in the Institute for Natural Healing's advertisement took place in 2013 and concerned a Nepalese man who had traveled through South Asia, Brazil, and Mexico before crossing illegally into Texas, as reported by the Wall Street Journal:The assertion that a U.S. outbreak has already begun is similarly incorrect: following the McCarren incident, the United States reported zero XDR-TB cases in 2014 and 2015. In 2016, one case was reported in the entire United States. In 2017, the most recent year for which CDC data is available, two cases were reported. According to CDC data, the percentage of TB cases that are drug resistant has remained stable for the last 20 years.The topic of multiple drug-resistant TB (not XDR-TB) at the Southern border was briefly revived in statements made by U.S. Rep. John Joyce, who in April 2019 participated in a fact-finding mission to the U.S.-Mexico border in Yuma, Arizona. During that trip, according to reporting by the Associated Press, Joyce said that there are 12 cases of multiple-drug-resistant strains of tuberculosis that had been identified in immigrants held in detention in Yuma, Arizona.Yuma, Arizona officials later stated that this information was incorrect, although the person who made the claim to the politician stood by it, according to the Arizona Republic:All told, there is no basis for the claim that an XDR-TB outbreak is present at the Southern border. Belief in such a claim would require taking the word of a company that once sold a $74 eBook created to teach readers how to find an incredible cure for cancer hidden in the Book of Matthew, over the reports of health officials on the ground and health monitoring agencies such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. As such, we rank the claim false.

FMD_train_284

Macy Neigh - Macy is neighing

08/06/2015

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

False

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

FMD_train_1093

The national debt is on track to double during Obamas presidency.

11/13/2013

Possible presidential aspirant Scott Walker opens his newbookwith a dismal depiction of conditions in the nations capital. If you are like me, the view from Washington, D.C., these days is pretty grim, the Republican governor writes in Unintimidated: A Governor's Story and a Nation's Challenge, which is due out Nov. 19, 2013. Barack Obama has been elected to a second term. Obamacare will not be repealed anytime soon. Congress has approved massive tax increases. Then Walker makes this claim: The national debt is on track to double during Obamas presidency. Lets see how much the debt has grown and to what extent Obama is responsible. What is the debt? We hear plenty about the federal debt and annual federal budget deficits. So, lets make sure were on the same page before we dig in. Total federal debt, also known as gross debt, is the amount of debt issued by the U.S. Treasury and other federal agencies. It has two components: Debt held by the government is money the government owes itself. Mainly, the government borrows from trust funds such as Social Security and Medicare -- payments owed to beneficiaries in the future -- to fund current government operations. Debt held by the public is owed to investors outside the federal government, including individual and corporate investors in the United States and overseas, foreign governments, the Federal Reserve and other entities. It's money the government borrows when it runs annual budget deficits -- in other words, the money the government needs to bridge the gap between what it spends and what it takes in. How much is the debt? Jacquelynn Burke, a publicist for Sentinel, Walkers publisher, responded to our request to Walker for information to back his claim. She told us Walker was referring to total debt and to the portion held by the public and cited two documents from Obamas own administration, a2013 reportfrom the Council of Economic Advisers and Obamas2014 budget. Its helpful here to note that debt is tallied at the end of the fiscal year and that the federal fiscal year runs from October through September. So, fiscal 2008 started in October 2007 and ended in September 2008. The documents Walker relies on show total debt on pace to double -- from $9.99 trillion in fiscal 2008 to an estimated $20 trillion in fiscal 2016; and debt held by the public to more than double, from $5.8 trillion to $14.7 trillion. (FactCheck.org also reports that debt held by the public ison pace to doubleduring Obamas presidency.) Chris Edwards, director of tax policy studies at the libertarian Cato Institute, cited the same documents Walker did when we asked him about Walkers claim. Edwards said that, even though fiscal 2008 ended more than three months before Obama was first inaugurated, it is a good starting point because most of the debt accumulated in fiscal 2009 was from Obamas stimulus plan. Joshua Gordon, policy director at the centristConcord Coalition, which advocates for fiscal responsibility, argued that a better starting point is the end of fiscal 2009 -- a year later than what Walker uses -- since Obama would have been in office for nearly nine months at that point. He also argued against examining total debt, saying that since it includes borrowing from Social Security, it doesn't really have any economic significance. Gordon cited figures from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office for debt held by the public. They show that that portion of the total debt was $7.54 trillion at the end of fiscal 2009, but isnt projected to double until fiscal 2019, after Obama leaves office. Gordon and Marc Goldwein, senior policy director of the nonprofitCommittee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a bipartisan organization focused on debt reduction, also made another point on comparing debt levels over time. They told us measuring debt as a percentage of gross domestic product is better for comparison purposes than simply using raw dollars. According to Congressional Budget Office figures, debt held by the public as a percentage of gross domestic product wont double during Obamas presidency. They show debt held by the public at the end of 2009 was equal to 52.3% of gross domestic product. Thats expected to reach 76.2% at the end of fiscal 2014, but then drop during the rest of Obamas presidency. At the same time, the federal debt is commonly reported in raw dollars, not as a percentage of GDP. So, at least in terms of raw dollars, there is evidence that debt is projected to double during Obamas time in office. Who's to blame Walker implied that Obama plays a role in how much the debt has grown, but he didnt say the president caused the increase. That squares with how weve evaluated similar claims in the past. For one thing, each president inherits the previous presidents budget, as well as the interest payments needed to pay off debts accumulated under previous presidents. Moreover, about two-thirds of the annual deficit during Obamas presidency term has been from entitlements and interest. Entitlements, such as Social Security and Medicare, are less susceptible to a presidents policy preferences than discretionary spending that Congress must approve on an annual basis. Entitlements are also more heavily driven by demographic factors, such as the aging of the population, which is also out of any presidents control. For its part, The White House didn't challenge Walker's claim, but cited documents indicating that annual deficits are becoming smaller. A couple of other points on responsibility for the debt before we close. Ananalysisby the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities acknowledged that deficits and debt have been sharply higher under Obama. But the analysis says the Great Recession, tax cuts adopted under President George W. Bush, and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq explain most of the deficits that have occurred on Obamas watch. The Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, meanwhile, traces the the debt problem back even further, to around 1970, when the government decided to significantly increase spending without a corresponding increase in revenue. The problem cant be fixed, according to thatanalysis, without creating a mechanism to prevent the government from running persistent deficits in the future. Our rating Walker said: The national debt is on track to double during Obamas presidency. Documents from Obamas own administration indicate the debt is on pace to double in raw dollars, the way the debt is commonly reported, though not as a percentage of gross domestic product. Walker aptly indicated that Obama bears part of the blame. We rate Walkers statement Mostly True. To comment on this item, please go toJSOnline.com.

True

Possible presidential aspirant Scott Walker opens his newbookwith a dismal depiction of conditions in the nations capital.Total federal debt, also known as gross debt, is the amount of debt issued by the U.S. Treasury and other federal agencies. It has two components:Jacquelynn Burke, a publicist for Sentinel, Walkers publisher, responded to our request to Walker for information to back his claim. She told us Walker was referring to total debt and to the portion held by the public and cited two documents from Obamas own administration, a2013 reportfrom the Council of Economic Advisers and Obamas2014 budget.(FactCheck.org also reports that debt held by the public ison pace to doubleduring Obamas presidency.)Chris Edwards, director of tax policy studies at the libertarian Cato Institute, cited the same documents Walker did when we asked him about Walkers claim. Edwards said that, even though fiscal 2008 ended more than three months before Obama was first inaugurated, it is a good starting point because most of the debt accumulated in fiscal 2009 was from Obamas stimulus plan.Joshua Gordon, policy director at the centristConcord Coalition, which advocates for fiscal responsibility, argued that a better starting point is the end of fiscal 2009 -- a year later than what Walker uses -- since Obama would have been in office for nearly nine months at that point. He also argued against examining total debt, saying that since it includes borrowing from Social Security, it doesn't really have any economic significance.Gordon and Marc Goldwein, senior policy director of the nonprofitCommittee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a bipartisan organization focused on debt reduction, also made another point on comparing debt levels over time. They told us measuring debt as a percentage of gross domestic product is better for comparison purposes than simply using raw dollars.Ananalysisby the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities acknowledged that deficits and debt have been sharply higher under Obama. But the analysis says the Great Recession, tax cuts adopted under President George W. Bush, and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq explain most of the deficits that have occurred on Obamas watch.The Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, meanwhile, traces the the debt problem back even further, to around 1970, when the government decided to significantly increase spending without a corresponding increase in revenue. The problem cant be fixed, according to thatanalysis, without creating a mechanism to prevent the government from running persistent deficits in the future.To comment on this item, please go toJSOnline.com.

FMD_train_1158

FDIC: Notification of Bank Insolvency

10/28/2009

Virus: FDIC notice of bank failure. REAL VIRUS Example: [Collected via e-mail, October 2009] FDIC has officially named your bank a failed bank You have received this message because you are a holder of a FDIC-insuredbank account. Recently FDIC has officially named the bank you have opened your accountwith as a failed bank, thus, taking control of its assets. You need to visit the official FDIC website and perform the followingsteps to check your Deposit Insurance Coverage: Visit FDIC website: https://www.fdic.gov/ https://www.fdic.gov/ Download and open your personal FDIC Insurance File to check your Deposit Insurance Coverage Origins: In October 2009, Internet users began receiving e-mails purporting to have come from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), the agency that insures deposits in U.S. bank accounts. These messages claimed that the recipients were holders of FDIC-insured bank accounts in failed banks and instructed them to click on a link to the FDIC web site in order download a file which would allow them to check their "Deposit Insurance Coverage." However, the link embedded in the e-mail led not to the real FDIC web site, but to a spoof web site. Attempting to download the proffered file from that site could initiate the installation of malware on the user's computer (presumably to collect sensitive personal information): The real FDIC put up an alert to warn consumers about this fraudulent mailing: alert The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) has received numerous reports of a fraudulent e-mail that has the appearance of being sent from the FDIC. The subject line of the e-mail states: "check your Bank Deposit Insurance Coverage." The e-mail tells recipients that, "You have received this message because you are a holder of a FDIC-insured bank account. Recently FDIC has officially named the bank you have opened your account with as a failed bank, thus, taking control of its assets." The e-mail then asks recipients to "visit the official FDIC website and perform the following steps to check your Deposit Insurance Coverage" (a fraudulent link is provided). It then instructs recipients to "download and open your personal FDIC Insurance File to check your Deposit Insurance Coverage." This e-mail and associated Web site are fraudulent. Recipients should consider the intent of this e-mail as an attempt to collect personal or confidential information, some of which may be used to gain unauthorized access to on-line banking services or to conduct identity theft. The FDIC does not issue unsolicited e-mails to consumers. Financial institutions and consumers should NOT follow the link in the fraudulent e-mail. Last updated: 28 October 2009

True

Visit FDIC website: https://www.fdic.gov/ The real FDIC put up an alert to warn consumers about this fraudulent mailing:

FMD_train_1220

Will All Child Support in the U.S. End on June 11th 2018?

09/20/2017

In April 2018, social media posts claiming "Donald Trump and U.S. Congress voted yesterday on a bill" to end all child support in the U.S. by 11 June 2018 were widely shared. posts These posts were just variants of a similar hoax from September 2017 created using the prank generator React365 which suggested that President Trump and Congress had effectively ended all child support payments as of 2018, blaring "No more child support after 2017!" and "CHILD SUPPORT SAID TO END BY BEGINNING OF 2018": React365 child support The word salad "news" content originated with React365, a prank generator whose sole purpose is to enable users to generate fake news and share it on social media: React365 On the footer of each page, a poorly-worded disclaimer explains that its headlines are "created by users" and are not a "source of information": Fake news about child support typically spreads with alacrity. However, there have been no legitimate news reports of either the President or Congress ending (or even intending to end) child support. It is simply false information generated by a prank web site. child support

False

In April 2018, social media posts claiming "Donald Trump and U.S. Congress voted yesterday on a bill" to end all child support in the U.S. by 11 June 2018 were widely shared.These posts were just variants of a similar hoax from September 2017 created using the prank generator React365 which suggested that President Trump and Congress had effectively ended all child support payments as of 2018, blaring "No more child support after 2017!" and "CHILD SUPPORT SAID TO END BY BEGINNING OF 2018":The word salad "news" content originated with React365, a prank generator whose sole purpose is to enable users to generate fake news and share it on social media:Fake news about child support typically spreads with alacrity. However, there have been no legitimate news reports of either the President or Congress ending (or even intending to end) child support. It is simply false information generated by a prank web site.

FMD_train_656

Did a Power Surge in a Plugged-In Air Fryer Cause a Fire, as Claimed in Viral Facebook Post?

11/30/2022

On June 18, 2022, Facebook user Cindy Jennings posted that her kitchen had experienced what appeared to be a large fire, as shown in a picture. According to her post, the fire was caused by a plugged-in air fryer that had undergone a power surge when electricity was restored in her home. "So please unplug your air fryers when not in use," the post concluded. Readers asked us if this story was true, as it was being copied and pasted by other users. The post in question was being shared as follows: FROM CINDY- Ughhh, the one thing I wanted to tell everyone in my last post but forgot to mention is that my mind's not working right yet. What caused this was our air fryer. We left it plugged in, and when the electricity came back on, it surged through it. We even had it plugged into a special outlet for protection, but it failed anyway. What I wanted to tell you was that the fire inspector said this was the sixth air fryer fire he has had to deal with; they (firefighters) are trying to get air fryer companies investigated because of all the fires. So please unplug your air fryers when not in use. Note: Jennings' post mentioned a previous post; however, that previous post was not visible to users who were not her Facebook friends. We sought to verify three key pieces of information for the readers who asked us to look into this story. We wanted to confirm that a power surge in an air fryer, which was said to have been plugged in with a surge protection product, was the cause of a fire in Jennings' home. Second, we aimed to verify with the firefighters she claimed to have spoken with that they had seen several air fryer fires similar to this one and that they were trying to get the problem investigated. We also wanted to find more details about any past recalls of air fryers. According to publicly available information on Jennings' Facebook profile, she appeared to live in Surfside Beach, South Carolina. We attempted to reach out by phone and email using contact information we found online. We also sent her a message through Messenger. One of our questions was whether the fire she described occurred in the town listed on her profile or if it had happened elsewhere. We did not receive any responses. In the event that the kitchen fire involving the air fryer and the power surge did happen in Surfside Beach, we contacted the Surfside Beach Fire Department. The day after we first published this story, we spoke by phone with Keith Williams, the department's fire marshal. "We can find no calls that we have run that would match this nature," Williams told us. "We can't find a call in our county database or in our municipal database that would correspond to this call Ms. Jennings would have had." By email, Williams also added that he would bring the supposed incident up at an upcoming fire marshal meeting for Horry County to find out if any other members were aware of an air fryer fire under the name of Jennings. After finding no success with our Surfside Beach search, we noticed that Jennings' profile also mentioned that she was apparently originally "from Chesterville, Ohio." An online search for Jennings' name on the public-information website WhitePages.com showed a person with the same name supposedly residing in Marengo, Ohio. The listing showed an address at a mobile home park named Bennington Springs. Chesterville and Marengo are both located within the jurisdiction of the Big Walnut Joint Fire District. On the Facebook page for the Big Walnut Joint Fire District, a post was made on the morning of June 15, just three days before Jennings' air fryer fire post. The post stated that a storm had caused a power loss in the area and mentioned that there had been a structure fire at the Bennington Springs mobile home park. This information seemed to align with the details in Jennings' post. The Big Walnut Joint Fire District had been busy in the last 24 hours due to the storm and power loss, responding to 18 calls for service, including two structure fires. The first fire was with Fredericktown Fire on Yankee Road, and the second was in the Bennington Springs mobile home park. Many of our members had gone almost 24 hours without sleep. We want to thank the community for continuing to support the Big Walnut Fire District so we can be there for you in times like this. We soon received confirmation from the fire department that Jennings' story was true. Here's what a spokesperson for the Big Walnut Joint Fire District had to say via email: Our department, Big Walnut Joint Fire District, did have a fire on 6/14/2022 at Bennington Springs mobile home park. The picture you included is from that scene. It followed a power outage that was county-wide due to several tornadoes. The power had been restored to the area approximately three hours prior to the fire. The residents had left the premises before the power returned. Our investigator, who is with multiple agencies, ruled the cause as the air fryer. This is the only fire our department has experienced with the origin being an air fryer. He stated there have been others, based on his experience at other departments. This individual is no longer with our department. I do not know the final findings declared by their insurance investigator. The air fryer had been left plugged into a standard residential GFI outlet. The extension cord [visible in the picture] was for the refrigerator, which was being powered by a generator. With the mystery solved, we were also curious to find information on air fryer recalls that had occurred in 2022. On April 21, 2022, Best Buy recalled around 772,000 Insignia air fryers and air fryer ovens, stating it was because they could "overheat, posing fire and burn hazards." Later, on October 13, 2022, NewAir recalled 11,750 of its own Magic Chef air fryers for the same reason. It's unclear what make and model of air fryer appeared in the picture posted by Jennings. Note: We also found this picture and story being discussed and shared in other posts on Reddit, Twitter, and Facebook. "Best Buy Recalls Insignia Air Fryers and Air Fryer Ovens Due to Fire and Burn Hazards." U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, April 21, 2022, https://www.cpsc.gov/Recalls/2022/Best-Buy-Recalls-Insignia-Air-Fryers-and-Air-Fryer-Ovens-Due-to-Fire-and-Burn-Hazards. "Big Walnut Joint Fire District." Facebook, June 15, 2022, https://www.facebook.com/bwjfd/posts/pfbid0XpieRQdCq8y6MrHNpKzkc3BSmRNZgm2qHD8tvkhefAA5Snr1jWdjCoirhkQ2H9TWl. ---. https://www.bwjfd.org/. Jennings, Cindy. Facebook, June 18, 2022, https://www.facebook.com/cindy.jennings.7798/posts/pfbid02o56oU9vsVh7nwphhcwyVXyz3YcTxq91thTYXMk8uLLigFPSjRvcLv3hFnJJm5JbUl. "Newair Recalls Magic Chef Air Fryers Due to Fire and Burn Hazards." U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, October 13, 2022, https://www.cpsc.gov/Recalls/2023/Newair-Recalls-Magic-Chef-Air-Fryers-Due-to-Fire-and-Burn-Hazards. Surfside Beach Fire. https://www.surfsidebeach.org/182/Fire. White Pages. https://www.whitepages.com/. December 1, 2022: This story was updated after the fire marshal for the Surfside Beach Fire Department responded to our inquiry to let us know they found no record of an air fryer fire under the name of Jennings. December 1, 2022: This story was updated after we found a link between an address in Ohio and a Facebook post from the Big Walnut Joint Fire District. December 5, 2022: This story has been updated from "Research In Progress" to "True" after we established with the Big Walnut Joint Fire District that the story was true.

True

On the Facebook page for the Big Walnut Joint Fire District, a post was made on the morning of June 15, just three days before the air fryer fire post from Jennings. The post said that a storm had caused a power loss in the area. It also mentioned that there had been a structure fire at the Bennington Springs mobile home park. This information seemed to line up with the details in Jennings' post.On April 21, 2022, Best Buy recalled around 772,000 Insignia air fryers and air fryer ovens, saying it was because they could "overheat, posing fire and burn hazards." Later, on Oct. 13, 2022, NewAirrecalled 11,750 of its own Magic Chef air fryers too, also because of the same reason.It's unclear what make and model of air fryer appeared in the picture posted by Jennings.Note: We also found this picture and story being discussed and shared in other posts on Reddit, Twitter, and Facebook.

FMD_train_1841

Did Michael Cohen Once Act as Hillary Clinton's Personal Attorney?

03/01/2019

Michael Cohen, former personal attorney to U.S. President Donald Trump, became the focus of renewed scrutiny in February 2019 when he testified before the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Oversight and Reform. This was Cohen's first Congressional testimony since he was sentenced to three years in prison for tax fraud and campaign finance violations related to his payment of "hush money" to women who alleged they had sexual relationships with Donald Trump before he became president. Cohen also admitted he had previously misled Congress when he told the House and Senate Intelligence committees that a proposed deal to build a Trump Tower in Moscow, Russia, had fallen apart in January 2016, when in fact negotiations continued until June of that year—by which time Trump was the presumptive Republican nominee for president. Following Cohen's dramatic testimony on February 27, 2019, some observers, including Trump himself, attempted to portray Cohen as an agent of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton who was dishonestly smearing Trump on behalf of the Democratic presidential nominee whom Trump defeated in 2016. The president highlighted the links between Clinton and Cohen's attorney, Lanny Davis, even suggesting that the former secretary of state was paying Cohen to provide damning testimony against Trump. Trump tweeted, "Michael Cohen's book manuscript shows that he committed perjury on a scale not seen before. He must have forgotten about his book when he testified. What does Hillary Clinton's lawyer, Lanny Davis, say about this one? Is he being paid by Crooked Hillary? Using her lawyer?" We couldn't find any evidence that Davis has ever acted as Clinton's personal attorney as Trump alleged, but the ties between Davis and the Clintons are longstanding. He served as a special counsel to former President Bill Clinton during the 1990s, attended Yale Law School with Hillary Clinton, and was a frequent public supporter of her 2008 and 2016 presidential campaigns, as shown in a July 2016 Fox News panel discussion. Against that background, a meme emerged on social media in late February 2019 that claimed an even more direct historical link between Cohen and Clinton, alleging that Cohen had previously served as her personal attorney and was a "member" of the Clinton Foundation, a non-profit organization founded by Bill Clinton that has been the subject of numerous conspiracy theories promulgated by right-leaning opponents of the Clintons. The meme included a photograph of Hillary Clinton standing alongside two men identified as "Michael Cohen" and "Clinton Foundation Chairman," along with text proclaiming, "Michael Cohen used to be Hillary Clinton's personal lawyer and was a member of the Clinton Foundation." The man identified as Cohen in the meme is indeed Cohen. The man identified as "Clinton Foundation Chairman" is, in fact, Patrick Kennedy, a Democratic former U.S. representative from Rhode Island and son of the late Democratic Sen. Ted Kennedy. Kennedy has never acted as chairman of the Clinton Foundation. The underlying photograph is authentic. Cohen himself tweeted it in June 2014, writing, "Being received by two great Americans ... Hillary Clinton and Patrick Kennedy at the Kennedy Compound." The photograph appears to have been taken in 2004 at a fundraising event for Kennedy's re-election campaign, which was attended by then-New York Sen. Clinton as well as Cohen. Greg Ehrlich, who co-chaired the fundraiser in question, later told the Washington Post that it was an opportunity to say he [Cohen] went to the Kennedy compound. And he loved the Clintons. They were like rock stars. Michael was always a climber. He wanted to be the guy. Although they once attended the same campaign fundraiser, we could find no evidence to corroborate the claim that Cohen ever acted as Hillary Clinton's personal attorney, despite our search of federal and New York state court records as well as news archives that extend back decades. During the 2016 presidential campaign, Cohen was publicly hostile towards Clinton, on one occasion tweeting out a meme that included the false claim she had "murdered an ambassador." On another occasion, Cohen tweeted at Clinton to say, "When you go to prison for defrauding America and perjury, your room and board will be free." Cohen deleted that tweet after he himself was given a three-year prison sentence for tax fraud and campaign finance violations. The Clinton Foundation does not have a membership structure, so it is unclear what the precise meaning is of the claim that Cohen was a "member" of the Clinton Foundation, but we also found no evidence that he has ever had any formal or informal association with that organization. We contacted representatives for Hillary Clinton, the Clinton Foundation, and Michael Cohen in order to definitively clarify the veracity of the February 2019 meme, but unfortunately, none of them responded in time for publication. For that reason, we issue a rating of "Unproven."

NEI

This was Cohen's first Congressional testimony since he was sentenced to three years in prison for tax fraud and campaign-finance violations relating to his payment of "hush money" to women who alleged they had sexual relationships with Donald Trump before he became president.Cohen also admitted he previously misled Congress when he told the House and Senate Intelligence committees that a proposed deal to build a Trump Tower in Moscow, Russia, had fallen apart in January 2016, when in fact negotiations continued until June of that year -- by which time Trump was the presumptive Republican nominee for president. Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 1, 2019We couldn't find any evidence that Davis has ever acted as Clinton's personal attorney as Trump alleged, but the ties between Davis and the Clintons are longstanding. He served as a special counsel to former President Bill Clinton during the 1990s, attended Yale law school with Hillary Clinton, and was a frequent public supporter of her 2008 and 2016 presidential campaigns, such as is shown in this July 2016 Fox News panel discussion:Against that background, a meme emerged on social media in late February 2019 that claimed an even more direct historical link between Cohen and Clinton, alleging that Cohen had previously served as her personal attorney and was a "member" of the Clinton Foundation, a non-profit organization founded by Bill Clinton that has been the subject of numerous conspiracy theories promulgated by right-leaning opponents of the Clintons.#tbt being received by two great Americans...Hillary Clinton and Patrick Kennedy at the Kennedy Compound pic.twitter.com/z57PXfWxfW Michael Cohen (@MichaelCohen212) June 26, 2014The photograph appears to have been taken in 2004 at a fundraising event for Kennedy's re-election campaign, which was attended by then-New York Sen. Clinton as well as Cohen. Greg Ehrlich, who co-chaired the fundraiser in question, later told the Washington Post that It was an opportunity to say he [Cohen] went to the Kennedy compound. And he loved the Clintons. They were like rock stars. Michael was always a climber. He wanted to be the guy.NBC/WSJ poll has @realDonaldTrump beating #CrookedHillary on #Honesty & #NationalSecurity. This picture says it all! pic.twitter.com/E9YKIgoqnV Michael Cohen (@MichaelCohen212) June 28, 2016Cohen deleted that tweet after he himself was given a three-year prison sentence for tax fraud and campaign-finance violations.

FMD_train_1579

Is Ree Drummond Leaving Food Network to Sell Keto Gummies?

05/15/2023

In mid-May 2023, a false rumor circulated online claiming that author and food blogger Ree Drummond, better known as "The Pioneer Woman," was fired from or was leaving Food Network to focus on selling a line of weight loss keto gummies. If Drummond had truly decided to leave her TV job, it would have ended her long-running show on the network, which is also named "The Pioneer Woman." To be clear, Drummond has never created or endorsed any weight loss keto gummies products. Her image and likeness were used without permission, just as they had been in June 2022 by scammers who misleadingly claimed she was involved with CBD gummies. For years, scammers have exploited the images and likenesses of many celebrities to sell CBD and keto gummies without their permission. Oprah Winfrey, Tom Selleck, Tiger Woods, and the cast of "Shark Tank" are just a few examples of famous individuals whose names have been misused by scammers to promote these products. Unfortunately for these celebrities, some of the people who have been scammed still believe they were involved in the deception, even though none of them ever endorsed the products. Online commenters have expressed resentment toward the celebrities they once admired, suggesting that the scammers have tarnished the celebrities' reputations in the eyes of the scammed customers. The rumor that Drummond was leaving Food Network originated in ads on Facebook and Instagram, which were paid for by an unknown person or group. Anyone who clicked on the ads was led to scam websites like travel4fun.pro, which hosted pages designed to mislead readers into believing they were reading a People magazine article. The fake People magazine article featured the false headline, "Ree Drummond Confirms She is 'LEAVING' The Food Network After Her Accidental 'Live' Confession On-Air." The article misleadingly claimed that Drummond had created her own line of weight loss keto gummies. According to the story, the candy-like gummies could purportedly help people magically lose weight without diet or exercise. Drummond's supposed affiliation with the so-called "amazing miracle gummy" product clashed with Food Network's relationship with Weight Watchers, the scam article claimed. Furthermore, the story alleged that Food Network producers were unhappy with her weight. To be clear, none of this was true. The dramatic article was fabricated by scammers in an apparent effort to make the weight loss keto gummies appear more trustworthy to those who trust and admire Drummond. Actor Melissa McCarthy and singer Kelly Clarkson were also named in the story, despite having no connection to any weight-loss gummy products. One of the products mentioned alongside Drummond's name was True Form Keto + ACV Gummies. Upon clicking the link in the fake People magazine article, users were directed to the product order page, trueformbrands.com/v1. On this page, the creator of the website falsely claimed that Dr. Mehmet Oz endorsed the product, calling it "the 'Holy Grail' of weight loss," even though he never made such a statement. The product order page also referenced CBS News, NBC, CNN, Women's Health, Woman's World, Honolulu Magazine, and the Diabetes, Obesity, and Metabolism Journal. However, True Form Keto + ACV Gummies has never been featured by any of these publishers. These mentions served as misleading trust signals. For any readers who were scammed, we recommend contacting your credit card company or financial institution to inform them about what happened. We also suggest asking your credit card company to block future charges from the seller, as these scams often enroll customers in recurring charges of hundreds of dollars each month. Additionally, the terms and conditions on trueformbrands.com/v1 stated, "If you are not completely satisfied with your purchase of True Form Keto at any time, please call or email us at." The sentence ended with a space and a period, with no phone number provided for customer service. In the past, we have found that this omission of a phone number is common on product-order pages for keto gummies scams. Even in cases where a phone number has been available, it often led to a call center whose agents would not disclose any information about their identity or the name of their parent company, with secrecy seemingly being the norm. We advise readers to steer clear of any products that claim to offer a weight loss "miracle" without the need for diet or exercise.

False

To be clear, Drummond has never created or endorsed any weight loss keto gummies products. Her image and likeness were being used without permission, just as they had been usedback in June 2022 by scammers who misleadingly claimed she also had something to do with CBD gummies.Oprah Winfrey, Tom Selleck, Tiger Woods, and the cast of "Shark Tank" are just a few of the many examples of actors and famous people who have been mentioned by scammers to push these products.One of the products named in the articles next to Drummond's name was True Form Keto + ACV Gummies. Upon clicking the link in the fake People magazine article, users were led to the product orderpage, trueformbrands.com/v1. On the product order page, the creator of the website falsely claimed that Dr. Mehmet Oz endorsed the product and called it "the 'Holy Grail' of weight loss," even though he never said anything of the sort.

FMD_train_849

My fellow resident, John Edwards.

09/02/2007

Claim: E-mail from neighbor describes Democratic vice-presidential candidate John Edwards. Example: [Collected on the Internet, 2004] Meet my neighbor. I'd like to introduce you to my neighbor. I'm from Raleigh, North Carolina, and for several years I've lived around the corner from Vice Presidential Candidate John Edwards. My neighbor John has been in the news a good deal lately, but it's hard to learn about the man himself from the coverage. Maybe I can help you get to know him better. Even several years ago, before he was elevated to the national stage, my neighbor John didn't socialize much with other neighbors. He didn't gather with them on the Fourth of July, and he didn't come out to the sledding hills to watch the kids play after a snow. My neighbor John preferred to jog through the neighborhood by himself. There's no sidewalk on Alleghany Drive, John's street in Raleigh, and if you drove past him while he was jogging on the road and didn't slow down enough for his taste, he'd flip you the bird. Even after he became a U.S. Senator, he'd still come home to Raleigh every once in a while, jog through the neighborhood, and flip the occasional bird to passing cars. He last showed me his middle finger about four years ago. Since then, my neighbor John is rarely in town. When he is home, though, we in the neighborhood all know it. My neighbor John invited reporters from TV, radio, and print news organizations to come to his house in January 2003 for the announcement of his presidential bid. He didn't want any news vans parked on his property; in fact, he made sure all the cameras and reporters waited in the street at the bottom of his driveway. That way, everyone could get good footage of him strolling down the driveway to make his announcement, young children in tow. The news vans drove into the yards of John's neighbors and parked there. I heard two families ended up re-sodding their damaged yards, and John never apologized to anyone, much less offered any compensation. The family across the street from my neighbor John has since put up posts at their property line to try to prevent that sort of thing from happening again. The appearance was good for my neighbor John. Since then, when my neighbor comes home (as he did on July 10, to be interviewed with John Kerry for "60 Minutes"), Raleigh police officers block off the street. Those of us who live near him end up coming and going to and from our homes on a circuitous route, on a bad, unsurfaced road. Forsyth Street has been closed to through traffic, except when my neighbor is in town, because the road has been ripped up for the installation of new gas and sewer lines. My neighbor's street is a public, city-maintained street, and it is the best way to get to homes just north of his. If my neighbor is around, though, apparently none of the rest of us can use the street at all. It's good for my neighbor John. My neighbor John has been a very successful trial lawyer, but his practice of law sometimes seems more like extortion. A friend of mine is a doctor in Raleigh. He recently spoke with another doctor, an anesthesiologist, who was named in a suit filed by my neighbor John. Apparently, a surgeon at a local hospital had made a mistake, and my neighbor John represented the injured patient. Not only did my neighbor John sue the doctor who made the mistake, but he also sued the hospital and a string of others, including the anesthesiologist. There was no problem with the anesthesia; the anesthesiologist had done absolutely nothing wrong. His attorney said so in a meeting with my neighbor John. John's neighborly response was that he couldn't care less if the doctor had done nothing wrong. That wasn't the point. The point was that clients come to my neighbor John because of his record of success and his reputation for thoroughness. Every defendant in a suit he files pays, regardless of whether they are actually guilty or not. My neighbor John demanded a settlement of $250,000 and said his firm was willing to spend $2 million to get it. The doctor's insurance company promptly paid the $250,000. The rate of growth in North Carolina's medical malpractice insurance rates is among the highest in the nation. The total cost of health care rises with those rates. My neighbor John's slimy extortion is part of the reason. Forget about right or wrong, guilt or innocence. My neighbor John did what was best for himself. My neighbor John may be a trial lawyer, but in front of juries, he also claims to be something of a psychic. You see, my neighbor John specializes in cases involving the death or serious injury of children. He claims to receive messages from dead or brain-damaged children, and the messages are much clearer and more specific than those received by the famous "psychic" who nearly shares my neighbor's name. When a child has been killed or is otherwise unable to speak for him or herself, my neighbor John says he has the ability to "channel" that child. He tells juries he feels the child inside him and that he has messages from that child, which he relays to jury members. He tells juries about the car-accident death of his own son, Wade, and speculates that he may have received the ability to "feel" the souls of dead or injured children because of the close relationship he still feels with his son. It sounds hokey and more than a little creepy, but it seems to play well with juries and results in very high jury awards. These awards have made my neighbor extremely wealthy. He's so wealthy that he created a corporation of which he is the only member and pays himself most of his earnings as corporate dividends, not as salary or wages. Medicare taxes are not levied on dividend income, so my neighbor has avoided paying $600,000 into the Medicare system since 1995 by setting up this tax shelter. But he says others aren't paying their fair share of Medicare taxes. It's good for my neighbor John. My neighbor made a lot of promises on his way to the Senate. He promised strong support for our military, but then voted against body armor, combat pay, and better health care for our troops in Afghanistan and Iraq. He promised to support traditional North Carolina values, but then voted to the left of Ted Kennedy on partial-birth abortion, taxes, property rights, and a host of other issues. We in North Carolina feel betrayed. My neighbor John figuratively gave his constituents the middle finger while he ingratiated himself to Tom Daschle and the rest of the Democratic Party leadership. My neighbor announced many months ago that he would not seek reelection because he knows he's unpopular in North Carolina and would lose by a huge margin. According to a poll released this week, when the Kerry/Edwards ticket was announced, support for Kerry in North Carolina went down, not up. We North Carolinians know John Edwards. We've been betrayed by him, and we do not support him. But as he broke his promises to us, he gained favor with the Democratic Party leadership. Now he's a political star. I guess turning his back on the people he claims to represent has worked out well for my neighbor, John Edwards. Origins: This piece about North Carolina senator John Edwards, the 2004 Democratic vice-presidential nominee, was posted to various political newsgroups and websites in early August 2004, attributed to one John Edwards posted by Brian T. Nicholson, "a neighbor of John Edwards." Mr. Nicholson does live on Yadkin Drive in Raleigh, a street that intersects Alleghany Drive, where Senator Edwards resides. However, Mr. Nicholson now maintains that he did not pen the essay attributed to him, but that he wrote a private message to family and friends which was altered by someone else and turned into the piece now circulating on the Internet. (He has not yet produced the original version or explained which parts of his message were altered, however.) According to the Raleigh News & Observer, other neighbors of Senator Edwards report they haven't observed the behaviors attributed to him in the piece quoted above. For example, the Internet essay maintains: If you drove past him as he was jogging on the road and didn't slow down enough for his taste, he'd flip you the bird. He last showed me his middle finger about four years ago. However, the News & Observer reports: But neighbors this week said they saw Edwards wave while jogging, sometimes giving a thumbs up or stopping briefly to chat. No one said they saw any rude gesture. "I've never seen him be rude or ugly," said Tootie Flythe, who was so upset by the essay that she wrote a multipage response in longhand, which she is keeping to herself. Flythe lives across the street from the Edwardses, and she said John Edwards sometimes cuts through her yard to get to a greenway. He always stops to ask about her family, said Flythe, a 54-year-old registered Democrat. The essay says Edwards didn't hang out with neighbors on the Fourth of July or go out to sledding hills to watch kids play in the snow. But Edwards' neighbors said they don't do that, either. Ray Mays lived across the street from Edwards for 10 years until he sold his house this summer. Mays, a 61-year-old who said he will vote for President Bush this fall, said he and Edwards were "passing acquaintances," though he knew Elizabeth Edwards better. Mays attended one or two Christmas parties at the Edwards home and remembers Elizabeth spending most of her time in the kitchen, cooking. "They were always friendly," he said. "They never gave the appearance that they were stuck up in any way." The essay also claims: My neighbor John invited reporters from TV, radio, and print news organizations to come to his house in January 2003 for the announcement of his presidential bid. He didn't want any news vans parked on his property; in fact, he made sure all the cameras and reporters waited in the street at the bottom of his driveway. That way, everyone could get good footage of him strolling down the driveway to make his announcement, young children in tow. The news vans drove into the yards of John's neighbors and parked there. I heard two families ended up re-sodding their damaged yards, and John never apologized to anyone, much less offered any compensation. But on January 2, 2003, the day he officially announced his candidacy for president, Senator Edwards sent a note containing the following apology and offer to repair damaged lawns (at his expense) to his neighbors: Dear Friends & Neighbors: As you know, 2003 has gotten off to an exciting start for our family. In light of our recent decision, we know that many of you may also be feeling the effects. We want to apologize for any inconvenience you and your family may have experienced. Please call our assistant, Andrew Young, if you have any lawn damage from the media traffic. Our personal lawn maintenance company will make any necessary repairs. Thank you for your patience. The Internet piece goes on to claim that the standard security provided to presidential and vice-presidential candidates is somehow an inconsiderate and selfish whim of Senator Edwards, one which has made access to the Raleigh neighborhood where he lives inconvenient for other residents: The appearance was good for my neighbor John. Since then, when my neighbor comes home (as he did on July 10, to be interviewed with John Kerry for "60 Minutes"), Raleigh police officers block off the street. Those of us who live near him end up coming and going to and from our homes on a circuitous route, on a bad, unsurfaced road. Forsyth Street has been closed to through traffic, except when my neighbor is in town, because the road has been ripped up for the installation of new gas and sewer lines. My neighbor's street is a public, city-maintained street, and it is the best way to get to homes just north of his. If my neighbor is around, though, apparently none of the rest of us can use the street at all. Again, however, the News & Observer reported differently: When Edwards is at home, which isn't often these days, police block his section of Alleghany Drive but let residents, guests, and home repair services through. The essay complained about that inconvenience, but Alleghany residents said they manage easily. "We have a lot of contractors coming and going," said Brenda Gibson, 47, a registered Republican. "I have nothing negative to say." Some of the neighbors said they liked having traffic access limited because it stops cars from speeding down the narrow street. "Alleghany was just a thoroughfare," said Clotilde Collins, 74. "You take your life in your hands trying to get out of your driveway." Some said they are excited to have Edwards as a neighbor. And they like looking out their windows to see Secret Service agents. "I love the security," Gibson said. Last updated: 13 August 2004 Sources: Bonner, Lynn. "E-Mail About Edwards Disputed." The [Raleigh] News & Observer. 13 August 2004.

NEI

Origins: This piece about North Carolina senator John Edwards, the 2004 Democratic vice-presidential nominee, was posted to various political newsgroups and web sites in early August 2004, attributed to one

FMD_train_1790

Has Biden made a promise to remove the 'Stepped-Up' Basis for Capital Gains Taxes?

02/03/2021

In early 2021, readers asked Snopes to examine the accuracy of a widely shared social media post that purported to describe U.S. President Joe Biden's intention to eliminate a piece of tax law that allows taxpayers to benefit from selling a home inherited from their parents. The post, which was critical of Biden and the supposed plan, first emerged during the 2020 presidential election campaign but regained prominence after Biden was inaugurated in January 2021. It typically read as follows: "Did you know Biden wants to get rid of something called 'stepped-up basis'? How does this affect you? When your parents pass and leave you the family house, normally you would inherit that property at its current value. If you were to sell that house, you would only pay taxes on the gain from its current value and what it sells for. If Biden does away with 'stepped-up basis,' you will inherit the property for what your parents paid for it. If you decide to sell, you will pay taxes on the difference between the original purchase price and what it sells for today. Here is what this looks like: Current Policy Inherited House at Current Value - $200,000 Sells for $205,000 Taxable income = $5,000 Taxes Due - 20% of $5,000 = $1,000 Profit to you = $204,000 Biden Policy Inherited House at Original Purchase Price - $40,000 Sells for $205,000 Taxable income = $165,000 Taxes Due - 20% of $165,000 = $33,000 Profit to you = $172,000 If your parents had sold this property prior to passing, they would have paid no taxes because it was their primary residence. So much for helping the middle class get ahead. My educated guess would be that at least 95% of Americans don’t even know Biden has proposed this. We are talking tens of thousands of additional tax dollars for the average person after inheritance! Wow, Google 'Biden stepped-up basis' and educate yourself because this is significant! Please share! The viral post accurately stated that Biden proposed getting rid of the 'stepped-up' basis for capital gains tax and correctly explained the potential practical consequences for an individual taxpayer who inherits a home. In fact, the tax burden for wealthier individuals would be even greater than the post stated, because Biden has also proposed doubling the rate of long-term capital gains tax for those with income over $1 million. Here's how the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office describes the stepped-up basis for capital gains tax, which is the tax due on profits from the sale of an asset, such as shares or property: When people sell an asset for more than the price they paid for it, they realize a net capital gain. The net gain is typically calculated as the sale price minus the asset's adjusted basis—generally the original purchase price adjusted for improvements or depreciation. To calculate the gains on inherited assets, taxpayers generally use the asset's fair-market value at the time of the owner's death, often referred to as stepped-up basis, instead of the adjusted basis derived from the asset's value when the decedent initially acquired it. When the heir sells the asset, capital gains taxes are assessed only on the change in the asset's value relative to the stepped-up basis. As a result, any appreciation in value that occurred while the decedent owned the asset is not included in taxable income and therefore is not subject to the capital gains tax. In 2015, then-President Barack Obama also proposed eliminating the stepped-up basis. Here's his administration's explanation of how it works: Suppose an individual leaves stock worth $50 million to an heir, who immediately sells it. When purchased, the stock was worth $10 million, so the capital gain is $40 million. However, the heir's basis in the stock is stepped up to the $50 million gain when inherited, so no income tax is due on the sale, nor ever due on the $40 million of gain. Each year, hundreds of billions in capital gains avoid tax as a result of the stepped-up basis. During the 2020 presidential election, Biden and his campaign repeatedly expressed his intention to eliminate the stepped-up basis. As first highlighted by Politifact, the Biden campaign presented the proposal as a partial way to pay for its proposed student loan reforms. In October 2019, ABC News reported that the plan makes official several policies the former vice president often discusses on the trail about student debt. Biden's policy includes his plan for reducing student loan debt obligations for students who enter the public service sector, allowing $10,000 of undergraduate or graduate debt relief per year for up to five years of service. Biden would also double the maximum amount of Pell grants available to students, including Dreamers, and would allow students making less than $25,000 a year to defer payments on their federal loans without accruing interest. Any student making more than $25,000 would pay 5% of their discretionary income toward their loans rather than the current 10% owed. The plan would be funded through the elimination of the stepped-up basis loophole, a type of break on inheritance taxes, and capping itemized deductions for wealthy Americans at 28%, according to the campaign. In June 2020, according to CNBC, Biden told potential donors: "I'm going to get rid of the bulk of Trump's $2 trillion tax cut, and a lot of you may not like that, but I'm going to close loopholes like capital gains and stepped-up basis." On the Biden-Harris campaign's website, a Spanish-language document outlining the campaign's plans for education reforms stated (translated): "The Biden plan for post-secondary education is a $750 billion investment over 10 years, aimed at developing a stronger and more inclusive middle class. It will be paid for by ensuring the super-rich pay their fair share. Specifically, this plan will be funded by eliminating the gap in our tax law known as the 'Stepped-up Basis Loophole' as well as reducing the itemized deductions that the richest Americans can make to 28%." Elsewhere, the Biden campaign proposed not only eliminating the stepped-up basis but also doubling the tax rate for long-term capital gains—that is, profits from the sale of an asset owned for more than one year—for relatively wealthy taxpayers. Here's what the Biden-Harris campaign website stated, as part of the campaign's healthcare plan: "As President, Biden will make healthcare a right by eliminating capital gains tax loopholes for the super wealthy. Today, the very wealthy pay a tax rate of just 20% on long-term capital gains... As President, Biden will roll back the Trump rate cut for the very wealthy and restore the 39.6% top rate he helped restore when he negotiated an end to the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy in 2012. Biden's capital gains reform will close the loopholes that allow the super wealthy to avoid taxes on capital gains altogether. Biden will ensure that those making over $1 million will pay the top rate on capital gains, doubling the capital gains tax rate on the super wealthy." The Facebook post shared widely in late 2020 and early 2021 accurately described Biden's stated intention to eliminate the stepped-up basis for capital gains tax, a move that would indeed increase the tax burden on an individual who inherits property from their parents before selling it. The tax burden for wealthier taxpayers would be even greater than the Facebook post outlined, since Biden has also proposed increasing the rate of long-term capital gains tax for those with an income above $1 million. The Facebook post did not mention that Biden had stipulated he would use the money raised from eliminating the stepped-up basis to help pay for his healthcare and education plans. Snopes contacted the White House to ask whether the Biden administration still intended to push for the elimination of the stepped-up basis, but we did not receive a response in time for publication.

True

The post which was critical of Biden and the supposed plan first emerged during the 2020 presidential election campaign, but regained prominence after Biden was inaugurated in January 2021. It typically read as follows:Here's how the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office describes the stepped-up basis for capital gains tax, which is the tax due on profits from the sale of an asset, such as shares, a piece of property, and so on:In 2015, then-President Barack Obama also proposed eliminating the stepped-up basis. Here's his administration's explanation of how it works:During the 2020 presidential election, Biden and his campaign repeatedly expressed his intention to get rid of the stepped-up basis. As first highlighted by Politifact, the Biden campaign presented the proposal as a partial way to pay for its proposed student loan reforms. In October 2019, ABC News reported that:In June 2020, according to CNBC, Biden told would-be donors: "Im going to get rid of the bulk of Trumps $2 trillion tax cut, and a lot of you may not like that but Im going to close loopholes like capital gains and stepped-up basis.On the Biden-Harris campaign's website, a Spanish-language document outlining the campaign's plans for education reforms stated (translated):Elsewhere, the Biden campaign proposed not only getting rid of the stepped-up basis, but also doubling the tax rate for long-term capital gains that is, profits from the sale of an asset that you owned for more than one year for relatively wealthy taxpayers. Here's what the Biden-Harris campaign website stated, as part of the campaign's healthcare plan:

FMD_train_1846

Credit for the burdensome financial responsibilities imposed on black individuals as a result of systemic inequalities.

05/01/2001

Claim: African-Americans are entitled to a $5,000 slavery reparation tax credit. Example: [Collected on the Internet, 2002] This goes out to all my friends, family, and everyone in the African American community. Once you receive this message please write down the number and then pass it along to every AfricanAmerican you know. As you my know, all African Americans living here in the United States are descendants of slavery,therefore our government has finally passed a bill to pay all descendants back. The way they are paying us back is through a refund called the, "Black Inheritance Tax Refund/40 Acres and a Mule". When you call this number you'll give them your name, address, and phone number and they'll send you out a packet, which includes further details and information on how to receive the refund. I was informed that it will take only two weeks to receive the packet and then two weeks to receive themoney. Now, if you know our government I bet they are not expecting a lot of people to call for this refund, and they may be right, because many of us will not be informed of this. Therefore, this is why I am taking it upon myself to pass on this information, so our community will soon be informed through word-of-mouth about what has been owed to our ancestors all these years. Black Inheritance Tax Refund 1-800-441-5629 press #3 to direct you to the appropriate line open betweenEast Coast: 8am and 12amWest Coast: 5am and 9pm Expect to wait anywhere from 5mins-25mins (There will not be any music to entertain you while you wait!) Ps: You must be 18 years or older and I'm assuming a legal residence of the United States. So, request an application for yourself, husband, wife, sister, brother, father, mother, etc, or just pass the number along. God Bless You All and please check this out!!!!!!!! Origins: In 2000, bogus letters claiming certain senior citizens were eligible for slavery reparations or higher Social Security payments were circulating in black churches in the South and elsewhere. The letters claimed blacks born before 1928 were eligible for a $5,000 "Negro Inheritance Tax Refund" due to a "Slave Reparation Act," and folks born between 1911 and 1926 might be entitled to higher monthly Social Security payments. This was but one of the many forms the "slavery reparation tax credit" misinformation has taken over the years. An April 1993 Lena Sherrod commentary entitled "Forty Acres and a Mule" which appeared in Essence magazine dealt with the concept that reparations were owed to the descendants of African-Americans who were forced to work unpaid for 246 years, and that African-Americans were owed a tax rebate for years of legalized racial discrimination. Sherrod wrote: The government also owes African-Americans a tax rebate for the 60 years of segregation and Jim Crow that followed slavery. Although we were consigned by law to second-class citizenship, we were still forced to pay first-class taxes . the delinquent tax rebate [is] now estimated . to be at $43,209 per household." Since de facto racial discrimination continues to function as a hidden Black tax, it ought to be deductible. So when income-tax time rolls around, on line 59 of form 1040 which asks you to list 'other payments' simply enter $43,209 in 'Black taxes' and compute accordingly. This commentary undoubtedly helped to foster the belief that a real income tax deduction was available as a form of reparation to the descendants of slaves. In 2002, people were being urged in e-mail to call an 800 number. Yet it's all the same hoax. No matter whether you got the letter from your church or read about the give-back in a magazine, the "reparations credit" does not and never has existed. Those who claim the deduction because they are black can be subject to fines and penalties, so really, really think twice before trying to wring it out of Uncle Sam. The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) can fine a taxpayer $500 for filing a frivolous claim. Moreover, if the tax department fails to catch the erroneous deduction at the time of filing, it has an additional six years to right its error. Upon catching the error, the taxmen would not only strike off the deduction, but would calculate interest owed on the new balance of tax due, dating it to the year of the original return. (For example, if you claimed the credit in 1994, and the IRS caught it in 1998, your 1994 return would be re-computed to remove the effect of the bogus deduction. You'd now get a bill from the IRS for the re-computed difference between tax paid and tax due, plus all the interest that had piled up on it across those four years, and maybe even a $500 penalty for trying to pull the wool over the tax department's eyes. Eeesh.) IRS offices across the nation have received thousands of requests daily for Form 2439, which some people have been mistakenly led to believe reimburses the descendants of slaves. Form 2439 is actually for shareholders trying to claim undistributed capital gains. Form 2439 Though word of the phony benefits is most often spread by well-meaning individuals whose only motivation is ensuring those who are supposedly in line for the break hear about it, at times unscrupulous tax preparers have stepped in to turn what is already a heart-wrenching disappointment into an out-and-out fraud perpetrated on the unwary by charging fees of hundreds (sometimes thousands) of dollars to "help" people apply for these nonexistent benefits. In a common version of this take-down, a con man promises his unwary clients that he can obtain up to $40,000 in "slave reparation" credits for them from the government and offers to file the necessary tax forms on their behalf in exchange for a percentage of their refunds. He then loads up his clients' tax returns with all manner of deductions and credits they're not entitled to take and thereby scams the government into sending them refund checks. When the IRS later goes over the returns more thoroughly and starts clamoring for their money back, the victims are left holding the bag. The $43,209 "Black tax refund" figure one sometimes hears bandied about is said to be based on the estimated value of "40 acres and a mule," a reparation supposedly laid out in an 1866 bill which lore claims was passed by Congress but was vetoed by President Andrew Johnson. The truth is a bit more complicated than that. The origins of the belief that the U.S. government promised 40 acres of land and a mule to freed slaves after the Civil War are indefinite. One possible source of this claim is Special Field Order No. 15, issued in January 1865 by Union General William Tecumseh Sherman, which set aside a coastal strip of land from Charleston, South Carolina, to Jacksonville, Florida, for the exclusive use of freed slaves, with each freed-slave family receiving a 40-acre chunk of this holding. As Eric Foner noted in his history of Reconstruction: Special Field Order No. 15 Sherman was neither a humanitarian reformer nor a man with any particular concern for blacks. Instead of seeing Field Order 15 as a blueprint for the transformation of Southern society, he viewed it mainly as a way of relieving the immediate pressure caused by a large number of impoverished blacks following his army. The land grants, he later claimed, were intended only to make "temporary provisions for the freedmen and their families during the rest of the war," not to convey permanent possession. Understandably, however, the freedmen assumed that the land was to be theirs, especially after Gen. Rufus Saxton, assigned by Sherman to oversee the implementation of his order, informed a large gathering of blacks "that they were to be put in possession of lands, upon which they might locate their families and work out for themselves a living and respectability." Debate continues over whether Sherman acted solely on his own authority in issuing Special Field Order No. 15 or whether he had the approval of the War Department (or even President Lincoln himself), but the end result was that a new policy (known as Howard's Circular 15) issued by the White House in September 1865 ordered the restoration of land to pardoned owners and thereby took away from freedmen the land appropriated for them by Sherman under Special Field Order No. 15 (The order made no provisions for giving mules to freedmen, but Foner notes that after issuing it, "Sherman later provided that the army could assist [freedmen] with the loan of mules.") Another possible source of the "40 acres and a mule" belief is the creation of the Freedmen's Bureau (originally the Bureau of Refugees, Freedmen and Abandoned Lands), a federal agency established as a subsidiary of the War Department in March 1865 (a month before the end of the Civil War) to deal with issues concerning refugees and freedmen within states under reconstruction, including the management of abandoned and confiscated property. One of the provisions of the Freedmen's Bureau Act directed that the bureau's commissioner should "have authority to set apart, for the use of loyal refugees and freedmen, such tracts of land within the insurrectionary states as shall have been abandoned, or to which the United States shall have acquired title by confiscation or sale, or otherwise, and to every male citizen, whether refugee or freedman, as aforesaid, there shall be assigned not more than forty acres of such land." However, this act did not propose giving property to freed slaves (the land was to be leased to freedmen for three years, then made available for purchase by them), nor did it make any mention of mules. Freedmen's Bureau Freedmen's Bureau Act President Johnson did not veto the Freedmen's Bureau Act, which was passed by Congress in March 1865 and signed by President Lincoln. (Johnson did not assume the presidency until Lincoln's assassination the following month.) Two events occurred in February 1866, both of which have been misstated as overturning the "forty acres" provision of the Freedmen's Bureau Act: An amendment to the Freedmen's Bureau Bill (also known as the "Second Freedmen's Bureau Act") proposed by Congressman Thaddeus Stevens, to add "forfeited estates of the enemy" to the land available to blacks, was overwhelmingly defeated in the House of Representatives. (At that time, the only group of slaveholders who were compelled to provide their former slaves with land were Indians who sided with the Confederacy.) President Johnson vetoed the Freedman's Bureau Bill, which sought to extend the life of the bureau indefinitely (it had originally been chartered only for one year after the end of the Civil War) and to greatly increase its powers. Congress passed the bill again (in modified form) over Johnson's veto in July 1866. The Southern Homestead Act of 1866 did in fact make land in five southern states available to freed blacks, but only public land, not plantations or other property confiscated from former slaveholders. Unfortunately, most of the land still available in the South for homesteading was too swampy and too far away from transportation links to be of much good to freedmen, and even then the largest portion of this inferior land was claimed by whites (often for quick resale to lumber companies). Although the notion of a "Black Inheritance Tax Refund" has long since been debunked and disclaimed, it nonetheless lives on and continues to cause headaches to the IRS and taxpayers alike. In April 2002, the Washington Post reported that the IRS had received more than 100,000 tax returns seeking nonexistent slavery-tax credits and had mistakenly paid out more than $30 million in erroneous refunds in 2000 and 2001. And in April 2005, the Manhattan U.S. attorney's office obtained a temporary restraining order enjoining a New York man from preparing income tax returns for others because he had "been including bogus tax credits such as reparations for African-American slavery and segregation." Barbara "taxing the imagination" Mikkelson Last updated: 27 May 2011 Brown, Timothy. "Black Churches in the South Targeted in Mail Hoax." The Associated Press. 31 August 2000. Deibel, Mary. "IRS Warns Black Taxpayers About Reparation-Claim Scam." The Washington Times. 7 October 2000 (p. A2). Fennell, Edward. "Slavery Reparations Program Labeled Lie." The [Charleston] Post and Courier. 24 September 2000 (p. B1). Foner, Eric. Reconstruction: America's Unfinished Revolution. New York: Harper & Row, 1988. ISBN 0-060-91453-X (pp. 70-71, 245-246). Foner, Eric and John Garraty. The Reader's Companion to American History. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1991. ISBN 0-395-51372-3 (pp. 987-988). Josar, David. "IRS Warns Against Trying to Get Refund for Reparations." The Detroit News. 28 August 1996 (p. D1). Kessler, Glenn. "IRS Paid $30 Million in Credits for Slavery." The Washington Post. 13 April 2002 (p. A1). La Hay, Patricia. "Slavery Reparations Tax Break Is Illegal." The Arizona Republic. 9 August 1997 (p. A1). McLeod, Ramon. "Even Street Gangs Are Among Those Involved in Fraud." The San Francisco Chronicle. 13 April 1996 (p. A17). Moore, Linda. "League Explains Nonrole in Slavery Reparations Hoax." The [Memphis] Commercial Appeal. 15 September 2000 (p. C2). Oubre, Claude F. Forty Acres and a Mule: The Freedmen's Bureau and Black Land Ownership. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1978. ISBN 0-807-10298-9. Sherrod, L.G. "Forty Acres and a Mule." Essence. April 1993 (p. 124). Stiehm, Jamie. "IRS Official Warns of Tax Hoax Using Slave Reparations." The Baltimore Sun. 12 February 2002. The Associated Press. "Blacks Targeted in Slavery Reparation Scam." 6 October 2000. Chicago Sun-Times. "Reparations Scam Preys on Ignorance." 17 July 1996 (p. 47). Chicago Tribune. "Tax Myths Don't Add Up at IRS." 23 February 1997 (p. C7). Reuters. "Man Barred from Making Slavery Tax Claims." 15 April 2005.

False

IRS offices across the nation have received thousands of requests daily for Form 2439, which some people have been mistakenly led to believe reimburses the descendants of slaves. Form 2439 is actually for shareholders trying to claim undistributed capital gains. The origins of the belief that the U.S. government promised 40 acres of land and a mule to freed slaves after the Civil War are indefinite. One possible source of this claim is Special Field Order No. 15, issued in January 1865 by Union General William Tecumseh Sherman, which set aside a coastal strip of land from Charleston, South Carolina, to Jacksonville, Florida, for the exclusive use of freed slaves, with each freed-slave family receiving a 40-acre chunk of this holding. As Eric Foner noted in his history of Reconstruction:Another possible source of the "40 acres and a mule" belief is the creation of the Freedmen's Bureau (originally the Bureau of Refugees, Freedmen and Abandoned Lands), a federal agency established as a subsidiary of the War Department in March 1865 (a month before the end of the Civil War) to deal with issues concerning refugees and freedmen within states under reconstruction, including the management of abandoned and confiscated property. One of the provisions of the Freedmen's Bureau Act directed that the bureau's commissioner should "have authority to set apart, for the use of loyal refugees and freedmen, such tracts of land within the insurrectionary states as shall have been abandoned, or to which the United States shall have acquired title by confiscation or sale, or otherwise, and to every male citizen, whether refugee or freedman, as aforesaid, there shall be assigned not more than forty acres of such land." However, this act did not propose giving property to freed slaves (the land was to be leased to freedmen for three years, then made available for purchase by them), nor did it make any mention of mules.

FMD_train_1289

Dalai Gun

04/02/2013

Claim: The Dalai Lama once said that if someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun. Example: [Collected via e-mail, April 2013] Did the Dalai Lama really say "If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun." I've found this on many sites, but just can't believe it's true. Origins: In May 2001 Tenzin Gyatso, the 14th and current Dalai Lama (the head monk of the Gelugpa lineage of Tibetan Buddhism), made a three-day visit to Portland, Oregon, during which he gave a talk to 7,600 area high school students in what was billed by organizers as the "Educating the Heart Summit." As reported by the Seattle Times, during that talk the Dalai Lama responded to a question posed by a student about how to react to a potential school shooter by stating that it would "be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun," with the proviso that one should aim to wound and not to kill: His message resonates in an era when schools must be on guard against violent acts by gun-toting students. Included in the audience were some 35 students from Thurston High School in Springfield, Ore., where Kip Kinkel went on a May 1998 rampage in which his parents and two students were killed and 24 other students were wounded. Students, in a question-and-answer period, asked some hard questions. One girl wanted to know how to react to a shooter who takes aim at a classmate. The Dalai Lama said acts of violence should be remembered, and then forgiveness should be extended to the perpetrators. But if someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, he said, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun. Not at the head, where a fatal wound might result. But at some other body part, such as a leg. Many Americans might find the Dalai Lama's response surprising, given that he has expressed a dedication to nonviolence, and Buddhism is widely viewed in western culture as a religion that embraces pacifism. However, commentators have noted that the image of Buddhist pacifism is an exaggerated one which has been projected onto Buddhism by others: commentators Buddhist cultures, including Tibet, have not historically been pacifist. The previous dalai lama strove to develop a modern military. So the current one's dedication to nonviolence should not be taken as a matter of course. He was influenced by Gandhi, a British-trained lawyer whose pacifism was rooted in Thoreau's Civil Disobedience. His nonviolent approach is exceptional for a Buddhist political leader and integrates Indian and western concepts of nonviolent struggle. The exaggerated image of pacifism projected on Buddhism (and Hinduism) was embraced and promoted by natives, as it conveyed moral superiority over colonialist oppressors and missionaries. Getting the message fed back by natives reinforced the original misconceptions. But the ultimate source is Euro-Americans themselves, weary of a century of warfare and longing for a pacifist Shangri-La. Buddhist cultural values were never so simplistic and practically served rajas, khans, and daimyo for millennia. The main reason Buddhists' history does not match our expectations, aside from them being as human as the rest of us, is that our expectations have been mistaken. Some think that fantasies of a pacifist utopia benefit the Tibetan cause. It can also be argued that they encourage communists to contemptuously dismiss western support for Tibet and obstruct Buddhists from engaging their values. The Buddhist world is racked with violence and it has never been more important to understand Buddhist ethics. These include never acting in anger; exhausting alternatives such as negotiation; striving to capture the enemy alive; avoiding destruction of infrastructure and the environment; and taking responsibility for how one's actions and exploitation cause enemies to arise. They also emphasise the great psychic danger to those who act violently, something we see in the large number of suicides among youth sent to these wars. Above all, rather than "national self-interest", the guiding motivation should be compassion. Last updated: 10 October 2015 Jenkins, Stephen. "It's Not So Strange for a Buddhist to Endorse Killing." The Guardian. 11 May 2011 (p. B1).

True

Many Americans might find the Dalai Lama's response surprising, given that he has expressed a dedication to nonviolence, and Buddhism is widely viewed in western culture as a religion that embraces pacifism. However, commentators have noted that the image of Buddhist pacifism is an exaggerated one which has been projected onto Buddhism by others:

FMD_train_1458

Kanye (West) looks and he sees black unemployment at the lowest its been in the history of our country. He sees Hispanic unemployment at the lowest its been in the history of our country. He sees (womens unemployment) the lowest its been in now almost 19 years.

04/26/2018

President Donald Trump took to the airwaves to tout his budding bromance with rapper Kanye West. The hosts ofFox & Friendsasked Trump during an April 26telephone interviewabout the enthusiastic tweets exchanged between the two men, such as this one. my MAGA hat is signed pic.twitter.com/DrDHJybS8V Trump turned his sudden friendship with West into a commentary about the economic results on his watch. Trump said, Kanye looks and he sees black unemployment at the lowest its been in the history of our country. He sees Hispanic unemployment at the lowest its been in the history of our country. He sees (womens unemployment) the lowest its been in now almost 19 years. Trump haspreviously made claims of this sort, but its been a few months, so we thought wed take a new look at the numbers. In March 2018, the African-American unemployment rate stood at 6.9 percent. Thats not a record low, but its close and the record low was 6.8 percent in December 2017, also on Trumps watch. Heres the full data for the black unemployment rate since the statistic was first calculated in 1972: The Hispanic unemployment rate was 5.1 percent in March 2018. Thats not a record either, but once again, its close. The Hispanic unemployment rate was as low as 4.8 percent three times in 2017, in June, October and November. Those low points all occurred on Trumps watch. Heres the full historical data: Currently, the unemployment rate for women is 4.0 percent. It was slightly lower during an earlier point in Trumps presidency 3.9 percent in October 2017. The womens unemployment rate was lower still in December 2000, when it hit 3.8 percent. That falls within the 19-year windowTrump cited. Heres the full run of data: Economists agree that presidents dont deserve either full credit or full blame for the unemployment rate on their watch. The president is not all-powerful on economic matters; broader factors, from the business cycle to changes in technology to demographic shifts, play major roles. And to the extent that a president does deserve credit for low unemployment, Trumps predecessor, Barack Obama, deserves at least as much as Trump does. As these charts show, the unemployment rate for blacks, Hispanics, and women declined dramatically on Obamas watch as the country pulled out of the Great Recession. Black unemployment peaked at 16.6 percent in April 2010, when Obama was president. It then fell by more than half to 7.8 percent by the time Obama left office in January 2017. Hispanic unemployment, meanwhile, peaked at 13 percent in August 2009, then fell to 5.9 percent at the end of Obamas term in January 2017. And unemployment among women peaked at 9 percent in November 2010, before falling to 4.8 percent by the time he left office in January 2017, a drop of nearly half. Trump said, Kanye looks and he sees black unemployment at the lowest its been in the history of our country. He sees Hispanic unemployment at the lowest its been in the history of our country. He sees (womens unemployment) the lowest its been in now almost 19 years. The unemployment rates for African-Americans and Hispanics have hit all-time lows in recent months on Trumps watch, and the rate for women was recently the lowest its been in more than 18 years. But its worth remembering that,to the extent that presidents deserve any credit for economic conditions on their watch, the heavy lifting in getting rates that low occurred before Trump became president. We rate the statement Mostly True.

True

The hosts ofFox & Friendsasked Trump during an April 26telephone interviewabout the enthusiastic tweets exchanged between the two men, such as this one.my MAGA hat is signed pic.twitter.com/DrDHJybS8VTrump haspreviously made claims of this sort, but its been a few months, so we thought wed take a new look at the numbers.

FMD_train_413

John Kerry and Heinz

03/30/2004

Claim: Senator John Kerry's wife owns Heinz, a company that outsources much of its work abroad. Example: [Collected on the Internet, 2004] Factories located at: Taipei, Taiwan (makes Heinz baby foods); Dublin, Ireland; Paris, France; Douarnenez, France; Lisbon, Portugal; Madrid, Spain; Milan, Italy; Monguzzo, Italy; Athens, Greece; Warsaw, Poland; Pudliszki, Poland; Wodzislaw, Poland; Miedzychod, Poland; Moscow, Russia; Georgievsk, Russia; Cairo, Egypt; Tel Aviv, Israel; Haifa, Israel; Elst, The Netherlands and six other plants there; Brussels, Belgium; Dusseldorf, Germany; Seesen, Germany; Turnhout, Belgium; Rovereto, Italy; Chateaurenard, France; North York, Ontario, Canada; Wheatley, Ontario, Canada; Caracas, Venezuela; San Jose, Costa Rica; Johannesburg, South Africa; Gaborone, Botswana; Harare, Zimbabwe; Chegutu, Zimbabwe; Wellington, South Africa; Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; Republic of Singapore; Auckland, New Zealand; Tokyo, Japan; Guangzhou, People's Republic of China (makes infant cereal); Qingdao, People's Republic of China (makes infant foods, ketchup, mayonnaise, and puree); Inchon, South Korea (makes Heinz products and StarKist); Bangkok, Thailand; Mumbai, India; Jakarta, Indonesia; Surabaya, Indonesia; Manila, Philippines; Wanchai, Hong Kong. Also recently purchased from Borden these products: Classico Pasta Sauce; Aunt Millie's Pasta Sauce; Mrs. Grass Recipe Soups; Wylers Bouillons & Soups. Think of the conflict of interest a President would have whose wife owns business interests in all of these countries and others. Pass it on!!!! Origins: In 1995, Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts wed Teresa Heinz, whom he first met at an Earth Day rally in 1990. Born Teresa Simes-Ferreira in Mozambique to Portuguese parents, Mrs. Kerry was previously married for 25 years to Henry John Heinz III, who was a member of the founding family of the H.J. Heinz Company and represented Pennsylvania for twenty years in both the U.S. House of Representatives and the Senate prior to his death in a plane crash in 1991. Mrs. Kerry inherited a Heinz family fortune estimated at over $500 million. Although Senator Kerry has been critical of the Bush administration for rewarding "Benedict Arnold CEOs" who move "profits and jobs overseas," the above-quoted attempt to link Kerry (through his wife) with the very outsourcing he decries is flawed in two major ways. First off, Teresa Heinz Kerry does not "own the Heinz Corporation"; she has no involvement whatsoever with the management or operations of the H.J. Heinz Company, nor does she own anything close to a controlling interest in the company's stock. According to Heinz itself, the Heinz family trust which Mrs. Kerry inherited sold most of its shares of Heinz stock back in 1995 and currently holds less than a 4% interest in the company. There is no connection between any philanthropic programs of the H.J. Heinz Company and its Foundation and the Heinz family interests (including the Howard Heinz Endowment, the Vira Heinz Endowment, and the Heinz Family Philanthropies). (A 4% stake in a company as large as Heinz still represents a considerable amount of money, but it isn't nearly large enough a share to give the holder any significant control or influence over the company's business decisions.) Moreover, the Heinz Company's operations are not an example of the type of outsourcing that is currently a hot political issue (i.e., sending out work to offshore companies to provide services which a company might otherwise have employed its own staff to perform). Heinz is a U.S.-based global business that sells its products in dozens of other countries, and like other food companies, it has to localize some of its production at factories located in its foreign market areas. (It makes little sense from either an economic or a freshness standpoint to be shipping fruits and vegetables and/or finished food products halfway around the world rather than producing them locally.) One wouldn't expect, for example, every can and bottle of Coca-Cola sold anywhere in the world—whether it be Australia, China, or Portugal—to be produced by U.S. bottlers. As the H.J. Heinz Company notes, well over half its sales come from foreign markets, and it therefore operates overseas facilities to serve those markets. Last updated: 2 September 2007.

False

Teresa Simes-Ferreira in Mozambique to Portuguese parents, Mrs. Kerry was previously married for 25 years to Henry John Heinz III, who was a member of the founding family of the H.J. Heinz Company and represented Pennsylvania for twenty years in both the U.S. House of Representatives and the Senate prior to his death in a plane crash in 1991. Mrs. Kerry inherited a Heinz family fortune estimated at over $500 million.Although Senator Kerry has been critical of the Bush administration for rewarding "Benedict Arnold CEOs" who move "profits and jobs overseas," the above-quoted attempt to link Kerry (through his wife) with the very outsourcing he decries is flawed in two major ways. First off, Teresa Heinz Kerry does not "own the Heinz Corporation" she has no involvement whatsoever with the management or operations of the H.J. Heinz Company, nor does she own anything close to a controlling interest of the company's stock. According to Heinz itself, the Heinz family trust which Mrs. Kerry inherited sold most of its shares of Heinz stock back in 1995 and currently holds less than a 4% interest in the company:

FMD_train_686

'Ye, New York': Did Kanye West Try to Rename a City?

03/12/2021

On March 11, 2021, a news outlet representing the city of Rye, in Westchester County, New York, reported that Kanye West was supposedly considering a move to the coastal town to start a new chapter after his divorce from Kim Kardashian. Kim Kardashian As part of that alleged change, The Rye Record claimed the famous rapper filed a formal request with officials to drop the "R" from the city's name so it's strictly "Ye" West's nickname and the title of his roughly 24-minute album released in 2018. 24-minute album "Rye officials may be 'highly motivated' by Wests offer to dedicate 10 percent of his wealth (estimated at $1,000,000,000 by Forbes) to erase both the City and School bond debt in full," the article alleged. "And in return, all West is asking is for the town to drop the R from its name." 1,000,000,000 In other words, the article claimed West was eyeing real estate in the town and willing to give millions of dollars to the municipal government if leaders agreed to change the name to "Ye." But no evidence substantiated the article's allegations, discrediting any assumptions that they authentically outlined West's plans. Namely, West's representatives did not respond to Snopes' questions to determine the validity of the name-change rumor, and nothing on his official social media channels or websites indicated that he was considering, or planning for, a move to Rye. Additionally, we deemed the rumors "false" because no reputable news outlet corroborated them, when, hypothetically speaking, they would be eminently newsworthy if they were indeed true. Let us unpack that decision fully. As the basis to its reporting, The Rye Record article titled, "Amid Divorce, Kanye West Files With Rye City Council To Drop 'R' From Name. Asks Town To Rename To 'Ye,'" cited one unnamed source who supposedly runs in the celebrity's circle. Amid Divorce, Kanye West Files With Rye City Council To Drop 'R' From Name. Asks Town To Rename To 'Ye,' "Kanye wants to move somewhere low-key where people will be receptive to the impact he can make," the person supposedly told the news outlet. "He has big, big plans for Ye and is highly motivated to make this happen." While it is a common practice for journalists to grant anonymity to people who fear personal or professional repercussions for speaking publicly, it was unclear why or under what circumstances the Rye Record writers decided to conceal the alleged source's identity. But aside from concerns over the credibility of the story's sourcing, the article does not explain the nature of West's alleged request to rebrand the city. It simply says that at an unidentified time after Kardashian filed for a divorce on Feb. 19, he "filed paperwork" for the proposed name change. The story's text did not elaborate on the nature of the purported documentation, nor identify a Rye agency West supposedly contacted. (As we noted above, the story's headline claimed he filed the alleged documentation with the Rye City Council, specifically.) Rye City Council Snopes contacted the Rye City Court, where an administrator told us West had not filed any type of documentation there, and we reached out to the City Council about the rumor. We did not receive a response from the legislative body. Next, no business owner substantiated the claims about West's alleged property-hunting in the town of roughly 16,000 people. According to the article, people saw the rapper looking at properties in Rye to potentially develop into his home, a "music/studio/creative think-tank," and a church. The existing buildings supposedly include a space that's currently being leased by the local YMCA. But Business Insider contacted multiple business owners in the area to talk about the rumor, and two of them appeared to be learning about West's purported venture for the first time. "We haven't heard anything about it," Rye YMCA's Executive Director Gregg Howells told the news outlet. But Business Insider Lastly, the labeling of Rye Record's article appeared inconsistent on its website. In at least one place on the website, creators categorized the story about Kanye as a "column" (a category of editorial content where, generally speaking, writers express their opinions), though the same article also appeared in news sections and the outlet's social media channels. As of this writing, the story about Kanye was among the site's top articles framed as "news" and purportedly based on factual reporting. Snopes reached out to multiple people listed as contacts on The Rye Record website to ask if, or to what extent, it fabricated the reporting, and, if not, how writers corroborated the anonymous source's assertions. We have not yet received a response. At least one other website -- a New York-based news outlet called Talk of the Sound -- recirculated the rumor, sourcing only The Rye Record article. "We will keep tracking this story until April 1st, which is, we would note, 3 weeks from today," that website said. other website Talk of the Sound Robert Cox, the publisher and managing editor of Talk of the Sound, reached out to Snopes after the initial publication of this report in mid-March. He dubbed The Rye Record article satire and said he attempted to make clear with his reporting that readers should not take the story seriously. "The Rye Record had opposed the recent bond referendum and their story was an inside joke," Cox wrote. In sum, while The Rye Record did not respond to our inquiry that would prove or disprove Cox's reading of the original article, we rate this claim "false" because no verified evidence corroborated its claims. This article was updated with a "false" rating given the information from Robert Cox, the publisher of a local news outlet.

False

On March 11, 2021, a news outlet representing the city of Rye, in Westchester County, New York, reported that Kanye West was supposedly considering a move to the coastal town to start a new chapter after his divorce from Kim Kardashian. As part of that alleged change, The Rye Record claimed the famous rapper filed a formal request with officials to drop the "R" from the city's name so it's strictly "Ye" West's nickname and the title of his roughly 24-minute album released in 2018."Rye officials may be 'highly motivated' by Wests offer to dedicate 10 percent of his wealth (estimated at $1,000,000,000 by Forbes) to erase both the City and School bond debt in full," the article alleged. "And in return, all West is asking is for the town to drop the R from its name."Let us unpack that decision fully. As the basis to its reporting, The Rye Record article titled, "Amid Divorce, Kanye West Files With Rye City Council To Drop 'R' From Name. Asks Town To Rename To 'Ye,'" cited one unnamed source who supposedly runs in the celebrity's circle.The story's text did not elaborate on the nature of the purported documentation, nor identify a Rye agency West supposedly contacted. (As we noted above, the story's headline claimed he filed the alleged documentation with the Rye City Council, specifically.)But Business Insider contacted multiple business owners in the area to talk about the rumor, and two of them appeared to be learning about West's purported venture for the first time. "We haven't heard anything about it," Rye YMCA's Executive Director Gregg Howells told the news outlet.At least one other website -- a New York-based news outlet called Talk of the Sound -- recirculated the rumor, sourcing only The Rye Record article. "We will keep tracking this story until April 1st, which is, we would note, 3 weeks from today," that website said.

FMD_train_1396

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

08/06/2020

As U.S. President Donald Trump accelerated unsubstantiated attacks on the legitimacy of mail-in voting during the summer of 2020, numerous Snopes readers asked us to investigate whether the leader of the U.S. Postal Service was carrying out a nefarious scheme to help Trump win another presidential term. mail-in voting In late July and early August, various rumors surfaced regarding Louis DeJoy, a North Carolina businessman whom the Postal Service's governing board selected to run the agency in May 2020. For example, a viral tweet thread alleged: viral tweet My mailman just confirmed they have all officially been told to "SLOW THE MAIL DOWN," per trump's Postmaster General...He says that there is backed up mail ALL OVER THE FLOOR. He's never seen anything like it. It has ALREADY begun. But as long as we keep each other informed, we can beat their dirty tricks with INFORMATION. The claim's underlying notions were these: DeJoy was a political ally to the Republican president, and the new postmaster general had used his new authority to order Postal Service carriers and clerks to slow deliveries to help Trump win the 2020 November election. A backlog of ballots in the weeks or days before Election Day, critics of the president worried, could lead to votes going uncounted or deemed invalid due to state laws governing mail-in election deadlines. state laws What follows is an examination of federal documents obtained by Snopes including letters by members of Congress, campaign finance reports, and internal memos to Postal Service employees as well as interviews with postal union representatives and a Postal Service spokesperson, to determine the legitimacy of those questions. DeJoy could not be reached for an interview for this report. Note: Snopes not only investigated DeJoy's relationship to Trump, but his financial stake in companies that compete with the Postal Service to evaluate if, or to what extent, his past investments provided any evidence of a plan to undermine the Postal Service's longstanding mission: to provide mail service to every American, no matter their address or income. Yes. DeJoy, who lives in Greensboro, donated more than $1.2 million to the Trump campaign between August 2016 and February 2020, according to campaign finance reports compiled by the Federal Elections Commission (FEC). Federal Elections Commission It's unclear when or how DeJoy developed a relationship with Trump, and why he decided to support the billionaire's political pursuits. In a 2005 interview with Greensboro's local newspaper, DeJoy then-CEO of New Breed Logistics, a distribution and warehousing company appeared less supportive of Trump, saying his self-important attitude on the reality-TV show "The Apprentice" was destructive. 2005 interview The Apprentice "I'd be fired," DeJoy said, if he was a contestant. Nonetheless, by early 2017, DeJoy was among his state's top donors to Trump (see below for The Charlotte Observer's list that ranks DeJoy at No. 3 with a total contribution of $111,000). And by October of that year, DeJoy had become close enough to the president to host him and other donors for fundraiser at his Greensboro house. top donors Greensboro house. Also, by that time, DeJoy's wife, Aldona Wos, had been appointed by the president to serve as vice chair of a White House commission that oversees paid fellowships in federal offices, according to the couple's foundation website. foundation website In addition to his contributions to Trump's political campaigns specifically, DeJoy has given hundreds of thousands of dollars to Republican causes or campaigns over decades, the FEC records show. The Postal Service's governing board, a group appointed by the president with confirmation from the Senate, selected DeJoy as Postmaster General on May 6, 2020, after what it described as an extensive nationwide search for qualified candidates. At the time of that decision, Trump had appointed all six board members Chairman Robert Duncan, John Barger, Ron Bloom, Roman Martinez IV, Donald Moak, and William Zollars since the early days of his presidency. what it described Robert Duncan John Barger Ron Bloom Roman Martinez IV Donald Moak William Zollars DeJoy, who was in charge of fundraising for the Republican National Convention (RNC) in Charlotte when the board made its announcement, made the following donations since the start of 2020, according to filings from the FEC: National Republican Congressional Committee. National Republican Congressional Committee Facebook In sum, considering DeJoy's record of donations, as well as evidence of him hosting a Trump fundraiser at his Greensboro home in fall 2017, it is accurate to claim that the new postmaster general is a political ally to the Republican president. home The answer to this question is less clear. In summer 2020, the viral claim about DeJoy that he had directed carriers to delay mail to benefit Trump's reelection campaign (which we unpack below) took on another layer: that DeJoy had also allegedly invested $70 million of his own money in delivery companies that compete with the Postal Service. another layer allegedly That allegation, which we deemed true (see the explanation below), was particularly worrisome for critics of Trump and DeJoy, who believed the alleged holdings were more proof of the two leaders conspiring together this time in an attempt to privatize the Postal Service. critics Here's some context before we dive into DeJoy's personal assets: Conservative Republicans have long pushed to remove government from mail services that they believe should be left to the private commercial market. Since Trump took office, he has called the Postal Service "a joke" or Amazon's "delivery boy," considering its package rates, and has floated the idea of eventually privatizing the agency. a joke delivery boy eventually privatizing the agency Meanwhile, others fear dismantling the federally-mandated mail service would disproportionately affect people who live in rural areas, where private companies such as FedEx and UPS either charge higher rates or do no shipments at all. At the same time, the Postal Service which does not receive tax dollars for its operating expenses faces a worsening financial situation due to a 2006 congressional mandate that required the agency to prepay health care benefits of retirees, as well as a decline in first-class mail customers. The coronavirus pandemic exacerbated those long-standing problems, forcing several post offices nationwide to completely close or scale back hours. congressional mandate coronavirus pandemic scale back hours For instance, on April 9, 2020, roughly one month before DeJoy was selected to lead the Postal Service, then-Postmaster General Megan Brennan said the agency was preparing for a $13 billion revenue shortfall due directly to COVID-19 and an additional $54.3 billion in losses over 10 years. Considering those projections, she said the agency could run out of cash this fiscal year or the end of September without federal intervention. (Brennan announced her retirement in October 2019, after more than 30 years with the agency.) April 9, 2020 announced her retirement The former Postal Service leader made those comments shortly after federal leaders negotiated a $2.2 trillion COVID-19 economic relief package, called the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, which, initially, included a $13 billion one-time boost for the mail service. But, purportedly at the urging of Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and aides to Trump, congressional leaders removed that provision from the stimulus package, and instead included a $10 billion loan that the Trump administration could leverage in its favor. Then, on July 29, 2020, The Washington Post reported that under DeJoy's leadership, the postal agency gave Mnuchin's office's proprietary information about the Postal Service's most lucrative private-sector contracts, such as Amazon, FedEx and UPS, in exchange for the loan money. economic relief package Steven Mnuchin The Washington Post By that time, Congressional leaders and Trump were battling yet again over another emergency relief package; Democrats proposed a $25 billion boost for the Postal Service but then lowered that amount to $10 billion during talks with Republicans. On Aug. 13, 2020, during an interview on Fox Business Network, the president said frankly the tug-and-pull over Postal Service funding was part of his administration's plan to try to make it harder for the agency to handle the expected surge in mail-in ballots in the November election. If we dont make a deal, that means they dont get the money, Trump told host Maria Bartiromo, referring to the false claim that Democrats are are proposing a universal mail-in voting system. That means they cant have universal mail-in voting; they just cant have it. told Which brings us to DeJoy's assets, and the above-mentioned claim that he had "$70 million invested in companies that compete with USPS." For the basis of this analysis, we considered private companies that provide shipping or distribution services, such as DHL, the FedEx Corporation, and United Parcel Service, Inc. (UPS), business competitors with the post office. For more than 30 years, DeJoy was the CEO of New Breed Logistics, a supply chain business that contracted with a variety of public and private companies, including the Postal Service. In 2014, XPO Logistics acquired DeJoy's company, and he served on the company's executive team or board of directors until May 2018. According to internal documents, which we obtained using the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission's (SEC) database of company filings, XPO Logistics considered its competitors to include DHL, FedEx, UPS, and J.B. Hunt Transport Services. XPO Logistics DHL FedEx UPS J.B. Hunt Transport Services Aside from that evidence, which proved DeJoy's former company competed for business with organizations that also competed with the Postal Service, Snopes uncovered a letter from his wife, Wos, to a White House legal advisor on January 3, 2020, that listed her family's financial assets, known as "Attachment A." According to that list, the family had stock in companies including UPS, J.B. Hunt Transport Services, Inc., and XPO Logistics, Inc. letter She wrote the letter in response to a nomination by the Trump administration to serve as U.S. ambassador to Canada, and she said she would divest from all holdings in the document within 90 days of her confirmation. However, as of this writing, Wos had not been sworn into the position. The letter, which was available via the Office of Government Ethics, read: nomination Office of Government Ethics As of June 15, 2020, the day DeJoy assumed his role as postmaster general, The Washington Post reported the couple had between $30.1 million and $75.3 million in assets in Postal Service competitors or contractors. XPO Logistics represented the vast majority of those investments, and the couple's combined stake in UPS and trucking company J.B. Hunt, for examples, was roughly $265,000. The Washington Post reported On DeJoy's first day, the Senate's top Democrat, Charles Schumer of New York, said in letter to the Postal Service's board of governors' chairman: "[DeJoy's] financial interests in companies that have business ties with the Postal Services, as well as his extensive campaign fundraising efforts, raise questions" over his ethical conflicts of interest and partisan interests. letter By that point, a spokeswoman for DeJoy told journalists he had resigned as finance chair for the Republican National Convention, and would "comply with any financial divestitures that are required" for the new leadership position. told journalists In sum, reports proved the DeJoy family at one point had millions of dollars in assets in companies that compete or contract with the Postal Service, which lend credibility to the viral assertion. But the exact amount of such investments was unclear, and as of this writing, it was unknown if or to what extent the couple had divested any of the financial holdings. Not exactly but there is some truth to the claim. Upon our analysis, the rumor seems to have stemmed from a series of directives DeJoy gave Postal Service employees since he took over the agency. On his first day, for example, he addressed the agency in a video that alluded to impending changes under his leadership that aimed to create a "viable operating model," though he did not go into specifics. video Then, in mid-July, he issued several memos to employees, including a "New [Postmaster General's] expectations and plan." Those messages to all managers, clerks, and carriers nationwide appeared to be the source of the claim, and detailed changes to how and when the Postal Agency would deliver mail. A July 10, 2020, internal document to managers, which Snopes received from the American Postal Workers Union and refers to an "operational pivot" for the agency, said the following, for example: American Postal Workers Union The initial step in our pivot is targeted on transportation and the soaring costs we incur due to late trips and extra trips, which costs the organization somewhere around $200 million in added expenses. $200 million in added expenses The shifts are simple, but they will be challenging, as we seek to change our culture and move away from past practices previously used. But perhaps most relevant to the claim, the DeJoy-sponsored directives included instructions for employees to leave letters or packages at distribution centers if they delayed carriers from their routes contradicting previous rules for deliveries and said the Postal Service would no longer pay employees overtime to complete all mail deliveries. The July 10, 2020 memo said: contradicting One aspect of these changes that may be difficult for employees is that temporarily we may see mail left behind or mail on the workroom floor or docks [in Processing and Distribution Centers], which is not typical. We will address root causes of these delays and adjust the very next day. Any mail left behind must be properly reported, and employees should ensure this action is taken with integrity and accuracy. As we adjust to the ongoing pivot, which will have a number of phases, we know that operations will begin to run more efficiently and that delayed mail volumes will soon shrink significantly. We also considered a separate message to employees in July 2020 that said, under a new initiative, carriers in certain regions would not sort any mail during the morning and instead clock in, retrieve sorted mail from the previous day and limit time in the office as much as possible. Then, when they returned from the streets, they would sort all available mail for the next day. July 2020 The agency said the extra spending on employees' overtime or delivery trips had not improved "our performance scores," without going into detail on what that meant, and framed the changes as necessary steps to improve its financial position. A July 27, 2020, public statement from DeJoy said: said public statement Given our current situation, it is critical that the Postal Service take a fresh look at our operations and make necessary adjustments. We are highly focused on our public service mission to provide prompt, reliable, and efficient service to every person and business in this country, and to remain a part of the nations critical infrastructure. David Partenheimer, manager of media relations for the Postal Service, told Snopes that the postmaster general was not doing any media interviews regarding the initiatives, nor about the underlying claims of this report. In a roughly 760-word email to us, however, Partenheimer reemphasized what the agency viewed as the need for the adjustments, and said: "We acknowledge that temporary service impacts can occur as we redouble our efforts to conform to the current operating plans, but any such impacts will be monitored and temporary ... and corrected as appropriate." Soon after the directives, American Postal Workers Union President Mark Dimondstein told us in a phone interview that employees and customers across the country were noticing mail delays. In the Philadelphia region, for instance, the Philadelphia Inquirer reported situations where residents were going upwards of three weeks without receiving packages and letters, and postal union leaders and carriers said mail was piling up at offices, unscanned and unsorted. Mark Dimondstein employees Philadelphia Inquirer "When you ... say this is what you have to do as workers, then that's what we have to do [the change] runs counter to everything that the Postal Service is about, which is we treat the mail as our own; we get it to the customer as quickly as we can," Dimondstein said. "They've never seen mail backed up like this it's not being moved." That meant, while DeJoy had not told carriers to "slow the mail down" verbatim, he initiated changes to how and when carriers go about doing their job that the Postal Agency said would cause temporary mail delays. However, it would be inaccurate to assume all slow deliveries under DeJoy's leadership were a result of the July 2020 directives specifically, when they could also be linked to reduced hours for some post offices or other circumstances. Roughly three months before the 2020 presidential election, voting rights groups and outspoken critics to the president believed the new directives by DeJoy occurred at a convenient time for Trump: when a record number of Americans were preparing to vote by mail and avoid potential exposure to the COVID-19 coronavirus by casting ballots at in-person polling places. Specifically, they worried the new requirements for post office carriers and clerks would lead to backlogs of mail-in ballots and thus create challenges for elections officials who, in the majority of states, must invalidate ballots that reach them after Election Day even if they were postmarked before that date. Rep. Carolyn Maloney, a Democrat from New York, for example, led colleagues in writing a letter to DeJoy on July 20, 2020, that said: Rep. Carolyn Maloney "While these changes [to mail service] in a normal year would be drastic, in a presidential election year when many states are relying heavily on absentee mail-in ballots, increases in mail delivery timing would impair the ability of ballots to be received and counted in a timely manner an unacceptable outcome for a free and fair election." We asked Dimondstein, APWU president, whether he believed the July directives by Postal Service leadership were somehow linked to a plan to cause mail service chaos before the November election and help Trump win reelection. He said: What we do know for truth is this administration is, in written record, proposing and planning to sell the post office to private corporations, i.e. privatizing...That was June 2018. We also know as a fact that ...that [there are] calls for reduced service, increased prices, and less workers' rights and benefits. So if you take those two things together, certainly if they're implemented, then they're going to cause delays in mail; they're going to cause service being undermined... written record This is a fact: [DeJoy is] what's considered a mega-donor of the Trump administration and the Republican party... Anything that undermines the Postal Service' [service to customers] ... has us concerned that it could be linked back to those who have an agenda to eliminate [the Postal Service]. But I can't sit here and tell you that that's a fact. Partenheimer said any notion that DeJoy made decisions for the Postal Service under directions from Trump (which include claims that he issued the July 2020 changes that resulted in delays to help Trump's re-election campaign) were "wholly misplaced and off-base." He said the Postal Service, typically an apolitical agency, remains committed to "fulfilling our role in the electoral process" in places where politicians allow voters to cast ballots by mail and "to delivering Election Mail in a timely manner consistent with our operational standards." He elaborated: "[Despite] any assertions to the contrary, we are not slowing down Election Mail or any other mail. Instead, we continue to employ a robust and proven process to ensure proper handling of all Election Mail consistent with our standards." Days later, he said in a statement to news media that certain deadlines concerning mail-in ballots, may be incompatible with the Postal Services delivery standards, especially if election officials dont pay more for first-class postage. To the extent that states choose to use the mail as part of their elections, they should do so in a manner that realistically reflects how the mail works, he said. news media Then, on Aug. 18, 2020, DeJoy issued a statement in which he said he would temporarily suspend initiatives "that have been raised as areas of concern as the nation prepares to hold an election in the midst of a devastating pandemic," including the controversial July 2020 directives that eliminated overtime and some delivery trips. The statement read: statement To avoid even the appearance of any impact on election mail, I am suspending these initiatives until after the election is concluded. I want to assure all Americans of the following: In addition, effective Oct. 1, we will engage standby resources in all areas of our operations, including transportation, to satisfy any unforeseen demand. In sum, it was accurate to state that DeJoy, a political ally to Trump, ordered Postal Service workers to leave late-arriving mail at distribution centers for delivery the following day and eliminate extra trips in July 2020 a change the Postal Service was expecting to cause temporary mail delays although no verifiable evidence proved those directives were part of a deliberate scheme to disenfranchise voters in the November 2020 election. Additionally, there was no proof to show the changes aimed to help Trump win reelection. For those reasons, we rate this claim "Unproven." Ye Hee Lee, Michelle and Bogage, Jacob. "Postal Service Backlog Sparks Worries That Ballot Delivery Could Be Delayed In November". The Washington Post. 30 July 2020. Naylor, Brian. "Pending Postal Service Changes Could Delay Mail And Deliveries, Advocates War". NPR. 29 July 2020. Naylor, Brian. "Pending Postal Service Changes Could Delay Mail And Deliveries, Advocates War". NPR. 29 July 2020. USPS Contributor. "What Is The History Behind The Unofficial USPS Motto?" Postal Posts. 11 September 2015. USPS. "Postmaster General Statement On Operational Excellence And Financial Stability". 27 July 2020. Office of Inspector General. "U.S. Postal Service's Processing Network Optimization And Service Impacts". USPS. 16 June 2020. Dawsey, Josh, et. al. "Top Republican Fundraiser And Trump Ally Named Postmaster General, Giving President New Influence Over Postal Service". The Washington Post. 6 May 2020. Bogage, Jacob. "Postal Service Memos Detail 'Difficult' Changes, Including Slower Mail Delivery". The Washington Post. 14 July 2020. Naylor, Brian. "New Postmaster General Is Top GOP Fundraiser". NPR. 7 May 2020. Hummel, Marta. "New Breed CEO No One's 'Apprentice' Louis DeJoy Is A Big Supporter Of George W. Bush But Says The Clinton Era Was His Most Profitable". News & Record. 7 January 2005. Heckman, Jory. "USPS Board Names Logistics Executive As New Postmaster General". Federal News Network. 6 May 2020. Gordon, Aaron. "USPS Plans To Slash Hours At Many Post Offices, Hoping To Save A Buck". Vice. 29 July 2020. Cohen, Rachel. "USPS Workers Concerned New Policies Will Pave The Way To Privatization". The Intercept. 29 July 2020. Derysh, Igor. "With Trump Donor In Charge, Postal Service May Shut Locations And Cut Service Before Election Day". Salon. 31 July 2020. Rushing, Ellie. "Mail Delays Are Frustrating Philly Residents, And A Short-Staffed Postal Service Is Struggling To Keep Up". The Philadelphia Inquirer. 2 August 2020. Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney. "Maloney, King Lead Bipartisan NY Delegation Call For Immediate Help For The Postal Service". 28 April 2020. House Committee On Oversight And Reform. "Senior Democrats Request Information On Postal Service's Operational Changes". 20 July 2020. Bogage, Jacob. "Trump Ally Takes Over Crisis-Ridden Postal Service As Top Senate Democrat Demands Inquiry On Hiring". The Washington Post. 15 June 2020. Murphy, Brian. "NC Businessman, A Big-Time GOP Donor, Is Tapped To Lead US Postal Service". The News & Observer. 7 May 2020. Shear, Michael. "Mail Delays Fuel Concern Trump Is Undercutting Postal Service Ahead Of Voting". The New York Times. 1 August 2020. Sargent, Greg. "Trump Just Told Us How Mail Delays Could Help Him Corrupt The Election". The Washington Post. 31 July 2020. Reichmann, Deb, and Izaguirre, Anthony. "Trump Admits He's Blocking Postal Cash To Stop Mail-In Votes." Associated Press. 14 August 2020. USPS. "Postmaster General Louis DeJoy Statement." 18 August 2020. This report was updated to include an interview by Trump with Fox Business Network on Aug. 13, 2020, where he acknowledged that he was intentionally blocking Postal Service funding in an attempt to make it harder for the agency to process mail-in ballots in the November presidential election. This report was updated to include a statement by DeJoy on Aug. 18, 2020, in which he announced the suspension of certain initiatives "to avoid even the appearance of any impact on election mail."

NEI

As U.S. President Donald Trump accelerated unsubstantiated attacks on the legitimacy of mail-in voting during the summer of 2020, numerous Snopes readers asked us to investigate whether the leader of the U.S. Postal Service was carrying out a nefarious scheme to help Trump win another presidential term.In late July and early August, various rumors surfaced regarding Louis DeJoy, a North Carolina businessman whom the Postal Service's governing board selected to run the agency in May 2020. For example, a viral tweet thread alleged:The claim's underlying notions were these: DeJoy was a political ally to the Republican president, and the new postmaster general had used his new authority to order Postal Service carriers and clerks to slow deliveries to help Trump win the 2020 November election. A backlog of ballots in the weeks or days before Election Day, critics of the president worried, could lead to votes going uncounted or deemed invalid due to state laws governing mail-in election deadlines.Yes. DeJoy, who lives in Greensboro, donated more than $1.2 million to the Trump campaign between August 2016 and February 2020, according to campaign finance reports compiled by the Federal Elections Commission (FEC).It's unclear when or how DeJoy developed a relationship with Trump, and why he decided to support the billionaire's political pursuits. In a 2005 interview with Greensboro's local newspaper, DeJoy then-CEO of New Breed Logistics, a distribution and warehousing company appeared less supportive of Trump, saying his self-important attitude on the reality-TV show "The Apprentice" was destructive.Nonetheless, by early 2017, DeJoy was among his state's top donors to Trump (see below for The Charlotte Observer's list that ranks DeJoy at No. 3 with a total contribution of $111,000). And by October of that year, DeJoy had become close enough to the president to host him and other donors for fundraiser at his Greensboro house.Also, by that time, DeJoy's wife, Aldona Wos, had been appointed by the president to serve as vice chair of a White House commission that oversees paid fellowships in federal offices, according to the couple's foundation website.The Postal Service's governing board, a group appointed by the president with confirmation from the Senate, selected DeJoy as Postmaster General on May 6, 2020, after what it described as an extensive nationwide search for qualified candidates. At the time of that decision, Trump had appointed all six board members Chairman Robert Duncan, John Barger, Ron Bloom, Roman Martinez IV, Donald Moak, and William Zollars since the early days of his presidency.In sum, considering DeJoy's record of donations, as well as evidence of him hosting a Trump fundraiser at his Greensboro home in fall 2017, it is accurate to claim that the new postmaster general is a political ally to the Republican president.In summer 2020, the viral claim about DeJoy that he had directed carriers to delay mail to benefit Trump's reelection campaign (which we unpack below) took on another layer: that DeJoy had also allegedly invested $70 million of his own money in delivery companies that compete with the Postal Service.That allegation, which we deemed true (see the explanation below), was particularly worrisome for critics of Trump and DeJoy, who believed the alleged holdings were more proof of the two leaders conspiring together this time in an attempt to privatize the Postal Service.Here's some context before we dive into DeJoy's personal assets: Conservative Republicans have long pushed to remove government from mail services that they believe should be left to the private commercial market. Since Trump took office, he has called the Postal Service "a joke" or Amazon's "delivery boy," considering its package rates, and has floated the idea of eventually privatizing the agency.At the same time, the Postal Service which does not receive tax dollars for its operating expenses faces a worsening financial situation due to a 2006 congressional mandate that required the agency to prepay health care benefits of retirees, as well as a decline in first-class mail customers. The coronavirus pandemic exacerbated those long-standing problems, forcing several post offices nationwide to completely close or scale back hours.For instance, on April 9, 2020, roughly one month before DeJoy was selected to lead the Postal Service, then-Postmaster General Megan Brennan said the agency was preparing for a $13 billion revenue shortfall due directly to COVID-19 and an additional $54.3 billion in losses over 10 years. Considering those projections, she said the agency could run out of cash this fiscal year or the end of September without federal intervention. (Brennan announced her retirement in October 2019, after more than 30 years with the agency.)The former Postal Service leader made those comments shortly after federal leaders negotiated a $2.2 trillion COVID-19 economic relief package, called the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, which, initially, included a $13 billion one-time boost for the mail service. But, purportedly at the urging of Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and aides to Trump, congressional leaders removed that provision from the stimulus package, and instead included a $10 billion loan that the Trump administration could leverage in its favor. Then, on July 29, 2020, The Washington Post reported that under DeJoy's leadership, the postal agency gave Mnuchin's office's proprietary information about the Postal Service's most lucrative private-sector contracts, such as Amazon, FedEx and UPS, in exchange for the loan money.On Aug. 13, 2020, during an interview on Fox Business Network, the president said frankly the tug-and-pull over Postal Service funding was part of his administration's plan to try to make it harder for the agency to handle the expected surge in mail-in ballots in the November election. If we dont make a deal, that means they dont get the money, Trump told host Maria Bartiromo, referring to the false claim that Democrats are are proposing a universal mail-in voting system. That means they cant have universal mail-in voting; they just cant have it.For more than 30 years, DeJoy was the CEO of New Breed Logistics, a supply chain business that contracted with a variety of public and private companies, including the Postal Service. In 2014, XPO Logistics acquired DeJoy's company, and he served on the company's executive team or board of directors until May 2018. According to internal documents, which we obtained using the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission's (SEC) database of company filings, XPO Logistics considered its competitors to include DHL, FedEx, UPS, and J.B. Hunt Transport Services. Aside from that evidence, which proved DeJoy's former company competed for business with organizations that also competed with the Postal Service, Snopes uncovered a letter from his wife, Wos, to a White House legal advisor on January 3, 2020, that listed her family's financial assets, known as "Attachment A." According to that list, the family had stock in companies including UPS, J.B. Hunt Transport Services, Inc., and XPO Logistics, Inc.She wrote the letter in response to a nomination by the Trump administration to serve as U.S. ambassador to Canada, and she said she would divest from all holdings in the document within 90 days of her confirmation. However, as of this writing, Wos had not been sworn into the position. The letter, which was available via the Office of Government Ethics, read:As of June 15, 2020, the day DeJoy assumed his role as postmaster general, The Washington Post reported the couple had between $30.1 million and $75.3 million in assets in Postal Service competitors or contractors. XPO Logistics represented the vast majority of those investments, and the couple's combined stake in UPS and trucking company J.B. Hunt, for examples, was roughly $265,000.On DeJoy's first day, the Senate's top Democrat, Charles Schumer of New York, said in letter to the Postal Service's board of governors' chairman: "[DeJoy's] financial interests in companies that have business ties with the Postal Services, as well as his extensive campaign fundraising efforts, raise questions" over his ethical conflicts of interest and partisan interests.By that point, a spokeswoman for DeJoy told journalists he had resigned as finance chair for the Republican National Convention, and would "comply with any financial divestitures that are required" for the new leadership position.Upon our analysis, the rumor seems to have stemmed from a series of directives DeJoy gave Postal Service employees since he took over the agency. On his first day, for example, he addressed the agency in a video that alluded to impending changes under his leadership that aimed to create a "viable operating model," though he did not go into specifics.A July 10, 2020, internal document to managers, which Snopes received from the American Postal Workers Union and refers to an "operational pivot" for the agency, said the following, for example:The initial step in our pivot is targeted on transportation and the soaring costs we incur due to late trips and extra trips, which costs the organization somewhere around $200 million in added expenses.But perhaps most relevant to the claim, the DeJoy-sponsored directives included instructions for employees to leave letters or packages at distribution centers if they delayed carriers from their routes contradicting previous rules for deliveries and said the Postal Service would no longer pay employees overtime to complete all mail deliveries. The July 10, 2020 memo said:We also considered a separate message to employees in July 2020 that said, under a new initiative, carriers in certain regions would not sort any mail during the morning and instead clock in, retrieve sorted mail from the previous day and limit time in the office as much as possible. Then, when they returned from the streets, they would sort all available mail for the next day.The agency said the extra spending on employees' overtime or delivery trips had not improved "our performance scores," without going into detail on what that meant, and framed the changes as necessary steps to improve its financial position. A July 27, 2020, public statement from DeJoy said:Soon after the directives, American Postal Workers Union President Mark Dimondstein told us in a phone interview that employees and customers across the country were noticing mail delays. In the Philadelphia region, for instance, the Philadelphia Inquirer reported situations where residents were going upwards of three weeks without receiving packages and letters, and postal union leaders and carriers said mail was piling up at offices, unscanned and unsorted.Specifically, they worried the new requirements for post office carriers and clerks would lead to backlogs of mail-in ballots and thus create challenges for elections officials who, in the majority of states, must invalidate ballots that reach them after Election Day even if they were postmarked before that date. Rep. Carolyn Maloney, a Democrat from New York, for example, led colleagues in writing a letter to DeJoy on July 20, 2020, that said:What we do know for truth is this administration is, in written record, proposing and planning to sell the post office to private corporations, i.e. privatizing...That was June 2018. We also know as a fact that ...that [there are] calls for reduced service, increased prices, and less workers' rights and benefits. So if you take those two things together, certainly if they're implemented, then they're going to cause delays in mail; they're going to cause service being undermined...Days later, he said in a statement to news media that certain deadlines concerning mail-in ballots, may be incompatible with the Postal Services delivery standards, especially if election officials dont pay more for first-class postage. To the extent that states choose to use the mail as part of their elections, they should do so in a manner that realistically reflects how the mail works, he said.Then, on Aug. 18, 2020, DeJoy issued a statement in which he said he would temporarily suspend initiatives "that have been raised as areas of concern as the nation prepares to hold an election in the midst of a devastating pandemic," including the controversial July 2020 directives that eliminated overtime and some delivery trips. The statement read:

FMD_train_922

President Joe Bidens infrastructure proposal is fully paid for. Across 15 years, it would raise all of the revenue needed for these once-in-a-lifetime investments.

04/07/2021

After signing a coronavirus and economic relief plan into law, President Joe Biden turned to an infrastructure proposal as his next legislative priority. Cabinet members, including Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, have fanned out to promote the presidents $2 trillion-plus package, while critics of the plan are complaining about the cost. In an interview on NBCs Meet the Press April 4, Buttigieg emphasized that the expenditures would be covered by revenue increases. The vision the president has put forward (in the infrastructure bill) is fully paid for,he said. Across 15 years, it would raise all of the revenue needed for these once-in-a-lifetime investments. The president himself re-emphasized the importance of this point in a speech touting the plan on April 7. Weve got to pay for this, he said. Buttigieg is largely correct, though there are some important caveats to note. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg appeared on NBCs Meet the Press on April 4, 2021. (Screenshot) Bidens proposal, called the American Jobs Plan, would provide funding for highways, bridges, ports, airports and transit systems, as well as infrastructure for water, the electric grid, and expanded high-speed Internet access. It would also support retrofitting and upgrading homes, commercial and federal buildings, schools, child care facilities and veterans hospitals, and it would invest in research and development. The proposal also includes items not traditionally considered infrastructure, such as funding to support home health care workers and job training, and pro-union provisions. In all, the proposal comes with a price tag of more than $2 trillion over a decade. To pay for it, Biden would lean heavily on new or higher taxes on corporations, including raising the corporate tax rate from 21% to 28%, preventing U.S. corporations from claiming an offshore tax haven as their place of business, eliminating tax preferences for fossil fuels, tightening tax enforcement by adding employees to the Internal Revenue Service, and changing other taxes that hit corporations. Republicans have attacked both the spending and revenue sides of Bidens proposal, arguing that some of the items in it are not really infrastructure, and that raising corporate tax rates could lead businesses to leave the United States. Biden said in his April 7 remarks that hes open to compromise on what a bill ultimately includes. For this article, well focus on whether the spending portions of the plan are equaled by the revenue-raising portions, as Buttigieg said. The White House pointed us to thefact sheetit has released on the plan, which makes that claim, but doesnt get into details. However, at least two independent groups have analyzed the plan and found that Buttigiegs formulation checks out. One was published by theCommittee for a Responsible Federal Budget. It found that the plan has approximately $2.65 trillion in new costs over eight years. Over the first 10 years, the group found, the plan would increase the deficit by about $900 billion. However, over a longer, 15-year period the one Buttigieg cited the plans revenues would match its expenses and would actually reduce deficits beyond that. The other analysis, published by the University of PennsylvaniasPenn Wharton Budget Model, came to a similar conclusion. The Penn group said the Biden plan would spend $2.7 trillion over 10 years and raise $2.1 trillion in that period, expanding the deficit by about $600 billion. However, the group found that over 15 years, it would generate more than $3.6 billion, which would be more than enough to cover its costs. Projections are always just that projections. Rght now, there is not even a formal bill, so the spending and revenue provisions could shift in either direction before theyre signed into law. For instance, Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va. whose support would be required for any Democratic bill has already said he wont support a corporate tax hike to anything higher than 25%. And under a 25% corporate tax, a lot of revenue would disappear. Similarly, some of the bills spending items could also disappear during lawmaker negotiations. Another asterisk is that these analyses are based on eight years worth of spending and 15 years of revenue increases, which is an unusual method. Typically, congressional legislation is judged based on what happens during a 10-year window. Buttigieg wouldnt have been able to say the plan paid for itself over the standard, 10-year budget window, so his focus on the 15-year time frame is a bit of cherry-picking. And the revenue impacts 15 years down the road are going to be harder to predict than the impacts in 10 years. That said, theres nothing economically significant about the 10-year window, said Marcos Dinerstein, an economist with the Penn Wharton Budget Model. Its just a convention. Just looking at a 10-year window can miss the benefits of policies like infrastructure and research and development that often take a while to start generating returns. Buttigieg said Bidens infrastructure proposal is fully paid for. Across 15 years, it would raise all of the revenue needed for these once-in-a-lifetime investments. Two independent analyses back up the notion that the new spending will be evened out by the new revenue raised in the plan after 15 years. But long-term projections like this are always tricky, and a 15-year time frame is unusual for evaluating the budget impact of legislation; under the typical 10-year time frame, the plan would not be fully paid for. We rate the statement Mostly True.

True

The vision the president has put forward (in the infrastructure bill) is fully paid for,he said. Across 15 years, it would raise all of the revenue needed for these once-in-a-lifetime investments.The White House pointed us to thefact sheetit has released on the plan, which makes that claim, but doesnt get into details.One was published by theCommittee for a Responsible Federal Budget. It found that the plan has approximately $2.65 trillion in new costs over eight years. Over the first 10 years, the group found, the plan would increase the deficit by about $900 billion. However, over a longer, 15-year period the one Buttigieg cited the plans revenues would match its expenses and would actually reduce deficits beyond that.The other analysis, published by the University of PennsylvaniasPenn Wharton Budget Model, came to a similar conclusion.

FMD_train_205

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

03/26/2021

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

True

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

FMD_train_1864

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

07/26/2023

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

False

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

FMD_train_1895

At least three or four of the pieces that are in in the Republican lame-duck legislation, Scott Walker has vetoed previously.

12/13/2018

Now that hes a lame duck himself, Republican Gov.Scott Walkersupports taking major actions during a lame-duck session of the Wisconsin Legislature aFull Flopfrom theposition he tookwhen he was first elected in 2010. As he enters his final weeks in office, the two-term governorhas signaledthat he generally supportsbills adoptedby the GOP-controlled Legislature that wouldweaken the powersof Gov.-electTony Evers, who defeated Walker in the November 2018 election, and incoming Attorney General Josh Kaul, both Democrats. There are also measures that would limit early voting, put lawmakers in charge of litigation aimed at overturning the federal Affordable Care Act and give Republicans more control over the Wisconsin Economic Development Corp., the state jobs agency. The Legislatures lame-duck bills and Walkers change in position havemadenationalnews. Theyve also drawnthreats of legal actionby liberals andcriticism fromprominent Republicanscalling the move apower graband urging Walker not to sign the bills. On Dec. 9, 2018, four days after the measures won approval from the Legislature during an overnight session, Evers appeared onNBCs Meet the Press.He repeated his call for Walker to veto the lame-duck bills, saying: The entire thing is a mess, its a hot mess, and I believe that he should veto the entire package. In fact, at least three or four of the pieces that are in there now, he has vetoed previously. And so, it makes no sense to me. Like us on Facebook. Follow us on Twitter:@PolitiFactWisc. So, are there three or four provisions in the legislation Walker is now considering that he has vetoed previously? Yes, although they are on more arcane measures, not the ones that have generated the recent controversy. The Wisconsin Legislative Reference Bureau, a nonpartisan state agency, identified four provisions in the lame-duck legislation that are similar to four measures Walker vetoed in September 2017 in the 2017-19 state budget. That information was requested from the bureau by the office of state Rep.Peter Barca, D-Kenosha. Barcas office then produceda memoon the similarities. That memo was cited to us by Evers spokeswoman as evidence to back Evers claim. We also revieweda memoon the lame-duck legislation by the Wisconsin Legislative Fiscal Bureau, another nonpartisan state agency. What we found is that the lame-duck legislation does contain some provisions that are the same -- or similar to -- provisions Walker previously vetoed. But those provisions arent the ones in the lame-duck legislation that have caused the big headlines. Heres a look: Walker 2017 veto 2018 GOP lame-duck legislation Effect Veto allowed transfer of funds by Department of Transportation between state highway programs without legislative oversight. Legislation would repeal altogether DOT's authority totransfer state funds between state highway program components. Less flexibility for Evers administration than Walkers administration. Veto deleted requirement that Department of Administration do annual report on statesself-funded portalfor consolidating accounting, budget and other services. Would require the annual report. Imposes requirement on Evers administration that Walker administration did not want to do. Veto deleted requirement that the Department of Veterans Affairs receive approval from Legislatures Joint Finance Committee before transferring money for state veterans homes to veterans trust fund. Would require department to notify the committee of any transfers. Walker vetoed the measure because it would have encroached on the executive branchs responsibility to manage state agency programs. The requirement is more of a burden on Evers, given that the Joint Finance Committee is majority Republican. Veto deleted requirement that Department of Health Services submit report to Legislatures Joint Finance Committee on Walker initiative to require childless adults to work or get work training in order to receive Medicaid. Veto also eliminated requirement that the Joint Finance Committee give approval before the work/work training requirement could be implemented. Legislation would codify into law the work and work training requirement. Without codifying the initiative into law, Evers administration could have made adjustments to the program; with new legislation, Evers administration would need approval from Joint Finance Committee or full Legislature. Evers said, At least three or four of the pieces that are in in the Republican lame-duck legislation, Walker has vetoed previously. There are four provisions in the lame-duck bills that Walker has vetoed previously and that would put new requirements or restrictions on the incoming Evers administration. But those provisions arent the major ones in the lame-duck session that have generated so much controversy and threats of lawsuits. For a statement that is accurate but needs clarification, our rating is Mostly True.

True

Now that hes a lame duck himself, Republican Gov.Scott Walkersupports taking major actions during a lame-duck session of the Wisconsin Legislature aFull Flopfrom theposition he tookwhen he was first elected in 2010.As he enters his final weeks in office, the two-term governorhas signaledthat he generally supportsbills adoptedby the GOP-controlled Legislature that wouldweaken the powersof Gov.-electTony Evers, who defeated Walker in the November 2018 election, and incoming Attorney General Josh Kaul, both Democrats.The Legislatures lame-duck bills and Walkers change in position havemadenationalnews. Theyve also drawnthreats of legal actionby liberals andcriticism fromprominent Republicanscalling the move apower graband urging Walker not to sign the bills.On Dec. 9, 2018, four days after the measures won approval from the Legislature during an overnight session, Evers appeared onNBCs Meet the Press.He repeated his call for Walker to veto the lame-duck bills, saying:Like us on Facebook. Follow us on Twitter:@PolitiFactWisc.That information was requested from the bureau by the office of state Rep.Peter Barca, D-Kenosha. Barcas office then produceda memoon the similarities. That memo was cited to us by Evers spokeswoman as evidence to back Evers claim.We also revieweda memoon the lame-duck legislation by the Wisconsin Legislative Fiscal Bureau, another nonpartisan state agency.Veto deleted requirement that Department of Administration do annual report on statesself-funded portalfor consolidating accounting, budget and other services.

FMD_train_701

Long Distance Bill Revenge

01/22/2000

This typical female revenge legend, which describes a woman's effective (but non-violent) way of striking back at her (former) partner, has been around since at least 1981. Legends such as these (see The $50 Porsche, for example) often feature a clever method of causing financial loss without the destruction of property. Examples: [Smith, 1986] A young couple living in the Bristol area had been experiencing marital problems, primarily due to the husband's bad temper and the constant fighting and arguing that had persisted for several months. Things finally came to a head one morning when the husband, just before leaving on a three-week business trip, told his wife that they were finished and that she had better get out of his house for good before he returned. When he arrived home, his wife had gone, leaving the house in a terrible mess. While he was cleaning up, he noticed that the telephone was off the hook. He replaced it and thought no more about it. Several weeks later, the quarterly telephone bill arrived, and it was astronomical, running into several thousands of pounds. He immediately queried it, only to be told that the phone had been connected to the speaking weather report in Australia for a three-week period. [Marsano, 1987] In Hollywood, a man dumped his live-in girlfriend by telling her that he was off on a business trip and expected her to have cleared out of the house by the time he returned. Pretty cold, right? The woman left, but when the man returned, he learned that she had found what Paul Simon might call the fifty-first way to leave your lover. The house was in good order, and the only thing amiss was that the phone was off the hook. When he picked it up, he heard incomprehensible babbling, so he hung up. When his next phone bill arrived, it explained a couple of things. The strange language he had heard was Japanese, and it was giving the correct time. It had been giving the correct time enough to run up a bill of $80,000. Variations: Sightings: An episode of the British sitcom Only Fools and Horses ("The Second Time Around," original air date 29 September 1981) features the evicted woman leaving a note announcing she's dialed the speaking clock in America. Eskapa, Roy. Bizarre Sex. London: Quartet Books, 1987. ISBN 0-7043-2518-7 (pp. 82). Fiery, Ann. The Complete and Totally True Book of Urban Legends. Philadelphia: Running Press Books, 2001. ISBN 0-7624-107404 (pp. 81-86). Holt, David and Bill Mooney. Spiders in the Hairdo. Little Rock: August House, 1999. ISBN 0-87483-525-9 (p. 97). The Big Book of Urban Legends. New York: Paradox Press, 1994. ISBN 1-56389-165-4 (p. 183). Barreca, Regina. Sweet Revenge: The Wicked Delights of Getting Even. New York: Harmony Books, 1995. ISBN 0-517-59757-8 (p. 45). Brunvand, Jan Harold. Curses! Broiled Again! New York: W. W. Norton, 1989. ISBN 0-393-30711-5; (pp. 216-217). Brunvand, Jan Harold. Too Good To Be True. New York: W. W. Norton, 1999. ISBN 0-393-04734-2 (pp. 79-80). Hardy, David. What a Mistake! Secaucus, NJ: Octopus Books, 1983. ISBN 1-55521-164-X (p. 78). Marsano, William. Man Suffocated By Potatoes. New York: Signet, 1987. (pp. 149-150). Smith, Paul. The Book of Nastier Legends. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1986. ISBN 0-7102-0573-2 (p. 85).

True

This typical female revenge legend, describing a woman's effective (but non-violent) way of striking back at her (former) partner, has been around since at least 1981. Legends such as these (see The $50 Porsche, for example) often feature a clever method of causing financial loss without the destruction of property: Fiery, Ann. The Complete and Totally True Book of Urban Legends Philadelphia: Running Press Books, 2001. ISBN 0-7624-107404 (pp. 81-86). Holt, David and Bill Mooney. Spiders in the Hairdo. Little Rock: August House, 1999. ISBN 0-87483-525-9 (p. 97). The Big Book of Urban Legends New York: Paradox Press, 1994. ISBN 1-56389-165-4 (p. 183).Barreca, Regina. Sweet Revenge: The Wicked Delights of Getting Even. New York: Harmony Books, 1995. ISBN 0-517-59757-8 (p. 45).Brunvand, Jan Harold. Curses! Broiled Again! New York: W. W. Norton, 1989. ISBN 0-393-30711-5; (pp. 216-217).Brunvand, Jan Harold. Too Good To Be True. New York: W. W. Norton, 1999. ISBN 0-393-04734-2 (pp. 79-80).Smith, Paul. The Book of Nastier Legends. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1986. ISBN 0-7102-0573-2 &nbsp. (p. 85).

FMD_train_237

Deceptive offer of complimentary Dunkin' Donuts voucher

04/18/2017

Social media users are frequently targeted by anniversary giveaway and survey scams, with one common form of bait being fake coupon offers for free boxes of Dunkin' Donuts: Such scams typically provide links which lead to web pages (not operated or sponsored by Dunkin' Donuts) displaying the Dunkin' logo along with entreaties to spread the scam further by sharing those pages and writing thank you in the comments field. The free Dunkin' Donuts offers are a variation of the company anniversary survey scam, a ploy that depends on the unwary unwittingly promoting the phony offer to their social media friends: anniversary survey scam These web pages (which are not operated or sponsored by the companies they reference) typically ask the unwary to click what appear to be Facebook share buttons and post comments to the scammers site (which is really a ruse to dupe users into spreading the scam by sharing it with all of their Facebook friends). Those who follow such instructions are then led into a set of pages prompting them to input a fair amount of personal information (including name, age, address, and phone numbers), complete a lengthy series of surveys, and finally sign up (and commit to paying) for at least two Reward Offers (e.g., Netflix subscriptions, credit report monitoring services, prepaid credit cards). A representative for Dunkin' Donuts wrote on the company's official Facebook page that the online "free dozen" coupon was not one offered by the chain: The Better Business Bureau issued guidelines warning specifically of identical scams on Facebook that target shoppers: Dont believe what you see. Its easy to steal the colors, logos and header of an established organization. Scammers can also make links look like they lead to legitimate websites and emails appear to come from a different sender. Legitimate businesses do not ask for credit card numbers or banking information on customer surveys. If they do ask for personal information, like an address or email, be sure theres a link to their privacy policy. When in doubt, do a quick web search. If the survey is a scam, you may find alerts or complaints from other consumers. The organizations real website may have further information. Watch out for a reward thats too good to be true. If the survey is real, you may be entered in a drawing to win a gift card or receive a small discount off your next purchase. Few businesses can afford to give away $50 gift cards for completing a few questions. Legitimate Dunkin' Donuts offers are listed in a Promotions page on the company's website. Promotions

False

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

FMD_train_63

Public Broadcasting Cuts (2005)

06/17/2005

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

True

https://www.moveon.org/publicbroadcasting/https://www.moveon.org/publicbroadcasting/Origins: Although a long-outdated piece decrying supposed upcoming cuts in funding for the NEA, NPR, PBS, and Sesame Street has been circulating for years (it addressed legislation already voted upon way back in 1995), recent congressional efforts have brought the issue to public attention again.In June 2005 the House Appropriations Committee voted to sharply reduce federal financial support for public broadcasting. If this budgetary plan were approved it would eliminate within two years all federal money for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), money which currently makes up 15% of the funding for public broadcasting. As the Washington Post reported:

FMD_train_559

Says people who signed recall petitions against Wisconsin state Sen. Jim Holperin received harassing phone calls from out-of-state telemarketers claiming to represent the Democratic Party and insinuating foul play by petition circulators.

05/18/2011

Kim Simac, a Wisconsintea partyleader, took aim at state Sen.JimHolperinafter the Conover Democrat fled to Illinois in February 2011.Like 13 other Democratic senators, Holperin, who represents a North Woods district where Simac lives, spent three weeks in Illinois. The move delayed a vote on Republican Gov. Scott Walkers budget-repair bill, which curtails the collective bargaining power of most state and local government employees, although the bill eventually became law.Court challenges have kept the collective bargaining changes from taking effect. But the law, and the Democrats reaction to it, spurred a recall movement ofhistoric proportions. Campaigns were launched against all 16 state senators -- eight Democrats and eight Republicans -- who were eligible to be recalled.Simac, vice-chairwoman of theVilas County RepublicanPartyand founder of Christian values group calledNorthwoods Patriots,headedthe signature-collectingcampaignto recall Holperin,a first-termsenatorwho previously served 10 years in the state Assembly.On April 21, 2011, Simac submitted some 23,000 signatures to the Government Accountability Board, which has not completed its review. She has announcedplans to run againstHolperinif a recall election is set.Eight days after the petitions were filed, Simac issued anewsreleasethat claimed petition signers, are being subjected to harassing phone calls from out-of-state telemarketers claiming to represent the Democratic Party and insinuating foul play by petition circulators.Lets see if thats what happened.When we asked Simac for evidence to back her claim, she asked people who received the calls to contact PolitiFact Wisconsin directly.We received calls from 17 people and e-mails from more than 30 others. We interviewed 10 of the people who called. Heres what we found: Those statements back the claim made by Simac.What did Holperin and the Democrats have to say about it?Holperin said he authorized the Wisconsin Democratic Party to call about 5,000 of the people who signed recall petitions against him.Graeme Zielinski, spokesman for the party, said the Minnesota telemarketing firm was hired to call people who signed petitions against Holperin and against two other Democrats who are facing possible recall elections.Holperin said he authorized the calls because, although petition circulators who worked under Simac were earnest, honest and friendly, more than a third of the 23,000 signatures were collected byKennedy Enterprises, a Colorado marketing and consulting firm hired by the Wisconsin Republican Party. Those petition circulators were often aggressive and misleading when they asked residents to sign petitions, Holperin said.According to Holperin, 534 petition signers -- about 10 percent of those who were called by the Minnesota telemarketing firm -- said they were given misleading information and that they asked to have their names removed from the petitions. He said that was the basis for acomplainthe filed with the Government Accountability Board challenging the petitions.Holperin provided ascriptthat he said the firm used in asking questions of people who signed recall petitions against him. The script shows that, among other things, callers were to: identify themselves as representing the Wisconsin Democratic Party; ask people whether they were aware their signatures appeared on a Holperin recall petition; and state that reports had been received that out-of-state paid circulators were misleading people about what they were being asked to sign.So, did we insinuate that foul play had occurred?, Holperin said. You bet we did, and we think we offered ample evidence that backs up our claim.Lets wrap up.Simac said people who signed Holperin recall petitions received harassing phone calls from out-of-state telemarketers claiming to represent the Democratic Party and insinuating foul play by petition circulators.Some people who received calls said they felt harassed even if they received just one call because they didnt expect to be questioned about signing a petition. The callers were employed by an out-of-state firm, they did identify themselves as representing the Wisconsin Democratic Party and did claim that petition circulators misled signers of the petitions.We rate Simacs claim as True.

True

Kim Simac, a Wisconsintea partyleader, took aim at state Sen.JimHolperinafter the Conover Democrat fled to Illinois in February 2011.Like 13 other Democratic senators, Holperin, who represents a North Woods district where Simac lives, spent three weeks in Illinois. The move delayed a vote on Republican Gov. Scott Walkers budget-repair bill, which curtails the collective bargaining power of most state and local government employees, although the bill eventually became law.Court challenges have kept the collective bargaining changes from taking effect. But the law, and the Democrats reaction to it, spurred a recall movement ofhistoric proportions. Campaigns were launched against all 16 state senators -- eight Democrats and eight Republicans -- who were eligible to be recalled.Simac, vice-chairwoman of theVilas County RepublicanPartyand founder of Christian values group calledNorthwoods Patriots,headedthe signature-collectingcampaignto recall Holperin,a first-termsenatorwho previously served 10 years in the state Assembly.On April 21, 2011, Simac submitted some 23,000 signatures to the Government Accountability Board, which has not completed its review. She has announcedplans to run againstHolperinif a recall election is set.Eight days after the petitions were filed, Simac issued anewsreleasethat claimed petition signers, are being subjected to harassing phone calls from out-of-state telemarketers claiming to represent the Democratic Party and insinuating foul play by petition circulators.Lets see if thats what happened.When we asked Simac for evidence to back her claim, she asked people who received the calls to contact PolitiFact Wisconsin directly.We received calls from 17 people and e-mails from more than 30 others. We interviewed 10 of the people who called. Heres what we found:Those statements back the claim made by Simac.What did Holperin and the Democrats have to say about it?Holperin said he authorized the Wisconsin Democratic Party to call about 5,000 of the people who signed recall petitions against him.Graeme Zielinski, spokesman for the party, said the Minnesota telemarketing firm was hired to call people who signed petitions against Holperin and against two other Democrats who are facing possible recall elections.Holperin said he authorized the calls because, although petition circulators who worked under Simac were earnest, honest and friendly, more than a third of the 23,000 signatures were collected byKennedy Enterprises, a Colorado marketing and consulting firm hired by the Wisconsin Republican Party. Those petition circulators were often aggressive and misleading when they asked residents to sign petitions, Holperin said.According to Holperin, 534 petition signers -- about 10 percent of those who were called by the Minnesota telemarketing firm -- said they were given misleading information and that they asked to have their names removed from the petitions. He said that was the basis for acomplainthe filed with the Government Accountability Board challenging the petitions.Holperin provided ascriptthat he said the firm used in asking questions of people who signed recall petitions against him. The script shows that, among other things, callers were to: identify themselves as representing the Wisconsin Democratic Party; ask people whether they were aware their signatures appeared on a Holperin recall petition; and state that reports had been received that out-of-state paid circulators were misleading people about what they were being asked to sign.So, did we insinuate that foul play had occurred?, Holperin said. You bet we did, and we think we offered ample evidence that backs up our claim.Lets wrap up.Simac said people who signed Holperin recall petitions received harassing phone calls from out-of-state telemarketers claiming to represent the Democratic Party and insinuating foul play by petition circulators.Some people who received calls said they felt harassed even if they received just one call because they didnt expect to be questioned about signing a petition. The callers were employed by an out-of-state firm, they did identify themselves as representing the Wisconsin Democratic Party and did claim that petition circulators misled signers of the petitions.We rate Simacs claim as True.

FMD_train_929

Lou Holtz Nails It

12/30/2014

Did Lou Holtz really say this, or is it yet another hoax? See the text below. I tried to search for it on your site and cannot find it. The Democrats are right; there are two Americas: the America that works and the America that doesn't, the America that contributes and the America that doesn't. It's not the haves and the have-nots; it's the dos and the don'ts. Some people do their duty as Americans, obey the law, support themselves, and contribute to society, while others don't. That's the divide in America. It's not about income inequality; it's about civic irresponsibility. It's about a political party that preaches hatred, greed, and victimization in order to win elective office. It's about a political party that loves power more than it loves its country. That's not invective; that's truth, and it's about time someone said it. The politics of envy was on proud display a couple of weeks ago when President Obama pledged the rest of his term to fighting "income inequality." He noted that some people make more than others and that some people have higher incomes than others, and he says that's not just. That is the rationale of thievery. It is the electoral philosophy that is destroying America. It conceals a fundamental deviation from American values and common sense because it ends up not benefiting the people who support it, but rather betraying them. The Democrats have not empowered their followers; they have enslaved them in a culture of dependence and entitlement, of victimhood and anger instead of ability and hope. The president's premise that you reduce income inequality by debasing the successful seeks to deny the successful the consequences of their choices and spare the unsuccessful the consequences of their choices because, by and large, income variations in society are a result of different choices leading to different consequences. Those who choose wisely and responsibly have a far greater likelihood of success, while those who choose foolishly and irresponsibly have a far greater likelihood of failure. Success and failure usually manifest themselves in personal and family income. If you choose to drop out of high school or skip college, you are likely to have a different outcome than someone who gets a diploma and pursues purposeful education. If you have your children out of wedlock, life is likely to take one course; if you have them within a marriage, life is likely to take another course. Most often in life, our destination is determined by the course we take. My doctor, for example, makes far more than I do. There is significant income inequality between us. Our lives have had an inequality of outcome, but our lives also have had an inequality of effort. While my doctor went to college and then devoted his young adulthood to medical school and residency, I got a job in a restaurant. He made a choice; I made a choice, and our choices led us to different outcomes. His outcome pays a lot better than mine. Does that mean he cheated and Barack Obama needs to take away his wealth? No, it means we are both free men in a free society where free choices lead to different outcomes. It is not inequality Barack Obama intends to take away; it is freedom—the freedom to succeed and the freedom to fail. There is no true option for success if there is no true option for failure. The pursuit of happiness means a whole lot less when you face the punitive hand of government if your pursuit brings you more happiness than the other guy, even if the other guy sat on his arse and did nothing, or made a lifetime's worth of asinine and shortsighted decisions. Barack Obama and the Democrats preach equality of outcome as a right while completely ignoring inequality of effort. The simple Law of the Harvest—"as ye sow, so shall ye reap"—is sometimes applied as, "The harder you work, the more you get." Obama would turn that upside down. Those who achieve are to be punished as enemies of society, and those who fail are to be rewarded as wards of society. Entitlement will replace effort as the key to upward mobility in American society if Barack Obama gets his way. He seeks a lowest common denominator society in which the government besieges the successful and productive to foster equality through mediocrity. He and his party speak of two Americas, and their grip on power is based on using the votes of one to sap the productivity of the other. America is not divided by the differences in our outcomes; it is divided by the differences in our efforts. It is a false philosophy to say one man's success comes about unavoidably as the result of another man's victimization. What Obama offered was not a solution but separatism. He fomented division and strife, pitting one set of Americans against another for his own political benefit. That's what socialists offer: Marxist class warfare wrapped up with a bow. Two Americas are coming closer each day to proving the truth of Lincoln's maxim that a house divided against itself cannot stand. Origins: Shortly after President Obama gave a speech about income inequality in December 2013, writer Bob Lonsberry published an essay on his website titled "Two Americas" about "The America that works and the America that doesn't." The article didn't initially gain much attention, but that situation changed when the text of Lonsberry's essay started circulating via e-mail with former football coach Lou Holtz's name featured prominently at the top in ways that inaccurately suggested he was the article's author, such as "Lou Holtz Nails It!", "Told As Only a Coach, An Old Coach Can," "Lou Holtz on America Today," and "Lou Holtz's Viewpoint." As Bob Lonsberry has confirmed, however, the "Two Americas" essay was not penned by a famous former football coach. It was written and originally published by Lonsberry on his own website on December 9, 2013. Last updated: December 30, 2014.

NEI

[Click here to expand text].Origins: Shortly after President Obama gave a speech about income inequality in December 2013, writer Bob Lonsberry published an essay on his web site titled "Two Americas" about the "The America that works, and the America that doesnt."

FMD_train_1217

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

03/08/2018

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

True

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

FMD_train_323

Is the Picture Depicting Stephen Hawking at 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_1433

No, Domino's is not providing complimentary digital vouchers for two large pizzas.

04/08/2020

In April 2020, Facebook posts circulating online offered coupons supposedly good for two free large pizzas from the Domino's pizza chain: 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 coupons: After completing the questionnaire, however, users were then required to click a button to share the "offer" with their Facebook friends before they could retrieve their coupons. Those who complied by spamming their friends were then allowed to click a "Receive the Coupon" button, but there was no actual coupon to receive. Like innumerable other "free merchandise" offers on Facebook, this offer was another variation of a common scam. other free merchandise offers Facebook We've had many occasions to alert readers to this kind of fraud: These types of viral coupon scams often involve websites and social media pages set up to mimic those of legitimate companies. Users who respond to those fake offers are required to share a website link or social media post 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

False

Like innumerable other "free merchandise" offers on Facebook, this offer was another variation of a common scam.The Better Business Bureau offers consumers several general tips to avoid getting scammed:

FMD_train_1498

False Rumor Suggests Sinking of Titanic Was Inside Job

09/15/2022

On Sept. 13, 2022, a Telegram user shared a baseless meme suggesting that the sinking of the Titanic was an inside job. It read, "These men opposed globalist world banks (Federal Reserve). Benjamin Guggenheim, Isidor Straus, and John Jacob Astor all opposed the new Federal Reserve bank. Today, these men would be worth $11 billion. All three were aboard the Titanic when it sank, and all three died that night." According to the TinEye reverse image search website, this meme had been circulating since at least 2014. However, the rumor itself had begun spreading several years earlier. It is true that American businessman Benjamin Guggenheim, Macy's co-owner Isidor Straus, and fur magnate and real estate developer John Jacob Astor all perished in the sinking of the Titanic. However, the overall claim implied by the meme was nothing more than a baseless conspiracy theory. The misleading meme appears to have originated from previous ones that mentioned American financier J.P. Morgan. Morgan owned the companies that managed the Titanic and was not a passenger on its maiden voyage. Past memes suggested that Morgan had somehow orchestrated the voyage to end in tragedy in order to kill Guggenheim, Straus, and Astor. According to these memes, Morgan's supposed reason for planning the demise of the three prominent men was that they all opposed the formation of the Federal Reserve. (The centralized banking system was established in 1913, the year after the sinking of the Titanic.) The meme in question also stated, "Today, these men would be worth $11 billion." However, it is unclear how much each of the men's descendants would be worth today had they survived. In March 2021, Reuters published a thorough report that debunked the rumor behind all of the memes on this subject. The article included an interview with a Titanic expert named George Behe, whose research into the history of the Titanic dates back to the 1970s. According to Behe, there is no known evidence that shows Guggenheim, Straus, or Astor opposed the formation of the Federal Reserve. In fact, in 1911, The New York Times reported that Astor was very much in favor of the idea. It is widely agreed upon by experts that the sinking of the Titanic was an accident, as reported by Reuters. The ship struck an iceberg on the night of April 14, 1912. Within hours, more than 1,500 people had died. We contacted Behe to find out if there had been any updates since Reuters published its story in 2021. "To the best of my knowledge, the conspiracy theory is just as false today as it was when it was first created, and no important new revelations have turned up within the last couple of years," Behe told us in an email dated Jan. 8, 2023. "Sadly, once these nonsensical conspiracy theories have been foisted upon the general public via the internet, they are destined to plague humanity forevermore and will continue to fool innocent people who are unfamiliar with the facts." For further details, Behe directed us to historian J. Kent Layton, who is credited as an author of books including "Conspiracies at Sea: Titanic and Lusitania," "On a Sea of Glass: The Life & Loss of the RMS Titanic," and "Recreating Titanic & Her Sisters: A Visual History." "We've been tackling this nonsense with historical data since at least the late '90s to early '00s," Layton told us by email in June 2023. "However, social media is a fantastic breeding ground for conspiracies of all sorts. Titanic seems to be a favorite of many." Layton elaborated on why the conspiracy theory made no sense to him: "I would point out that if the sinking had actually been a conspiracy to kill those three individuals, there would have been no way to ensure their actual demise unless they had locked them somewhere inside the ship to die as it sank. Instead, the evidence indicates that all three were seen during the sinking. Guggenheim famously cast aside his heavy coat and lifebelt after his steward had helped him into them, saying that he and his manservant were 'dressed in their best and prepared to go down as gentlemen.' Straus nearly made it into a lifeboat, and fellow passengers even recommended that he board a lifeboat with his wife, but he deferred, preferring to let women and children board while he waited behind with other men. Astor was seen very late in the disaster, helping his wife into a lifeboat; when he asked an officer loading the boat, apparently Second Officer Lightoller, if he could board, Lightoller said no. However, Lightoller had maintained a rather rigid policy of allowing no men into the lifeboats that he filled, and there had been plenty of other opportunities for Astor to board a boat. In fact, we recently discovered an account indicating that Astor and his wife had approached an early boat on the other side of the ship, when the situation seemed less serious, but they had stepped back from the lifeboat of their own accord at the last moment and stayed for a while longer on the ship. If a conspiracy to kill these three men had been so deep and involved as to actually sink an ocean liner and kill hundreds of innocent people, one would think that the individuals responsible would not have left the survival of these three men to chance. This story will be updated in the future should we uncover any further helpful information.

False

It's true that American businessman Benjamin Guggenheim, Macy's co-owner Isidor Straus, and fur magnate and real estate developer John Jacob Astor all perished in the sinking of the Titanic. However, the overall claim intimated by the meme was nothing more than a baseless conspiracy theory.The misleading meme appears to have been born out of previous ones that mentioned American financier J.P. Morgan. Morgan owned the companies that managed the Titanic and was not a passenger on its maiden voyage.According to the memes, Morgan's supposed reason for planning the demise of the three prominent men was because they all opposed the formation of the Federal Reserve. (The centralized banking system was established in 1913, the year after the sinking of the Titanic.)In March 2021, Reuters published a thorough report that debunked the rumor behind all of the memes on this subject. The article included an interview with a Titanic expert named George Behe, whose research into the history of Titanic goes all the way back to the 1970s. According to Behe, there is no known evidence that showed Guggenheim, Straus, or Astor opposed the formation of the Federal Reserve. In fact, in 1911, The New York Times reported that Astor was very much in favor of the idea.It's widely agreed upon by experts that the sinking of the Titanic was an accident, the reporting from Reuters said. The ship struck an iceberg on the night of April 14, 1912. Within hours, more than 1,500 people had died.

FMD_train_9

Can sending a text with the word 'FOOD' assist in offering complimentary summer meals to children?

06/02/2017

In late May 2017, Facebook users began sharing a message claiming that if you send a text message to a particular phone number, you would receive the address of a nearby location where school-aged children could get free meals during the summer. The message was typically worded like this: "If you have a school-aged student in need of breakfast and lunch this summer, simply text FOOD to 877877 and receive a message back with the location closest to where they can get free summer meals. Even if you aren't in need, someone else's kids are. No child deserves to go hungry, ever. This is a real phone number, a real program, and an accurate message. The text information service is run by No Kid Hungry, an initiative of the non-profit organization Share Our Strength. No Kid Hungry has access to information about tens of thousands of groups serving free meals nationwide as part of the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Summer Food Service Program. Once the free meal providers register with the USDA, No Kid Hungry makes their location and hours available to the public via the 877-877 number. To use the service, text "FOOD" to 877-877 and enter your zip code when prompted. Spanish speakers can also text "COMIDA" to 877-877. You can also locate registered, licensed free meal providers using this interactive map on the USDA website. Unfortunately, your nearest free meal provider may not be in your town. This is because, by law, sites are only allowed in areas where 50% of schoolchildren or more are eligible for free or low-cost school meals, according to the USDA. You can check whether your local area is eligible to host a Summer Food Service Program site using this map. However, even if your neighborhood isn't eligible for a free meals provider, there is no restriction on you and your children traveling to the nearest site to get free meals there. The summer program is federally funded and administered by the USDA's Food and Nutrition Service, which also runs the National School Lunch Program and School Breakfast Program during the academic year, as well as the Child and Adult Care Food Program and the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program. According to a spokesperson for the No Kid Hungry campaign, the Summer Food Service Program served 177 million free meals at 47,816 sites across the U.S. in 2016.

True

This is a real phone number, a real program, and an accurate message. The text information service is run by No Kid Hungry, an initiative of the non-profit organization Share Our Strength.No Kid Hungry has access to information about tens of thousands of groups serving free meals nationwide as part of the the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Summer Food Service Program.You can also locate registered, licensed free meal providers using this interactive map on the USDA website.Unfortunately, your nearest free meal provider may not be in your town. This is because, by law, sites are only allowed in areas where 50% of schoolchildren or more are eligible for free or low-cost school meals, according to the USDA. You can check whether your local area is eligible to host a Summer Food Service Program site, using this map.

FMD_train_1757

Did Trump receive a military that was weakened from Obama?

09/26/2020

One claim that has often been repeated by U.S. President Donald Trump is that he rebuilt a military that was "totally depleted" by his predecessor, Barack Obama. Trump's grievance is based on a grain of truth: military spending was reduced during Obama's second term, but Trump's statements on the matter have combined distorted facts with outright falsehoods. The way Trump tells it, the United States military was in complete shambles when he took office. Over the years, Trump has made a variety of statements to perpetuate this notion. In one oft-repeated story, Trump illustrated his claim that Obama depleted the military by saying that the armed forces had "no ammunition" when he took office. In October 2019, for instance, Trump said, "When I took over our military, we did not have ammunition." This is not true. The military did not run out of ammunition during the Obama administration (or during any other administration, as far as we can tell). In addition, Trump falsely claimed in August 2018, as he was signing the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2019, that the military had not received any money for years. Trump said, "We've been trying to get money. They never gave us money for the military for years and years. And it was depleted." This, again, is false. In fact, approximately $600 billion was spent on the military in the year before Trump took office. President Trump has also mischaracterized his own military spending. On May 22, 2020, during a speech at the "Rolling to Remember Ceremony: Honoring our Nation's Veterans and POW/MIA," Trump claimed that he spent trillions on equipment: "We've invested $2.5 trillion in all of the greatest equipment in the world, and it's all made here, right in the USA." This is not true. The $2.5 trillion figure refers to the total Department of Defense (DOD) budget that was passed under Trump—comparatively speaking, Obama's budget during his first term was about $3.3 trillion and $2.7 trillion during his second term—but only a portion of the DOD budget is spent on equipment. The amount spent on procurement, or the act of obtaining military equipment and supplies, varies from year to year, but it generally made up about 15% of Trump's total military budget. While Trump has told several falsehoods about how Obama supposedly "totally depleted" the military, there is some general truth to the idea, as overall military spending was reduced during the Obama administration. However, there is a bit more nuance to this issue than is often heard on the campaign trail. While the military was leaner during the Obama years, the Obama administration still spent trillions on national defense. Calculating an exact dollar figure for how much the U.S. spends on the military (and which administration is responsible for that spending) is a complicated proposition. The military budget covers a wide range of expenses across five military branches: the Army, Marine Corps, Navy, Air Force, and Space Force. One could also factor in money spent on the Department of Veterans Affairs, on overseas contingency operations, and on other security agencies, such as Homeland Security. Military contracts and budgetary plans also often overlap presidential terms, meaning that spending authorized under one president may end up getting spent under another. Furthermore, each president is faced with different domestic and global threats, which require different approaches and therefore different spending. Lastly, no president has sole discretion over military spending. For instance, sequestration, a provision of the 2011 Budget Control Act that passed Congress with bipartisan support, limited the amount that could be spent on the military. The "green book," an annual budgetary analysis put out by the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense, shows that military spending greatly increased following the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks during the administration of U.S. President George W. Bush. Spending continued to increase after Obama took office. In 2010, there was a slight decrease in military spending, and that trend continued until 2015. Spending increased again during Obama's final year in office and then continued to increase during Trump's administration. The following chart from the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) takes a look at the United States' budget stretching back to the 1980s. The green line at the top of this chart represents the United States budget for National Defense. Trump's military budget for his first four years (approximately $2.9 trillion) was more robust than Obama's budget during his last four years (approximately $2.7 trillion). However, it was smaller than Obama's budget during his first four years (approximately $3.3 trillion). The Marine Corps Times writes that the military the president inherited from Obama was not depleted or facing a massive readiness crisis, which resulted from massive underfunding in the Obama years. In fact,

False

In one oft-repeated story, Trump illustrated his claim that Obama depleted the military by saying that the armed forces had "no ammunition" when he took office. In October 2019, for instance, Trump said: "When I took over our military, we did not have ammunition."This is not true. The military did not run out of ammunition during the Obama administration (or during any other administration, as far as we can tell).President Trump has also mischaracterized his own military spending. On May 22, 2020, during a speech at the "Rolling to Remember Ceremony: Honoring our Nations Veterans and POW/MIA," Trump claimed that he spent trillions on equipment:This is not true. The $2.5 trillion figure refers to the total Department of Defense (DOD) budget that was passed under Trump -- comparatively speaking, Obama's budget during was about $3.3. trillion during his first term and $2.7 trillion during his second term -- but only of a portion of the DOD budget is spent on equipment. The amount spent on procurement, or the act of obtaining military equipment and supplies, varies from year to year, but it generally made up about 15% of Trump's total military budget. Calculating an exact dollar figure for how much the U.S. spends on the military (and what administration is responsible for that spending) is a complicated proposition. The military budget covers a wide range of expenses across five military branches: the Army, Marine Corps, Navy, Air Force, and Space Force. One could also factor in money spent on the Department of Veterans Affairs, on overseas contingency operations, and on other security agencies, such as Homeland Security. Military contracts and budgetary plans also often overlap presidential terms, meaning that spending authorized under one president may end up getting spent under another. Furthermore, each president is faced with different domestic and global threats, which require different approaches and therefore different spending. Lastly, no president has sole discretion over military spending. For instance, sequestration, a provision of the 2011 Budget Control Act that passed congress with bipartisan support, limited the amount that could be spent on the military.The "green book," an annual budgetary analysis put out by the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense, shows that military spending greatly increased following the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks during the administration of U.S. President George W. Bush. Spending continued to increase after Obama took office. In 2010, there was a slight decrease in military spending, and that trend continued until 2015. Spending increased again during Obama's final year in office and then continued to increase during Trump's administration. The following chart from the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) takes a look at the United States' budget stretching back to the 1980s. The green line at the top of this chart is the United States budget for National Defense. The Marine Corps Times writes:Todd Harrison, the director of Defense Budget Analysis for CSIS, examined Obama's budget for fiscal year 2017, the budget that would be in place when Trump took office, and found that "nearly every measure of force structure the number of brigades, aircraft, ships and subs, marine battalions, and end strength [was] smaller than when the [post 9/11] buildup began." However, this "smaller force consumes a budget more than 50 percent larger in real terms than before 9/11. The military is spending more for a smaller force." Here's how The New York Times explained the impact of the congressional sequester on military spending:

FMD_train_1167

Has a group affiliated with the Republican party put up billboards in Minnesota that oppose Trump?

01/05/2018

An eye-catching billboard in the state of Minnesota caused some controversy in the early days of January 2018. Purportedly sponsored by "Republicans for Honesty in Government," the billboard showed a photograph of President Donald Trump accompanied by the words "Big Mistake." billboard We received several inquiries from readers about the authenticity of the billboard, and whether it was actually produced by Republicans. The billboard is real, as is another similar one found elsewhere in Minnesota. However, the group behind it"Republicans for Honesty in Government"is run by a Democratic donor and businessman in the state, suggesting there is more to the campaign than meets the eye. On 2 January 2018, the left-wing Facebook page Occupy Democrats posted a photo of the billboard, along with a message emphasizing the apparent party affiliation of its sponsors: photo REPUBLICANS erected this billboard in Minnesota...speaks volumes about the current state of our Liar-in-Chief's presidency, doesn't it? That post was shared almost 25,000 times within three days. The photo appears to have originally been posted to Facebook in October 2017 by Rosemary Rocco, who said the billboard was located along U.S. Route 52, in the state's second congressional district, which includes parts of Minneapolis-St. Paul and Wabasha County. She wrote: posted Seen on MN Highway 52 south-CD2! Proof there are Republicans who care about our country. Note the disclaimer on the billboard. This is what country first looks like. Earlier in October, a Reddit user posted another photograph of a billboard bearing a photograph of Trump along with the word "Clueless." It was also purported to have been erected by the same group. photograph According to records held by the Minnesota Secretary State, Republicans for Honesty in Government was first registered as a non-profit corporation in Minnesota in 2006, as reported by the regional news web site Bluestem Prairie. Its registered agent is Robert Johnson, founder and director of the Minnesota real estate investment firm AEI Capital. records Bluestem Prairie AEI Capital Republicans for Honesty in Government shares its address with that of AEI Capital. The group was dissolved in 2009, but was reinstated in March 2017. However, despite being the man behind a non-profit organization that labels itself Republican, Johnson is a prolific donor to Democratic candidates and the Minnesota branch of the Democratic-Farmer-Labor party (DFL). Federal Election Commission records show that a "Robert P. Johnson," "Robert Johnson" or "Bob Johnson" at "AEI Fund Management" or related company names in Minnesota has donated a total of $43,830.50 in federal campaign funding since 2004. All of it went to DFL and Democratic candidates or political action committees. records Johnson told the Minnesota news web site GoMN that he had leaned towards the Republican party in the past, but switched allegiances after what the web site described as a shift to the right within the GOP. GoMN "My political position was staked out decades ago and has not changed," he told GoMN. "What has changed is the positions of the parties and their platforms." Federal Election Commission records show that in 1980, Johnson did donate $500 to the Minnesota Independent-Republican Finance Committee, his only non-Democratic federal election donation. records However, Johnson registered "Republicans for Honesty in Government" in 2006, two years after he began donating exclusively to Democratic and DFL candidates, including $7,000 to former Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry, and more than $10,000 to the Minnesota DFL party. $7,000 We asked Johnson questions about his involvement with Republicans for Honesty in Government, his party affiliation, his political donations, and the purpose of the billboards. We did not receive a response. He told GoMN that the billboards were intended to provoke Minnesotans to think more carefully about their electoral choices"to maybe rub their chin metaphorically a little bit and wonder, what kind of decisions are we making?" Sorenson, Sally Jo. "Is Billboard on Highway 52 for Real?; Or, Who Are Those 'Republicans for Honesty in Government'". Bluestem Prairie. 2 January 2018. McLaughlin, Shaymus. "Who is the Group Behind the Donald Trump 'BIG MISTAKE' Billboard?" GoMN. 3 January 2018.

NEI

An eye-catching billboard in the state of Minnesota caused some controversy in the early days of January 2018. Purportedly sponsored by "Republicans for Honesty in Government," the billboard showed a photograph of President Donald Trump accompanied by the words "Big Mistake."On 2 January 2018, the left-wing Facebook page Occupy Democrats posted a photo of the billboard, along with a message emphasizing the apparent party affiliation of its sponsors:The photo appears to have originally been posted to Facebook in October 2017 by Rosemary Rocco, who said the billboard was located along U.S. Route 52, in the state's second congressional district, which includes parts of Minneapolis-St. Paul and Wabasha County. She wrote:Earlier in October, a Reddit user posted another photograph of a billboard bearing a photograph of Trump along with the word "Clueless." It was also purported to have been erected by the same group. According to records held by the Minnesota Secretary State, Republicans for Honesty in Government was first registered as a non-profit corporation in Minnesota in 2006, as reported by the regional news web site Bluestem Prairie. Its registered agent is Robert Johnson, founder and director of the Minnesota real estate investment firm AEI Capital. Federal Election Commission records show that a "Robert P. Johnson," "Robert Johnson" or "Bob Johnson" at "AEI Fund Management" or related company names in Minnesota has donated a total of $43,830.50 in federal campaign funding since 2004. All of it went to DFL and Democratic candidates or political action committees.Johnson told the Minnesota news web site GoMN that he had leaned towards the Republican party in the past, but switched allegiances after what the web site described as a shift to the right within the GOP. Federal Election Commission records show that in 1980, Johnson did donate $500 to the Minnesota Independent-Republican Finance Committee, his only non-Democratic federal election donation.However, Johnson registered "Republicans for Honesty in Government" in 2006, two years after he began donating exclusively to Democratic and DFL candidates, including $7,000 to former Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry, and more than $10,000 to the Minnesota DFL party.

FMD_train_1410

Lockheed Martin Layoffs

10/27/2012

Lockheed Martin is going to lay off 123,000 defense workers due to military downsizing. This information was reported on the Drudge Report yesterday, and we are livid. The law requires Lockheed to give a 60-day notice to all employees who are to be laid off. That deadline would be November 1st. Since this would be detrimental to the election, it has been suggested that the government would cover all Lockheed severance packages for laid-off employees if the company refrained from releasing the names and locations of those losing their jobs until after the election. In August 2011, Congress passed, and President Obama signed, the Budget Control Act of 2011 to resolve the U.S. debt-ceiling crisis and prevent the federal government from defaulting on its debt. This legislation identified $1.2 trillion in budget cuts to be made over ten years and called upon Congress, through the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction (also known as the "super-committee"), to devise a plan to cut the budget deficit by another $1.5 trillion (through revenue increases and/or spending reductions) by November 23, 2011. If that committee failed to produce a viable deficit reduction plan by the deadline, or if Congress failed to approve the committee's plan, the legislation mandated automatic, across-the-board cuts (known as "sequestration") to take effect. The super-committee did not reach an agreement on a deficit reduction plan, stating, "After months of hard work and intense deliberations, we have concluded that it will not be possible to make any bipartisan agreement available to the public before the committee's deadline." Unless lawmakers can agree on a solution to the budget impasse, the sequestration budget cuts are set to take effect with the 2013 budget. Since those cuts may include significant reductions in Pentagon spending, some defense contractors anticipate having to engage in substantial layoffs in the upcoming year. Under the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act, enacted in 1989, most employers with 100 or more employees are required to issue a 60-day advance notification of mass layoffs. When Lockheed Martin announced on October 1, 2012, that it would follow White House guidance not to issue WARN Act-mandated layoff notices to thousands of employees just before the November presidential election, Republican critics contended that President Obama was engaging in a partisan political maneuver to protect votes in a key battleground state (Lockheed Martin has a significant business presence in Virginia) at the expense of workers who might soon find themselves without jobs. U.S. Senators John McCain, Lindsey Graham, and Kelly Ayotte released a statement regarding the Obama Administration's guidance instructing defense companies and other government contractors not to issue mass layoff notices to their employees, as required under the WARN Act, in anticipation of the $109 billion in across-the-board budget cuts scheduled to occur under sequestration on January 2, 2013. They stated, "Today, President Obama put his own reelection ahead of the interests of working Americans and our national security by promising government contractors that their salary and liability costs will be covered at taxpayer expense if they do not follow the law that requires advance warning to employees of jobs that may be lost due to sequestration." The WARN Act exists to protect workers by providing at least 60 days' notice of layoffs from government contracting work. However, the Office of Management and Budget published guidance for the defense industry and other government contractors indicating that they do not have to provide that notice now, even though, under current law, the $109 billion in across-the-board budget cuts scheduled to occur on January 2 are estimated to result in as many as 1 million lost defense jobs. It appears that President Obama prioritizes politics over American workers by denying them adequate time to plan their finances and care for their families. Those who work in the defense industry and other government contracting companies deserve as much notice as possible that they are at risk of losing their jobs. The issue stems from a Training and Employment Guidance letter issued by the Department of Labor (DOL) on July 30, 2012, and reiterated in a September 28, 2012 memo from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), advising employers that the issuance of WARN Act notifications in anticipation of sequestration was not required by law and would be a waste of resources because it is currently unknown which contracts might be affected by potential budget cuts and when those effects might occur. The DOL's letter also informed employers that if they followed the DOL's advice and refrained from issuing WARN Act notifications in anticipation of sequestration, and later had to engage in mass layoffs due to sequestration, the government would cover any legal costs incurred as a result. Although it is known that sequestration may occur, efforts are being made to avoid it. Thus, even the occurrence of sequestration is not necessarily foreseeable. Additionally, the sequester's impact on specific accounts will depend, at least in part, on Fiscal Year (FY) 2013 funding that Congress has not yet enacted. Federal agencies also have some discretion in how to implement the required reductions if sequestration were to occur. Given that federal agencies, including the Department of Defense (DOD), have not announced which contracts will be affected by sequestration, and that many contracts may remain completely unaffected, the actual contract terminations or cutbacks that will occur in the event of sequestration are unknown. Therefore, in the absence of any additional information, potential plant closings or layoffs resulting from such contract terminations or cutbacks are speculative and unforeseeable. The Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification generally requires employers with at least 100 employees to provide written notice to affected employees 60 days before ordering certain plant closings or mass layoffs if they are reasonably foreseeable. The DOL concluded that it is neither necessary nor appropriate for federal contractors to provide WARN Act notice to employees 60 days in advance of potential sequestration due to uncertainty about whether sequestration will occur and, if it does, what effect it would have on specific contracts, among other factors. In reaching this conclusion, the DOL explained that giving notice in these circumstances would waste state resources in undertaking employment assistance activities where none are needed and create unnecessary anxiety and uncertainty for workers. Despite the DOL's guidance, some contractors have indicated they are still considering issuing WARN Act notices, and some have inquired about whether federal contracting agencies would cover WARN Act-related costs in connection with the potential sequestration. To further minimize the potential for waste and disruption associated with the issuance of unwarranted layoff notices, this memorandum provides guidance regarding the allowability of certain liability and litigation costs associated with WARN Act compliance. Specifically, if (1) sequestration occurs and an agency terminates or modifies a contract that necessitates that the contractor order a plant closing or mass layoff of a type subject to WARN Act requirements, and (2) that contractor has followed a course of action consistent with DOL guidance, then any resulting employee compensation costs for WARN Act liability as determined by a court, as well as attorneys' fees and other litigation costs (irrespective of litigation outcome), would qualify as allowable costs and be covered by the contracting agency, if otherwise reasonable and allocable. GOP critics maintain that the legality of the DOL's advice is questionable and amounts to "giving contractors a free pass" in exchange for a "multi-billion dollar campaign contribution." As a result of the OMB guidance, the Department of Defense will have to allow companies to claim repayment for the salaries of workers who are laid off but did not receive the required WARN notices—a cost to the taxpayer that could be as much as $4 billion. Additionally, the DOD will have to reimburse companies for any legal damages paid to workers who are laid off but did not receive the required WARN notices—a cost that is inestimable. Facing intense lobbying by defense companies and other government contractors for financial protection if they agreed not to issue WARN notices, the Obama Administration is giving contractors a free pass and potentially burdening taxpayers with a multi-billion dollar campaign contribution. We also have questions regarding the legal authority of the OMB to interpret the WARN Act as it has and to obligate the federal government to pay billions of dollars in potential claims from private contractors arising from this interpretation. The Obama Administration is attempting to circumvent the WARN Act to keep the American people unaware of this looming national security and fiscal crisis. The president should insist that companies act in accordance with the clearly stated law and proceed with the layoff notices. Republicans and Democrats in Congress, as recently as three days ago, called on the president to work with them to avert the looming threat of sequestration to our national security. Other labor officials contended that the DOL's advice to employers about implementing the WARN Act was consistent with the law. William Gould, a Stanford Law School professor emeritus specializing in labor law and a former chair of the National Labor Relations Board appointed by President Bill Clinton, stated that the Labor Department was correct when it said the possibility of sequestration-induced layoffs did not warrant WARN notices. "The courts have been very clear that mere conjecture does not trigger the obligation," he said. Rick McHugh, an attorney with the National Employment Law Project, agreed, stating, "The obligation to give notice arises once the employer believes or should have known that a mass layoff or plant closing is going to happen at a particular worksite. At this point, no one knows with any certainty whether layoffs will be taking place or not at a particular worksite." Lockheed Martin never announced that it was planning to lay off 123,000 workers (a number that represents the entirety of the company's workforce). In June 2012, a Lockheed Martin official expressed frustration with the uncertainty surrounding the sequestration issue and stated that if it were not resolved soon, the company would have to send WARN Act notices to the "vast majority" of their workers because they had received no guidance on the issue from the government and thus had no idea who might be affected. Right before Election Day, the company was likely to notify the "vast majority" of its 123,000 workers that they were at risk of being laid off, said Greg Walters, the company's vice president of legislative affairs. Walters's comments were among the most specific threats yet from an industry trying to avert the $500 billion in automatic cuts in defense spending set to begin taking effect on January 2. Called sequestration, the cuts are being phased in over ten years, with about $55 billion slated for 2013. Unless Congress reaches a deal to stave off the cuts, "we will find it necessary to issue these [layoff] notices probably to the vast majority of our employee base," Walters said. The company has little choice, he explained, because federal law requires large employers to provide two months' notice to workers facing layoffs. "We would see a requirement, an obligation, to issue [layoff] notices 60 days prior to sequestration taking effect," he said. The layoffs, of course, will not all happen on January 2, as it would likely take months for sequestration to begin affecting contractors' bottom lines. However, the timing of the cuts, along with the requirement of a 60-day notice, provides an opportunity for the defense industry to increase pressure on President Barack Obama and congressional leaders to address the issue before November. Only a fraction of Lockheed's workers would ultimately be let go as a result of the cuts. However, the company plans to send out mass notifications because it is unsure exactly which employees would be affected. The White House Office of Management and Budget has not yet provided guidance on how sequestration would be carried out. "We've wanted a dialogue about what sequestration could look like," Walters said. "But as of right now, no, we have no answers from OMB." In a July 2012 memo, Lockheed Martin projected a much lower figure of potential layoffs, stating that "Our very rough estimate of the number of employees who could be affected [by sequestration], based on the limited information available to us from the government, is about 10,000." Ultimately, Lockheed Martin announced on October 1, 2012, that after "careful review of the additional guidance" provided by the government, they would not be issuing sequestration-related WARN notices this year. For much of this year, we and others in the industry and government have worked to raise awareness in Congress about the devastating effects of sequestration—the federal law passed last year through the Budget Control Act that forces automatic across-the-board cuts in government spending. In July, we informed you that, without clear direction from the government about how these cuts would be implemented, the corporation could issue conditional Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) notices to a substantial number of employees. We have been working closely with the government to understand our obligations under the WARN Act and to ensure our employees are provided fair treatment and appropriate notice if their jobs are impacted by sequestration. On Friday afternoon, the U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the Department of Defense (DOD) released guidance clarifying responsibilities under the WARN Act and outlining their timeline for making sequestration-related program decisions. After careful review of the additional guidance provided by the Office of Management and Budget and the Department of Defense, we will not issue sequestration-related WARN notices this year. The additional guidance offered important new information about the potential timing of DOD actions under sequestration, indicating that DOD anticipates no contract actions on or about January 2, 2013, and that any action to adjust funding levels on contracts as a result of sequestration would likely not occur for several months after January 2. The additional guidance further ensures that, if contract actions due to sequestration were to occur, our employees would be provided the protection of the WARN Act and that the costs of this protection would be allowable and recoverable. We remain firm in our conviction that the automatic and across-the-board budget reductions under sequestration are ineffective and inefficient public policy that will weaken our civil government operations, damage our national security, and adversely impact our industry. We will continue to work with leaders in our government to stop sequestration and find more thoughtful, balanced, and effective solutions to our nation's challenges. If sequestration were to happen, we are compelled to comply with the law and will do so as respectfully and as ably as we can. While we work to stop sequestration, we will also continue to petition the government to outline exactly how sequestration will be implemented so that we can responsibly prepare for the impact on our employees and our business. Finally, as political reporter Bob Woodward noted, the sequester in the Budget Control Act that could result in automatic defense spending cuts in 2013 was not part of an Obama administration policy to "downsize the military," but rather a means of prodding Congress into developing a concrete plan for addressing the deficit issue. "No one thought [sequestration] would happen. The idea was to design something ... that was so onerous that no one would ever let it happen. Of course, it did, because [Congress] couldn't reach an agreement. They all believed that the supercommittee was going to come up with a $1.2 trillion deficit-reduction plan, so there would be no sequestration. Of course, the supercommittee failed, and so the trigger went off, which has all of these very Draconian [budget] cuts."

False

with the 2013 budget. Since those cuts, if they take place, may include large reductions in Pentagon spending, some defense contractors are anticipating that they may have to engage in significant layoffs of personnel in the upcoming year, and under the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act, enacted in 1989, most employers with 100 or more employees are required to issue 60-day advance notification of mass layoffs.When one such defense contractor, Lockheed Martin, announced on 1 October 2012 that it would abide by White House guidance not to issue WARN Act-mandated layoff notices to thousands of employees just before the November presidential election, Republican critics contended that President Obama was engaging in a partisan political ploy to protect votes in a key battleground state (Lockheed Martin has a large business presence in Virginia) at the expense of workers who might soon find themselves without jobs:At issue is a Training and Employment Guidance letter issued by the Department of Labor (DOL) on 30 July 2012, and reiterated in a 28 September 2012 memo from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), advising employers that the issuance of WARN Act notifications in anticipation of sequestration was not required by law and would be a waste of resources because it is currently unknown which contracts might be affected by potential budget cuts and when the effects of those budget cuts might take place. The DOL's letter also informed employers that if they followed the DOL's advice and refrained from issuing WARN Act notifications in anticipation of sequestration, and they later had to engage in mass layoffs due to sequestration, the government would cover any legal costs they incurred as a result:(In a July 2012 memo, Lockheed Martin projected a much lower figure of potential layoffs, stating that "Our very rough estimate of the number of employees who could be affected [by sequestration], based on the limited information available to us from the government, is about 10,000.") Ultimately, Lockheed Martin announced on 1 October 2012 that after "careful review of the additional guidance" provided by the government, they would not be issuing sequestration-related WARN notices this year:

FMD_train_1086

Hunters contribute more than $500 million to West Virginia.

12/10/2018

In a tweet that preceded West Virginias buck firearm season, West Virginia Gov. Jim Justice encouraged West Virginians to purchase a hunting license. In the tweet, he offered an economic rationale -- that hunting is an economic engine for the state. In theNov. 5 tweet, Justice wrote, I've said it before and I'll say it again, hunting is really something that can help our economy grow! Hunters contribute more than $500 million to our state each year and help support a lot of jobs. Get a license today athttp://wvhunt.com.#WV#WVHunt. I've said it before and I'll say it again, hunting is really something that can help our economy grow! Hunters contribute more than $500 million to our state each year and help support a lot of jobs. Get a license today athttps://t.co/burilhQECG.#WV#WVHuntpic.twitter.com/btBNdz4TR6 State offices have thrown around the figure more than once. The West Virginia Division of Natural Resources sent atweeton Nov. 24 that used the same dollar figure, adding that deer hunters in particular spend an estimated $230 million in West Virginia, much of it in the rural areas of the state. We wondered: Do bucks, and other game, really bring the state 500 million bucks? When we contacted Justices office, Jordan Damron, the governors assistant legal counsel and digital director, cited it to the West Virginia Division of Natural Resources. A Nov. 14press releasefrom the division includes the $500 million figure and said that hunting is estimated to be responsible for 5,400 jobs and $35 million in sales taxes on goods and services spent in West Virginia. The news release said the numbers came from Southwick Associates, a research firm focusing on outdoor markets. TheSouthwick Associates reportsaid that there had been $421,819,113 in retail sales in West Virginia, with a multiplier effect raising that amount to $552,085,233. The multiplier was used to estimate the total amount of spending that occurs in the economy as a result of hunters spending. The report also said that 5,377 jobs were created through hunting and $35,544,522 in state and local taxes were gathered due to hunting. The amount spent on deer hunting alone was $291,972,745. So the numbers cited by Justice exist. But well offer a few caveats. First, the report is from 2012 and the data is from 2011. Though Justice offered a specific-sounding figure, the actual figure might have grown or shrunk in the subsequent seven-plus years. Second, multiplier effects are estimates and are highly dependent on the assumptions used. Different assumptions will lead to different results. Using the retail sales figure without the multiplier adjustment might have been a more defensible approach. Finally, the report says it was funded by the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) and produced in partnership with the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies. The association represents government officials who oversee hunting, but the National Shooting Sports Foundationbills itselfas the firearms industry trade association. This means that the NSSF is an advocacy group that has a vested interest in promoting hunting. As with any advocacy group, its data should be understood in this context. Justice said that hunters contribute more than $500 million to West Virginia. This statistic comes from a comprehensive, 50-state report, but its worth noting that the data is more than seven years old, that it uses an estimate of economic impact beyond just retail sales, and that the report was funded by an industry trade group. We rate the statement Mostly True.

True

In theNov. 5 tweet, Justice wrote, I've said it before and I'll say it again, hunting is really something that can help our economy grow! Hunters contribute more than $500 million to our state each year and help support a lot of jobs. Get a license today athttp://wvhunt.com.#WV#WVHunt.I've said it before and I'll say it again, hunting is really something that can help our economy grow! Hunters contribute more than $500 million to our state each year and help support a lot of jobs. Get a license today athttps://t.co/burilhQECG.#WV#WVHuntpic.twitter.com/btBNdz4TR6State offices have thrown around the figure more than once. The West Virginia Division of Natural Resources sent atweeton Nov. 24 that used the same dollar figure, adding that deer hunters in particular spend an estimated $230 million in West Virginia, much of it in the rural areas of the state.When we contacted Justices office, Jordan Damron, the governors assistant legal counsel and digital director, cited it to the West Virginia Division of Natural Resources. A Nov. 14press releasefrom the division includes the $500 million figure and said that hunting is estimated to be responsible for 5,400 jobs and $35 million in sales taxes on goods and services spent in West Virginia.TheSouthwick Associates reportsaid that there had been $421,819,113 in retail sales in West Virginia, with a multiplier effect raising that amount to $552,085,233. The multiplier was used to estimate the total amount of spending that occurs in the economy as a result of hunters spending.Finally, the report says it was funded by the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) and produced in partnership with the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies. The association represents government officials who oversee hunting, but the National Shooting Sports Foundationbills itselfas the firearms industry trade association. This means that the NSSF is an advocacy group that has a vested interest in promoting hunting. As with any advocacy group, its data should be understood in this context.

FMD_train_1287

'Unidentified Flying Object' Seen as SpaceX Rocket Exploded?

09/07/2016

On the morning of 1 September 2016 a SpaceX Falcon-9 rocket carrying an Israeli satellite called Amos-6 exploded three minutes prior to a scheduled static fire test. SpaceX confirmed the event, stating that an anomaly had occurred in the upper stage of the oxygen tank as they were loading propellant into the rocket. The cause is still under review. anomaly Also lost during the explosion was the rockets payload: the Amos-6 satellite, which was built by Israel Aerospace Industries (an aerospace and defense contractor) and operated by the telecommunications company Spacecom. According to Spacecoms web site, the new satellite would provide expanded coverage and redundancy in case of other existing satellite malfunction: expanded coverage and redundancy AMOS-6 strengthens 4W orbital location with wider coverage and new services. AMOS-6 high power and large amount of Ku-band transponders offer Spacecoms existing and new customers a reliable growth-engine for their business. AMOS-6 enhances Spacecoms existing service offering by supporting a full range of services, including Direct-To-Home (DTH), video distribution, VSAT communications and broadband Internet. Facebook had also leased some of the communication equipment on this satellite to support their effort to provide free internet access to large swaths of Africa. After this loss of the satellite, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg posted a statement: posted a statement As I'm here in Africa, I'm deeply disappointed to hear that SpaceX's launch failure destroyed our satellite that would have provided connectivity to so many entrepreneurs and everyone else across the continent. Fortunately, we have developed other technologies like Aquila that will connect people as well. We remain committed to our mission of connecting everyone, and we will keep working until everyone has the opportunities this satellite would have provided. The most widely shared video of the explosion comes from USLaunchReport.com (an NGO that produces video reports of all things space"). This video appears to show a rapidly moving object cross above the rocket right before it explodes: USLaunchReport.com https://www.youtube.com/embed/_BgJEXQkjNQThe video does show an object that enters from the right of the screen and passes in a fairly straight line above the rocket (at least from the camera angle) as it explodes. This has led to accusations from some corners of the internet that someone or something of intentionally bringing the rocket down. The video Reddit, Sptember 2016Early this morning there was a test-fire for Elon Musk's Falcon-9 rocket, which is standard procedure before any launch (static fire test). They reported an anomalous explosion originating near the second stage oxygen tank. From footage posted by USLaunchReport.Com, (a non profit that brings Veterans to rocket launches I don't question the footage on that note) there is a clearly identifiable-unidentifiable that passes by at incredible rate of speed as the explosion occurs. It destroyed the launch vehicle & the payload. Hypothesis: The AMOS-6 was destroyed by the passing UFO. (I know this is hard to accept for some, but others who are aware of certain things going on right now will appreciate this.) Some culprits discussed on the original Reddit thread include: aliens, a private aerospace competitor to SpaceX, a government worried about an Israeli spy satellite/weapons system, and/or Facebooks world domination plans. These claims have been amplified by the conspiracy focused website Neon Nettle and others. Reddit thread Neon Nettle What complicates this evidence is that there are a number of other objects, generally reported as birds or bugs, that make similar appearances before (and after) the explosion with far less fanfare. To successfully argue something scandalous, one has to prove that the object cant be a bird or a bug. Those in favor of an intentional sabotage conspiracy point to three arguments: Unfortunately, the fact that a massive telephoto lens captured the video adds to the challenge, if not outright impossibility of accurately assessing any of these questions scientifically. This camera, based on the time it took the noise of the explosion to reach it (~12 seconds) is easily over two miles away from the pad (assuming sound traveling at 0.2 miles per second). The further the zoom, the more of an effect the lens will have on an object's perceived distance and size. An object closer to the camera, additionally, would be required to travel at a much slower speed to make it from one side of the frame to the other compared to something two miles away. more of an effect Moreover, YouTube videos such as the uslaunchreport.com video are subjected to lossy compression, an effect resulting in loss of information as well as the introduction of potential artifacts. Per the FBIs Recommendations and Guidelines for the Use of Digital Image Processing in the Criminal Justice System: lossy compression Recommendations and Guidelines for the Use of Digital Image Processing in the Criminal Justice System Lossy compression achieves greater reduction in file size by removing both redundant and irrelevant information. Because the irrelevant information (as determined by the compression algorithm) cannot be replaced upon reconstruction of an image for display, lossy compression results in some loss of image content as well as the introduction of artifacts. This effect is minimal when you are not zooming in; but it becomes a bigger issue when you try to get a level of detail that has already been removed by a compression algorithm. compression algorithm An image treated in this way has been making the rounds as evidence that this object was clearly behind the left-most tower on the launch pad (these towers are used to protect the rocket from lightning strikes): image treated in this way Without more information, it is impossible to know what these pixels are telling us. If the object is in the foreground (and not in the background, as conspiracy theorists suggest) then the issues of the object's apparent larger-than-bird size and faster-than-bug speed can easily be attributed to that fact. The other argument in favor of the object being both distant and fast moving also comes from questionable handling of compressed images. According to some believers, there is a reflected glow off of the object when it passes over the explosion. These images, which also purport to show that the object doesnt look bird- or bug-like, have been enhanced, by methods that are not plainly documented: These images It is unclear what processes, outside of inverting the colors, went into the creation of these images; but zooming in on the object in each frame without any enhancement does not appear to reveal much about reflected light or shape: https://www.snopes.com/uploads/2016/09/Screen-Shot-2016-09-07-at-11.32.48-AM.pngA final flaw in the alien/government/evil corporation argument is that it does not explain how an object traveling above the rocket (without making any physical contact) would cause its explosion, nor does it touch on why this novel method might have been employed. Do we know for sure what this object is? No. But the prevalence of similar harmless objects prior to the explosion, the fact that the evidence is based on wishfully enhanced screengrabs of downsampled video, and the fact that rockets are super explosive on their own, make an outside agent low on the list of possible explanations. Updated [30 September 2017]: Added information about other websites sharing similar claims.

NEI

On the morning of 1 September 2016 a SpaceX Falcon-9 rocket carrying an Israeli satellite called Amos-6 exploded three minutes prior to a scheduled static fire test. SpaceX confirmed the event, stating that an anomaly had occurred in the upper stage of the oxygen tank as they were loading propellant into the rocket. The cause is still under review.Also lost during the explosion was the rockets payload: the Amos-6 satellite, which was built by Israel Aerospace Industries (an aerospace and defense contractor) and operated by the telecommunications company Spacecom. According to Spacecoms web site, the new satellite would provide expanded coverage and redundancy in case of other existing satellite malfunction:Facebook had also leased some of the communication equipment on this satellite to support their effort to provide free internet access to large swaths of Africa. After this loss of the satellite, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg posted a statement:The most widely shared video of the explosion comes from USLaunchReport.com (an NGO that produces video reports of all things space"). This video appears to show a rapidly moving object cross above the rocket right before it explodes:https://www.youtube.com/embed/_BgJEXQkjNQThe video does show an object that enters from the right of the screen and passes in a fairly straight line above the rocket (at least from the camera angle) as it explodes. This has led to accusations from some corners of the internet that someone or something of intentionally bringing the rocket down.Some culprits discussed on the original Reddit thread include: aliens, a private aerospace competitor to SpaceX, a government worried about an Israeli spy satellite/weapons system, and/or Facebooks world domination plans. These claims have been amplified by the conspiracy focused website Neon Nettle and others.Unfortunately, the fact that a massive telephoto lens captured the video adds to the challenge, if not outright impossibility of accurately assessing any of these questions scientifically. This camera, based on the time it took the noise of the explosion to reach it (~12 seconds) is easily over two miles away from the pad (assuming sound traveling at 0.2 miles per second). The further the zoom, the more of an effect the lens will have on an object's perceived distance and size. An object closer to the camera, additionally, would be required to travel at a much slower speed to make it from one side of the frame to the other compared to something two miles away.Moreover, YouTube videos such as the uslaunchreport.com video are subjected to lossy compression, an effect resulting in loss of information as well as the introduction of potential artifacts. Per the FBIs Recommendations and Guidelines for the Use of Digital Image Processing in the Criminal Justice System:This effect is minimal when you are not zooming in; but it becomes a bigger issue when you try to get a level of detail that has already been removed by a compression algorithm.An image treated in this way has been making the rounds as evidence that this object was clearly behind the left-most tower on the launch pad (these towers are used to protect the rocket from lightning strikes):The other argument in favor of the object being both distant and fast moving also comes from questionable handling of compressed images. According to some believers, there is a reflected glow off of the object when it passes over the explosion. These images, which also purport to show that the object doesnt look bird- or bug-like, have been enhanced, by methods that are not plainly documented:

FMD_train_141

Video Does Not Show Electric Scooter Bikes Abandoned in a 'Graveyard' Due to High Cost of Batteries

11/30/2022

On Nov. 28, 2022, the@Xx17965797N Twitter accounttweeteda video with a misleading caption that claimed the clip showed a sea of lined-up electric scooter bikes that were abandoned because of the high cost of electric vehicle (EV) battery replacement. The tweet read, "Electric green scooters that have reached end of battery life. Due to the batteries being so expensive to replace, electric scooters are abandoned because disposing of them any other way is dangerous and expensive." tweeted This was not true, despite the tens of thousands of combined retweets and likes that the tweet received. The same video upload from @Xx17965797N was also misleadingly reshared by accounts including@PeterDClack, @JamesMelville, and @MillerForTexas. The former two tweets received thousands of engagements, despite the fact that the information pushed in the original tweet was not true. @PeterDClack @JamesMelville @MillerForTexas In cases like these where a caption is incorrect but the picture or video is real, we issue a fact-check rating of "Miscaptioned." Days before the @Xx17965797N tweet was posted, the@ElevaBrasilES account also misleadingly tweeted that the same video was shot in France. The tweet went up on Nov. 21 with an incorrect caption that read, "Green energy Cemetery of electric motorcycles in France. Now designated as a 'biohazard zone.'" (Note: This mention of France reminded us of other rumors we've debunked in the past, in particular about two photosof other car graveyards. The two pictures showed false captions that claimed the cars had been abandoned due to the high cost of battery replacement, just like the video we're looking at in this fact check.) tweeted two photos The oldest upload of the video that we could find came from TikTok user @smartsetting. The video was uploaded on Nov. 7 and by the end of the month had received nearly 5 million views. Based on watching the video, the scooters appeared to be parked in a parking lot near a basketball court, perhaps in a university complex or public park. Several blurry Chinese characters were visible on the side of the bikes. At the end of the clip, a tall building could be seen on the right-hand side of the frame. Other than those pieces of information, we didn't have much to go on. In order to find the truth behind this video, we first used Adobe Media Encoder to export a JPEG file for each and every frame from the video. The results of this export were 440 individual images from the 14-second video. We then performed numerous reverse image searches with these picture files using Google Images and TinEye.com. These reverse image searches provided several clues as to where other users had reposted the video. However, we did not find any further details from these searches. Next, we tried several searches on Google, Twitter, and YouTube with phrases such as "electric scooter China" and "electric bike graveyard China," among other terms. This helped to find several repostsof the video. The searches alsoshowedresults for many of the sites in China that are the final resting placesfor massive stacks of bicycles dumped by bike-sharing companies with failed business models. Perhaps the most striking video we found was titled, "No Place To PlaceThe Wonders of Shared Bicycle Graveyards in China." several reposts showed results sites final resting places failed business models video At one point in our research, we stumbled upon an AFP videofrom 2021 that appeared to show the same yellow color and model of electric scooter bike. The caption for the clip said that it was captured "outside the city of Shenyang." The end of the video showed a stadium with special colors for seating zones. video model After an exhaustive search, we were able to find this same stadium by using the map tools on the Chinese website Baidu.com. Unlike Google Maps, Baidu.com has street-level views of nearby roads. However, this part of our effort wasn't very helpful. It remained unclear if this was the same location where the viral clip was shot. Baidu.com In the end, it was going back to TikTok that helped us find the origins of the video. A search on TikTok for "electric share bike China" brought us to this video from @evstevepan. The video showed the same kind of yellow electric scooter bike with a similar logo. A scan of the logo using a mobile phone camera and Google Translate revealed the company name Meituan, which is known as an "all-encompassing platform for local services." this video We then searched the internet for Meituan and electric scooters, which produced plenty of pictures on Shutterstock.com. For a moment, the two large characters on the side of the scooter didn't seem to match those from the viral video. We then horizontally flipped a still-frame from the viral video, which led us to discover that it had been mirrored, meaning that all words and numbers were backward. plenty of pictures All of these developments in our research led us to news articles that helped to show our findings were lining up. In April 2018, news broke that Meituan had purchased the company Mobike for $2.7 billion. According to the story, Mobike is "a Chinese startup that helped pioneer bike-sharing services worldwide." broke But by November of that same year, TechCrunch reported that Meituan would be "[walking] away from bike-sharing and ride-hailing," as there wasn't enough demand from customers for the supply of its bike-sharing venture: reported In April, Meituan entered the bike-sharing fray after it scooped up top player Mobike for $2.7 billion to face off Alibaba-backed Ofo. Over the past few years, Mobike and Ofo were burning through large sums of investor money in a bid to win users from subsidized rides, but both have shown signs of softening their stance recently. Mobike is downsizing its fleets to "avoid an oversupply" as the bike-sharing market falters, Meituan's chief financial officer Chen Shaohui said during the earnings call. Ofo has also scaled back by closing down many of its international operations... During its third quarter that ended September 30, Meituan posted a 97.2 percent jump on revenues to 19.1 billion yuan, or $2.75 billion, on the back of strong growth in food delivery transactions. The firm's investments in new initiatives including ride-hailing and bike-sharing took a toll as operating losses nearly tripled to 3.45 billion yuan compared to a year ago. Meituan shares plunged as much as 14 percent on Friday, the most since its spectacular listing. Just as so many electric bicycles from bike-sharing companies had piled up across China, so had electric scooters like the ones seen in the viral video. In sum, social media users falsely claimed that a video showed tons of lined-up electric scooter bikes that were abandoned in a "graveyard" due to the high cost of EV battery replacement. All evidence pointed to a simple answer: supply and demand. The number of electric scooter bikes and bicycles far outnumbered the number of people who requested to use them (or else they went missing or were stolen), which resulted in downsizing by some companies, and the closure of others.The clip appears to have been shot in China, although its precise location is unclear. far outnumbered went missing or were stolen We reached out to Meituan for comment on Nov. 29 but did not receive a response in time for publication. 25 2022 . ELDORADO, https://www.youtube.com/shorts/gbI2Bo2xKCc. A Veces Hay Cosas Que Duelen y Desesperan. Lamenta, 2022, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OmV5lBEYEMU. @Atomicfact. Twitter, 14 Aug. 2018, https://twitter.com/atomicfact/status/1029352130086424576. Baidu. https://map.baidu.com/. @BBC. "The Problem of China's Huge Bike Graveyards." Twitter, 20 May 2018, https://twitter.com/bbc/status/998231947359997952. @ElevaBrasilES. Twitter, 21 Nov. 2022, https://twitter.com/elevabrasiles/status/1594826198831570947. @evstevepan. "Share Electric Scooter in China #electricscooter #china #vlog." TikTok, 25 Sept. 2022, https://www.tiktok.com/@evstevepan/video/7147290373868506411. Freer. "Meituan Electric Shared Bikes on the Street." Shutterstock, 19 May 2020, https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/zhongshan-guangdong-chinamay-19-2020meituan-electric-1736816009. Google Images. https://images.google.com/. Google Translate. https://translate.google.com/. "Graveyard of the Bikes: Aerial Photos of China's Failed Share-Cycle Scheme Show Mountains of Damaged Bikes." The Straits Times via AFP, 21 Apr. 2021, https://www.straitstimes.com/asia/east-asia/graveyard-of-the-bikes-chinas-failed-share-cycle-scheme-from-above. "Graveyard of the Bikes: China's Failed Share-Cycle Scheme from Above." Techxplore.com via AFP, 21 Apr. 2021, https://techxplore.com/news/2021-04-graveyard-bikes-china-share-cycle-scheme.html. @JamesMelville. Twitter, 29 Nov. 2022, https://twitter.com/jamesmelville/status/1597532727338639360. Liao, Rita. "Meituan, China's 'everything App,' Walks Away from Bike Sharing and Ride Hailing." TechCrunch, 23 Nov. 2018, https://techcrunch.com/2018/11/23/meituan-scale-back-ride-hailing-and-bike-sharing/. @mbrennanchina. Twitter, 4 Dec. 2018, https://twitter.com/mbrennanchina/status/1069940186786775042. @MillerForTexas. Twitter, 28 Nov. 2022, https://twitter.com/millerfortexas/status/1597346555111280640. No Place To PlaceThe Wonders of Shared Bicycle Graveyards in China. Guoyong Wu, 2020, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TDfLWFv3ixk. @PeterDClack. Twitter, 28 Nov. 2022, https://twitter.com/peterdclack/status/1597371847397761024. Russell, Jon. "Chinese Bike-Sharing Pioneer Mobike Sold to Ambitious Meituan Dianping for $2.7B." TechCrunch, 3 Apr. 2018, https://techcrunch.com/2018/04/03/chinese-bike-sharing-pioneer-mobike-sold-to-ambitious-meituan-dianping-for-2-7b/. Shared Electric Bikes Roll into Changsha in Central China. CGTN, 2021, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DkSUN-FSuNI. Siqi, Ji. "Taxpayers Foot the Clean-up Bill for China's Bike-Sharing Bust." South China Morning Post, 2 Oct. 2020, https://www.scmp.com/business/china-business/article/3103908/what-happens-discarded-bikes-chinas-sharing-boom-taxpayers. Sprawling Bike Graveyard from China's Failed Share-Cycle Scheme. AFP News Agency, 2021, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9N1Qxs_KOYo. TinEye Reverse Image Search. https://tineye.com/. u/silvertomars. "A Graveyard for Electric Scooters the Batteries Have Reached the End of Their Life-Time, but Are Too Expensive to Replace and Safely Disposing or Recycling the Batteries Is Also Too Expensive." r/Wallstreetsilver via Reddit.com, 28 Nov. 2022, https://www.reddit.com/r/Wallstreetsilver/comments/z7i7ng/a_graveyard_for_electric_scooters_the_batteries/. @vegastarr. Twitter, 28 Nov. 2022, https://twitter.com/vegastarr/status/1597338236472659968. @Xx17965797N.Twitter, 28 Nov. 2022, https://twitter.com/xx17965797n/status/1597310309139873792. Yan, Alice. "Chinese Bike-Share Firm Closes after 90 per Cent of Cycles Stolen." South China Morning Post, 21 June 2017, https://www.scmp.com/news/china/society/article/2099293/chinese-bike-share-firm-closes-after-90-cent-cycles-stolen.

False

On Nov. 28, 2022, the@Xx17965797N Twitter accounttweeteda video with a misleading caption that claimed the clip showed a sea of lined-up electric scooter bikes that were abandoned because of the high cost of electric vehicle (EV) battery replacement. The tweet read, "Electric green scooters that have reached end of battery life. Due to the batteries being so expensive to replace, electric scooters are abandoned because disposing of them any other way is dangerous and expensive."The same video upload from @Xx17965797N was also misleadingly reshared by accounts including@PeterDClack, @JamesMelville, and @MillerForTexas. The former two tweets received thousands of engagements, despite the fact that the information pushed in the original tweet was not true.Days before the @Xx17965797N tweet was posted, the@ElevaBrasilES account also misleadingly tweeted that the same video was shot in France. The tweet went up on Nov. 21 with an incorrect caption that read, "Green energy Cemetery of electric motorcycles in France. Now designated as a 'biohazard zone.'" (Note: This mention of France reminded us of other rumors we've debunked in the past, in particular about two photosof other car graveyards. The two pictures showed false captions that claimed the cars had been abandoned due to the high cost of battery replacement, just like the video we're looking at in this fact check.)Next, we tried several searches on Google, Twitter, and YouTube with phrases such as "electric scooter China" and "electric bike graveyard China," among other terms. This helped to find several repostsof the video. The searches alsoshowedresults for many of the sites in China that are the final resting placesfor massive stacks of bicycles dumped by bike-sharing companies with failed business models. Perhaps the most striking video we found was titled, "No Place To PlaceThe Wonders of Shared Bicycle Graveyards in China."At one point in our research, we stumbled upon an AFP videofrom 2021 that appeared to show the same yellow color and model of electric scooter bike. The caption for the clip said that it was captured "outside the city of Shenyang." The end of the video showed a stadium with special colors for seating zones.After an exhaustive search, we were able to find this same stadium by using the map tools on the Chinese website Baidu.com. Unlike Google Maps, Baidu.com has street-level views of nearby roads. However, this part of our effort wasn't very helpful. It remained unclear if this was the same location where the viral clip was shot.In the end, it was going back to TikTok that helped us find the origins of the video. A search on TikTok for "electric share bike China" brought us to this video from @evstevepan. The video showed the same kind of yellow electric scooter bike with a similar logo. A scan of the logo using a mobile phone camera and Google Translate revealed the company name Meituan, which is known as an "all-encompassing platform for local services."We then searched the internet for Meituan and electric scooters, which produced plenty of pictures on Shutterstock.com. For a moment, the two large characters on the side of the scooter didn't seem to match those from the viral video. We then horizontally flipped a still-frame from the viral video, which led us to discover that it had been mirrored, meaning that all words and numbers were backward.In April 2018, news broke that Meituan had purchased the company Mobike for $2.7 billion. According to the story, Mobike is "a Chinese startup that helped pioneer bike-sharing services worldwide."But by November of that same year, TechCrunch reported that Meituan would be "[walking] away from bike-sharing and ride-hailing," as there wasn't enough demand from customers for the supply of its bike-sharing venture:In sum, social media users falsely claimed that a video showed tons of lined-up electric scooter bikes that were abandoned in a "graveyard" due to the high cost of EV battery replacement. All evidence pointed to a simple answer: supply and demand. The number of electric scooter bikes and bicycles far outnumbered the number of people who requested to use them (or else they went missing or were stolen), which resulted in downsizing by some companies, and the closure of others.The clip appears to have been shot in China, although its precise location is unclear.

FMD_train_1318

Is the account of Neerja Bhanot and the 1986 Pan Am hijacking based on actual events?

04/06/2021

Sometimes, Snopes readers stumble on old stories that require us to revisit key moments of history. One such story was of the courageous actions of Neerja Bhanot, an Indian flight attendant on Pan Am flight 73, which was hijacked in 1986 by Palestinian militants on its way to the United States while on a stopover in Karachi, Pakistan. Neerja Bhano Many of our readers shared social media posts, and queries, asking us to detail some of the main events of the hijacking, including Bhanots death from a gunshot wound. posts One reader asked us to confirm the following: When radical Islamic terrorists hijacked her A/C in Karachi, Pakistan she informed the pilots (who used their escape hatch to runaway) and kept both the passengers/remaining crew calm. When the terrorists demanded to know who the Americans were on the flight so they could execute them she gathered all the passports and hid the ones belonging to Americans under seat cushions. The terrorists confused and unable to determine the national origins of the passengers didn't execute anyone. When Pakistani police raided the plane she was able to nearly singlehandedly evacuate all the passengers as the firefight ensued. She being one of the last people on board did a last check and found three children still hiding. As she led the children to safety the surviving terrorists spotted the children and opened fire on them. Neerja jumped in the way of the bullets and was mortally wounded. She was able to evac the children to safety before dying from her wounds. Neerja was awarded the Ashok Chakra Award by India, the highest peacetime gallantry award possible. She was the youngest and first civilian to ever be awarded this honor. Through testimonies from the flight crew and passengers during the sentencing of one of the hijackers, and interviews done by the BBC, we were able to gather key facts from that fateful day. In 2004, Zayad al Safarini, a Jordanian hijacker who was part of the attack, was sentenced by a U.S. district judge to 160 years in prison. At the hearing for his sentencing, a number of passengers, flight attendants, and Bhanots brother, came forward to recount the events of the hijacking. The full transcript of their testimonies can be read here. testimonies BBC sentenced here The Palestinian militants who hijacked the aircraft were affiliated with the Abu Nidal Organization (ANO), which was opposed to U.S. and Israeli policies in the Middle East, and was described as a secular international terrorist organization. When the hijackers boarded the plane, they began trying to identify any Americans on board. A 2016 BBC report included interviews with the surviving flight attendants, described the scene: described BBC report Sunshine, Madhvi Bahuguna and another flight attendant began collecting passports, quietly avoiding collecting any that were American. They then went through the bags of passports they had collected, secretly sifting out any remaining American ones and tucking them under their seats or concealing them in their clothing. Mike Thexton, a passenger on the plane, describes the act in his book What Happened to The Hippy Man? as "extremely brave, selfless and clever". "I may be biased but I feel that day proved that the flight attendants on board were some of the best in the industry." Descriptions from passengers and family members from the sentencing of Safarini detailed the moment that flight attendants were told to gather passports, and the ways in which they tried to protect the Americans among them. Aneesh Bhanot, Neerjas brother, who was not on the plane as these events took place, described this effort as one carried out by all the flight attendants together: Descriptions Neerja was an Indian citizen. All the other flight attendants were also Indian citizens. Mr. Safarini and his gang were targeting Americans, as was very obvious from the passenger calls which you heard later on. Neerja and all the other attendants knew this. That is why when they asked them to get the passports of all the passengers, they hid the American passports on the airplane. He also cited the testimony of another passenger that was published in the Cincinnati Enquirer in September 1986. A clipping of that paper is available below (in which Bhanot is referred to as Neerja Mishra): Michael John Thexton, a British passenger, recounted the following: recounted Then came the call for passports, and I should have ignored it. But I felt that I had to obey orders. So I took out my passport and I handed it in, still thinking that the Americans would be in front of us, not reckoning the ingenuity and the extraordinary bravery of the stewardess who was making the collection in discarding American passports that had a white face. I suppose the British were [the] third choice for the terrorists. And after the Americans and the Israelis, mine was the only one of a small handful of British passports with a white face in that pile. I think maybe six or seven, something of that sort. So the call came over the public address for passenger Michael John to come forward, then Michael John Thexton, and I knew that they wanted to shoot me. Darrell Pieper, an American passenger, credited flight attendant Sunshine Vesuwala for protecting his identity. In his testimony, he said, Sunshine hid my passport when she realized the hijackers are looking for Americans. I'm grateful to her for her quick thinking and action, which again saved my life. credited Gregg Maisel, the attorney representing the U.S. government, said, the flight attendants, risking their own lives, deliberately refused to accept United States passports from some passengers and hid several United States passports under seat cushions. said Given that Bhanot played a big role in protecting the American passengers by hiding their passports, but was not the only flight attendant doing this, we rate this part of the claim as true. In this instance, even as Bhanot showed remarkable bravery in getting passengers to safety, she was not alone in this effort. According to Maisel, passengers escaped after Bhanot and others were able to open up some exits: escaped As the bullets and grenades flew, Neerja Bhanot, as well as other flight attendants and passengers, heroically managed to force open two exits in the economy section. The opening of the rear exit triggered inflation of the emergency slide, but the opening of the exit over the wing did not trigger the inflation of a second emergency slide. People clamored to reach both exits fearful that the hijackers would resume the assault.[...]This diagram illustrates the efforts of surviving hostages to escape the aircraft using the emergency slide and climbing onto the wing of the plane. While the slide was a safer escape route, the sheer number of people attempting to leave the plane through this exit at night resulted in additional injuries to some who were unable to exit quickly enough to avoid being crushed by others behind them.[...]At the direction of several flight attendants, other passengers reentered the plane climbing over the wounded and the dead and used the rear exit where the slide was inflated to the safer escape route. Aneesh Bhanot also recounted an article written by a Pakistani passenger: recounted There's another passenger from Pakistan, a gentleman called Hussein, who had written an article in a newspaper called the Star of Pakistan. And he wrote again that says as the lights went out at 10:00 p.m. we was herded with the passengers and the shooting started. From nowhere, his savior, Neerja, and I'm sure other flight attendants also did the same thing, had the presence and the nerve to steer through the pandemonium to lead the passengers where to go. Neerja, by sheer zest, it seems, single-handedly opened the chute. Her favorite words to him and other passengers were, get out, run. In this instance, since Bhanot appeared to have taken the lead in helping passengers escape and was also aided by other crew and passengers, we rate this part of the claim as a mixture, given that she did not do this alone. Bhanots death was described through different accounts, based on information gathered in the aftermath of the attack. Some reports said she was protecting three children, while flight attendants described her being shot during the escape. Jennifer Levy, another attorney representing the U.S. government, described Bhanots final moments: described When the lights went out just before the final assault, Ms. Bhanot ran for the emergency door and activated the inflatable chute. Instead of escaping as one of the first off the aircraft, she remained on board to help others out of the plane. She was shot in the final assault. Although she was taken off the plane alive by her fellow flight attendants, she died shortly afterwards of massive bleeding. Viraf Daroga, Pan Ams director in Pakistan, described how Bhanot was brought down from the aircraft through the emergency chute: described Those who were injured were picked up as they came down the chute, put in ambulances that came rushing to the aircraft, and were driven off to various hospitals. Neerja, the senior purser, was brought down by her colleagues and was taken to the hospital. She died in the hospital in the arms of one of my staff. Aneesh Bhanots testimony described how Bhanot was indeed protecting three children when she was shot and killed: described Neerja could have been the first one to escape from the aircraft as she opened the emergency door, yet she chose not to do that. Instead, she got the passengers out and gave her own life, as we are told, while shielding three small children from gunfire. Her actions probably saved hundreds of lives. The Pan Am Historical Foundation also described her death by saying As the hijackers opened fire on passengers and crew, Neerja Bhanot lost her life shielding three children from bullets. described Since reports differ on what happened during Bhanots final moments, and some details remain uncertain, we rate the overall truth of this claim as "Mixture." But there is no doubting that her actions, as well as the actions of other flight attendants and crew, saved many lives. She was posthumously awarded the Ashok Chakra award, which is India's highest civilian decoration for bravery. Ashok Chakra award

NEI

Sometimes, Snopes readers stumble on old stories that require us to revisit key moments of history. One such story was of the courageous actions of Neerja Bhanot, an Indian flight attendant on Pan Am flight 73, which was hijacked in 1986 by Palestinian militants on its way to the United States while on a stopover in Karachi, Pakistan.Many of our readers shared social media posts, and queries, asking us to detail some of the main events of the hijacking, including Bhanots death from a gunshot wound.Through testimonies from the flight crew and passengers during the sentencing of one of the hijackers, and interviews done by the BBC, we were able to gather key facts from that fateful day. In 2004, Zayad al Safarini, a Jordanian hijacker who was part of the attack, was sentenced by a U.S. district judge to 160 years in prison. At the hearing for his sentencing, a number of passengers, flight attendants, and Bhanots brother, came forward to recount the events of the hijacking. The full transcript of their testimonies can be read here.The Palestinian militants who hijacked the aircraft were affiliated with the Abu Nidal Organization (ANO), which was opposed to U.S. and Israeli policies in the Middle East, and was described as a secular international terrorist organization. When the hijackers boarded the plane, they began trying to identify any Americans on board. A 2016 BBC report included interviews with the surviving flight attendants, described the scene:Descriptions from passengers and family members from the sentencing of Safarini detailed the moment that flight attendants were told to gather passports, and the ways in which they tried to protect the Americans among them. Aneesh Bhanot, Neerjas brother, who was not on the plane as these events took place, described this effort as one carried out by all the flight attendants together:Michael John Thexton, a British passenger, recounted the following:Darrell Pieper, an American passenger, credited flight attendant Sunshine Vesuwala for protecting his identity. In his testimony, he said, Sunshine hid my passport when she realized the hijackers are looking for Americans. I'm grateful to her for her quick thinking and action, which again saved my life.Gregg Maisel, the attorney representing the U.S. government, said, the flight attendants, risking their own lives, deliberately refused to accept United States passports from some passengers and hid several United States passports under seat cushions.In this instance, even as Bhanot showed remarkable bravery in getting passengers to safety, she was not alone in this effort. According to Maisel, passengers escaped after Bhanot and others were able to open up some exits:Aneesh Bhanot also recounted an article written by a Pakistani passenger:Jennifer Levy, another attorney representing the U.S. government, described Bhanots final moments:Viraf Daroga, Pan Ams director in Pakistan, described how Bhanot was brought down from the aircraft through the emergency chute:Aneesh Bhanots testimony described how Bhanot was indeed protecting three children when she was shot and killed:The Pan Am Historical Foundation also described her death by saying As the hijackers opened fire on passengers and crew, Neerja Bhanot lost her life shielding three children from bullets.Since reports differ on what happened during Bhanots final moments, and some details remain uncertain, we rate the overall truth of this claim as "Mixture." But there is no doubting that her actions, as well as the actions of other flight attendants and crew, saved many lives. She was posthumously awarded the Ashok Chakra award, which is India's highest civilian decoration for bravery.

FMD_train_177

Mike Martinez has voted to raise taxes and utility rates while ending free bus service for seniors.

12/11/2014

Austin voters should doubt mayoral aspirant Mike Martinezs commitment to an affordable city, his opponent in a Dec. 16, 2014, runoff maintains. The narrator of a Steve Adler TV ad says that as an Austin City Council member, Mike Martinez has voted to raise taxes and utility rates while ending free bus service for seniors. That statement is made against this visual backdrop: Source: TV ad from Steve Adler, Austin mayoral candidate,Mike Martinez Record on City Council, posted online Dec. 2, 2014. Martinez has been a council member since June 2006. So its no surprise he would have had a say on taxes and rates charged by the city-owned utilities, though unsaid here is that no single council member controls any such decisions; its been a seven-member body, including the mayor. Martinez also chairs theeight-person boardoverseeing Capital Metro, which provides local bus and limited rail service. So he could have voted on fares charged the elderly. Lets recap Martinezs actions on fares, city taxes and utility rates. Bus fares To our inquiries, Adlers campaign didnt provide comprehensive backup for his ad claim. But by email, spokesman Jim Wick pointed out a September 2010Austin American-Statesmannews storystating the Cap Metro board voted to require bus riders 65 and older to pay 50 cents a ride or $15 for a 31-day bus pass, starting in 2011. The story also said the board was deciding to charge seniors and people with disabilities to ride buses for the first time since 1989. For Capital Metro, spokeswoman Francine Pares told us by email Martinez has been a board member since June 2007 and chairman since January 2010. Pares also confirmed the boards decision to charge the 50-cent fares, though she said that change was adopted at the boards November 2010 gathering, which Martinez didnt attend, she said. According tominutes of the Nov. 10, 2010, board meeting, the six members who were there unanimously approved a resolution authorizing higher fares in part, the resolution said, to generate additional operating revenues while striving to meet growing demand for transportation options. Martinez and another board member were recorded as absent. Pares told us theboard in September 2013approved another increase in senior fares, to 60 cents, effective in 2015. Generally, she said, senior citizens receive 50 percent off regular fares. By phone, Martinez agreed he and fellow board members agreed to charge the fares for elderly residents. But that happened, he said, only after a state panel issued marching orders including a recommendation calling for Capital Metro to raise more money from fares. In a 2010 report, the staff of the Sunset Advisory Commission recommended the authority charge a bus fare of 50 cents for groups currently riding free. The commission had said 30 percent of Capital Metros passengers were riding for free and, it noted, the board had rejected proposed fares in 2008 and 2009. In its finalJuly 2011 reporton Capital Metro, the commission said: While fare increases are difficult, requiring only a portion of its ridership to bear the burden of these increases is not equitable or sustainable, especially in bad financial times. Martinez pointed out the sunset review occurred in keeping withlegislation passed into lawby the 2009 Legislature, which wanted Capital Metro to get its finances in order. City taxes On taxes, Wick of Adlers camp offered as backup news stories indicating thatin 2009, Martinez said taxpayers would have to pay a little more in taxes and fees through 2010 to maintain services andin 2010, the council acting to raise the citys property tax rate from 42.09 cents per $100 of property value to 45.71 cents; the city tax on a median value home was expected to increase $52 to $843. Wick followed up by emailing us achart made by Adlers campaignindicating city property taxes on a median-valued home going up on Martinezs watch. For a non-campaign analysis, we turned to the Travis Central Appraisal District; the chief appraiser, Marya Crigler, emailed us achartindicating city property taxes on a median-value homestead in 2007 were $715; in 2014, the comparable figure was $1,014. We converted the 2007 figure to 2014 dollars, using afederal inflation calculator. Upshot: Adjusted for inflation, city taxes on a median-value Austin homestead went up $278, or 34 percent, from 2007 through 2014, Martinezs council years. Over those years, according to the district, the median taxable value of an Austin homestead went from $177,257 to $228,032. Adjusting for inflation suggests there was a nearly $18,800, 9 percent, increase. Martinez agreed property owners paid more in taxes in his council tenure, results influenced by surging property values, he said. Still, he said, in five of eight years, council members voted to keep the citys property tax rate the same or to lower it. When the rate was raised, he said, the economy was in recession. For another fact check, the city provided this chart of tax rates, which shows the council raised the rate three times in Martinezs tenure, most recently for 2013, but cut the rate four times, most recently for 2014. In September 2014, the council left the 2014 rate intact for 2015. Utility rates In 2011,we found Mostly Truea claim that Austin Energy, the city electric utility, was considering its first hike in rates since 1994. The base electric rate, covering staff, the electric system, power plants, vehicles and the like, hadnt changed since 1994. Meantime, residential customers were paying less for electricity than they once had, taking inflation into account. On June 7, 2012, the council unanimously voted to raise the base rate, theAmerican-Statesmanreported. The news story said: The complicated new rate structure will hit customers in different ways; generally speaking, the larger and more energy-hungry the home, the higher the percentage increase, effective October 2012. A typical home, which uses an average of 1,000 kilowatt-hours a month over the course of a year, will see its monthly bill rise by $8, to $113, according to Austin Energy calculations. A home that uses a lot of electricity would see its monthly bill increase by $59, to $332, the story said. How would Adler have voted? We asked Wick how Adler would have voted on the bus fares, tax and utility rate hikes we confirmed. Theres no simple answer, Wick said by email, but Adler favors free fares for senior citizens. Our ruling Mike Martinez has voted to raise taxes and utility rates while ending free bus service for seniors. Austin residents pay more in taxes and could be paying more for electricity thanks to council actions Martinez supported. He also backed a decision by the Capital Metro board to charge half fares to elderly bus riders who had previously not been charged, though Martinez hardly did this by himself; its worth clarifying, too, that Capital Metro was under pressure to improve its finances and that Martinez missed the vote creating the then-50-cent fare. We rate this statement Mostly True. MOSTLY TRUE The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information. Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check.

True

Source: TV ad from Steve Adler, Austin mayoral candidate,Mike Martinez Record on City Council, posted online Dec. 2, 2014.Martinez also chairs theeight-person boardoverseeing Capital Metro, which provides local bus and limited rail service. So he could have voted on fares charged the elderly.To our inquiries, Adlers campaign didnt provide comprehensive backup for his ad claim. But by email, spokesman Jim Wick pointed out a September 2010Austin American-Statesmannews storystating the Cap Metro board voted to require bus riders 65 and older to pay 50 cents a ride or $15 for a 31-day bus pass, starting in 2011. The story also said the board was deciding to charge seniors and people with disabilities to ride buses for the first time since 1989.According tominutes of the Nov. 10, 2010, board meeting, the six members who were there unanimously approved a resolution authorizing higher fares in part, the resolution said, to generate additional operating revenues while striving to meet growing demand for transportation options. Martinez and another board member were recorded as absent.Pares told us theboard in September 2013approved another increase in senior fares, to 60 cents, effective in 2015. Generally, she said, senior citizens receive 50 percent off regular fares.In a 2010 report, the staff of the Sunset Advisory Commission recommended the authority charge a bus fare of 50 cents for groups currently riding free. The commission had said 30 percent of Capital Metros passengers were riding for free and, it noted, the board had rejected proposed fares in 2008 and 2009. In its finalJuly 2011 reporton Capital Metro, the commission said: While fare increases are difficult, requiring only a portion of its ridership to bear the burden of these increases is not equitable or sustainable, especially in bad financial times.Martinez pointed out the sunset review occurred in keeping withlegislation passed into lawby the 2009 Legislature, which wanted Capital Metro to get its finances in order.On taxes, Wick of Adlers camp offered as backup news stories indicating thatin 2009, Martinez said taxpayers would have to pay a little more in taxes and fees through 2010 to maintain services andin 2010, the council acting to raise the citys property tax rate from 42.09 cents per $100 of property value to 45.71 cents; the city tax on a median value home was expected to increase $52 to $843.Wick followed up by emailing us achart made by Adlers campaignindicating city property taxes on a median-valued home going up on Martinezs watch. For a non-campaign analysis, we turned to the Travis Central Appraisal District; the chief appraiser, Marya Crigler, emailed us achartindicating city property taxes on a median-value homestead in 2007 were $715; in 2014, the comparable figure was $1,014. We converted the 2007 figure to 2014 dollars, using afederal inflation calculator. Upshot: Adjusted for inflation, city taxes on a median-value Austin homestead went up $278, or 34 percent, from 2007 through 2014, Martinezs council years.In 2011,we found Mostly Truea claim that Austin Energy, the city electric utility, was considering its first hike in rates since 1994. The base electric rate, covering staff, the electric system, power plants, vehicles and the like, hadnt changed since 1994. Meantime, residential customers were paying less for electricity than they once had, taking inflation into account.On June 7, 2012, the council unanimously voted to raise the base rate, theAmerican-Statesmanreported. The news story said: The complicated new rate structure will hit customers in different ways; generally speaking, the larger and more energy-hungry the home, the higher the percentage increase, effective October 2012. A typical home, which uses an average of 1,000 kilowatt-hours a month over the course of a year, will see its monthly bill rise by $8, to $113, according to Austin Energy calculations. A home that uses a lot of electricity would see its monthly bill increase by $59, to $332, the story said.Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check.

FMD_train_633

Says at the state level we're spending more on tax expenditures than we are on public safety, health care and education combined.

04/10/2012

Jefferson Smith has his sights set on the Portland mayor's office, but state issues seem to arise in his campaign. It's little wonder, given that he has represented Portland in the Oregon House since 2009. One fact he has taken to repeating—first during a candidates' forum hosted by Family Forward Oregon and Mother PAC, and later during a Rotary Club meeting—is that at the state level, we're spending more on tax expenditures than we are on public safety, health care, and education combined. Tax expenditures is government-speak for what most of us call tax breaks. "I think we should think about money beyond tax breaks," he said just before making his claim. "That is a handy tool. But it is a tool we've been using for years and years and years." Sure, tax breaks come in many different shapes and sizes—seniors can deduct medical expenses, and businesses can receive breaks for green building improvements—but could they really outweigh the amount the state spends on some of its core programs? We began to investigate. Smith's campaign wasn't very helpful—staffers had no source for his claim, and his spokeswoman, Stacey Dycus, told us the idea was a random remark he made while explaining something. We were on our own. Thankfully, we know our way around the state budget. Our first stop was the state's 2011-2013 tax expenditure report. The report clearly lays out the amount of tax expenditures—or breaks—for the current biennium. All told, the state gives about $12 billion in income tax breaks, $19 billion in property tax breaks, and just over $100 million in others, for a grand total of $31.3 billion in forgone revenues. Getting those figures was the easy part—the hard part was figuring out what to compare them to. The state's budget can be divided and analyzed in dozens of ways. Generally, though, we talk about the state's general fund and lottery budget—this budget deals with the money that the state has the most discretionary power over—and the total funds budget, which includes cash we receive from the federal government for programs like Medicare and Medicaid, as well as food assistance programs. Let's start with the all-funds budget. The current budget accounts for nearly $59 billion in total spending—this is without the tax breaks. Of that, $13.5 billion goes to education, and $3.6 billion goes to public safety. The health care figure is a little harder to determine. The best estimate we could find is the total funds budget for the Oregon Health Authority—the executive bureaucracy that handles the majority of the state's health care work. That budget is just over $12 billion. If you add those three budget areas, you get $29.1 billion, about $2.2 billion short of the tax breaks the state provides. By this measurement, Smith is correct. Now, another way to approach this would be to look at the general and lottery funds budget. This method might be somewhat fairer, given that so much of the total funds budget is made up of federal dollars. All told, the current general and lottery funds budget includes about $11.7 billion for health care, education, and public safety. Obviously, that's quite a bit less than the $31.3 billion in state tax breaks. The problem here is that you can't directly compare those two figures. We mentioned earlier that there's a report that clearly lays out the various tax giveaways, but it doesn't explain exactly how that money would be rerouted if it were being collected by the state. For instance, $19 billion of those giveaways are for property taxes. Most of that money would go to municipalities if it were collected—not the state. There is an argument to be made that about 40 percent of the property tax revenue would go to local schools—relieving a burden on the state and freeing up cash, but that's all indirect. That said, about $12 billion of those giveaways—the portion that comes from income taxes—would end up in the state's general fund budget. Again, that's slightly more than the $11.7 billion the state allocates to those three program areas. We wanted to add a little context to all of this because tax policy is never so simple, so we made calls to individuals in the state's legislative fiscal and revenue offices and to the state's chief economist. Paul Warner from the revenue office explained it most clearly. "Smith is technically correct," he said, "that there's about $31 billion in lost revenue." But he cautioned that there would be many steps to try to collect those dollars. The revenue document itself addresses this as well. It notes that the dollar impact listed for tax breaks is not the amount of revenue you could gain if you wanted to repeal all of them. It gets very technical and somewhat tedious here, so we'll give you just one example: Federal land, which Oregon has a lot of, is exempt from property taxes. And, Warner notes, there's federal law that prohibits us from taxing federal land. Certainly, some of these tax breaks are up for grabs if the Legislature decided to mine a few of them for increased revenues. On the books are laws for home mortgage deductions, along with tax cuts for green energy and property tax exemptions for private aircraft. Smith knows that. Last year, he pushed for a package of bills that would have reduced some of these credits, including one that would put a sunset date on all income tax credits, subtractions, and exemptions. Indeed, the Legislature has since instituted a six-year cycle in which all credits will be reviewed before being renewed. That's a little beyond the point, though. As for our ruling, Smith's claim is accurate. The state does spend more on tax breaks than it does on public safety, health care, and education. This holds true whether you look at the larger all-funds budget or the smaller general and lottery funds budget. However, there is some important context here, including the fact that many of those tax breaks are off-limits to state lawmakers. We rate this claim Mostly True—accurate but requiring some clarification.

True

Return to OregonLive to comment on this ruling.